Page 2 of 27 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 268

Thread: List of Linux friendly Kickstarter projects

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    these kickstarter games show so great to me i love it!

    its the gamers hearth not casual bullshit this is all so 1337 hardcore stuff i like it very much!

    and its so good for linux now the gamer community stand up for linux !

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Larian View Post
    The only people I remember doing the bitching were a very few Windows and Mac users who were disparaging Linux users for downgrading or withdrawing their pledges before the devs revealed their "carefully considered reasons" for not supporting us (which I am very much looking forward to reading, by the way.) Personally, I don't think it matters why they're not doing it - "you're not getting the game" is still "you're not getting the game", and funding a project in which you have no vested interest doesn't make a lot of sense.
    I think there were just a couple of comments from the linux fanbase that did go a little over the top (don't have one handy to quote though), though I wouldn't be surprised if some of that was provoked by some of the other non-linux users comments. I think I remember one guy saying his "dreams were shattered" when the update came out saying that the linux port was denied, which I have to say I find a little amusing

    I actually just received a PM right then on kickstarter from Harebrained Schemes (Shadowrun devs) in response to a message I'd sent them asking about a linux port before they announced it was on the table. They mention, that they're just being "very careful not to over-commit to ideas and features just to get more funding" and just repeated they will do a careful considered response to the linux issue. Fair enough I guess, they're obviously trying to keep the scope very tight on the project which is understandable, elanthis is probably right - they probably don't have any guys on their team with any linux knowledge at all so they see this as being too costly in time or money in detriment of other things in the project, or with not enough return.

    Heh, I've just responded to their PM and included Ryan Gordon's details/resume in there just incase

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kamikaze View Post
    I think there were just a couple of comments from the linux fanbase that did go a little over the top (don't have one handy to quote though), though I wouldn't be surprised if some of that was provoked by some of the other non-linux users comments. I think I remember one guy saying his "dreams were shattered" when the update came out saying that the linux port was denied, which I have to say I find a little amusing

    I actually just received a PM right then on kickstarter from Harebrained Schemes (Shadowrun devs) in response to a message I'd sent them asking about a linux port before they announced it was on the table. They mention, that they're just being "very careful not to over-commit to ideas and features just to get more funding" and just repeated they will do a careful considered response to the linux issue. Fair enough I guess, they're obviously trying to keep the scope very tight on the project which is understandable, elanthis is probably right - they probably don't have any guys on their team with any linux knowledge at all so they see this as being too costly in time or money in detriment of other things in the project, or with not enough return.

    Heh, I've just responded to their PM and included Ryan Gordon's details/resume in there just incase
    Well since they're already doing a OS X version i don't see how they'd need to dedicate so many resources to a linux port that it would cause them to loose focus. As is their statement doesn't make much sense. I think it's very likely that they're uninformed on the issue

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raven3x7 View Post
    Well since they're already doing a OS X version i don't see how they'd need to dedicate so many resources to a linux port that it would cause them to loose focus. As is their statement doesn't make much sense. I think it's very likely that they're uninformed on the issue
    Right. Because porting to Linux is as easy as s/Darwin/Linux/g on the codebase.

    It doesn't require rewriting the entire windowing system bindings (and then, hell, which ones to support is an issue on Linux). It doesn't require learning how to configure a build system when you don't have Visual Studio or XCode. It doesn't require porting various low-level system call uses that different between Darwin's and Linux's where they both diverge from POSIX. It doesn't require figuring out packaging and distribution on a platform that requires 50,000,000 different packages for every release of every distro and with no widely used central distribution channel. It doesn't require figuring out "basic" questions like where to store user configuration files or other data that is different than the other OSes (yes, that is a real problem real devs have to deal with, and it sounds simple but to people who don't know anything about Linux it's still something that takes time and energy to find out and then verify that you did right). It doesn't require testing differences in OpenGL supported versions and extensions. it doesn't require testing driver differences, both in video and in audio/networking/input.

    The list goes on.

    Porting takes time, effort, and money.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    Right. Because porting to Linux is as easy as s/Darwin/Linux/g on the codebase.

    It doesn't require rewriting the entire windowing system bindings (and then, hell, which ones to support is an issue on Linux). It doesn't require learning how to configure a build system when you don't have Visual Studio or XCode. It doesn't require porting various low-level system call uses that different between Darwin's and Linux's where they both diverge from POSIX. It doesn't require figuring out packaging and distribution on a platform that requires 50,000,000 different packages for every release of every distro and with no widely used central distribution channel. It doesn't require figuring out "basic" questions like where to store user configuration files or other data that is different than the other OSes (yes, that is a real problem real devs have to deal with, and it sounds simple but to people who don't know anything about Linux it's still something that takes time and energy to find out and then verify that you did right). It doesn't require testing differences in OpenGL supported versions and extensions. it doesn't require testing driver differences, both in video and in audio/networking/input.

    The list goes on.

    Porting takes time, effort, and money.
    They need to do none of the things above(some of which is also not true/irrelevant). They just need to hire someone to do the work for them and when they are already approaching 200% of their goal i'm pretty sure they could find the funding if they cared enough.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Also, they don't really need to handle packaging. I'm sure that if they released the source to the game launcher on Linux, somewhere in the community there'd be a guy who could make it work and package it for his distro.

    I'd be fine with a source release like that and having to build it myself, and with early beta access available a community member could probably make a compile / run script that would be available to everyone before release.

    I donated through paypal on their site and I'm unsure how to pull my funding, so hopefully they will come around.

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vhaarr View Post
    Also, they don't really need to handle packaging. I'm sure that if they released the source to the game launcher on Linux
    They even doesn't need to release sources. Gameolith, Canonical and Desura may handle packaging for Linux.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    407

    Default

    thread need some updates:

    Vigrior-maneuver-warfare (innovative space RTS/RTT; 40% founded; linux support confirmed)

    Aura-tactics (fully founded; using unity3d engine. "However, Unity 3.5 does support Google Native Client! (Which will run on Linux) We are currently in the process of migrating to Unity 3.5")


    more info on google's native client:
    http://blog.chromium.org/2011/12/gam...to-native.html

    So yes, both Unity3d and Moai engine (used on shadowrun), support Native client, so just like Aura-tactics, they should consider it as a "within their engine" solution so linux users can access their games.
    Last edited by madjr; 04-10-2012 at 10:53 AM.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    677

    Default

    After seeing Trine 2's text-based installer - I hope these games will come with .debs or mojosetup installers.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vadi View Post
    After seeing Trine 2's text-based installer - I hope these games will come with .debs or mojosetup installers.
    Keep in mind Trine 2 is still in beta, so the current installer might not be the final one

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •