id Software: Linux Hasn't Produced Positive Results

[AJSB]

Yeah, and that small portion of gamers are the most lucrative to hardware makers. I just buy an i3 and run Intel graphics on a cheap motherboard with 8GB of RAM. A gamer will likely buy an i5 or i7 k series, a $150-300 motherboard, 16GB+ of RAM and a $300-600 graphics card.

I don't think anyone notice that LESS than Zero is a NEGATIVE number and that meant that NO ONE plays games in a PC

Did you noticed the "-" next to the 10 and to the 20 in my post ?


But yeah, gamers spend a LOT of money in their rigs and if it wasn't gamers were using still Pentium I

[MonkeyPaw]

I don't think anyone notice that LESS than Zero is a NEGATIVE number and that meant that NO ONE plays games in a PC

Did you noticed the "-" next to the 10 and to the 20 in my post ?


But yeah, gamers spend a LOT of money in their rigs and if it wasn't gamers were using still Pentium I

I was more or less agreeing with you. PC gaming is small, but a very dedicated following. They are typically the dedicated few that OC the living piss out of everything, which in turn has encouraged manufacturers to build better components....for all of us. As much as I hate car/computer analogies, it's similar to how the sports and luxury cars from each manufacturer allow for better tech in our everyday drivers.

[AJSB]

I was more or less agreeing with you. PC gaming is small, but a very dedicated following. They are typically the dedicated few that OC the living piss out of everything, which in turn has encouraged manufacturers to build better components....for all of us. As much as I hate car/computer analogies, it's similar to how the sports and luxury cars from each manufacturer allow for better tech in our everyday drivers.

I fully agree with that...gaming is the driving force in PCs evolution, no doubt about that...anyone that think otherwise is delusional.

[elanthis]

Yeah, and that small portion of gamers are the most lucrative to hardware makers.

No they aren't. The volume in sales of the cheap parts vastly swamps the income they make from the high-end parts.

The only reason they care about you at all is because you're an advertising sap. Company A puts out stupid $800 CPU/GPU. Dumbass gamers gobble it up because it's so fast. Gaming magazines publish articles about how amazing Company A's $800 CPU/GPU is. Average Joe goes to buy a new part, but doesn't want to pay $800 for one part, because that's fucking retarded. He looks at the sanely priced $100-$300 parts. He remembers all the hype about how fast Company A's $800 part is. He buys Company A's $200 part. He never bothers to check and find out that Company B's $200 part actually has better performance in that price range.

It's all just marketing hype, and an age-old technique. Put out sensational announcement about amazing impractical product, get everyone talking about company's name, and ensure that customers come flocking to the company for all their not-amazing practical needs.

It's the same way, for instance, that Khronos has claimed for OpenGL 4.1, OpenGL 4.2, and now OpenGL 4.3 that it "finally" has parity with Direct3D and even leapfrogs it somewhat, three times in a row despite D3D not having changed since 2010. Or how Valve made sure to announce to the world how fast their Linux renderer was compared to Windows' D3D rather than comparing their games' performance to other games like most people care about, and poo on that evil mean Microsoft and their Windows Store that will sever Valve's 30% cut on most of the PC gaming market (granted, if Games for Windows Live is any indicator, PC gaming is fucked if Valve gets pushed out of the picture). Or how Microsoft claims that Windows Phone is the bestest phone OS ever and goddamn Metro is so very sexy and makes life so much better than that nasty Apple hipster crap, even though none of us have ever met a single soul who wanted a Windows Phone that didn't have an "i bing, u bing" bumper sticker on one end of his car and a Microsoft parking lot sticker on the other end. Or how Apple claims that PPC is the best thing since sliced bread and only a fool buys an Intel PC; crap, I mean how Apple claims that Intel is the best thing since sliced bread and only a fool buys a fine Intel CPU in some other clown's PC hardware that doesn't even have Firewire; crap, I mean how Apple claims that Intel is the best thing since sliced...

It's all just marketing.

[9a3eedi]

What a load of BS.
[1] Humble bundle proved that Linux users are willing to pay for software, twice as much as Windows users, that is.
[2] RedHat passing the 1B mark proves the Linux users willing to pay for support.
[3] As I'm being called cheap ass under achiever / nut case / etc, lets compare notes: In the past 10+ years I've spent a 7 digit number of Linux licenses. You've spent **** on Windows / MacOS / Windows licenses (digit count is sufficient)?
[4] Given the fact that 30%-80% (!!!!!!!!) of all Windows copies are pirated [1], and given the likely fact that game pirating is just as bad, I assume that Windows users are, and I quote "under achievers, the economic nut cases, the do nothings and anti establishment flakes", right?
[5] Have you consider that I, like many (!) of my friend and, wait for it, co-workers use Linux both at home and at work due to many diverse reasons beyond "software freedom", like customization? huge amount of developments tools? stability? performance? general-dislike for Microsoft direction? heck, personal preference?

Now, I understand some of the points you're raising and even agree with a couple of them. But your gross generalization is simply insulting.

- Gilboa
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_s...rating_systems

I agree with you and I don't agree with wizard69 entirely, but I have a few points

Just wondering about [2]... isn't the amount of support cash they're getting mostly from enterprise and not actual users?

There is one thing I might agree with wizard69 about, and that is that Linux users might be too "cheap" to be willing to pay for actual software. Why buy software when you can probably find an opensource alternative that runs almost or just as well? For example, if someone made a commercial office suite for Linux, would you buy it? Or would you just stick to LibreOffice? When you want to do something on Linux, what do you check first? the package manager which offers programs for free? Or some commercial app store?

I feel this mentality is the same with Android users as well.. people aren't willing to pay when there are lots of easily found free alternatives that may or may not be as good. I find that on Windows, those free alternatives are usually less and/or not very easily found sometimes.

I could be wrong though, but this is just my observation. Also, I think this wouldn't be the case with games, because free games that are also good rarely exist :P especially opensource ones

[uh20]

id's approach is reasonable, they are probably losing budget, and so they need to get back to putting resources effiently into the windows versions until otherwise

unless there is a personal bias, they only will pull out of linux because of lack of money, which you get 8x less revenue from (im too lazy to find the source of this, just kinda remember it)
they might also pull out because linux development is a bit new...'ish to them, and i guess slightly harder to develop for saying a bunch of dev tools are directx-coolaid boosters

its still a hostile territory out here
and agains't what anyone here prefers to happen, most companies should not jump on linux unless they have enough extra cash to do the full meal deal, such as valve, who have tons of un-invested money.

and as a final thought
i will now ;_;
oh what am i kidding, their games are slowly downgrading


also, first post, hai yall, stop posting such long confusing things, thanks, is this not just about id's reason to quit linux support, or did it turn into a multidiscussion battleground?

[kraftman]

definitely not

the gaming market is less than 0% of all desktop users, Windows included

That's interesting. However, my point is still correct in OS X case. Btw. are you according to PCs only or any other desktops (windows included is somehow misleading)?

[kraftman]

I was more or less agreeing with you. PC gaming is small, but a very dedicated following. They are typically the dedicated few that OC the living piss out of everything, which in turn has encouraged manufacturers to build better components....for all of us. As much as I hate car/computer analogies, it's similar to how the sports and luxury cars from each manufacturer allow for better tech in our everyday drivers.

In this case it doesn't matter how large or small PC gaming market is compared to non PC platforms. It only matters how many people use their PCs for playing games.

[Ferdinand]

I was more or less agreeing with you. PC gaming is small, but a very dedicated following. They are typically the dedicated few that OC the living piss out of everything, which in turn has encouraged manufacturers to build better components....for all of us. As much as I hate car/computer analogies, it's similar to how the sports and luxury cars from each manufacturer allow for better tech in our everyday drivers.

Most PC gamers play on facebook. Another big percentage don't know how to overclock and have never bought a videocard. That is why it will be so cool when integrated graphics and webbrowsers will be able to give AAA quality games for these people.

[Ferdinand]

I fully agree with that...gaming is the driving force in PCs evolution, no doubt about that...anyone that think otherwise is delusional.

SSD's are the current revolution and they do almost nothing for games.