I purchased one of these games on a Steam sale, but never played it. But I'll definitely be getting this, if only to support big titles coming to Linux.
Yeah personally I think it's the RIGHT kind of game to bring to Linux. It's not exactly the kind of thing/genre we have a lot of. In fact I can't think of any typical sport related game, though I'm sure there's something out there.
I can picture there being quite a market for it; Linux is no longer purely the realm of the absolute nerdy.
Another games that need to be available on Linux: Phantasy Star Online 2. The minimum requirement is friendly for low performance desktop and laptop.
I wasn't familiar with this franchise before now, when I saw the article title I was expecting to see something based on American football and was pleasantly surprised to find that it was a proper football game. This seems like it could be interesting; I will probably pick it up just to try it out.
Sonic on Linux would give me an orgasm (even if a lot of the Sonic games aren't that great, they can still be somewhat fun), and since they do release on several different platforms I don't think it is out of the question. Square Enix and Linux though? I really really hope they convert to Linux sometime too because I would love to see not only FF on Linux but also Thief 4 (and previous ones would be awesome too). Oh, and Kingdom Hearts. Linux needs sneakers and roleplaying games!
Originally Posted by Sonadow
I can't think of any sports titles either aside from the few racers that try to be realistic. This will certainly be good for the Linux software ecosystem including the Steambox.
Originally Posted by ElderSnake
Last edited by Yfrwlf; 05-28-2013 at 11:33 AM.
Just to clarify: I am referring to the existing PC versions of the games mentioned. Sonic Adventure DX, to my knowledge, is the only post-2D Sonic game that received a proper PC port. I have no problems with having the rest of the Sonic series stay as console exclusives since they were designed to belong on consoles.
Originally Posted by Yfrwlf
Same thing with Square's Final Fantasy series. To the best of my knowledge, only 4 Final Fantasy games (FF8, FF 11, FF14 and FF14 Reboot) were released for PC, one of which was a console-to-PC port (FF8) and the other 3 were exclusively designed for PC gaming. I don't have any problems with the console versions of the rest of the FF games not being ported over to the PC.
In fact, I am strongly against porting any console-exclusive title to the PC (that includes Linux) because console owners such as myself paid for the exclusivity for having the title on a specific console system. Ditto for Kingdom Hearts: I have sunk money into a PlayStation 2 and a Nintendo DS to play Kingdom Hearts so I will be understandably pissed to see KH ported onto the PC. Console-exclusives should remain as console-exclusives, period.
Last edited by Sonadow; 05-28-2013 at 12:05 PM.
Wrong. There is nothing stopping a studio from making a title multi-platform. Many games already exist that have both PlayStation, Xbox, Nintendo and PC ports. Just look at Capcom's lineup if you want a good real-world example; they have tons of multiplatform titles that exist on both PCs and consoles, and they also have various PC-exclusive and console-exclusive titles as well.
Originally Posted by Yfrwlf
If a title has already been released as multi-platform and includes a PC port then they can go ahead and re-release the PC port for Linux. That i have no problem with.
But if a title has already been established as a console exclusive I don't want it anywhere on a PC ever. I don't care if the title gets ported to other consoles (I didn't mind the fact that FF eventually reached the Xbox after being exclusive to Nintendo and Sony for so long even though I am a PlayStation owner; ditto for how Kingdom Hearts eventually found its way to the Nintendo consoles) but those titles have no business being on the PC.
The same thing applies for PC-exclusive games; I don't want them appearing anywhere near a console because they don't belong there, period. That is the main reason I don't own an Xbox: while they have their own Xbox-only exclusives, much of their catalogue still consists of PC-to-console ports which I am opposed to, on both principle and performance/playability. Portal is one such example of a game that should have stayed on the PC and never have gotten a console port.
That's why we pay for consoles; to enjoy access to each system's exclusive library of games. I skipped meals for months just to accumulate enough cash to buy my PS3 and the exclusive games for it, and I don't see why others can't do so.
Last edited by Sonadow; 05-28-2013 at 01:13 PM.
Because we enjoy meals more than consoles?
What kind of reasoning is that? You know, if the games get ported to SteamBox, they will also work on PCs. Because consoles are PCs, just with static hardware, branding, and freedom restrictions for keeping vendor lock-in. There is nothing special about them. You can plug a keyboard to a console (if it supports that, see freedom restrictions again) and it will play just like a PC. And you can plug a controller to a PC, and it will play just like a console. The fact that you see differences when you have ports is due to either the game being designed for one type of controller scheme in mind (which is fair enough, they should just leave the scheme as it was in that case, maybe offer another one as an unsupported alternative), or due to the perceived differences between the console and the PC markets, where typically console players are seen as people who like things to be on a silver platter, and PC players are seen as people who like to customise and tweak things. And I don't think such stereotypes are correct to begin with.
Originally Posted by Sonadow
What you get when buying such "console exclusive" titles is the chance to play them sooner. It doesn't mean that they always have to remain exclusive to the console – that's just destructive thinking. If you think that the console you bought would be worthless if the exclusive titles were ported to the PC, then perhaps you should also realise that the console was a poor purchase to begin with. At this point, your reasoning feels like "if I made a bad purchase, at least force others to make a bad purchase as well!", and that is not a constructive viewpoint.
Plus, buying consoles just for that encourages the vendors to continue their lobbying for console-exclusive titles. And that's just bad. It's artificial restrictions again, limits of freedom again. It shouldn't be encouraged in any way.
Personally I would love to have an opportunity to play Unreal Championship and Unreal Championship II. But it's not at all worth buying a whole (original) Xbox for, and supporting Microsoft in the process.