I don't know if you guys are following the latest news on windows 8 gaming. Valve and others (Rob Pardo from Blizzard included) are pretty pissed off with windows 8, because of the app store which will take a cut of game prices. So they're talking about migrating to linux, Valve already announced Steam will go to linux. Now they're reporting they're testing the Source Engine on Linux. And what surprised many people is that they're saying the game runs better on linux because OpenGL is faster than microsoft's directx.
How serious is this going to keep hapening? Are they really gonna migrate to linux? If AAA titles start releasing on both, and representing faster fps on linux. Would you change to linux just to play it?
edit: For those not following the news, here's the interview with Gabe Newell that started all this. When he said Valve wants to support linux because "windows 8 is a catastrophe for the PC industry". Blizzard's Rob Pardo later agreed with him:
For me its all about compatibility. If all my hardware and software plays fine on Linux (or better as this article says) then Linux is a strong possibility for me.
Only reason to have windows, is because most games are compatible with it. With indie devs and now blizz and valve switching. Linux becomes more and more viable.
In the end I don't really care which operating system I use. I will adapt to it. So if I can play my games on Linux I would happily switch.
Sometimes I think Microsoft try too hard in their products they miss the point. Look at Vista ffs. Now they're coming out with this Apple-inspired bullshit platform, and us gamers once again get left in the dust. The more similar to XP, the better.
Wow, interesting. Linux might be the Hardcore PC gamer OS, hopefully we mght get rid of CoD children on our future games, you know, their parents will keep using Windows.
On August 03 2012 02:18 Knighthawkbro wrote: The day I will switch is when Nvidia creates their own drivers for linux instead of using the generic open source drivers you can find.
Nvidia provides their proprietary driver for years now.
On August 03 2012 02:08 Medrea wrote: OpenGL is shit honestly. But even if you have a different opinion than me thats fine.
For what reason? From a developers point of view, OpenGL has some advantages over Direct3D, and almost no downsides. From a user point of view, it absolutely doesn't matter. The FPS differences that they showed will be like 1/10th of one FPS for an application that targets 60fps.
On August 03 2012 02:08 Medrea wrote: OpenGL is shit honestly. But even if you have a different opinion than me thats fine.
Its fine because.... Source Engine. Are you fucking kidding me? Who cares about that archaic crap anymore. Time to move on folks.
Because source engine from 2004 is exactly the same as the one valve games use now.
Actually, the source engine gets constantly improved, it's buildup modular, so different parts can be added on and removed. Also gameplay > graphics. I don't really care about the graphics honestly, source engine always had a nice feel to it. So fuck off with your archaic crap. Also I hope I don't have to remind you that there are a lot of BW fans out here. Are they playing and watching archaic crap too? I thought not.
Pretty cool they brought it to linux imo. From what I've hear the opinions on Windows 8 are quite controversial. Some people think it's shit, other people think it's amazing.
valve certainly won't drop support for windows just out of the clouds because microsoft gets a cut, they might earn a little less money that way but they still earn money so they'll stay for now. Maybe the gaming market *might* slowly move away, but certainly not in a single big "omg valve switched windows gaming is dead" bang.
That being said, more options for customers is always good. and if games on linux are maybe even sold cheaper than on win8 because of less third party fees, all the better. I just hope they realize that linux houses a whole bunch of geeks who will probably figure out easy ways to get around steam drm like offline mode not working or shit like that faster than when they stay on windows. But that again can only be good for customers, which is what we should care about. This in turn might however mean that less AAA titles will come out on steam, because ubisoft&co selling linux-compatible copies is certainly not going to happen. Although one might argue that ubisoft console ports are horribad anyways, so who cares.
Yay for valve on this one. Took long enough to pick up linux.
On August 03 2012 01:07 Psychobabas wrote: Personally I have no experience on linux at all.
For me its all about compatibility. If all my hardware and software plays fine on Linux (or better as this article says) then Linux is a strong possibility for me.
Idd im a coder and mainly a ms coder simply because i like their tools. But the other major reason is that i never use linux when i install it at home because historically nothing really runs on it .
That said i bet i still cant get decent drivers for my sound recording gear on it though.
I use linux on a day to day basis due to work related duties. I have a windows machine just
1/ to play games 2/ so my girlfriend doesn't go crazy when she uses the computer.
I don't think enough game companies will support linux for me to use it as an actual machine in the near future. but this is a HUGE step in that direction in the sense that if the big guns for for it, the rest of the flock will follow.
On August 03 2012 02:18 Knighthawkbro wrote: The day I will switch is when Nvidia creates their own drivers for linux instead of using the generic open source drivers you can find.
Nvidia provides their proprietary driver for years now.
Yea I know that, but the desclaimer they use is "Note that many Linux distributions provide their own packages of the NVIDIA Linux Graphics Driver in the distribution's native package management format. This may interact better with the rest of your distribution's framework, and you may want to use this rather than NVIDIA's official package." http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-amd64-295.59-driver.html Click on additional information And it known that Nvidia does not put that much into supporting those types of drivers
On August 03 2012 02:18 Knighthawkbro wrote: The day I will switch is when Nvidia creates their own drivers for linux instead of using the generic open source drivers you can find.
Nvidia provides their proprietary driver for years now.
Yea I know that, but the desclaimer they use is "Note that many Linux distributions provide their own packages of the NVIDIA Linux Graphics Driver in the distribution's native package management format. This may interact better with the rest of your distribution's framework, and you may want to use this rather than NVIDIA's official package." http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-amd64-295.59-driver.html Click on additional information And it known that Nvidia does not put that much into supporting those types of drivers
They are talking about packaging. The driver itself is proprietary (closed source code) so it's under full nvidia's control. Complaints about support are mostly about some very special features that you don't need at Desktop PC.
On August 03 2012 02:08 Medrea wrote: OpenGL is shit honestly. But even if you have a different opinion than me thats fine.
Its fine because.... Source Engine. Are you fucking kidding me? Who cares about that archaic crap anymore. Time to move on folks.
Because source engine from 2004 is exactly the same as the one valve games use now.
Actually, the source engine gets constantly improved, it's buildup modular, so different parts can be added on and removed. Also gameplay > graphics. I don't really care about the graphics honestly, source engine always had a nice feel to it. So fuck off with your archaic crap. Also I hope I don't have to remind you that there are a lot of BW fans out here. Are they playing and watching archaic crap too? I thought not.
Pretty cool they brought it to linux imo. From what I've hear the opinions on Windows 8 are quite controversial. Some people think it's shit, other people think it's amazing.
I don't do this very often, but holy shit Medrea got owned here.
It's amazing what Valve can do with their engine though. I had no idea it was modular, but I suppose after seeing games like Portal, TF2, and other recent titles that use that engine, it makes sense. Valve seems to pretty smart when it comes to developing their games.
So what opengl 4.2 probably vs d3d9, all the proved is that when they update their game engine(which source a old engine that gets patched sorta for every new game they make, leading to that steam bloat 10gig games) shit runs better. I mean l4d2 is what 3 maybe 4 years old depending on what they did with the engine past l4d, i doubt they added many more optimizations just accommodated for new weapons and zombie abilities.
A fairer comparison between the two would be opengl 2.0 or 2.1(which was shit horrid in featureset and as usual opengl is shitty to program with which is why directx took off). Opengl 4.2 is more like dx11 doesn't have some of the older things slowing it down such as the overhead which was commentated in the article. Really valve needs to release HL3 and a new game engine :D.
Btw people i doubt devs will move to linux and opengl(btw there are game engines that are coded in opengl take id software which swears by it), sure now OpenGL isn't the pure shitfest that it was in 2.0 and it has as diverse if not better featureset by default for once, then d3d11. But in terms of development money, support and ease of use directx is far better then trying to use opengl, openal and w.e else needed vs a full collection of api that directX offers.
On August 03 2012 02:18 Knighthawkbro wrote: The day I will switch is when Nvidia creates their own drivers for linux instead of using the generic open source drivers you can find.
Nvidia provides their proprietary driver for years now.
Yea I know that, but the desclaimer they use is "Note that many Linux distributions provide their own packages of the NVIDIA Linux Graphics Driver in the distribution's native package management format. This may interact better with the rest of your distribution's framework, and you may want to use this rather than NVIDIA's official package." http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-amd64-295.59-driver.html Click on additional information And it known that Nvidia does not put that much into supporting those types of drivers
They are talking about packaging. The driver itself is proprietary (closed source code) so it's under full nvidia's control. Complaints about support are mostly about some very special features that you don't need at Desktop PC.
Yea, I know that but if I were to switch I would notice a downgrade in performance in the games I own due to the fact that there isn't as much support as compared to a windows installation. That package I linked too supports almost all the graphics cards nvidia has to offer, but it is not tailored to an individual card like its windows counterpart
I've used Linux a ton and love it, would definitely use it if games were as compatible, I would even bare with FPS drops if that were the case, improved FPS would just be a nice bonus.
devs will never move to linux. developers can hardly release a complete game let alone developing for both opengl and d3d to include a tiny minority of users that strictly use only linux.
I can see a big push towards OpenGL and Linux on the horizon. At first that sounds ludicrous however I think not, Windows8 are pushing towards a windows store and xbox live tie-ins to try and take back some of steams revenue, however at the same time Valve are pushing for a linux client.
This would still sound like it wouldn't be enough on it's own after all why would AAA developers produce for OpenGL?
This is the big one, coming soon are the next generation of consoles. Sony's development libraries crippled the Playstaton 3's potential for quite some time, plus Valve and Sony have already demonstrated a working relationship. Combine all these factors together and it seems obvious to me Playstation 4's development will be done using the OpenGL libraries with Sony pushing for home console domination and Valve pushing for a Linux PC gaming revolution.
Can someone more computer literate explain to me exactly what the difference is between Linux and Windows is? Advantages/Disadvantages of both? Why should I care about this?
On August 03 2012 02:08 Medrea wrote: OpenGL is shit honestly. But even if you have a different opinion than me thats fine.
Its fine because.... Source Engine. Are you fucking kidding me? Who cares about that archaic crap anymore. Time to move on folks.
Because source engine from 2004 is exactly the same as the one valve games use now.
Actually, the source engine gets constantly improved, it's buildup modular, so different parts can be added on and removed. Also gameplay > graphics. I don't really care about the graphics honestly, source engine always had a nice feel to it. So fuck off with your archaic crap. Also I hope I don't have to remind you that there are a lot of BW fans out here. Are they playing and watching archaic crap too? I thought not.
Pretty cool they brought it to linux imo. From what I've hear the opinions on Windows 8 are quite controversial. Some people think it's shit, other people think it's amazing.
Someone is a little bit upset need a tissue for the issue? In all honesty it's whoever's fault for buying windows 8... Win7 is perfectly fine, runs near perfectly and will still be service packed, no reason to upgrade unless you NEED to have it (which you don't) stick with win7 and enjoy yourself, still has years to go.
On August 03 2012 02:08 Medrea wrote: OpenGL is shit honestly. But even if you have a different opinion than me thats fine.
Its fine because.... Source Engine. Are you fucking kidding me? Who cares about that archaic crap anymore. Time to move on folks.
Because source engine from 2004 is exactly the same as the one valve games use now.
Actually, the source engine gets constantly improved, it's buildup modular, so different parts can be added on and removed. Also gameplay > graphics. I don't really care about the graphics honestly, source engine always had a nice feel to it. So fuck off with your archaic crap. Also I hope I don't have to remind you that there are a lot of BW fans out here. Are they playing and watching archaic crap too? I thought not.
Pretty cool they brought it to linux imo. From what I've hear the opinions on Windows 8 are quite controversial. Some people think it's shit, other people think it's amazing.
Yes yes. "HAD"
Past tense. Thats my point -.-
And yes BW is very very old now. But it's not an engine. Its a game. And a very good one.
The opinions about windows 8 has nothing to do with its backend operating system. Its backend is fine, people hate windows 8 because of the god awful metro frontend, and like a million other user interface things it does wrong. Win 8 actually has proper thread scheduling, that alone is huge.
Also, you dont care about the graphics? This is a thread about graphics -.-
On August 03 2012 02:08 Medrea wrote: OpenGL is shit honestly. But even if you have a different opinion than me thats fine.
Its fine because.... Source Engine. Are you fucking kidding me? Who cares about that archaic crap anymore. Time to move on folks.
Because source engine from 2004 is exactly the same as the one valve games use now.
Actually, the source engine gets constantly improved, it's buildup modular, so different parts can be added on and removed. Also gameplay > graphics. I don't really care about the graphics honestly, source engine always had a nice feel to it. So fuck off with your archaic crap. Also I hope I don't have to remind you that there are a lot of BW fans out here. Are they playing and watching archaic crap too? I thought not.
Pretty cool they brought it to linux imo. From what I've hear the opinions on Windows 8 are quite controversial. Some people think it's shit, other people think it's amazing.
I don't do this very often, but holy shit Medrea got owned here.
It's amazing what Valve can do with their engine though. I had no idea it was modular, but I suppose after seeing games like Portal, TF2, and other recent titles that use that engine, it makes sense. Valve seems to pretty smart when it comes to developing their games.
Yes Valve has done ok with it but the engine itself has a lot of problems. Source games have huge optimization issues because the engine simply does not scale well at all (particularly with GPU's). And other people seem to be terrible at using it properly. Vindictus is a good example of a game that looks mediocre and runs slower than Crysis 2. Team Fortress 2, awful optimization issues with both nVidia and AMD hardware. You can look on TL alone and see all the threads with people complaining about it.
There are a LOT of source games out on the market. But source itself is really long in the teeth. Now if this was an article about Unreal Engine 3, or 4. THAT would turn more heads. (UE3 scales really really well).
Lol windows 8 hate has always been funny, it's metro layout isn't just made for touchscreen it's made off the data of windows 7 users because they rarely touched the start button, most of the time they pinned a program and clicked that, or clicked on desktop icons, all they did was extend that out, made icons bigger and added more functionality to them. Also i find it funny because isn't there a thread on tl about rainmeter and shiz which is about adding functionality similar to metro.
People who hate on the metro interface never gave it a time of day, as in used it for a day with the goal on learning the new ui. Instead of just shitting on it because it's a change.
Btw again, devs don't develop games for OpenGL because you'd still have to port them to xbox360 the biggest gaming market. OpenGL for ps3 is not the same for linux or mac, ps3 OpenGL is basically an emulation layer on top of libGCM and devs hate using it vs the ease of use of directX. Development money from places like nvidia and amd, let alone you're not counting all the gaming studios under microsoft games.
But if by "shit" you mean "harder to use" and "bad documentation". Then yea, I agree.
There is more to it than that.
But as I said I just dont like OpenGL at all and I am open to other peoples opinions.
For others who dont know, OpenGL versus DirectX is a Holy War topic that people get into enormous flame wars over. Quite honestly, I don't see there being much of an end performance difference between the two except in exacerbated cricumstances. The user doesnt care part is true. Which to me means ease of use and clarity is the primary defining factor. I just think people like OpenGL because DirectX is the establishment and hipsters are all about bringing down the establishment.
Carmack used OpenGL for RAGE, and by his own admission that game (release) was a total clusterfuck. Though he didnt say because of OpenGL of course. But it makes me worry when such talent fails.
On August 03 2012 03:05 semantics wrote: So what opengl 4.2 probably vs d3d9, all the proved is that when they update their game engine(which source a old engine that gets patched sorta for every new game they make, leading to that steam bloat 10gig games) shit runs better. I mean l4d2 is what 3 maybe 4 years old depending on what they did with the engine past l4d, i doubt they added many more optimizations just accommodated for new weapons and zombie abilities.
A fairer comparison between the two would be opengl 2.0 or 2.1(which was shit horrid in featureset and as usual opengl is shitty to program with which is why directx took off). Opengl 4.2 is more like dx11 doesn't have some of the older things slowing it down such as the overhead which was commentated in the article. Really valve needs to release HL3 and a new game engine :D.
Btw people i doubt devs will move to linux and opengl(btw there are game engines that are coded in opengl take id software which swears by it), sure now OpenGL isn't the pure shitfest that it was in 2.0 and it has as diverse if not better featureset by default for once, then d3d11. But in terms of development money, support and ease of use directx is far better then trying to use opengl, openal and w.e else needed vs a full collection of api that directX offers.
Ok, first off. The API is not the main reason games run better on Linux. It's the kernel itself. Linux handles memory better than windows. Programming languages runs a lot faster in linux. Even the netcode is superior in the linux kernel.
You could argue about OpenGL vs D3D all you want, but it's all about what developers got used to. Many companies refuse to use D3D because they find it more difficult and they more importantly want to push more platforms (ID Software, Blizzard also prefer OpenGL). Microsoft made a push to monopolize the gaming market with their fud campaigns. Unfortunately it worked, and most developers now are schooled in Direct3D and not OpenGL.
As I said I think the end performance differences between the two API's are nominal. I think its easier to fuck up big with OGL than with D3D. And I would use both Blizzard and ID as examples of fucking up big when it comes to runtimes in modern times (last 3 years).
And yeah Linux runs stuff faster, that is basically what it was bred for to begin with.
I hope this means that linux will have more gaming options, becuase wine is kinda bad. I've always been a linux fan boy, so i'm biased, but i hope that linux begins to get a bigger market share at the cost of microsoft and windows. If this lets me stopp dual booting windows to play games, i have no complaints.
On August 03 2012 04:03 heishe wrote: Why is it easier to fuck up big time with OpenGL? Why "do you just not like it" as much as D3D?
Prior experience. Probably some bias mixed in there and I will admit that. Im old enough to do that. I learned OpenGL's api first back in high school when OpenGL was in the spot D3D is now. Popular. When we learned D3D, the experience was way less jagged.
Hipsters all clamored around D3D if I remember. And I did like it as well though I hate hipsters. Maybe the times have changed, but so far judging from the OpenGL AA and AAA titles that have attempted to use it to its fullest Im hesitant to think they have. OpenGL proponents always talk about its performance and features, but I don't really see many claims about its usability being easier, which is very important.
I'm not seeing evidence in the OP's link that Valve has any intention of making Linux their primary OS, and haven't seen reports of Blizzard heading in that direction either. Any sources to corroborate this speculation? Valve/Blizzard thoughts on the Windows Store?
If games and applications gain support on Linux, then I will switch when MS stops supporting windows 7.
On August 03 2012 04:28 Excalibur_Z wrote: I'm not seeing evidence in the OP's link that Valve has any intention of making Linux their primary OS, and haven't seen reports of Blizzard heading in that direction either. Any sources to corroborate this speculation? Valve/Blizzard thoughts on the Windows Store?
On August 03 2012 04:28 Excalibur_Z wrote: I'm not seeing evidence in the OP's link that Valve has any intention of making Linux their primary OS, and haven't seen reports of Blizzard heading in that direction either. Any sources to corroborate this speculation? Valve/Blizzard thoughts on the Windows Store?
It has nothing to do with programming it has everything to do with Microsoft store vs steam. And a little to do with hyping up the steam box which is suppose to be android based. Linux will never be their primary os when there aren't enough people on it esp when windows is like 95% of steamusers and will stay that way because not all games will port to linux so easily.
On August 03 2012 04:28 Excalibur_Z wrote: I'm not seeing evidence in the OP's link that Valve has any intention of making Linux their primary OS, and haven't seen reports of Blizzard heading in that direction either. Any sources to corroborate this speculation? Valve/Blizzard thoughts on the Windows Store?
I have other issues with the source as well.
OP's source talks about FPS differences on a game thats running over 200 FPS. You do not do benches this way because factors not included are at play. Like bus speeds and bandwidth with PCI-e.
NOTE that the OP does not include the following.
Motherboard. RAM speed, just size was included. What bandwidth the card was operating in (probably 16x, but no mention worries me).
And yet the source talks about framerates in excess of 300+.
Nope. OP is trying to make a profound statement, but the statement is incomplete.
120hz monitors have just started becoming consumer mainstream. Talk of such high framerates is a bit silly.
On August 03 2012 04:28 Excalibur_Z wrote: I'm not seeing evidence in the OP's link that Valve has any intention of making Linux their primary OS, and haven't seen reports of Blizzard heading in that direction either. Any sources to corroborate this speculation? Valve/Blizzard thoughts on the Windows Store?
Didn't think it was necessary. This is literally all over the news, so I thought TL'ers would be aware. Haven't this been posted here before? Anyway...
Then Rob Pardo from Blizzard tweets agreeing with him: -
And now the latest news, that I just posted here. Valve now announces their own benchmarks claiming they just noticed their games run faster on Linux than they did on Windows.
On August 03 2012 01:22 Morthy wrote: Only reason to have windows, is because most games are compatible with it. With indie devs and now blizz and valve switching. Linux becomes more and more viable.
In the end I don't really care which operating system I use. I will adapt to it. So if I can play my games on Linux I would happily switch.
Wait what? How is blizzard switching towards linux? Last thing they released on Linux was during Vanilla Wow closed beta afaik.
Edit: oh you're refering to the Rob Pardo tweet above me?
As of now, Linux is not that "make it alone" as it was, say, five years ago. If you do want to use Linux you will face little troubles, like a lot of companies crate software that works for Win-OS only, but for gaming I'd say that Linux got much brighter future than Win. As long as we get some sort of nice support from game designers actually caring about customers and not about getting paid by Microsoft.
^ games for mac are more likely to happen then games for linux just due to market share and type of buyer. Next thing people will say is opera will overtake chrome, ie and firefox after all it has a bright future. And Euclideon's engine will make polygon games a thing of the past.
Of course they reports things like this, they need to move to Linux now when Microsoft has their own integrated software store.
Why would anyone want to install third party software like Steam when the same functionality can be found integrated in Windows? Developers will slowly move over to Microsofts marketplace when it becomes more and more popular.
Valve needs to switch their main platform or else they will go under. Praising the new platform as well as talking shit about the old one a tactic to get more people to follow them.
Well, linux always seemed like that exciting shiny new thing to try out, but I never did so because of gaming. If that will no longer be a problem in the future, Linux all the way, baby!
On August 03 2012 06:15 semantics wrote: ^ games for mac are more likely to happen then games for linux just due to market share and type of buyer. Next thing people will say is opera will overtake chrome, ie and firefox after all it has a bright future. And Euclideon's engine will make polygon games a thing of the past.
When publishers makes games for Mac, the game is almost ready for Linux at the same time. The systems are so equal to eachother on a library level that if you use OpenGL it's only the QA on another system that is holding you back.
Bear in mind, Steam had "linux" support since it was born. When it was released it had files named "something_linux" so they were testing at that time, but the driver support wasn't there at the time for good 3D, so the business plan properly wasn't that good at the time.
On August 03 2012 06:27 eviltomahawk wrote: What if patch 1.5 is actually bug-free on Linux and runs better on it too?
/conspiracy-bisu
LOL
I was pretty pumped when I heard several months ago Valve was porting L4D2 and other games to Linux. Besides, not only the gaming corner of Linux will improve by Valve's efforts. By working together with AMD/Nvidia they work on improving drivers what will help the whole community, like they said on their blog site. Looking forward to a time where we are allowed to choose what OS we want to play our favorite games on.
I'm not up on Windows 8 but is the concern that programs are going to be treated like phone apps in that you have to either crack the OS or install them through the built in store which Microsoft is going to take a huge cut from? I find it hard to believe that MS is short sighted enough to do that considering the drastic impact it'll have on free programs and small developers of non-gaming applications with built in subscriptions.
On August 03 2012 04:28 Excalibur_Z wrote: I'm not seeing evidence in the OP's link that Valve has any intention of making Linux their primary OS, and haven't seen reports of Blizzard heading in that direction either. Any sources to corroborate this speculation? Valve/Blizzard thoughts on the Windows Store?
Didn't think it was necessary. This is literally all over the news, so I thought TL'ers would be aware. Haven't this been posted here before? Anyway...
And now the latest news, that I just posted here. Valve now announces their own benchmarks claiming they just noticed their games run faster on Linux than they did on Windows.
Thanks, I hadn't seen it before. I am a little confused as to why Blizzard and Valve are flipping out so hard over this because I believe it's only been confirmed that WinRT (tablet OS/ARM) apps will be exclusively available on the Microsoft Store, not that Win8 itself will be a closed environment. Therefore WinRT:MS Store::iOS:iTunes Store.
Now, if Blizz and Valve have plans for WinRT deployment (and I have no reason to believe they wouldn't in some form) then that would be justification to complain, because MS is automatically getting a cut. From what I understand, Win8 should operate very similarly to previous Windows OSs and won't have the MS Store governing every non-WinRT Win8 purchase.
On August 03 2012 15:52 Medrea wrote: Whoa whoa whoa.
Who said Win 8 would be a closed environment.
What other reason would they have for being so frustrated with it? Seems like if you're not making apps for the store and you continue to sell direct, you're fine.
i've been out of the loop but my understanding is that opengl has been known to be capable of outperforming directx for a while. the problem was/is that the infastructure and distrobution are both fueling directx development, as well as hindering opengl development. it's not finacially viable until everyone else does it. with John and iD turning their backs on pure PC gaming (he made opengl what is currently is and would be the one to call upon to lead this charge.), it will take another powerhouse to redirect the industry. no pun intended. valve couldn't have done this 5-10 years ago. now they might actually have enough power over the industry to dictate where gaming is going to be. this is a blessing but it will not be immediately around the corner.
If microsoft want a cut from game sales, we'd have 2 middlemen microsoft and valve and I doubt the much loved Valve would put up with someone taking their profits.
On August 03 2012 16:06 konadora wrote: all we have to do is stay on windows 7 :p
You mean on Windows XP At this moment, there's not a single thing that runs on Windows 7 that can't run on WinXP for me, while the reverse is unfortunately true
On August 03 2012 16:06 konadora wrote: all we have to do is stay on windows 7 :p
I'm not tech savvy but that is what I'm planning to do for years to come. XP survived 10 years before first game(s) dropped support (BF3), please do point out if I got it wrong.
And following the usual Microsoft trend, Windows 9 might just make everything good again. Although I've always found the prices on Windows OS a rip off but as there's never been good other options and I try to avoid pirating I've just dealt with it.
It's still nice to see Linux catching up a little, maybe one day I'l be playing games on Linux but that day is still pretty far.
On August 03 2012 01:39 jpak wrote: It would give me a good reason to learn linux.
Contrary to popular belief, there's very little to learn, yet there's this stigma that you have to use terminals all day and be a neckbeard or nothing works. Maybe the case 10 years ago, now everything is graphical and super easy while still being tinker able for those who know how (or those who like to learn!).
On August 03 2012 16:06 konadora wrote: all we have to do is stay on windows 7 :p
You mean on Windows XP At this moment, there's not a single thing that runs on Windows 7 that can't run on WinXP for me, while the reverse is unfortunately true
Hmmm?
Like what? Win 7 has full compatibility modes with Win XP.
On August 03 2012 01:39 jpak wrote: It would give me a good reason to learn linux.
Contrary to popular belief, there's very little to learn, yet there's this stigma that you have to use terminals all day and be a neckbeard or nothing works. Maybe the case 10 years ago, now everything is graphical and super easy while still being tinker able for those who know how (or those who like to learn!).
Depends on what you want to do though. Yeah, my mother could use linux and never touch the terminal, no doubt. But if you want to do some light development work etc, not too advanced, you will definitely have to get used to the terminal. Then again, if you're good enough with computers to want to do stuff like that, learning linux on that level is a breeze.
On August 03 2012 16:06 konadora wrote: all we have to do is stay on windows 7 :p
You mean on Windows XP At this moment, there's not a single thing that runs on Windows 7 that can't run on WinXP for me, while the reverse is unfortunately true
Hmmm?
Like what? Win 7 has full compatibility modes with Win XP.
Tons of games don't run as well on XP either (XP doesn't even support higher version of directx if I remember correctly). Honestly, staying on XP is a dumb idea unless you have a really old computer.
On August 03 2012 06:20 Batch wrote: Of course they reports things like this, they need to move to Linux now when Microsoft has their own integrated software store.
Why would anyone want to install third party software like Steam when the same functionality can be found integrated in Windows? Developers will slowly move over to Microsofts marketplace when it becomes more and more popular.
Valve needs to switch their main platform or else they will go under. Praising the new platform as well as talking shit about the old one a tactic to get more people to follow them.
Because most gamers already have a lot of games on steam. What incentive will I have to switch to windows game just because it's "pre-installed?" It's like asking "why would anyone install a third party media player when there's windows already integrated." I think you know the answer to that one.
I had a shitty 10 year old laptop and put linux on it but never got round to playing with it. At the moment I have a 2 year old samsung laptop that does fine for sc2 and Day Z but I'm soon to buy a new pc and if I can save the money and have a free OS, fuck yeah I'll use linux.
Linux isn't as hard as people believe, and I'm sure that with valve going into linux, they would release their own version on linux that is super simple to use and looks beautiful. It WILL happen.....I hope
The problem with Linux is a number of distributions and different version of dependencies between libraries. To develop a product targeted for mass audience, where anyone has a different distribution with different kernel, and etc will be hell. It might happen that there will be certain distributions for which games will be written, lead basically to the same situation as we have now, just instead of Windows we will have lets say Ubuntu or other dist.
On August 03 2012 17:19 Roman666 wrote: The problem with Linux is a number of distributions and different version of dependencies between libraries. To develop a product targeted for mass audience, where anyone has a different distribution with different kernel, and etc will be hell. It might happen that there will be certain distributions for which games will be written, lead basically to the same situation as we have now, just instead of Windows we will have lets say Ubuntu or other dist.
Except instead of paying for Windows and Microsoft Office, you'll get your operating system for free and use free software.
On August 03 2012 16:32 Medrea wrote: I play the most obscure titles imaginable and I have em all working fine on Win7
Yeah, same here.
I was actually an XP loyalist for the longest time. I only switched to Win 7 last year (skipped Vista) when I realized that really the only way I've been putting it off was due to appearance and various superficial differences rather than any lack in functionality.
Once I set up a proper Windows Classic theme, together with the old style start menus and taskbars, I felt at home and everything runs perfectly.
Yeah once games are generally supported/aimed toward Linux users I'll switch at the drop of a hat. Those are the only thing left keeping me on Windows.
On August 03 2012 17:19 Roman666 wrote: The problem with Linux is a number of distributions and different version of dependencies between libraries. To develop a product targeted for mass audience, where anyone has a different distribution with different kernel, and etc will be hell. It might happen that there will be certain distributions for which games will be written, lead basically to the same situation as we have now, just instead of Windows we will have lets say Ubuntu or other dist.
Nah, it doesn't work like that. Different distros are just different combinations of linux software, there's nothing exclusive. Any linux program you want, you can have on any distro, you just need to install it. Same would happen with games, if they depend on library X, just install it. Now if you do that using apt-get, manually or any other package system, that's up to you and your distro, nothing else.
On August 03 2012 17:29 Kyir wrote: Yeah once games are generally supported/aimed toward Linux users I'll switch at the drop of a hat. Those are the only thing left keeping me on Windows.
Over time I've come to accept Microsoft as not being the devil, but they sure make it difficult to learn how to do things that aren't "Microsoft approved."
By which I mean as I've grown older and taught myself programming, web design, and game design and become more experienced, the problems I often encountered and still do encounter are very often Microsoft's doing. When you're reading an API manual or some SDK, the exceptions and special notes are almost always for Windows or Microsoft. Learning web design was the worst; every tutorial I found had exceptions for IE, and notes saying "this is standard, but Microsoft doesn't support it so here's a complicated workaround for Internet Explorer that should work"
DirectX vs OpenGL is yet another way they've fucked the programming world up with their own greed and locking people into Windows. People have to use DirectX because it's what windows uses, but only windows uses it efficiently leaving people who want to write portable games having to use DirectX for windows (so they have the buzzwords, the brand recognition and Microsoft's heavenly blessing) and OpenGL for everything else, and when you've got most of your target audience on Windows, you can't exactly leave a lot of time for optimising OpenGL from a business sense.
It's such a fucking awful situation. If you don't buy the DirectX games, you're running the game dev businesses into the ground, not microsoft. If you don't buy Windows, you can't play the games so you have to buy windows, meaning no matter what, Microsoft gets your money. Even if you only buy games with crossplatform support, Microsoft still gets money from licensing fees and shit like that.
I have hope the situation can and will be changed, but I'd be surprised if it happens in the next 5 years, and still a little shocked if it happens in the next 10. Microsoft are getting better, but slowly. I've got to give them credit for taking full advantage of the situation they were presented, and from a business perspective they fully deserved boatloads of money. But as their stranglehold gets looser, we need to make sure that no company ever has so much control again... and Apple aren't much better and seem to be slowly digging their claws into the mobile market.
On August 03 2012 18:16 SgtCoDFish wrote: Over time I've come to accept Microsoft as not being the devil, but they sure make it difficult to learn how to do things that aren't "Microsoft approved."
By which I mean as I've grown older and taught myself programming, web design, and game design and become more experienced, the problems I often encountered and still do encounter are very often Microsoft's doing. When you're reading an API manual or some SDK, the exceptions and special notes are almost always for Windows or Microsoft. Learning web design was the worst; every tutorial I found had exceptions for IE, and notes saying "this is standard, but Microsoft doesn't support it so here's a complicated workaround for Internet Explorer that should work"
DirectX vs OpenGL is yet another way they've fucked the programming world up with their own greed and locking people into Windows. People have to use DirectX because it's what windows uses, but only windows uses it efficiently leaving people who want to write portable games having to use DirectX for windows (so they have the buzzwords, the brand recognition and Microsoft's heavenly blessing) and OpenGL for everything else, and when you've got most of your target audience on Windows, you can't exactly leave a lot of time for optimising OpenGL from a business sense.
It's such a fucking awful situation. If you don't buy the DirectX games, you're running the game dev businesses into the ground, not microsoft. If you don't buy Windows, you can't play the games so you have to buy windows, meaning no matter what, Microsoft gets your money. Even if you only buy games with crossplatform support, Microsoft still gets money from licensing fees and shit like that.
I have hope the situation can and will be changed, but I'd be surprised if it happens in the next 5 years, and still a little shocked if it happens in the next 10. Microsoft are getting better, but slowly. I've got to give them credit for taking full advantage of the situation they were presented, and from a business perspective they fully deserved boatloads of money. But as their stranglehold gets looser, we need to make sure that no company ever has so much control again... and Apple aren't much better and seem to be slowly digging their claws into the mobile market.
great post. the only thing i would add is that people don't even really understand that video cards have been tailored to directx for several years now as well. so we would have to go backwards quite a ways to even start going forward again with opengl. hardware isn't engineered over night. it all sounds so shady that it's hard to believe it wasn't scripted.
On August 03 2012 16:06 konadora wrote: all we have to do is stay on windows 7 :p
You mean on Windows XP At this moment, there's not a single thing that runs on Windows 7 that can't run on WinXP for me, while the reverse is unfortunately true
Hmmm?
Like what? Win 7 has full compatibility modes with Win XP.
My mouse (MX510) drivers don't work on Windows 7. I've had the mouse for nine years now, and only repairs I've done on it is change the feet and open it up to clean it once. Works good, would work better with drivers. It bothers me a bit, as the mouse movements with drivers are really really smooth, but not enough to revert back to XP. A bit of a side-problem from newer technology is that my motherboard doesn't have a PS/2 port any more, and I'm stuck on USB. Other than that, everything I use runs just fine on either OS.
On August 03 2012 16:06 konadora wrote: all we have to do is stay on windows 7 :p
You mean on Windows XP At this moment, there's not a single thing that runs on Windows 7 that can't run on WinXP for me, while the reverse is unfortunately true
Hmmm?
Like what? Win 7 has full compatibility modes with Win XP.
My mouse (MX510) drivers don't work on Windows 7. I've had the mouse for nine years now, and only repairs I've done on it is change the feet and open it up to clean it once. Works good, would work better with drivers. It bothers me a bit, as the mouse movements with drivers are really really smooth, but not enough to revert back to XP. A bit of a side-problem from newer technology is that my motherboard doesn't have a PS/2 port any more, and I'm stuck on USB. Other than that, everything I use runs just fine on either OS.
Hmm are you talking about some specific driver version that no longer works or are you saying MX510 just doesn't have win7 compatible drivers? Because if it's the latter, then you need to work on your googling skills, as I found this in 10 seconds as the 2nd highest hit.
e: just in case the download link from that link above doesn't work, here should be an alternate location for setpoint 4.80. It says xp/vista, but I assume it works in 7 based on the info on the first link.
They did say "we found we could get more performance out of the hardware, these tweaks showed improvement even on Windows!" -.. so hopefully the new code gets imported in to all new updates to Source engine games. because +30fps rocks.
On August 03 2012 21:19 DarKcS wrote: They did say "we found we could get more performance out of the hardware, these tweaks showed improvement even on Windows!" -.. so hopefully the new code gets imported in to all new updates to Source engine games. because +30fps rocks.
that would be so awesome, its allmost too good to be true...
The moment blizz switches to linux, I'm switching as well Recently, more and more software has become linux compatible, I feel like soon there will be no advantage in using windows.
Like what? Win 7 has full compatibility modes with Win XP.
That's not entirely true. I know The Sims does not run on win7 x86 (or crashes at startup), compatibility mode and all that jazz does not work. Obviously software as old as that will not be supported for decades and I don't really mind, but I couldn't get it to run on my partents' computer. And yeah, I've googled for workarounds - found nothing.
No I will not switch. Why? Because it doesn't even matter anymore. Graphics won't improve significantly anymore. I no longer have any desire to improve my computer's graphical performance.
On August 03 2012 23:03 Greggle wrote: No I will not switch. Why? Because it doesn't even matter anymore. Graphics won't improve significantly anymore. I no longer have any desire to improve my computer's graphical performance.
Graphics will definitely go on improving. We're seeing a slowdown over the last few years as the console hardware is so outdated, and developers don't want to lose sales by sticking to PC.
Give it another 3-4 years and the games we're playing now will look dated.
On August 03 2012 17:19 Roman666 wrote: The problem with Linux is a number of distributions and different version of dependencies between libraries. To develop a product targeted for mass audience, where anyone has a different distribution with different kernel, and etc will be hell. It might happen that there will be certain distributions for which games will be written, lead basically to the same situation as we have now, just instead of Windows we will have lets say Ubuntu or other dist.
Nah, it doesn't work like that. Different distros are just different combinations of linux software, there's nothing exclusive. Any linux program you want, you can have on any distro, you just need to install it. Same would happen with games, if they depend on library X, just install it. Now if you do that using apt-get, manually or any other package system, that's up to you and your distro, nothing else.
Still it creates a headache for developers - they need to state precisely which version of the library they compiled the game against - in open source development you can not hope that some day, one guy wont come up with the idea: "Oh this API is shit, lets totally burn it and rewrite it". End user will be forced to downgrade his system to older libs to play a certain game, or keep several versions of one library on his system. Still i think this is a move in a right direction. At the moment people are basically forced to buy Windows if they want to play a game. They can try to run it on a different OS but this is unsupported by game making companies and most of the time they wont get the same experience when running it on target OS, that is Windows.
On August 03 2012 23:03 Greggle wrote: No I will not switch. Why? Because it doesn't even matter anymore. Graphics won't improve significantly anymore. I no longer have any desire to improve my computer's graphical performance.
Graphics will definitely go on improving. We're seeing a slowdown over the last few years as the console hardware is so outdated, and developers don't want to lose sales by sticking to PC.
Give it another 3-4 years and the games we're playing now will look dated.
we have a slow down due to consoles being the main area where games are sold outside of that pc games industry largely relies on server side games for 2 reasons freemium games people tend to spend more money on avg then if they priced it at a set amount and you also have a harder time pirating a game that is partly on a server somewhere. Consoles hold us back becuase developers don't really use new technology they stick to what the consoles can support and more pc ports are half assed.
I don't know if you just read a kotaku article or some shit about what Pardo actually said but it was "not awesome for Blizzard either." I'd hardly call that a full agreement with the statement that w8 is a "catastrophe for everyone in the PC space."
Pardo did not echo Newell's statements as implied. And the only reason W8 is a 'catastrophe' is because the planned MS Store is a threat to Steam's current almost-monopoly on Windows digital distribution of games.
I can hardly imagine, that buying games through Steam/Battle.net will not be possible in Windows 8!? If that's the case Microsoft should be boycotted - i would be pissed as well. The game industry was backing up Microsoft for years now.
On August 04 2012 05:19 Sanz wrote: I can hardly imagine, that buying games through Steam/Battle.net will not be possible in Windows 8!? If that's the case Microsoft should be boycotted - i would be pissed as well. The game industry was backing up Microsoft for years now.
how should that work? a game is just an application, and microsoft sure as hell cannot block arbitrary application installation unless it's through their store (think iphone without jailbreak), that would be their death sentence. The only game specific thing they could block is the integration like a shortcut in the games folder and the likes, but who cares about that anyways.. other than that, how would you make the operating system tell the difference between a 3d simulating CAD program and a video game? that's not possible.
and buying through something like steam is the same as buying through amazon. they can't block buying either because buying something over the internet is just visiting a bunch of pages, you can't automatically distinguish game sales from other sales.
tldr: you can't block installing or buying games unless you block installing anything or visiting any websites as well. and that's not feasible.
On August 04 2012 05:19 Sanz wrote: I can hardly imagine, that buying games through Steam/Battle.net will not be possible in Windows 8!? If that's the case Microsoft should be boycotted - i would be pissed as well. The game industry was backing up Microsoft for years now.
If that happens idk what I will do. Steam is more important to me than Windows and buying an Apple is not an option.
On August 03 2012 03:16 sinii wrote: I can see a big push towards OpenGL and Linux on the horizon. At first that sounds ludicrous however I think not, Windows8 are pushing towards a windows store and xbox live tie-ins to try and take back some of steams revenue, however at the same time Valve are pushing for a linux client.
This would still sound like it wouldn't be enough on it's own after all why would AAA developers produce for OpenGL?
This is the big one, coming soon are the next generation of consoles. Sony's development libraries crippled the Playstaton 3's potential for quite some time, plus Valve and Sony have already demonstrated a working relationship. Combine all these factors together and it seems obvious to me Playstation 4's development will be done using the OpenGL libraries with Sony pushing for home console domination and Valve pushing for a Linux PC gaming revolution.
Markus "Notch" Persson (creator of Minecraft) is also of the opinion that Windows 8 could end up being a huge step backwards for PC gaming. Their fears are well-founded, because if Microsoft decides to close off the Windows platform so that you can only buy games through them (where they can act as a necessary intermediary and charge a large percentage of the sales price as a commission), then that would pretty much mean the death of Steam and other third-party platforms on Windows 8...
As a Mac user, I like Apple's OS X as my general use OS and my preferred gaming platform; that said, there's a lot of games out there that run on Windows but don't run on OS X, so I have a separate partition of my HDD where I have Windows XP installed exclusively for playing the games that don't run on OS X. I wouldn't mind having to use Linux instead and cutting Windows off altogether, but all of this still greatly depends on whether MS finally decides to screw over its users and third party developers and closes off Windows 8, or if they decide that the backlash and lower adoption of Windows 8 that would result from closing it off outweighs the benefits and therefore choose to keep the platform open.
On August 04 2012 05:43 Zato-1 wrote: Markus "Notch" Persson (creator of Minecraft) is also of the opinion that Windows 8 could end up being a huge step backwards for PC gaming. Their fears are well-founded, because if Microsoft decides to close off the Windows platform so that you can only buy games through them (where they can act as a necessary intermediary and charge a large percentage of the sales price as a commission), then that would pretty much mean the death of Steam and other third-party platforms on Windows 8...
As a Mac user, I like Apple's OS X as my general use OS and my preferred gaming platform; that said, there's a lot of games out there that run on Windows but don't run on OS X, so I have a separate partition of my HDD where I have Windows XP installed exclusively for playing the games that don't run on OS X. I wouldn't mind having to use Linux instead and cutting Windows off altogether, but all of this still greatly depends on whether MS finally decides to screw over its users and third party developers and closes off Windows 8, or if they decide that the backlash and lower adoption of Windows 8 that would result from closing it off outweighs the benefits and therefore choose to keep the platform open.
For WinRT titles. I don't think anything has been announced for desktop applications.
On August 04 2012 05:43 Zato-1 wrote: Markus "Notch" Persson (creator of Minecraft) is also of the opinion that Windows 8 could end up being a huge step backwards for PC gaming. Their fears are well-founded, because if Microsoft decides to close off the Windows platform so that you can only buy games through them (where they can act as a necessary intermediary and charge a large percentage of the sales price as a commission), then that would pretty much mean the death of Steam and other third-party platforms on Windows 8...
As a Mac user, I like Apple's OS X as my general use OS and my preferred gaming platform; that said, there's a lot of games out there that run on Windows but don't run on OS X, so I have a separate partition of my HDD where I have Windows XP installed exclusively for playing the games that don't run on OS X. I wouldn't mind having to use Linux instead and cutting Windows off altogether, but all of this still greatly depends on whether MS finally decides to screw over its users and third party developers and closes off Windows 8, or if they decide that the backlash and lower adoption of Windows 8 that would result from closing it off outweighs the benefits and therefore choose to keep the platform open.
It's just speculation people are shitting themselves over crap that has never been announced. It is likely that windows RT will probably be like the ipad and have a closed store not that it matters much because it will be ARM edition most things would have to be made for it. But regular windows 8 being a closed system entirely is full of shit, the store yes will be regulated by windows and they will get a cut of sales, so what valve you do the same exact thing, if you pay you can get in their distro network what's new.
People hear windows store and auto assume closed system unable to do anything but interact though their store, yet you can still install programs like you can with any windows in the windows 8 developer preview. So really it's a matter if windows 8 RT is a locked down or not, and does it really matter for a tablet only os, that is ARM based.
They are going off an idea that has never been verified or even hinted by Microsoft. It's basically speculation that barrack obama is a secret Kenyan, pretty baseless and full of crap.
On August 04 2012 05:43 Zato-1 wrote: Markus "Notch" Persson (creator of Minecraft) is also of the opinion that Windows 8 could end up being a huge step backwards for PC gaming. Their fears are well-founded, because if Microsoft decides to close off the Windows platform so that you can only buy games through them (where they can act as a necessary intermediary and charge a large percentage of the sales price as a commission), then that would pretty much mean the death of Steam and other third-party platforms on Windows 8...
As a Mac user, I like Apple's OS X as my general use OS and my preferred gaming platform; that said, there's a lot of games out there that run on Windows but don't run on OS X, so I have a separate partition of my HDD where I have Windows XP installed exclusively for playing the games that don't run on OS X. I wouldn't mind having to use Linux instead and cutting Windows off altogether, but all of this still greatly depends on whether MS finally decides to screw over its users and third party developers and closes off Windows 8, or if they decide that the backlash and lower adoption of Windows 8 that would result from closing it off outweighs the benefits and therefore choose to keep the platform open.
It's just speculation people are shitting themselves over crap that has never been announced. It is likely that windows RT will probably be like the ipad and have a closed store not that it matters much because it will be ARM edition most things would have to be made for it. But regular windows 8 being a closed system entirely is full of shit.
People hear windows store and auto assume closed system unable to do anything but interact though their store, yet you can still install programs like you can with any windows in the windows 8 developer preview. So really it's a matter if windows 8 RT is a locked down or not, and does it really matter for a tablet only os.
I think the whole thing revolves around metro and the fear that it will one day completely replace the desktop which is the obvious design direction from the current jumbled Windows8 mess. At that point a steam Windows client would be required to pay Microsoft 30% of sales. A fully metro Windows would be very closed and terrible for PC gaming.
On August 04 2012 05:43 Zato-1 wrote: Markus "Notch" Persson (creator of Minecraft) is also of the opinion that Windows 8 could end up being a huge step backwards for PC gaming. Their fears are well-founded, because if Microsoft decides to close off the Windows platform so that you can only buy games through them (where they can act as a necessary intermediary and charge a large percentage of the sales price as a commission), then that would pretty much mean the death of Steam and other third-party platforms on Windows 8...
As a Mac user, I like Apple's OS X as my general use OS and my preferred gaming platform; that said, there's a lot of games out there that run on Windows but don't run on OS X, so I have a separate partition of my HDD where I have Windows XP installed exclusively for playing the games that don't run on OS X. I wouldn't mind having to use Linux instead and cutting Windows off altogether, but all of this still greatly depends on whether MS finally decides to screw over its users and third party developers and closes off Windows 8, or if they decide that the backlash and lower adoption of Windows 8 that would result from closing it off outweighs the benefits and therefore choose to keep the platform open.
It's just speculation people are shitting themselves over crap that has never been announced. It is likely that windows RT will probably be like the ipad and have a closed store not that it matters much because it will be ARM edition most things would have to be made for it. But regular windows 8 being a closed system entirely is full of shit.
People hear windows store and auto assume closed system unable to do anything but interact though their store, yet you can still install programs like you can with any windows in the windows 8 developer preview. So really it's a matter if windows 8 RT is a locked down or not, and does it really matter for a tablet only os.
I think the whole thing revolves around metro and the fear that it will one day completely replace the desktop which is the obvious design direction from the current jumbled Windows8 mess. At that point a steam Windows client would be required to pay Microsoft 30% of sales. A fully metro Windows would be very closed and terrible for PC gaming.
What does metro have to do with steam paying microsoft a cut of sales, metro has nothing to do with the store. And again in the developer preview you can install programs onto windows 8 circumventing the store, so again there is no indication that it would be compeltely closed off outside of using the store for all interactions. Windows RT the tablet version may be different but that doesn't matter to most people unless you're going to buy a surface. Metro interface is just that it's a UI but the base functions and interactions of the OS is the same as windows 7 it just looks a little different.
I love linux, but you don't have a choice over which desktop OS you want to use. Linux just doesn't have the driver support of windows, and developers prefer directx which is microsoft only. The preference for directx over opengl isn't just from the monopoly of 1 platform over the other, directx is much easier to use from a developer stand point, even if it is slower. It's a complete api that plugs into all the major input devices, keyboard, mice, game controllers, and audio controls, opengl is video only and I don't think there's a framework that comes close to the ease of development that directx currently enjoys.
Still though, I'd love to see an open platform wrest control back from microsoft and to a lesser extent apple. If valve and blizzard are serious about linux support and can get amd and nvidia to start supporting linux as well I'd easily make the jump from linux being a small partition on one of my harddrives on an old retired machine to my main platform.
EDIT: I have to address this major issue that is occupying this thread. The windows store model preventing anyone else from selling on the platform. For starters, microsoft is not apple, they'd be shooting themselves in the head if they did this. Secondly, they don't have to implement this to have complete desktop control. They've already done this with directx and driver manufacturers. You have to make your games specifically for windows if you want them to run with the latest toys.
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/03/evolving-the-start-menu.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/04/designing-the-start-screen.aspx metro isn't a bad interface it's pretty nice in some aspects, if you habitually only used pinned programs on a task bar or icons to start and use programs it's a nice thing as it adds features to those interactions. Metro just removes the start button and menu because their developers found only a few number of people used it regularly, everyone else rarely touched the start button except to shut down the machine or start up a program they haven't touched in a long time. People fear change but don't bother to actually try it out before they freak out. The sad part is this happens with every windows, people called XP i think a tonka toy becuase of the new look of the start bar, people disliked vista and 7's task bar and clear view because again change, even though pinning is pretty dope (after all pinning is just an expansion on quick launch icons, and metro is an extension of pinning). Frankly i could never use anything that didn't have windows 7's snap feature as it's more intuitive then hitting windows key + left/right.
Yes somethings are different but different doesn't auto mean end of the world...
On August 04 2012 06:06 EAGER-beaver wrote: I love linux, but you don't have a choice over which desktop OS you want to use. Linux just doesn't have the driver support of windows, and developers prefer directx which is microsoft only. The preference for directx over opengl isn't just from the monopoly of 1 platform over the other, directx is much easier to use from a developer stand point, even if it is slower. It's a complete api that plugs into all the major input devices, keyboard, mice, game controllers, and audio controls, opengl is video only and I don't think there's a framework that comes close to the ease of development that directx currently enjoys.
Still though, I'd love to see an open platform wrest control back from microsoft and to a lesser extent apple. If valve and blizzard are serious about linux support and can get amd and nvidia to start supporting linux as well I'd easily make the jump from linux being a small partition on one of my harddrives on an old retired machine to my main platform.
DirectX isn't slower
Opengl 4.2 and DirectX 11 are very similar
Opengl 4.2 vs directX 9c are very different which is what valve's comparison would be like.
Plus linux is very bare bones to begin with which can help with the benchmark, linux is more like a race car striped down to what you needed, while windows is a luxury car gets you from point a to b in style and comfort. If you loaded up the features of windows into linux you'd probably see very similar opengl numbers.
On August 03 2012 16:06 konadora wrote: all we have to do is stay on windows 7 :p
You mean on Windows XP At this moment, there's not a single thing that runs on Windows 7 that can't run on WinXP for me, while the reverse is unfortunately true
Hmmm?
Like what? Win 7 has full compatibility modes with Win XP.
My mouse (MX510) drivers don't work on Windows 7. I've had the mouse for nine years now, and only repairs I've done on it is change the feet and open it up to clean it once. Works good, would work better with drivers. It bothers me a bit, as the mouse movements with drivers are really really smooth, but not enough to revert back to XP. A bit of a side-problem from newer technology is that my motherboard doesn't have a PS/2 port any more, and I'm stuck on USB. Other than that, everything I use runs just fine on either OS.
You can install unsigned drivers in Windows 7 if you know how.
On August 04 2012 06:06 semantics wrote: metro isn't a bad interface it's pretty nice in some aspects, if you habitually only used pinned programs on a task bar or icons to start and use programs it's a nice thing as it adds features to those interactions. Metro just removes the start button and menu because their developers found only a few number of people used it regularly, everyone else rarely touched the start button except to shut down the machine or start up a program they haven't touched in a long time. People fear change but don't bother to actually try it out before they freak out. The sad part is this happens with every windows, people called XP i think a tonka toy becuase of the new look of the start bar, people disliked vista and 7's task bar and clear view because again change, even though pinning is pretty dope (after all pinning is just an expansion on quick launch icons, and metro is an extension of pinning). Frankly i could never use anything that didn't have windows 7's snap feature as it's more intuitive then hitting windows key + left/right.
Yes somethings are different but different doesn't auto mean end of the world...
On August 04 2012 06:06 EAGER-beaver wrote: I love linux, but you don't have a choice over which desktop OS you want to use. Linux just doesn't have the driver support of windows, and developers prefer directx which is microsoft only. The preference for directx over opengl isn't just from the monopoly of 1 platform over the other, directx is much easier to use from a developer stand point, even if it is slower. It's a complete api that plugs into all the major input devices, keyboard, mice, game controllers, and audio controls, opengl is video only and I don't think there's a framework that comes close to the ease of development that directx currently enjoys.
Still though, I'd love to see an open platform wrest control back from microsoft and to a lesser extent apple. If valve and blizzard are serious about linux support and can get amd and nvidia to start supporting linux as well I'd easily make the jump from linux being a small partition on one of my harddrives on an old retired machine to my main platform.
DirectX isn't slower
Opengl 4.2 and DirectX 11 are very similar
Opengl 4.2 vs directX 9c are very different which is what valve's comparison would be like.
Plus linux is very bare bones to begin with which can help with the benchmark, linux is more like a race car striped down to what you needed, while windows is a luxury car gets you from point a to b in style and comfort. If you loaded up the features of windows into linux you'd probably see very similar opengl numbers.
I never said directx was slower then opengl, I said even if, as in the difference in raw speed is a minor point compared to the developer point of view of working with the different API's. Opengl 4.2 and directx are very similar, opengl and directx9 are different? What? How so? I'm just mentioning the key differences between the two, regardless of version, for a developer. If you open up an opengl library vs a directx one, directx is a complete package to everything on your PC, opengl is strictly video.
And linux isn't like a race car, it's more like a choo-choo train
Plus linux is very bare bones to begin with which can help with the benchmark, linux is more like a race car striped down to what you needed, while windows is a luxury car gets you from point a to b in style and comfort. If you loaded up the features of windows into linux you'd probably see very similar opengl numbers.
To be honest I find most of the additions from M$ to be completely useless and unneeded. They're just there to take up space and to slow down the system most of the time (Through dozens of unnecessary services, for example). To me, the more barebones an OS is, the better. I don't find all the M$ additions "comfort", more like annoyances, not a luxury car but a car that costs as much as one while driving like a normal one and having spikes on the nut as a "bonus feature"
On August 04 2012 06:06 semantics wrote: metro isn't a bad interface it's pretty nice in some aspects, if you habitually only used pinned programs on a task bar or icons to start and use programs it's a nice thing as it adds features to those interactions. Metro just removes the start button and menu because their developers found only a few number of people used it regularly, everyone else rarely touched the start button except to shut down the machine or start up a program they haven't touched in a long time. People fear change but don't bother to actually try it out before they freak out. The sad part is this happens with every windows, people called XP i think a tonka toy becuase of the new look of the start bar, people disliked vista and 7's task bar and clear view because again change, even though pinning is pretty dope (after all pinning is just an expansion on quick launch icons, and metro is an extension of pinning). Frankly i could never use anything that didn't have windows 7's snap feature as it's more intuitive then hitting windows key + left/right.
Yes somethings are different but different doesn't auto mean end of the world...
On August 04 2012 06:06 EAGER-beaver wrote: I love linux, but you don't have a choice over which desktop OS you want to use. Linux just doesn't have the driver support of windows, and developers prefer directx which is microsoft only. The preference for directx over opengl isn't just from the monopoly of 1 platform over the other, directx is much easier to use from a developer stand point, even if it is slower. It's a complete api that plugs into all the major input devices, keyboard, mice, game controllers, and audio controls, opengl is video only and I don't think there's a framework that comes close to the ease of development that directx currently enjoys.
Still though, I'd love to see an open platform wrest control back from microsoft and to a lesser extent apple. If valve and blizzard are serious about linux support and can get amd and nvidia to start supporting linux as well I'd easily make the jump from linux being a small partition on one of my harddrives on an old retired machine to my main platform.
DirectX isn't slower
Opengl 4.2 and DirectX 11 are very similar
Opengl 4.2 vs directX 9c are very different which is what valve's comparison would be like.
Plus linux is very bare bones to begin with which can help with the benchmark, linux is more like a race car striped down to what you needed, while windows is a luxury car gets you from point a to b in style and comfort. If you loaded up the features of windows into linux you'd probably see very similar opengl numbers.
I never said directx was slower then opengl, I said even if, as in the difference in raw speed is a minor point compared to the developer point of view of working with the different API's. Opengl 4.2 and directx are very similar, opengl and directx9 are different? What? How so? I'm just mentioning the key differences between the two, regardless of version, for a developer. If you open up an opengl library vs a directx one, directx is a complete package to everything on your PC, opengl is strictly video.
And linux isn't like a race car, it's more like a choo-choo train
? Opengl 4.2 and dx11 both don't have the cpu overhead that dx9c has it was significantly reduced, that is simple performance gain right there. Ofc most people don't see this because often when DX11 is used it's used with all it's features they don't make a DX9 looking game in DX11 so it ends up costing more, or worse they just slap dx11 features onto dx9 and its just clunky. And yeah i suppose you can look at linux as a choo-choo train but car to car i thought was easier to look at haha. After all what would windows be in that?
Pretty much everyone uses Windows and will continue Windows, so it's not like Valve is going to drop the overwhelming percentage of their customers just to switch to an OS family few people use. Steam will always be on Windows.
I typically use Ubuntu for non-.NET development so it'll be cool to play some games while working without having to reboot to Windows .
Trains are actually way more comfortable than cars are. Especially if you manage to get a ticket for a personal wagon.
Linux requires intellectual capabilities of it's user, "you want this part to work like this or like this?". Windows is like "okay, we got a new part, let's make it work whatever way I think is better".
On August 03 2012 16:06 konadora wrote: all we have to do is stay on windows 7 :p
You mean on Windows XP At this moment, there's not a single thing that runs on Windows 7 that can't run on WinXP for me, while the reverse is unfortunately true
Battlefield 3 would like to have a word.
EDIT: and I expect that a lot more developers are going to drop DX9 support in the near future.
I've been dual booting 7 and Mint for a while now. I like them both, but I try to use linux wherever possible. It's more work but I enjoy learning this sort of stuff.
On August 03 2012 16:06 konadora wrote: all we have to do is stay on windows 7 :p
You mean on Windows XP At this moment, there's not a single thing that runs on Windows 7 that can't run on WinXP for me, while the reverse is unfortunately true
Battlefield 3 would like to have a word.
EDIT: and I expect that a lot more developers are going to drop DX9 support in the near future.
I expect that they won't. 20,55% of computers were still on DX 9 or lower in July this year according to Steam Survey. Will probably be another year until it becomes standard to start dropping it on demanding games. No reason for indie games and similar to drop it unless they really want the features of 10/11 instead of developing for DX 9 from start.
Linux is relatively user friendly these days, its also free and quite a good operating system.
Only real reason to use windows these days is compatibility.
I am very happy that steam is going to Linux, its a great thing for PC gaming since windows 8 from what I have heard is poorly optimized for home computers and designed for tablets and such.
On August 03 2012 06:15 semantics wrote: ^ games for mac are more likely to happen then games for linux just due to market share and type of buyer. Next thing people will say is opera will overtake chrome, ie and firefox after all it has a bright future. And Euclideon's engine will make polygon games a thing of the past.
idk if this has been answered already, but the mac OS is just a modified linux essentially. So if its ready for linux its pretty much ready for mac.
I would support mac/linux over windows any day, the moment the compatibility is there i'm jumping ship. I generally don't like apple very much but I really dislike what I have seen from windows 8 and I would rather games be designed for a freeware operating system.
On August 03 2012 16:06 konadora wrote: all we have to do is stay on windows 7 :p
You mean on Windows XP At this moment, there's not a single thing that runs on Windows 7 that can't run on WinXP for me, while the reverse is unfortunately true
Battlefield 3 would like to have a word.
EDIT: and I expect that a lot more developers are going to drop DX9 support in the near future.
I expect that they won't. 20,55% of computers were still on DX 9 or lower in July this year according to Steam Survey. Will probably be another year until it becomes standard to start dropping it on demanding games. No reason for indie games and similar to drop it unless they really want the features of 10/11 instead of developing for DX 9 from start.
That's barely 1/5th, and those people aren't in the market for "hardcore" games like BF3 in the first place, so developers are not likely to take them into account.
On August 03 2012 16:06 konadora wrote: all we have to do is stay on windows 7 :p
You mean on Windows XP At this moment, there's not a single thing that runs on Windows 7 that can't run on WinXP for me, while the reverse is unfortunately true
Battlefield 3 would like to have a word.
EDIT: and I expect that a lot more developers are going to drop DX9 support in the near future.
Our resident investigator Barnz has done some more digging in the Source Filmmaker script files, and he's uncovered probably some of the biggest news we've ever reported on our site.
He's found many more references to a "Source 2", but not just one vague line like our previous entry. We're only one file deep, and already it's clear that the references to "Source 2" are indeed referring to a next-gen engine that Valve is currently developing. I'm only going to show one line in this post, but there are about 60+ references here, and this one line is probably the most telling.
On August 03 2012 06:15 semantics wrote: ^ games for mac are more likely to happen then games for linux just due to market share and type of buyer. Next thing people will say is opera will overtake chrome, ie and firefox after all it has a bright future. And Euclideon's engine will make polygon games a thing of the past.
idk if this has been answered already, but the mac OS is just a modified linux essentially. So if its ready for linux its pretty much ready for mac.
I would support mac/linux over windows any day, the moment the compatibility is there i'm jumping ship. I generally don't like apple very much but I really dislike what I have seen from windows 8 and I would rather games be designed for a freeware operating system.
Yes and i already know that mac is a unix-like so similar to linux-ish by sharing unix history but they are quite far form each other there is quite a bit of work to make a game that works on mac to work on linux. Mac software esp in graphics != linux compatible. And with that said mac still commands alot more of personal computers market share then linux ever has or ever will which is where game companies target. Stop being a hater and get shit right you'd know that although a linux based gaming system may be nice for you developers will prefer the support and ease of use of directX for the most part and if one thing has always held true devs are lazy when it comes to things outside of content creation in games. So as long as markets persist, with xbox and windows directX will hold strong and because of that windows will hold strong.
On August 03 2012 06:15 semantics wrote: ^ games for mac are more likely to happen then games for linux just due to market share and type of buyer. Next thing people will say is opera will overtake chrome, ie and firefox after all it has a bright future. And Euclideon's engine will make polygon games a thing of the past.
idk if this has been answered already, but the mac OS is just a modified linux essentially. So if its ready for linux its pretty much ready for mac.
I would support mac/linux over windows any day, the moment the compatibility is there i'm jumping ship. I generally don't like apple very much but I really dislike what I have seen from windows 8 and I would rather games be designed for a freeware operating system.
Yes and i already know that mac is a unix-like so similar to linux-ish by sharing unix history but they are quite far form each other there is quite a bit of work to make a game that works on mac to work on linux. Mac software esp in graphics != linux compatible. And with that said mac still commands alot more of personal computers market share then linux ever has or ever will which is where game companies target. Stop being a hater and get shit right you'd know that although a linux based gaming system may be nice for you developers will prefer the support and ease of use of directX for the most part and if one thing has always held true devs are lazy when it comes to things outside of content creation in games. So as long as markets persist, with xbox and windows directX will hold strong and because of that windows will hold strong.
Mac is based on unix, but apart from the bash console, mac is nothing like linux.
For example you can't change your window manager on mac, and you don't have a good package manager. Package managers are great because you can install anything immediately without even using the browser, and being able to change your window manager is the one thing that I love about Linux more than anything else.
The usability on most GUI based window managers are just really bad though, there are some really good ideas (3d workspaces, tabbed file explorer, conky, etc), but its not seamless like windows, its kind of all over the place and buggy. I have a console based tiling window manager which is extremely fast for doing anything (bash is a million times better than dos), but obviously learning hundreds of commands is not viable for the everyday user.
I'm sure though that GUI's will become much much better if Linux becomes more popular. Much better than Windows or Mac even because there will be all these free mods out there to get it exactly how you want.