Linux - is it time yet?

[steb]

I *really* liked the CM demo. I *really* hate booting into windows. Decisions, decisions. I see the last comment from BTS that there are 'No plans for a linux port' were middle of last year. And I'm wondering how market conditions have affected those plans (More likely, less likely)?

Also, I'd like to comment for the benefit of the BTS developers that a single code base can be made to run on windows, *nix and other platforms using OpenGL, SDL and a number of other readily available graphics libraries.

------------------

Curiosity killed

schrodingers cat.

[Schrullenhaft]

You're talking a lot of work to convert to another API since CM currently uses DirectX and RAVE. Maybe by the time that work commences on CMII there will be thoughts about a different graphic API and the OS's that would be compatible with it.

Once the patches to CMBO are done it is on to CM2, which will remain DirectX and RAVE to my knowledge.

I believe that the main driving force to possibly using OpenGL as the API for CM will be OS X. If it permeates the Mac market thoroughly in two years then I would guess that OpenGL would be up for serious consideration. Once that happens then Linux may get supported.

[David Aitken]

RAVE is dead. It was dead before CMBO was released. Charles probably doesn't fancy coding OpenGL support, and that's okay, because Mac OS X has backwards compatibility. But releasing new games based on RAVE is something to be avoided, simply because it's old technology and isn't supported any more.

I picked up a Voodoo 5500 card on the cheap, and 3Dfx's RAVE support seems to be very poor. Even with FSAA turned off, it's slower at 640x480 than my ATI Nexus at 1600x1200. I wonder whether nVidia are supporting RAVE with their new Mac cards.

[Dogface]

BUMP

BTS??? Madmatt??

im down to just two games on my Win. box

CMBO and Red Barron 3d. RB3D isnt being supported by serria anymore so i know that bolth the client and server wont be ported..

But....CM is still being worked on so....

is there a chance???

CM2

or CMII???

ill still buy it even if you dont btw thats how much i love it!!!!!!!!(no other game can bost that)

------------------

Berlin calling, Berlin calling,

when Berlin calls it pays to listen.....

-----------------------------------------

http://ponyshow.com some screenshots Powered by Apache and RH 7.0

[This message has been edited by Dogface (edited 02-04-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Dogface (edited 02-04-2001).]

[Slapdragon]

You know that with OSX it may be more possible to recompile under UNIX flavors, depending on what bells and wistles are added. I just rempiled R/WRITE on OSX beta, and some of my BSD-Apache modules just slipped right in to my NetTen server on OSX. Who knows what the API layer in OSX will allow as a posibility for easy ports to and from Linnux.

Also, I can see a lot of Linnux users just porting their stuff to OSX when it comes time to change hardware because the GUI is easier to work with than what many Linnux users do now -- boot Windows.

[Strider]

I'm just beginning to learn Linux...so no way to test this yet...anyone tried using WINE for CM? Seems quite a few Win games are running ok using it.

[Dogface]

Originally posted by Strider:

I'm just beginning to learn Linux...so no way to test this yet...anyone tried using WINE for CM? Seems quite a few Win games are running ok using it.

the problem with that is that you need so much ram and processor power (wine not as much say vmware but still) then with cmbo added on top of that boy.. mabey on one of the linux boxes at my work p3 733 w/ 384 megs

of ram ya boy that would be nice..

+ its still a windows interface..

------------------

Berlin calling, Berlin calling,

when Berlin calls it pays to listen.....

-----------------------------------------

http://ponyshow.com some screenshots

[This message has been edited by Dogface (edited 02-04-2001).]

[Dogface]

one more try...

<font size="10">BUMP</font>

really I'm chompin at the bit here

------------------

Berlin calling, Berlin calling,

when Berlin calls it pays to listen.....

-----------------------------------------

http://ponyshow.com some screenshots

[Phoenix]

Seems to have been answered by Charles

some months back -

"I won't say "never", but there are currently no plans for one."

I read that as, "Maybe, when were done with CM2, the new CMII engine, CM3 AND CM4,

Then maybe we'll look into it.

In other words, there's no plans for one.

Just my enterpretation.

[Guest Martin Cracauer]

I test CM in the CVS version of wine at

least once a week. Not there yet, some

DirectDraw APIs used by CM are reported

as unimplemented. Wine includes a wrapper

from Direct3D to OpenGL, BTW, don't know

how far the effort went so far.

The best way to get a Linux version of CM

probably is to preorder a bunch.

CM runs in vmware just fine, but 640x480

without 3D hardware acceleration. You will

prefer to use the keyboard to move the

camera. I used it to check situations and

review experiments at work, but doing an

actual move required a real PC for me.

[stodge]

I tried to play the CM demo under Winex (from CVS) but as soon as it gets into the 3D part of the game, it all goes horribly wrong. The main menus work fine though.

It's a shame; I'd love to play it under Linux.

[Kurtz]

There is an article at Osnews that might be interesting: Direct 3D 8.0 Wrapper for OpenGL

From the article:

The speed or efficiency of the wrapper depends mainly of the OpenGL extensions supported. Since most of the time is consumed on rendering and not on API calls, this should be as fast as the original Direct3D code.

But you know, the goal is to get the DirectX API available on non-Win32 platform in order developers be able to create or port actual Direct3D 8 code.

Even if there is a performance penalty, I think there are good chances that this will be compensated by the lower overhead of the OS. I'm still using W98 for gaming, but who knows what will happen with next version of DirectX, perhaps it will only be available for XP/2000.

And a Linux version of CM would do wonders to my uptime!

[Jarmo]

It'll be summer (at least) by the time BTS is ready to move forward from CMBB. Then it'll be time to start thinking about CM II. BTS will likely wait as long as possible before committing to any particular API to avoid getting burned like with RAVE.

From BTS's mac centric approach, I assume OSX will be supported. But whether it'll be through OpenGL or some other method is a difficult question.

No doubt it'd be great for them to be able to have a single cross platform API, like OpenGL. But with MS actively trying to (and seemingly succesfully) squish GL in favour of DirectX, and with Apple making 180 turns every now and then,it might not be a viable option.

[Puff the Magic Dragon]

Originally posted by steb:

...And I'm wondering how market conditions have affected those plans (More likely, less likely)?...

Well, regarding the market situation - LINUX is a fine OS, but it is and will always be - at least in the next 10 years - a niche market. Especially for the 'normal' home user. And games are only sold to home users. Beside that, even some of my very Mircosoft critical pals must agree that XP is a good OS.

- How many game PCs are running under LINUX, compared to Windows? I guess 1%, maybe even less.

- How much time and money would it cost the 4 men company BTS to port CM to LINUX?

- How much money can BTS make with a LINUX version? BTS is surely an exeption, regarding their contact and support to the customers, but at last we shouldn't forget, they also must live from it.

IMO, seen from a comercial point of view, don't expect a CM for LINUX. Not before LINUX change into the OS for computer games. And I don't expect this in the near future.

[ February 13, 2002, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: Puff the Magic Dragon ]

[Nick Schieben]

I'd much rather know that the BTS gang are looking ahead with more CM developments and enhancements rather than tinkering around with "Revenge of the nerds". Imagine the number of messages on the Support Page going something like, "Gunzip? why can't I just tar -xvf ... " Or " I get these weird messages while compiling CM on my P200". You think we have graphics rants now?

Naah!

[Priest]

Let's see......

I am a network engineer, I have a Linux Server at home, and am somewhat familiar for the OS.

That being said WHY IN THE HELL WOULD THEY BOTHER?

I am sorry and I am not bashing Linux, but if huge game companies consider Linux (and most of the time MAC btw) as bad investments for their game applications what in the hell thinks that BTS can afford to do it?

I also tire of all the microsoft bashing, funny my Windows 2000 system runs great at a hi resolution with all hires graphics. In fact at a slightly lower res my lowend Win 98 box runs CMBO perfectly with all hires graphics. Come to think of it my laptop even ran CMBO with all hires graphics fine!

While I do not want to start a war, Microsoft while far from perfect, is better than most give it credit for. I know they have made my life easier, everybody uses them so I only have to learn one OS to have a career (i do play with others but most of my certs are for MS systems).

[newlife]

Actually, given that OSX has UNIX based kernal and it is supposedly much easier to port things back and forth (I have not tried yet nor have heard any unbiased trials on that), a LINUX based CMII might actually be plausable. Maybe not likely, but possible. As to why would they? Why does anyone make any game for LINUX? Because they want to.

Pete

[NightGaunt]

exactly:they want to. not: they want to make money and be succesful

seriously, linux is a great operating system, but until it becomes main stream enough that major companies install it on workstations to the point where they make a significant dent in the workstation OS %, home users are not going to increase their % of linux use substantialy.

and if that doesnt happen, few will bother to sell games because the $s are not there.

[Brian]

Working both with Unix (various flavours, including several linuxes) and Windoze, of the two, it should be pointed out, Unix and Linux are considerably more secure and stable than Windoze.

However, stability and security are not necessarily what home owners want in an OS, I admit. They want bangs and whistles, pretty lights and yes, as much as I hate to admit it, games. Personally I think XP looks like it was designed by an escapee from a preschool art class but I have to admit, I seem to be in the minority there.

For servers, on the otherhand, they are factors which are considered extremely important. Windoze doesn't cut it, not even Win-2000, in both those areas. Indeed, even the great demon himself, Mr.Gates admitted that recently, when he suspended all development within MS for a fortnight while the company concentrated completely on improving, what have jokingly always been referred to as "features" not "bugs" in MS OS's (ie security holes ).

I agree that linux will have to make significant inroads into the desktop market in order to have most game companies look seriously at it as a platform. However, it should also be remembered that the very demographic the game companies are often aiming at, are the ones who are also most likely to be using linux, either for fun or for work, so one should be careful about not shooting the goose that laid the golden egg and ignoring linux completely.

I use linux both at home and work. Like others, I'd prefer not to have to use Mr.Gates' creations in order to play CM if I could. Unfortunately I can't so I have to have an extra machine set up with Win98 in order to do it.

[ianc]

Unix and Linux are considerably more secure and stable than Windoze

Hmmm... I'm afraid that is a facetious and unsubstantiated statement my friend. I'm definitely with you if you want to compare Linux to Win9x. Remember though; security, while important, is more the concern of someone running a production server rather than a home gaming machine. XP and 2000 are fast and rock-solid.

Linux is great, but you may be sure most people use it for two reasons:

1) It's dirt cheap or free.

2) They hate Bill Gates and M$ for their own reasons.

Linux is still a tinkerer or hobbyist's OS, and therein lies part of its charm. Windows can be just installed and run. Period.

Personally, I don't dislike Linux at all and think competition is healthy, but I also have nothing against Bill myself. Therefore, I run 2000 at home for games, and it is hideously stable right out of the box.

It just doesn't seem to make economic sense to invest in a port to Linux considering the percentage of people running it...

[Brian]

Originally posted by ianc:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Unix and Linux are considerably more secure and stable than Windoze

Hmmm... I'm afraid that is a facetious and unsubstantiated statement my friend. I'm definitely with you if you want to compare Linux to Win9x. Remember though; security, while important, is more the concern of someone running a production server rather than a home gaming machine. XP and 2000 are fast and rock-solid.

Linux is great, but you may be sure most people use it for two reasons:

1) It's dirt cheap or free.

2) They hate Bill Gates and M$ for their own reasons.

Linux is still a tinkerer or hobbyist's OS, and therein lies part of its charm. Windows can be just installed and run. Period.

Personally, I don't dislike Linux at all and think competition is healthy, but I also have nothing against Bill myself. Therefore, I run 2000 at home for games, and it is hideously stable right out of the box.

It just doesn't seem to make economic sense to invest in a port to Linux considering the percentage of people running it...</font>

[Gyrene]

I think that the whole "Makes no economic sense" talk as not making much sense itself, and elitist.

When BTS began to develop CMBO the whole concept "Made no economic sense" because there was no market for a game like this one before BTS made the market; even BTS is surprised at it's own success.

The whole notion of "no economic sense" is just Windows users' favorite way to poo-poo someone else's computer choices, and if it was up to your average Windows user the Mac version of CM wouldn't even exist, let alone a Linux version.

I'd like to give BTS a little more credit than just thinking of the "economic sense" all the time, after all if "economic sense" was all BTS cared about we'd all be playing CM5 by now and complaining at how crappy and rushed it was and how we'd all need 64Mb cards and Ghz + CPU's.

The only problem with a Linux port is that Linux users want everything for free.

Gyrene

[Brian]

Originally posted by Gyrene:

I think that the whole "Makes no economic sense" talk as not making much sense itself, and elitist.

When BTS began to develop CMBO the whole concept "Made no economic sense" because there was no market for a game like this one before BTS made the market; even BTS is surprised at it's own success.

The whole notion of "no economic sense" is just Windows users' favorite way to poo-poo someone else's computer choices, and if it was up to your average Windows user the Mac version of CM wouldn't even exist, let alone a Linux version.

I'd like to give BTS a little more credit than just thinking of the "economic sense" all the time, after all if "economic sense" was all BTS cared about we'd all be playing CM5 by now and complaining at how crappy and rushed it was and how we'd all need 64Mb cards and Ghz + CPU's.

The only problem with a Linux port is that Linux users want everything for free.

Gyrene

Not quite true. GNU public licensing is a radical shift in the thinking of how IT operates. Yes, a lot of stuff for linux is free but always remember, you get what you pay for. However, the difference between MS style licensing and GNU licensing is that while the software is free, the information which actually makes it work, or the services to set it up and so on, isn't.

The funny thing is, that MS supposedly has this superb help system setup to help users yet everytime I've been forced to utilise it, to solve the real problems I've encountered, its failed dismally. Linux on the otherhand, I've never been left out on a limb, there is always someone who can help and is usually willing to do so. There are companies which make quite a comfortable living providing that help. There is even commercial linux software as well, although its only a small fraction of the total linux pool.

The biggest problem is I think that the game developers have gone after the wrong end of the market, with the wrong product. BTS would be in an ideal position to exploit the obvious niche it has. If they were to add true multiplayer capability to the game's TCP/IP capabilities and ported it to Linux, it could well be the next Doom IMO.

[ianc]

Brian,

I've been a SysAdmin for over 12 years and I've seen linux grow from exactly as you describe it, to a stable and extremely powerful and useful OS. Windoze, in the same time frame has become basically what unix was nearly 5-7 years ago. Everything Gates trumpets as being "new" and "superior" in 2000 or XP, with the exceptions of the bells and whistles stuff of the GUI, was in unix then and unix was still more secure than windoze is today.

I've had over 8 years as a sysadmin/network eng myself. At my last job, NT/2000 handled mail, DNS, Firewall/encryption and frontend web/ftp services very capably and reliably. Backend was Sun running Oracle, and it was also very reliable. Both staffs were the same size. The Sun machines were less numerous, but more expensive to purchase, maintain and configure in terms of support, man hours and initial purchase price. Regardless of this, both implementations were the right solution for the job.

I'm betting you fall into my category #2 of Linux enthusiasts, who just dislike Bill and M$ for whatever reason. You give yourself away a little when you refer to Bill Gates as 'The Demon'. It seems to me therefore that you won't like Windows no matter how good it is, so it's probably a fruitless discussion. To dwell on these things removes us from the context of the original argument and more into a partisan discussion however. Don't elevate this into a jihad when the issue is solely one of economics.

99% of home game-playing machines today are Win machines of some type, but you needn't lament this fact due to your dislike of Bill et al... In fact, a lot of them are very stable, speedy and enjoyable to use, as I personally can attest.

While not denigrating Linux as a viable OS in the least, it just strikes me as highly unlikely that the time and effort required to port CMBB to Linux would prove financially remunerative. I guess only Charles' hairdresser knows for sure...

ianc

[Viceroy]

Matt's hairdresser is the one who knows all the secrets