Linux Port for BI Titles

[Herbal Influence 10]

I don't get that point. If all games have their own OS on DVD, then you'll have to boot for each game.

If all you want is that they port it to ubuntu (or whatever else), sure, then there's no rebooting as soon as more devs did that. But I don't understand why you want to sell the game *with* the OS on a DVD?

The reasoning is:

1. People could spare the money they used to pay to Microsoft for paying BIS (50 - 250 Dollars - roughly estimated). Remember: Everytime you buy a new PC with Microsoft you are paying Microsoft that amount for the OS.

2. The developers would have an insight in their "whole project". I know some software developers and they love free software for this. With closed software you always depend on the pieces of information the OS-Seller wants to give you - with Open Source software you have full control. It's is also easier to optimize special things for BIS software.

3. You deliver a surplus for the same money: Not only does the customer get BIS software, but also a state of the art OS and an Officesuite.

[-Snafu- 78]

How will BIS get the money when the OS is open source and free?

Won't BIS lose resources (which must be pretty stretched at the moment) having to fiddle about with an OS? They probably have enough to do without that on top.

People want a game, not an OS. I would say 90% of PC users don't care about this freedom and open source crap. Furthermore, other games won't work with it. So what's the point? You would need to dual boot. Plus, people already have word processing software. It just makes it a pain in the arse for people who don't care about this "freedom" bullshit.

Edited March 17, 2010 by Snafu

[echo1 0]

1. People could spare the money they used to pay to Microsoft for paying BIS (50 - 250 Dollars - roughly estimated). Remember: Everytime you buy a new PC with Microsoft you are paying Microsoft that amount for the OS.

What about all the other games that people want to play? Don't they need Windows too, or are we going to assume that we live in a magical fairy land where everyone jumps over to Linux?

2. The developers would have an insight in their "whole project". I know some software developers and they love free software for this. With closed software you always depend on the pieces of information the OS-Seller wants to give you - with Open Source software you have full control. It's is also easier to optimize special things for BIS software.

But they don't need to know anything about the OS other than how DirectX works, because that's how games interact with a Windows machine. Microsoft tells people how DirectX works, what else do they need?

3. You deliver a surplus for the same money: Not only does the customer get BIS software, but also a state of the art OS and an Officesuite.

If people want Open Office, they can install it on a Windows machine. Simples.

[Herbal Influence 10]

@snafu:

It's too bad you cannot appreciate that kind of freedom I spoke of.

But that's your personal preferences. No problem.

What about all the other games that people want to play? Don't they need Windows too, or are we going to assume that we live in a magical fairy land where everyone jumps over to Linux?

They can buy Microsoft OSs like they did before.

They have to pay for that like before.

But - important ! - they - first time in their life - is not dictated to buy Microsoft.

First time in their life - they have the choice.

Freedom of choice is not too bad a thing.

There is indeed a fairy land that you would have laughed upon and called people crazy even imagining it, too:

Ubuntu Linux runs fast and smooth incl. OpenOffice with no cost at all on many desktops.

Free as free beer and free as in free speech ...

And as I already said: The real committed BIS-gamer doesn't have the time to do other games. :eek: But if not: He can do like he always did: Buy and boot Microsoft ...

But they don't need to know anything about the OS other than how DirectX works, because that's how games interact with a Windows machine. Microsoft tells people how DirectX works, what else do they need?

Well - sure you are right to a big part.

But I don't think it's only DirectX they gotta deal with.

I would like to hear their voices on this ... :rolleyes:

If people want Open Office, they can install it on a Windows machine. Simples.

Sure they can.

With a 30 min install of Ubuntu it's on the PC without realizing it.

This should/could be a sign to the customers:

Hey - you really don't need to buy anything else - this PC is perfect and perfectly free in two senses: Free as free beer and free as in free speech.

You mustn't follow me - it sure needs a certain marketing, a special sensibility.

Lez just imagine the news saying:

"Microsoft introduces new obligatory antivirus-update for 60 USDollars/year. If you don't accept this security update, OSs performance will decrease over the time of 12 months."

Just to feel the dependancy that is there in fact and to get a taste of freedom.

By the by: as of today with Linux you don't need an antivirus-software. That's another thing BIS could sell as a surplus.

Sure you can use without costs e.g. Avira - but last test in ct (heise.de) showed it under the worst of comparable (and costly!) antivirus-software.

Edited March 19, 2010 by Herbal Influence

[echo1 0]

Ubuntu Linux runs fast and smooth incl. OpenOffice with no cost at all on many desktops.

If set up right, Windows 7 is probably faster and smoother. Wait a second, didn't I say this before?

And as I already said: The real committed BIS-gamer doesn't have the time to do other games.

Speak for yourself.

Well - sure you are right to a big part.

But I don't think it's only DirectX they gotta deal with.

Any specifics? Or is it just auto-assumption that Microsoft is obviously fucking everyone over because they're Microsoft?

"Microsoft introduces new obligatory antivirus-update for 60 USDollars/year. If you don't accept this security update, OSs performance will decrease over the time of 12 months."

...

showed it under the worst of comparable (and costly!) antivirus-software.

MS has a free AV which is probably the best on the market anyway. Wait a second, didn't I say this before?

You should really try coming up with new arguments. Ones that make sense too.

Edited March 19, 2010 by echo1

[NoRailgunner 0]

Linux users, like users on every operating system, must always be aware of security issues. There is no bulletproof system!

[slay0rwr4th 10]

awesome, I'd like to see my copy of Linux Mint 8 Run it :D, after reading, is it not happening?, might try using playonlinux again soon, got to starting screen with demo but everything was semi transparent squares, no writing, nothing was clickable etc.

Games coming with their own OS? one pro would be an "Xbox-esque" speed increase to your computer. other than that it's too much work? it's a cool idea though for games like ARMA, ARMA II, screw even having a proper OS, just load straight into the world with an ESC menu and an m4a1... your internet connection working blindly in the background (good old linux) without any work... maybe have a ~ command line option for advanced users, and everything is reflected in the ESC menu for those scared of deeper editing.

It would seem smarter for there to be a Linux distro built solely for games, it's mission statement being to crack a true directx alternative? - I have linux mint installed and it's great, but there are far better ones...

Edited March 19, 2010 by slay0rwr4th
reading more subject content

[echo1 0]

Linux users, like users on every operating system, must always be aware of security issues. There is no bulletproof system!

Correct. The Windows NT kernel was designed by people who wrote very reliable mainframe OSes for DEC. The fact that it ended up in things like Vista show that it doesn't matter if you have a good design, if the vendor can't make proper use of it, it's going to fail. Ubuntu has the same problem really, there are far better Linux OSes than it.

[Herbal Influence 10]

Oh, guys, you have a million-bucks-marketing behind you.

You doing quite easy defending Microsoft, believing Microsoft - nothing easier than that.

I surrender.

Not because of facts, but because it's not easy to come up with a idealistic idea and being critisized for just that.

I am a dreamer - a dreamer running a few PCs with Ubuntu Linux 24h/7days.

In professional use, professional circumstances.

And Linux has credibility - by openess, not by marketing, not by money.

Linux exists free, Linux exists for free, Linux is open.

If you don't have a bit of a dream things getting free again, nothing will ever happen.

You might be older than me?

Lost your dreams?

Imagine there's only Open Source.

Imagine all the people living life in peace.

You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.

One day you'll awake if there are 99 % of Opels down the streets.

And you will remember: Has there never been any other cars than just Opels?

Where have they gone?

Should I have bought a BMW to help it survive?

Weren't they for free?

Why did I buy only Opels myself ... the last years. Now BMWs are dead. :-(

And don't get me wrong: I don't hate Microsoft as a Software. I hate a demolished, a destroyed free market. That's what makes me sad.

A free market needs people who want it to be free.

Edited March 19, 2010 by Herbal Influence

[echo1 0]

[-Snafu- 78]

@snafu:

It's too bad you cannot appreciate that kind of freedom I spoke of.

But that's your personal preferences. No problem.

You don't understand.

To the average user this "freedom" you talk about means absolutely nothing. People just want something that's simple and works. They don't want to know the code of the OS. They don't want to modify it. They don't want to have to stop using software they like because Linux can't run it. Remember the golden rule: KISS (keep it simple stupid).

I have nothing against Linux/Ubuntu or whatever. I would gladly welcome another OS to the market. BUT considering the fact that you have to jump through hoops to get a lot of stuff to work and that some things may not work at all is a major put off. No amount "freedom" garbage talk will change that.

For BIS to deliver their own OS would just put a lot of people off from buying it. It would be a disaster.

And as I already said: The real committed BIS-gamer doesn't have the time to do other games. :eek: But if not: He can do like he always did: Buy and boot Microsoft ...

I think the herb has influenced you a little too much.

I have been playing BIS games since 2001. I still play OFP and ArmA, still make missions for them. I play BIS games more than others.

I also play other games so to say that a BIS committed gamer doesn't have time to play other games is completely ridiculous.

People tend not to play games because of the developer who made them, yes it will play a role but a very small one.

For example, I like military games that have a sense of realism. That is why I play Close Combat, OFP, ArmA, ArmA 2, Wars in America, Panzer General, Allied General, The Operational Art of War, Combat Mission Shock Force etc.

All good challenging games with a degree of realism and accuracy (not all are FPS). As much as I like ArmA 2 I would not play BIS games only. I am interested in military stuff which is why I play OFP, ArmA and ArmA 2. Carrier Command is being developed, at least partly, by BIS, however, I will not play it as I am not interested in science fiction.

I guarantee that even the most ardent BIS fanboy would not just play BIS games. I bet there are only a handful, if any, that do.

If BIS followed your advice and released an OS for ArmA it would mean that people could not play the other games that they like. Computers require a lot of maintenance and fiddling about with as it is. People don't want to bother with a dual boot for one game.

It would be a waste of BIS stretched resources.

Edited March 20, 2010 by Snafu

[echo1 0]

I think you're fighting a lost cause. Even I've given up at this stage!

[Herbal Influence 10]

@Snafu:

"No amount "freedom" garbage talk will change that."

That's something you saying in a world that is ruled to 97 % by one software developer - commercial and proprietary.

You seem to be sure that you would not be urging for freedom when down in the streets there are 97 % of Ford-cars driving around though there used to be a lot more kind of different cars ...

@ch_123:

No revolution will ever take place with the attitude that Big Brother Microsoft is doing everything quite right for you, cosy and warm.

According to what you call sober realism and on the other hand use of too much herbs - OFP would never have happened.

You would have bashed that idea of OFP from BIS in 1999 down the thread faster than they could have posted ..... with the same arguments: Too complicated, too buggy by principle (for it's openess), other games much more serious and nicer etc. etc.

And now that BIS did undertake that step of a revolutionary game, you sit back in your velvets seats again and bash the next revolutionary step that is kinda logic ...

Come on guys - stop bashing ideas. Have them!

[echo1 0]

EDIT: Nevermind

Edited March 21, 2010 by echo1

[-Snafu- 78]

@Snafu:

"No amount "freedom" garbage talk will change that."

That's something you saying in a world that is ruled to 97 % by one software developer - commercial and proprietary.

You seem to be sure that you would not be urging for freedom when down in the streets there are 97 % of Ford-cars driving around though there used to be a lot more kind of different cars ...

I know English isn't your first language but did you even read my posts?

I said I would welcome another OS to the market but you can't ignore the problems with Linux and your suggestion for BIS by dressing it in nonsense ideological language. You can go back to my post and see them, no point in me spelling it all out again.

Bad example with Ford. I see lots of types of cars on the road.

[Herbal Influence 10]

Yeah - you still see the cars because the EU Commission dropped a fine on Microsoft a few times ... other browsers, other mediaplayers would have died otherwise.

Microsoft attacked the freedom of the market, the freedom of the customers - and had to be stopped and fined by the EU Government.

If you see other cars than Fords on the street, than you are not a software developer with a good idea:

He sees only one sort of cars - Fords.

If he would start to develop for other cars, he would be ruined fastly - for "defacto", there are no other cars than just Fords around.

That's what you call freedom? Freedom of choice for software developers?

What are the problems with Linux other than OpenGL ?

(That part I cannot evaluate - it might be a big hindrance. Though I posted OpenGL is making big steps .. .. recently.)

[th3flyboy 0]

Yeah - you still see the cars because the EU Commission dropped a fine on Microsoft a few times ... other browsers, other mediaplayers would have died otherwise.

Microsoft attacked the freedom of the market, the freedom of the customers - and had to be stopped and fined by the EU Government.

If you see other cars than Fords on the street, than you are not a software developer with a good idea:

He sees only one sort of cars - Fords.

If he would start to develop for other cars, he would be ruined fastly - for "defacto", there are no other cars than just Fords around.

That's what you call freedom? Freedom of choice for software developers?

What are the problems with Linux other than OpenGL ?

(That part I cannot evaluate - it might be a big hindrance. Though I posted OpenGL is making big steps .. .. recently.)

Speaking as someone with experience developing for both DX and OGL, I can say that the effort put in to learning OGL is well worth it.

[echo1 0]

If you see other cars than Fords on the street, than you are not a software developer with a good idea:

He sees only one sort of cars - Fords.

If he would start to develop for other cars, he would be ruined fastly - for "defacto", there are no other cars than just Fords around.

That's what you call freedom? Freedom of choice for software developers?

Software developers develop software, surprisingly enough. They want to concentrate on the thing that they are developing, and not saving the world from itself. They are not Operating System developers. They pick the platform that serves their product best, and this includes a) the one is going to be the easiest to write for and support and b) the one that will get them the greatest number of customers.

For a game, Windows is the best choice by far. OpenGL is just not at the same standard as DirectX. People have lots of experience developing for DirectX, the latter alone is probably a more important consideration - huge chunks of the world's software is written in C++ or Java. There are far better languages than these, but everyone knows how to use them, and everything else is written in them. Ironically, the expansion of Linux in the corporate market has been greatly sped up by this very thing you despise - there have been superior operating systems that have been abandoned because their market share was too small to justify companies making software for them, and they just wrote them for Linux instead.

If you want to increase the market adoption of Linux, what you are proposing is like building a house by starting with the roof. You need to get people to adopt Linux on it's own merits and then people will make software for it. I think a lot of effort has to be expended into making it more suitable for the general market.

I'm not going to say any more... countering circular arguments tends to lead to more circular arguments...

Edited March 22, 2010 by echo1

[nomdeplume 0]

DirectX and OpenGL aren't directly comparable, as DirectX includes audio and input handling as well as graphics.

"You need to get people to adopt Linux on it's own merits and then people will make software for it." reveals the circular nature of the beast: until your average user can run their games and whatnot on Linux, almost nobody's going to release games that can run on Linux.

Look at how few games run on Mac, which has a much higher market share than Linux, is designed for and suits commercial proprietary software, and is used by people other than geeks. So if nobody cares about the Mac, why is anybody going to care about Linux?

The "freedom" issue matters to you even if it doesn't matter to you. Think of it like the freedom of the press: if you're not a reporter, you couldn't care less if they have restrictions on what they can report on or not. But if being held accountable by reporters prevents the government from becoming an oppressive totalitarian regime that will make your life miserable, then it actually does matter rather a lot.

[Placebo 29]

This thread seems to have moved well past the original question, the answer to which being, there are no current plans for Linux ports.