why hasn't Linux gaming taken off?

Dauntless · 2002-05-15T09:55:13

Not really sure if this is more appropriate in the GDnet lounge or here, but here goes. Here are my theories: 1) Linux is harder to program on than windows, and/or there are fewer Linux developers 2) Gaming libraries/API''s aren''t as robust or complete as DirectX (OpenGL is graphics only, OpenAL is audio only, SDL still has some compatibility issues, etc.) 3) DirectX is more versatile than OpenGL 4) Linux users don''t want to pay for software 5) No one uses Linux on the desktop, therefore there is no market Too bad the Linux console idea never got off the ground...it would have been interesting. But I think the really pertinent points are #4 and #5. Something like 90% of the desktop marketplace is M$. M$ is for the masses because Joe-six pack doesn''t want to have to figure out how to run Linux....and perhaps more importantly, he wants tech support to be there when his machine runs afoul. I work in tech support and I know how this goes. I think that the very large part of the consumer populace is still incredibly ignorant about computers...Windows included. You would be amazed at how many calls I get from people that don''t know how to turn off their computer much less even know how to copy and paste things into folders. The ignorance of quite a large group of people is pretty staggering. What amazes me is that if people don''t even know how to use Windows, and you essentially have to hold their hands to get them to work with it, why not go ahead and train them in Linux? I''ve been pushing our business to do this with no effect...and I''ll tell you why. There is no one to go to to point a finger at or escalate business failures to. And this is a huge issue for the company and I would imagine for Joe Six pack too. When Joe six pack runs into trouble, who does he call? Most distributions only have limited support, and what vendors sell Linux installed PC''s? Basically there is no one anywhere to hold anyone''s hand...and that really scares people away. The other major issue is that Linux gamers probably wouldn''t pay for software. I think in some ways they are spoiled by free software to the point that they expect things to be free. While you can make amateur games for free pretty easily, if you want professional caliber games with models and cut scenes created on Maya, and professional quality music and effects, then it''s not going to happen on Linux. I don''t really know how to counter any of my above points. Perhaps in time 1-3 will be abolished, but something needs to change for 4 and 5. Hopefully with IBM throwing it''s support for Linux on the mainframe, maybe it will eventually start supporting Linux on the desktop too. Hey, if IBM could make M$ what it is today by bundling MS-DOS with their PC''s, why not for Linux? Without IBM, M$ would be nothing (and probably Intel too for that matter).

Everything Unix Technical

Started by Dauntless May 04, 2002 02:32 PM

46 comments, last by Dauntless 21 years, 11 months ago

Oluseyi

2,123

May 09, 2002 01:28 PM

quote:Original post by Greven
What I''m saying is, there are helpdesks available that will do Linux support.

Not a whole lot. And they''re struggling because they haven''t proven very successful (I''m talking about dedicated helpdesk companies). Read this, for example O''Reilly Network: Lessons from the Layoffs at Linuxcare. Linuxcare found out the hard way that phone support wasn''t viable, and have refocused on enterprise, OEM and ISV solutions.

That said, there is definitely an opportunity there, as with most of Linux. The challenge is in learning how to commercialize a product that is free (hint: focus on the ancillaries).

[ GDNet Start Here | GDNet Search Tool | GDNet FAQ ]
[ MS RTFM [MSDN] | SGI STL Docs | Boost ]
[ Google! | Asking Smart Questions | Jargon File ]
Thanks to Kylotan for the idea!

DaWanderer

538

May 09, 2002 02:27 PM

quote:Original post by _the_phantom_
Original post by Red Ghost
However, one point, I am as yet to find any IDE which comes close to what Visual Studio has with regards to layout etc, and with VS.Net M$ have come up with another damn good IDE.

Check out an IDE called Anjuta. I''d been using VS .NET for a good while when I switched over to Linux and had the same problem of finding a good dev IDE (I didn''t really care for KDevelop either). Anjuta has a lot of the same features of VS .NET''s IDE and runs a hell of a lot faster (IMHO). Head over to http://anjuta.sourceforge.net/ and see if you like it.

As far as Linux gaming is concerned, SDL and similar cross-platform APIs are going to be the key. Writing games strictly for Linux at this point in time is bad business, but if you use something like SDL, you can get both popular OS''s in one swing.

The Bear

122

May 09, 2002 02:31 PM

quote:
Linux will eventually penetrate the marketplace, but only as it matures into a system that presents real, tangible benefits to its users.

According to the research firms IDC and AllNetResearch, Linux servers represent approximately 27% of the total server market. (Note: this number is disputed by M$ and research groups funded by M$)

quote:
This is the fault of many Linux advocates (and the reason why I strongly dislike RMS [Stallman], Maddog and the FSF) for only popularizing Linux on the basis of "down with Microsoft." A colleague attended a talk by John "Maddog" Hall, president of Linux International and found the man to spend the whole time attacking Microsoft and its policies.

It is unfortunate that the battle has broken down to this level. Linux advocates, however, are not the only ones slinging mud. Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer and other M$ figurheads have all made low-blow attacks on Linux and the "cancerous" Open Source Initiative.
Ask yourself this question: If Linux is so unviable, why is M$ spending so much time, money and energy attempting to discredit and squash it?

quote:
I''m banking on Big Blue to become a major Linux player.

I think that you may be correct. And as Linux become more ubiquitous in the "behind the scenes" markets, it will start to penetrate the "in your face" consumer markets. Mac OS X is already beginning to improve the perception of "open" and "free" sources.
I use Windows 2K and DirectX everyday, but I prefer the Unix/Linux/Irix with OpenGL environments. I still miss my SGI Indy...

Kylotan

10,510

May 10, 2002 07:38 AM

quote:Original post by Dauntless
Maybe people missed my other comment, but what about the factor of WineX in preventing developers from creating native Linux games? Is this a good or bad strategy?

I''d personally like to see native games made using native Linux API''s and middleware rather than going through an emulation layer. Why? Because it sort of defeats the purpose of necessitating Linux or improving its popularity.

Perhaps we can look at things like WineX as reducing the ''cost'' of moving to Linux. Some people won''t migrate because they can''t play games. WineX alleviates that issue, giving Linux a chance to become more established. And as it gets more established, hopefully the other APIs will become more popular as a better option...

[ MSVC Fixes | STL | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost | Asking Questions | Organising code files ]

Flarelocke

410

May 11, 2002 05:10 PM

There are historical arguments for and against interoperability. Both lacking and having interoperability work(IIRC, which I probably don''t, telephones were compatible with telegraphs, but OS2 was compatible with Windows). It must be something else that will determine whether Linux becomes popular on the desktop.

Btw, as far as OEMs go, MS OEM licensing(without which they would have an irrecoverable disadvantage) says that they pay for each computer. Because a linux computer is still a computer, they pay for copies of windows on the linux computers--which don''t have them--anyway. So they can''t sell the system for any less just because it has Linux on it, which would otherwise be cheaper. IOW, MS eliminates switching OS as a means of gaining price advantage. This evidence was presented in the anti-trust trial. Oh, and if you were thinking, well, put both on, MS licensing explicitly prohibits giving the user a visible choice at bootup of which OS to choose.

Several analysts have said that without the tech-slump, Linux would have had clear sailing because of widespread support from hardware vendors. With dot-com bust, though, hardware makers need users to buy more systems. Bloated operating systems make new hardware look more attractive.

Eric S. Raymond(Open Source Initiative founder and excellent coder) has said that he believes once computer hardware drops to the $350 level, hardware makers can no longer afford to pay the Microsoft "tax". There is evidence for this argument in the arena of palmtop and embedded computing. >$350 have Windows CE. <$350 have Linux. Some >$350 also have Linux.

We''re at the $500 level(although you need to shop hard) for a P4 system. 500 and decrementing.

Anyway, Linux in the workplace is pretty on topic for games because games are made in workplaces. We can''t get game developers comfortable with it if they don''t use it.

---New infokeeps brain running;must gas up!

_the_phantom_

11,263

May 12, 2002 03:01 PM

2 Quick things, cheers to DaWanderer for pointing out Anjuta to me, I''ll have a look at it later as currently I''m having to do all my work in windows.

And, on the Wine(X2) subject, really it should be most use for old games which we still wanna play, but wont ever get a linux version, the new games should really be written for the native system as teh performance over stuff which has to go via a layer is going to be so much better

declspec

126

May 12, 2002 03:10 PM

think it comes down to market.

ya i know people into linux. but they seem to always have a windows machine. can i say that bout windows? that windows home users seem to always have a linux machine?

no

what im presenting is that you cant say "linux market is wide open for games" implying your not competeing against windows game companies. you are competeing against the windows platform game companies however; because that home user has finite dollars,a linux machine, and a windows machine on average _if_ they own a linux machine.

Prefect

373

May 15, 2002 09:55 AM

That''s why you should develop cross-platform games, and sell both Windows and Linux (and any other OS) versions in the same box. Porting a game after its initial release and then selling it seperately for the new platform may make sense for console games. It certainly doesn''t make sense when the new platform is just a different OS, based on the same hardware.

cu,
Prefect

Return to the Shadows

Widelands - laid back, free software strategy

why hasn't Linux gaming taken off?

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

why hasn't Linux gaming taken off?

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Reticulating splines