Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The future of linux gaming?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Dragonlord View Post
    Hehe... maybe I should have written 1e6 instead but I had not been sure if all understand then
    ... do you mean e from natural logarithm or e as in x10^n?

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Aradreth View Post
      ... do you mean e from natural logarithm or e as in x10^n?
      As in C++... the only real programming language ( except SmallTalk of course )

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by xav1r View Post
        Do you understand the amount of paid hours many coders, producers, engineers, etc. are involved in the making on an engine like unreal 3 or id tech? Well, maybe id tech 5's case is special, carmack does it all. But still, those things take a long time and lots of effort, and more importantly, cost a lot to make. Asking for an equal grade solution from a traditionally volunteered or freetime work is not realistic.
        I wholeheartedly disagree. What we don't have in time we can make up for in sheer numbers. That's the whole point of open source -- it's a community project, not a closed studio. And as Linux itself has proven, when commercial interests get involved in open source projects, the impossible becomes reality. And that's exactly what we want.

        Dragonlord: So your engine can stream during gameplay? Or does it merely support worlds that big on systems that can cram an entire gameworld that large worth of textures/sounds/etc into RAM? If the former, we may have a winner... You wouldn't happen to have an SVN would you?

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by RealNC View Post
          There's no other option though. Even Ubuntu is not good enough. MS offers a new version every 3 years maybe. Ubuntu every 6 months. Companies aren't really eager to constantly keep track of what breaks every 6 months.
          Excuse me, Microsoft OFFICIALLY offers a new version every 3 years or so. But, not unlike what we get with distributions, they do SP's which are the same thing with about the same regularity.

          The main reason they don't do things has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with what you're claiming. Seriously.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by roothorick View Post
            So your engine can stream during gameplay? Or does it merely support worlds that big on systems that can cram an entire gameworld that large worth of textures/sounds/etc into RAM?
            Yes and no. This engine does not work like your conventional monolithic black box engine. The design is different. If your game uses streaming or not is entirely up to the game. The engine does not provide explicit streaming support. It provides you with a definition of the game world which you are allowed to change continuously. You have a huge world at your disposal but which sectors ( assuming you work in sectors, since different games work best with different streaming types no static streaming support is provided ) are added to the world at any time is up to you. This allows the game to choose the best streaming system instead of wrestling with a predefined one. Mind that you can work with multiple worlds at the same time if required whereas though each world is closed. So think of the world as a canvas you can fill the way you want.

            Chances are though you have to explain first what you think of doing since I see you think in "load all at the time" patterns and that's static design but my engine uses dynamic design.

            You wouldn't happen to have an SVN would you?
            Not released yet. It's a complex beast and to avoid API breaks right at the beginning I delay the first release until I stabilized all interfaces.

            EDIT: I'm now not sure if we talk about the same thing. Do you mean "streaming" as the actual process of asynchronously loading resources from disk and plugging them in the world or fully loading world content from definition files asynchronously? If the former then yes the engine supports asynchronous resource handling if the former no that's the game developers job.
            Last edited by Dragonlord; 02-09-2009, 02:47 PM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
              Excuse me, Microsoft OFFICIALLY offers a new version every 3 years or so. But, not unlike what we get with distributions, they do SP's which are the same thing with about the same regularity.
              An SP every 3 years. That's what I've with "new version."

              XP had 3 SPs. And even the SPs don't break stuff. Compatibility is top priority.

              The main reason they don't do things has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with what you're claiming. Seriously.
              My Windows 95 programs still work in XP. That's how far they went to ensure software doesn't break.

              Ubuntu? Hah hah. Let's have the latest glibc just to show off even though it's totally useless to update it anyway.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by xav1r View Post
                qft. One of the biggest problems with linux games is the terrible gfx and soun implementations linux has to deal with, namely X, (one of the buggiest pieces of software off all time), it's sound system, etc. Linux needs a robust, easy to use API like DirectX for game devs to flock over to linux. As much as M$ is a crappy, monopolistic greedy company, their directX API is very well maintained, and gamedevs just love it. OpenGL 3.0 was a major dissapointment for gamedevs, mostly because the khronos group wanted to cater to the CAD market, leaving gamedevs in the dust. That has to change.
                Disclaimer: I'm not a programmer/developer

                X one of the buggiest pieces of software off all time? I honestly can't remember the last time I had a problem with X, it's been that many years (primarily using Nvidia). I would like development of X to gain momentum, so I can experience all the things Phoronix reports on, but I can't say I feel there's a problem with the curent state of X, as a user (work and play). Care to explain?
                Sound.. well, it works, but it does seem a little messy. Pulseaudio has not been a good experience on my systems ("glitch free"? right..), and I feel a tad worried about it being positioned as the defacto sound system. I don't know enough about the fundamental sound issue, I'm just glad I can hear sound! :P
                OpenGL3 did not turn out to be what most expected, true, but it still is the best, and only, crossplatform solution. What good is DirectX for me? I dont own/use Windows. What about XP users and DX10? And about Khronos leaving gamedevs in the dust:
                http://www.khronos.org/developers/li...OF%20Aug08.pdf
                Even if it's only PR, Blizzard are one of the most respected gamedevs.

                @ RealNC
                Wow, according to you, no commercial software will ever work on Linux! Firstly, the "problem" with the many distros and their "different" libs. I don't experience it. Professionally, I work with DCC (3D, compositing) under Linux using highend commercial software. Sure they usually state that the software is only supported under RHEL/SUSE, but we run it on Gentoo and Fedora without problems. I can't see your point, and it sounds like FUD to me. Same with games. I usually buy games for Linux, even though I'm not the biggest gamer anymore. All works out of the box, on different distros. Again, what is the problem? When big name gamedevs like id, and indy developers alike can make it happen, it IS possible.
                Secondly, it's not a technical problem, as shown above. that so few develop commercially for Linux. It's a matter of markedshare, and lazy developers that want as much handholding as possible. And people believing what you write. Please stop spreading FUD.

                Sorry roothorick, for not replying on topic.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by numasan View Post
                  @ RealNC
                  Wow, according to you, no commercial software will ever work on Linux!
                  When did I say that? You should read again perhaps.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                    There's no other option though. Even Ubuntu is not good enough. MS offers a new version every 3 years maybe. Ubuntu every 6 months. Companies aren't really eager to constantly keep track of what breaks every 6 months.
                    Obviously commercial software exists and works on Linux. It's how you decribe the situation: "Why bother?" Why? Because if companies want my money, they need to think crossplatform.

                    BTW, what's that thing about stuff breaking, possibly every 6 months? I own a copy of Maya 6.5 from 2004, and guess what. Still works on bleeding edge distros. Same with old games commercial games like the Quake series. Sure, some stuff breaks (old Loki games?) but there are workarounds in those situations.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                      When did I say that? You should read again perhaps.
                      My Windows 95 programs still work in XP. That's how far they went to ensure software doesn't break.

                      Ubuntu? Hah hah. Let's have the latest glibc just to show off even though it's totally useless to update it anyway.
                      That IS what you just posted. You've got that hole 6' deep now...time to call a break, friend...

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
                        That IS what you just posted. You've got that hole 6' deep now...time to call a break, friend...
                        I'm not calling a break on anything. Updating each 6 months with a new set of core libs makes vendors unwilling to support it.

                        If you don't grasp that, you might have a mental problem. Go ask Intel "ICC won't work here". You get told "we only support SuSE 7"... Guess why?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Usually you only have to compile it against an older glibc like 0.3.6 if you want to support Debian 4.0 for example and ship all needed libs with your app. Usually newer distros are supported then out of the box with the same binary, you just can not go backwards - like when you compile it on a too new build system.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                            I'm not calling a break on anything. Updating each 6 months with a new set of core libs makes vendors unwilling to support it.
                            That's more because they don't know how to do things right. Moreover, they also don't want to support things forever. If you're used to dealing with commercial stuff, they only like supporting things, including compilers, etc. from only about 1-2 years back. You try getting Intel to support you in using ICC on Win95...

                            If you don't grasp that, you might have a mental problem. Go ask Intel "ICC won't work here". You get told "we only support SuSE 7"... Guess why?
                            You know what, you've damned near stepped over the line right there.

                            1) Intel doesn't want to support past a certain point (Read: My Win95 remark- they'll support 2k and above, but shortly they'll only support XP and above...). This has nothing to do with Linux, but how they work. I know, I've been AT this game for 25+ years now.

                            2) It's not at all hard to make a binary that'll work with stuff all the way back to Debian Woody. All you need is to link against Woody's API edge and it'll work forward. With libs up until just recent times, all one had to do to do this without using Woody for build would be to use Autopackage's Autobuild scripts. Now it's a little more modern, but to support Woody wouldn't be TOO hard. Just a rootstrap of the right type in Scratchbox and it'd be the same result with apbuild.

                            Another remark like "you might have a mental problem", though, and I'll report the abuse. You don't see things eye to eye with me- that's fine. But, in the same vein, I've been at this a LOOOONG time and will be for some time to come and I know the whys and wherefores of a lot of this you're grousing on- and from the horse's mouth in many cases. If you don't agree, that's fine- back it up with PROOF moreso than your current remarks and you might even convince me. Whenever you resort to insults, etc. you've lost from start to finish.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              "Every group has a couple of experts. And every group has at least one idiot. Thus are balance and harmony (and discord) maintained. It's sometimes hard to remember this in the bulk of the flamewars that all of the hassle and pain is generally caused by one or two highly-motivated, caustic twits."
                              -- Chuq Von Rospach, about Usenet

                              Anyway...
                              Originally posted by Svartalf
                              with a day-job, two differing businesses I'm trying to lever up (a horse farm and a security consulting business...) in addition to the game porting.
                              I see you like to diversify! Not a bad idea considering the times we are in.

                              Originally posted by Dragonlord
                              As in C++... the only real programming language ( except SmallTalk of course )
                              x10^n then. :P
                              I much prefer scripting, take less time to write and I don't mess up quite so often

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Aradreth View Post
                                "Every group has a couple of experts. And every group has at least one idiot. Thus are balance and harmony (and discord) maintained. It's sometimes hard to remember this in the bulk of the flamewars that all of the hassle and pain is generally caused by one or two highly-motivated, caustic twits."
                                -- Chuq Von Rospach, about Usenet
                                Heh... Nice way to (hopefully...) chill out the whole thread and bring it back (again, hopefully...) on topic...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X