Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Primal Carnage Says Goodbye To Unigine

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by dopehouse View Post
    Thats why my >7 years old copy of SimCity 3000 still works on a modern Linux Distro.

    Hell, this game works better than games made for Win9x running on XP or even Vista.
    On Linux I can play windows xp games which stoped working on... windows xp, because of sp3.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by NoEffex View Post
      How am I not surprised. Linux game development is rather difficult. APIs change far too much.
      Total rubbish. OpenGL/OpenAL/SDL/FreeType etc. are all cross-platform and pretty much completely backwards compatible with older versions. In fact one of GLs criticisms has always been it's backwards compatibility; its *lack* of change.

      The only reasons games aren't ported to Linux more often are business and legacy decisions (e.g. low provable market share and set DX based toolchain and development process, although it's mainly the former).

      What makes this more frustrating is Primal Carnage just switched to a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ENGINE and don't think anything of it, yet that is likely more work than porting an existing game to a new platform (e.g. from Windows to Linux).

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by kayosiii
        I don't think this is entirely fair on all counts. I didn't know that Primal Carnage was going to offer a Linux client version of the game and I am a little bit surprised that they did. However I am pretty sure that they did this is good faith.
        I don't use to side with the trigger-happy Linux crowd in these situations, but really, this one is pathetic. They are making stupid excuses and blaming whoever as long as it's not them.

        The benefits of the UDK are enormous. Obviously, the fact that the engine is built for FPS games is a huge advantage. When you take into account Speedtree integration, XBox and PS3 compatability, strong support, many developers that know it inside-out and great AAA software it's easy to see why the UDK is the perfect choice for Primal Carnage.
        OK, this one is acceptable. These people are in it for the money and decided that this particular solution will help the game to be a success. Fair enough. But things start going downhill pretty soon after that:

        Making a game is not easy, especially if you have no funding or resources, we tried our very best to work with unigine, however unigine is a un-finished engine and stopped giving us support.
        How lack of funding can be the problem when the engine was licensed for free? Also, the engine is finished according to the Unigine representative present in the forum.

        We were having a lot of trouble trying to keep our team together as well as recruiting people who would be willing to learn that tool set. We switched to the UDK because it gives this game a greater opportunity and much bigger chance of success and gives us the option to port to psn / xbla and PC.
        Then it wasn't lack of funding and support? You saw a bigger opportunity to make cash and reach consoles, right?

        As I have mentioned, we simply were not getting as much support from the linux fanbase to keep the project going on linux.
        WHAT. Is this a joke? Where are the cameras? Note that these three snippets actually belong to a single paragraph, which makes it all even more surrealist.

        Finally, we come back once more to blame Unigine:

        I'm very sorry but it's not fair to be mad at us, you can blame unigine for not supporting our project.
        okay...

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Kazade View Post
          Total rubbish. OpenGL/OpenAL/SDL/FreeType etc. are all cross-platform and pretty much completely backwards compatible with older versions. In fact one of GLs criticisms has always been it's backwards compatibility; its *lack* of change.

          The only reasons games aren't ported to Linux more often are business and legacy decisions (e.g. low provable market share and set DX based toolchain and development process, although it's mainly the former).

          What makes this more frustrating is Primal Carnage just switched to a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ENGINE and don't think anything of it, yet that is likely more work than porting an existing game to a new platform (e.g. from Windows to Linux).
          This might suprise you, but as far as I am aware, Primal Carnage doesn't have system level game programmer. That is why they are using game middleware. Talking about anything below the middleware is pretty much beside the point. It will be painful for them to throw the code they had written away but by switching engines it will be less work overall UDK is much less work for the type of game they are wanting to do.

          I am really hoping that Unigine itself will be able to things to the point where it is a good choice for a company like Primal Carnage and I am sure if it does we will see more games coming out for Linux.

          Comment


          • #35
            I'm kind of disappointed as I was definitely going to buy the game just for its Linux support. But hey, that just means more money for other games. I'll spend it on Amnesia and HoN instead.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by yotambien View Post
              I don't use to side with the trigger-happy Linux crowd in these situations, but really, this one is pathetic. They are making stupid excuses and blaming whoever as long as it's not them.
              I don't think it is fair for them to be criticizing Ungine in the way they did. If they had a different team they could have made Unigine work for them - but they need to focus on doing the best they can with what they have got.

              How lack of funding can be the problem when the engine was licensed for free? Also, the engine is finished according to the Unigine representative present in the forum.
              Because when developing a game you have to pay for more than just the technology . Typically you have artists and coders who need to eat and websites to host, promotions, hardware that needs to be bought etc.

              Then it wasn't lack of funding and support? You saw a bigger opportunity to make cash and reach consoles, right?
              I don't think that consoles really was a factor in the decision. Remember this is the first title and getting it out on a platform, any platform will be a good first step.

              Comment


              • #37
                I have been developing a game for 3 years. I work mostly under Linux and just started using CB as IDE a couple of days ago. I still write code in Kate and run scons manually. Even so, I prefer to work under Linux instead of Windows. The problem with commercial games is that they develop for Windows and then spent a lot porting to Linux. They get a small profit, so, Linux is bad, no Linux buyers, blah, blah.
                I agree that Unigine needs an indie license, perhaps paying after the game is sold. Unreal Engine is by far the most used engine and they do it! And also support for Blender, but thats another story. By the way, who do I have to kill to get a free Unigine license?

                Comment


                • #38
                  bill gates? steve balmer?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by NoEffex View Post
                    How am I not surprised. Linux game development is rather difficult. APIs change far too much.
                    That's not true. APIs for GNU/Linux generally keeps compatibility until a major rewrite require otherwise.

                    Unigine already supports GNU/Linux, so the developers of Primal Carnage does not have to port the game, just test it to check for bugs and package it.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      they are lazy.... or M$ send some cash....

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Kazade View Post
                        Total rubbish. OpenGL/OpenAL/SDL/FreeType etc. are all cross-platform and pretty much completely backwards compatible with older versions. In fact one of GLs criticisms has always been it's backwards compatibility; its *lack* of change.

                        The only reasons games aren't ported to Linux more often are business and legacy decisions (e.g. low provable market share and set DX based toolchain and development process, although it's mainly the former).

                        What makes this more frustrating is Primal Carnage just switched to a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ENGINE and don't think anything of it, yet that is likely more work than porting an existing game to a new platform (e.g. from Windows to Linux).
                        No. You're talking to a dev here. There is constant API change, and more importantly ABI change. If you compile something on Fedora 13, the likelihood of it running on fedorda 12, or debian, or ubuntu, or arch linux, or centos, or rhel, is slim to none. It can be the most basic console app that tells you hello (hello world .

                        On Windows on the other hand, apps from the last century can still be run. Thus, if they make a game for Windows, chances are, it's going to last longer, whereas if they did it on Linux, it might last until the next week or two when there's a API/ABI change.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by NoEffex View Post
                          No. You're talking to a dev here. There is constant API change, and more importantly ABI change. If you compile something on Fedora 13, the likelihood of it running on fedorda 12, or debian, or ubuntu, or arch linux, or centos, or rhel, is slim to none. It can be the most basic console app that tells you hello (hello world .

                          On Windows on the other hand, apps from the last century can still be run. Thus, if they make a game for Windows, chances are, it's going to last longer, whereas if they did it on Linux, it might last until the next week or two when there's a API/ABI change.
                          My friend, you are full of BS. The only way a real developer would say that, would be if he was a Windows-only developer... What you are saying is simply not-true and almost everyone in this forum will be able to see that and not take your opinion seriously...

                          Or you are simply a troll...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by rogerdv View Post
                            I have been developing a game for 3 years. I work mostly under Linux and just started using CB as IDE a couple of days ago. I still write code in Kate and run scons manually. Even so, I prefer to work under Linux instead of Windows. The problem with commercial games is that they develop for Windows and then spent a lot porting to Linux. They get a small profit, so, Linux is bad, no Linux buyers, blah, blah.
                            I agree that Unigine needs an indie license, perhaps paying after the game is sold. Unreal Engine is by far the most used engine and they do it! And also support for Blender, but thats another story. By the way, who do I have to kill to get a free Unigine license?
                            What's CB? just curious. I am really enjoying working with Unigine and KDevelop4 at the moment - really nice combo. Unigine really cuts a lot of work out of doing cross platform Linux stuff but this has meant that they wrote the editor in Engine which is a bit of culture shock to a lot of companies and to be honest they could be a lot better. It is interesting you mention blender because that is an app that I think does single graphics context quite well.

                            I suspect that Unigine is not going to use that pricing structure because they don't have a great deal of cash reserves. I know at my work we the consensus is that Unigine's up front fees work out a lot better than UDK's 25% at the end deal but you have got to have the capital to make that happen I guess. I can only suggest talking to them.

                            As for the blender bit, two things... You can use the Resource Editor tool to convert obj and Collada models to Unigine format and the binary file formats are well documented and quite simple so it would not be a great deal of work to write an importer/exporter for Blender.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by NoEffex View Post
                              No. You're talking to a dev here. There is constant API change, and more importantly ABI change. If you compile something on Fedora 13, the likelihood of it running on fedorda 12, or debian, or ubuntu, or arch linux, or centos, or rhel, is slim to none. It can be the most basic console app that tells you hello (hello world .

                              On Windows on the other hand, apps from the last century can still be run. Thus, if they make a game for Windows, chances are, it's going to last longer, whereas if they did it on Linux, it might last until the next week or two when there's a API/ABI change.
                              This is true to a degree but you are hyperbolising. You can compile apps that will work on most versions of Linux if you follow some precautions and quite a number of companies do this successfully. You should compile against a fairly old version of glibc either include specific versions of libraries you compile against or compile on a very vanilla system like Debian.

                              And while Windows is better at maintaining ABI compatibility it is far from perfect. At work here there has been more than one application that has required using an older version of windows to run.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Cb is code block for short!

                                @NoEffex: dude you are a joke... if you make a driver for linux and you compile it with gcc 4.5.1 and try to use a kernel that was compiled with a different version of gcc you might have some issues.... But saying that a windows 3.1 software could be run on a windows vista/7 because there is almost no changes in the api/abi is bullshit.... then win7 is built with win 3.1 source code inside, right?

                                if you compile with gcc with kernel 2.6.3X and install a that software with kernel 2.4 then yes you will have some issues.... but if your software is a game that needs to run on a specific hardware you'll use older gcc, kernel, gfx driver to compile your game... you don't make a game with newer kernel version if you intend to support old kernel...

                                it's a bit messy my arguments sorry!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X