Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Source Engine On Postal III Is Still Coming To Linux

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
    well first, if anyone hasn't been aware, the #1 reason why commercial developers do not support linux is because of how diverse the platform is - there are so many architectures,
    No there aren't. The only people who are going to buy games on Linux are running x86 or x86-64, and the latter can use multilib. SPARC, PPC, Alpha, ARM, etc. aren't used on desktop computers anymore, other than a handful of greybeards who bought over-priced workstations a decade ago and steadfastly cling to their out-dated, slow, under-powered hardware that doesn't even have access to PCI-X based GPUs new games require to perform worth a crap.

    so many ways to install things
    This is the one real problem with Linux as a consumer OS. No way for third-parties to distribute software. I'd love to see this fixed, and started putting together some technical documents on it. Actually getting it implemented would take some months, most of which would be wasted effort anyway because Fedora, SUSE, Ubuntu, Arch, etc. would never include the necessary infrastructure to support any new installer format. They intentionally want to fuck their users and force them to stick to their application silos so they can be lazy and not have to define a platform rather than just creating new incompatible OS appliances every 6 months.

    too many conflicting desktop environments
    That's not at all important. No application needs any particular deep integration with any desktop. They just need to be able to install icons in the right places and maybe (for the badly behaving applications) put a notification icon somewhere. Everything else is desktop-agnostic.

    Especially with games.

    and too many distros use too many versions of things.
    This is a mild issue, one that can be fixed easily. It really just requires the definition of a platform. For instance, the LSB mandates that a number of libraries with specific ABIs must be present.

    The LSB just doesn't cover enough. Especially when it comes to games.

    Honestly, the only ABIs that have broken repeatedly in recent years are the audio APIs (OSS->ALSA->Pulse) and the disk management APIs (manual mounts of /dev/cdrom vs automount vs supermount vs hal vs udev vs udisk etc.).

    Everything else has been pretty stable.

    my realization is this - steam has it's own way of installing things, even in windows. games bought with steam will not run without it. if commercial devs design games specifically for steam, you could simply put it as "if your computer will not run steam, it will not run our game". steam could be designed to install all major libraries current games need.
    That is precisely why Steam on Linux is so enticing, yes. Steam itself doesn't accomplish much, and Steam being on Linux doesn't mean any particular games will be on Linux. It does mean that third-party developers would finally have a way of getting their products onto Linux without needing to work around the asshat distribution developers and their artificial barriers to interoperability imposed by their packaging systems walling off otherwise identical ABIs between distributions.

    as i see it, this is really just a lot of challenging work for the steam devs, but if they can get this done, then this should make developing games for linux easy.
    It will make _distributing_ games for Linux easy.

    Developing them is already trivial, especially if your game already has non-DirectX code paths for OS X or consoles. That is, adding an OpenGL renderer and OpenAL audio engine and POSIX I/O facilities to an engine that's already multi-platform is easy. It's all the engines that are DirectX-only that are a bitch to port. Engines that are PC/XBox exclusive will be a bitch to port to Linux. Everything else is going to be a breeze.

    The hardest part is porting the shaders, actually, because GLSL is crap compared to HLSL, and because there will often be more shader code in a modern game than there is low-level API code. All you really use the Direct3D/OpenGL APIs for anymore are basically loading data onto the GPU and sending "draw this list of vertex elements" commands. OpenGL is a huge and unsightly beast, but take a look at the Direct3D 10 or 11 APIs and you can see just how little the graphics API actually does anymore. And Direct3D includes all the useful utilities that OpenGL doesn't, like shader loaders and texture loaders, and high-level effects composition, and it's still a fraction of the size and complexity of OpenGL.

    There is one thing holding back both Steam and any major publisher porting to Linux which is unlikely to ever be fixed, however, and that would be DRM. All of the big publishers -- EA, Activision, 2K, Ubisoft, etc. -- are making very heavy use of very hardcore DRM. They're not going to forego that on some rinky-dink platform. Steam can't implement its excellent DRM on Linux because there's no way to protect things at a kernel level in a FOSS OS.

    I am not defending DRM. I hate it. But I also sympathize with the companies using it, because piracy really does hurt. A lot. The Freetards like to argue otherwise using unsourced quotes and statistics or small-scale anecdotes from fringe companies. The industry professionals use real statistics gathered from actual metrics like, say, X sales of a game vs Y people connecting to the multiplayer servers where Y is often 2*X, 4*X, or even 10*X. And those servers are expensive to run, and a large influx of freeloading players costs the companies millions and sometimes even puts them out of business or ruins a game launch (because all those paying customers can't connect to the overloaded servers). DRM sucks and is user-hostile, but too many users suck and are developer-hostile, so until someone figures out a way to create a satellite-mounted canon that blasts shitheads into dust when they try to pirate a game, we're stuck with DRM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by elanthis View Post
      This is a mild issue
      In reality it doesn't seem so mild. I own a bunch of LGP Games and nearly all of them have trouble installing or running. Some like Mind Rover don't work at all. And LGP has years of experience with Linux. I don't think a newcomer had any chance of releasing a game for Linux that wouldn't break on the first new distro release.

      Comment


      • #18
        How about providing a new updated installer for it? Did you ask for that?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Kano View Post
          How about providing a new updated installer for it? Did you ask for that?
          Of course I did. In fact it has been reported to the bugtracker since 08-10-09.

          Comment


          • #20
            What I find interesting about this is:
            We are hopeful to reach a distribution deal at GDC and worse case we go [direct download] and will find another team [for] Linux.
            basically not STEAM

            oh I could say soo many things about phoronix past articles

            Comment


            • #21
              Sounds like RWS is working on porting the Source engine to Linux. If Valve already had a version for Linux, they wouldn't need to be doing that. So I'm taking this as a sign that Valve aren't readying it for Linux themselves.
              Nothing to do with Steam here. Which I also doubt it coming anytime soon, if at all.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by mirv View Post
                Sounds like RWS is working on porting the Source engine to Linux. If Valve already had a version for Linux, they wouldn't need to be doing that. So I'm taking this as a sign that Valve aren't readying it for Linux themselves.
                Nothing to do with Steam here. Which I also doubt it coming anytime soon, if at all.
                Thats my point. The Phoronix artical went all QQ that people didn't believe that SOURCE was coming to linux YET that was the one thing that was all but confirmed and that was when Postal3 was announced years ago to use SOURCE and come to linux. Thats a given

                What was in question was STEAM. Go look at past articles from Phoronix they are peddling that it is confirmed that STEAM is coming to linux. NOT ONCE is that confirmed.
                This article, and I quote,
                because this game is now being powered by Valve's Source Engine, and there still being many in disbelief that it's coming to Linux.
                As I have pointed out, SOURCE coming to linux wasn't really doubted.
                In the same artical to provide justification
                Some have failed to believe my reports that Valve is bringing Steam / Source Engine to Linux,
                linking to:
                http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...uncement&num=1
                with the headline:
                It's Official: Valve Releasing Steam, Source Engine For Linux!

                See that, Phoronix peddling two statements (and using this old article as proof "they were right" for this present artical)
                The 1st being STEAM Not once has this been confirmed, not once in the 9months! and the funny thing is this new artical (which then uses the old as reference) actually shows that STEAM isn't coming to linux before May. So the most optimistic statement that can be made is that the original artical about STEAM coming to linux jumped the gun by over a year, and that assumes it then arrives just after May.

                The 2nd SOURCE well yup RWS and Postal3 confirmed that.

                SOURCE does not mean STEAM

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by mirv View Post
                  Sounds like RWS is working on porting the Source engine to Linux. If Valve already had a version for Linux, they wouldn't need to be doing that. So I'm taking this as a sign that Valve aren't readying it for Linux themselves.
                  Nothing to do with Steam here. Which I also doubt it coming anytime soon, if at all.
                  That's an assumption.

                  There's tons of coding that needs to get done for a game- and you might end up "patching" the engine as well.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
                    That's an assumption.

                    There's tons of coding that needs to get done for a game- and you might end up "patching" the engine as well.
                    True, sorry, I hadn't emphasised the "sounds like" part enough. With diddly squat from Valve on the matter of Linux though, I can't take a single game based off their engine as proof of anything.
                    Cheers to RWS though!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by mirv View Post
                      True, sorry, I hadn't emphasised the "sounds like" part enough. With diddly squat from Valve on the matter of Linux though, I can't take a single game based off their engine as proof of anything.
                      Cheers to RWS though!
                      Indeed. It could mean just the game, or it could mean a bit more- you just can't tell until it happens. Main big thing here is that there's enough going for things that it's better to be just cynical enough to sit on the fence on this, rather than say "it ain't gonna happen"- too much smoke about right at the moment to say yea or nay on this.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I agree, we don't know what's happening, but that makes Phoronix "reporting" on Steam/Source for Linux even more embarrassing. Because of that some people may still hold their breath thinking they'll be able to download and play Half-Life, L4D, Portal, etc through Steam on Linux, when it may only end up with Postal 3 being ported by a third party (I guess buying the engine allows you to do a port to whatever platform).

                        There's no reason to think Valve would include the changes in their main engine, and even if they did for some reason (maybe as a bullet point for other licensees: "Cross-platform!") there is no guarantee they will release their franchise games for Linux, like what has happened with other games using id Softwares engines.

                        No matter what happens, right now it's a joke and the possible nice surprise is ruined.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          *sight* feel like repeating myself.... well postal 3 is coming, nice! with source engine too? that's too sweet! Steam is quite doubtful, yeah we saw linux binaries (broken, bugged), we saw ppl bashing flaming, trolling, selling theirs panties and etc. But nothing proves that there isn't a possibility for it... If valve doesn't want a linux client for steam and source engine, why the heck they want/ed a linux programmer to port games to linux???? they do support Mac OS X when nobody knew that it was underway....

                          Now, i ask myself, if Postal 3, powered by source engine, makes a good sell into the linux community will that help valve to make their mind? they did port their rendering engine to opengl (mc os x) though

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Postal to Linux?! Mixed feelings about that...

                            Postal to Linux?! Mixed feelings about that...

                            I am very happy to see that there are some who invest into Linux gaming.

                            But, Postal?! Linux users may lose that ueber credit they have now, being relegated to slash fest nerds, an image that has been reserved for MS users.

                            Had it been Portal, then!!!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by sabriah View Post
                              Postal to Linux?! Mixed feelings about that...

                              I am very happy to see that there are some who invest into Linux gaming.

                              But, Postal?! Linux users may lose that ueber credit they have now, being relegated to slash fest nerds, an image that has been reserved for MS users.

                              Had it been Portal, then!!!
                              If that were the case, we're pretty much doomed out of the box since Postal and Postal 2 have been ported to Linux as well...

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
                                If that were the case, we're pretty much doomed out of the box since Postal and Postal 2 have been ported to Linux as well...
                                Isn't one of the big appeals to linux are the "options"?

                                If they don't like playing Postal then they could always try Padman or http://www.lgdb.org/game/pink_pony

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X