Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD/ATi + Blizzard

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

  • AMD/ATi + Blizzard

    I read this comment for Diablo 3 at dailytech:

    "Now ATI is collaborating with Blizzard for better game support on the HD48xx and Blizzard announces the use of Havok which ATI is implementing, it will be an even better choice to buy ATI!"

    I don't know how true this is, but can't AMD/ATi push a little bit more Blizzard/Vivendi into make the game a native Linux game, now that AMD/ATi has a sudden interest in Linux ?

    It's funny how they can't realize the money they are losing here.

  • #2
    Originally posted by sundown View Post
    I read this comment for Diablo 3 at dailytech:

    "Now ATI is collaborating with Blizzard for better game support on the HD48xx and Blizzard announces the use of Havok which ATI is implementing, it will be an even better choice to buy ATI!"

    I don't know how true this is, but can't AMD/ATi push a little bit more Blizzard/Vivendi into make the game a native Linux game, now that AMD/ATi has a sudden interest in Linux ?

    It's funny how they can't realize the money they are losing here.
    Actually it's quite sad because when developing it they will most probably have an in house linux version like they did with WOW.

    6:41pm CEST: Q: Wil there be Linux support? What are the barriers? A: We have no immediate plans for support of Linux client. We had a Linux version early on for compatiability purposes, but have no plans to make the final game for Linux.
    full interview here

    Comment


    • #3
      For what it's worth, there has been a Blizzard employee with the ATI Linux beta program now for some time at least.
      Michael Larabel
      http://www.michaellarabel.com/

      Comment


      • #4
        I really don't understand why they don't just release the WoW Linux client (unsupported, if they want)... work already been done, community would love it, game with 10.000.000 players of which they will be at least some thousand Linux gamers...

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by d2kx View Post
          I really don't understand why they don't just release the WoW Linux client (unsupported, if they want)... work already been done, community would love it, game with 10.000.000 players of which they will be at least some thousand Linux gamers...
          Somewhere in the order of about 100K according to some figures, for WoW alone.

          Michael, if that is indeed true (and having into account, again, that one of their Lead Software Engineers pioneered SDL), that is the more feasible. If there is one other company I'd LOVE to see their games on Linux, that'd be Blizzard. Forget Valve, forget 3D Realms, forget BioWare, even... The kind of stuff that Blizzard could bring to the table is just... amazing... In my utopian world they'd also release the code for the Warcraft II, Diablo and Starcraft engines, so that there could be Linux binaries for these games (you'd still had to have the original title to play these), alas... Not very likely to happen... ever.

          At any rate, I'd love to see at least Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 native Linux clients.

          Comment


          • #6
            Mhh I'd like to have the sources of Warcraft™ to be able to add the facilities of Warcraft2 (mouse right button) and to make graphics better, keeping the game as it is... since I think it was the most wonderful game I ever played

            And Diablo3 native in linux will be worth buying it

            So, a better linux / open source support from Blizzard will be much welcome

            but I'm not that confident in it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Thetargos View Post
              Somewhere in the order of about 100K according to some figures, for WoW alone.
              Problem: The most telling figures are the demise of Loki and the problems LGP are facing.

              If there were 100K linux gamers willing to pay, we would already have a vibrant games set-up, as that many sales would probably have kept Loki alive. No offence to LGP, but Lokis game lineup was decidely superior.

              Even worse: you mention 100K potential customers, and the price of rights for games goes up. You can't sell a Linux port to any company as having 100K potential customers, and than argue that the rights should be cheap because you can't expect more than 10K sales!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by d2kx View Post
                I really don't understand why they don't just release the WoW Linux client (unsupported, if they want)... work already been done, community would love it, game with 10.000.000 players of which they will be at least some thousand Linux gamers...
                Publisher nixed it. It wasn't up to them.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by RobbieAB View Post
                  If there were 100K linux gamers willing to pay, we would already have a vibrant games set-up, as that many sales would probably have kept Loki alive. No offence to LGP, but Lokis game lineup was decidely superior.
                  Heh... There's some reason behind the lineup deltas. Loki scoring what it did how it did and then owing people LOTS of cash for the deals they wrangled causes an environment worse than when Loki was around- they muddied the waters for everyone that followed them in that respect.

                  Even worse: you mention 100K potential customers, and the price of rights for games goes up. You can't sell a Linux port to any company as having 100K potential customers, and than argue that the rights should be cheap because you can't expect more than 10K sales!
                  Got it in one! Now, if you KNOW you can expect 20k units out of that potential market, you can live with the deal to wrangle the rights from someone like Blizzard (or Id, or...). You might even have the money backing however it comes to actually ADVERTISE the silly thing at that level. But, sadly, we aren't seeing this story, now are we?
                  Last edited by Svartalf; 07-02-2008, 12:37 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    In the case of Blizzard, I don't think that they may be intrinsically hostile towards Linux as such (due to sales fears), but rather due to their publishers (and more so being now owned by Vivendi-Universal) who have been openly hostile towards Linux.

                    Edit

                    I don't believe that a company such as Blizzard would have many problems with regards to potential customers. Their games are virtually instant hits.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Thetargos View Post
                      In the case of Blizzard, I don't think that they may be intrinsically hostile towards Linux as such (due to sales fears), but rather due to their publishers (and more so being now owned by Vivendi-Universal) who have been openly hostile towards Linux.
                      Yep. At one point they were openly hostile towards us but that mellowed over time along with them picking up some key people who're Linux friendly (Heh...Sam Lantiga, amongst others...). It's more the publishers that're doing the, "Linux version? No. Way." play here- and we're seeing it a bit more often.

                      I don't believe that a company such as Blizzard would have many problems with regards to potential customers. Their games are virtually instant hits.
                      Depends on the metrics they use. If they believe at least 10-20k units will sell and it's not going to be problematic to make a cross-platform engine and won't cost them more than maybe 2% extra time and overhead, then they'll do it. If the effort's bigger or the numbers look smaller, it's a much rougher sell for them.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Thetargos View Post
                        In the case of Blizzard, I don't think that they may be intrinsically hostile towards Linux as such (due to sales fears), but rather due to their publishers (and more so being now owned by Vivendi-Universal) who have been openly hostile towards Linux.

                        I don't believe that a company such as Blizzard would have many problems with regards to potential customers. Their games are virtually instant hits.
                        You mean Activision. They recently bought Vivendi.

                        Blizzard definitely isn't hostile if they made a early linux client. In fact WoW supports OpenGL, and that's the beginning. Blizzard does work with the Transgaming developers, so the "want to" is there. Take a look at how many Blizzard games run with Wine/Cedega (What's that? All of them?)

                        Hopefully Activision is more friendly to the Linux cause.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by me262 View Post
                          You mean Activision. They recently bought Vivendi.
                          Now those are some news, indeed! Activision is also the publisher of choice for id and they don't mind them releasing their games commercially for Linux (nor their engines as GPL code)

                          Originally posted by me262 View Post
                          Blizzard definitely isn't hostile if they made a early linux client. In fact WoW supports OpenGL, and that's the beginning. Blizzard does work with the Transgaming developers, so the "want to" is there. Take a look at how many Blizzard games run with Wine/Cedega (What's that? All of them?)
                          Actually Blizzard has been adding OpenGL render paths to their games, not out of "portability" as such, but rather for the Mac market, which they consider to be much bigger than Linux is [rant](my only concern being that for most American companies some times the "world" is located between the Great Lakes and the Big River; and between the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, sometimes the northern border moves up to the Yukon, though)[/rant].

                          [Edit]

                          It is undeniable that there are markets where Linux is much stronger than what it is in the American contient: Europe and China are two big and reacurring examples, but there's also other markets like India and some Latin American countries with developing economies. IMO the biggest problem with Linux-related software is the fact that Linux users are regarded most of the time as ungrateful bastards who want it all for Free (as in beer... perfect example of the abiguity of the term in colloquial English)... And as demonstrated by the motivation behind why LGP is incorporating DRM in their latest games, some users actually confirm these worst fears of Linux users being a bunch of pirates, and Open Source being a means to violate IP.

                          [/Edit]
                          Originally posted by me262 View Post
                          Hopefully Activision is more friendly to the Linux cause.
                          There has been a record of gmes originally published by them that DO have Linux ports (id games like Quake & Doom series, Raven games like RTCW, SoF, Quake IV, etc.

                          Now I was looking for some information about this news of Vivendi and Activision, and it would seem as if Vivendi actually bought out Activision (or a big chunk of it, and called for merger)... This doesn't necessarily looks good towards Linux support in the future from the new venture called Activision Blizzard

                          Ohh, I almost forgot about this Blog post: link
                          Last edited by Thetargos; 07-09-2008, 08:57 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Thetargos View Post
                            It is undeniable that there are markets where Linux is much stronger than what it is in the American contient: Europe and China are two big and reacurring examples, but there's also other markets like India and some Latin American countries with developing economies. IMO the biggest problem with Linux-related software is the fact that Linux users are regarded most of the time as ungrateful bastards who want it all for Free (as in beer... perfect example of the abiguity of the term in colloquial English)... And as demonstrated by the motivation behind why LGP is incorporating DRM in their latest games, some users actually confirm these worst fears of Linux users being a bunch of pirates, and Open Source being a means to violate IP.

                            Now I was looking for some information about this news of Vivendi and Activision, and it would seem as if Vivendi actually bought out Activision (or a big chunk of it, and called for merger)... This doesn't necessarily looks good towards Linux support in the future from the new venture called Activision Blizzard
                            That is slightly disturbing. I guess we'll see when iD releases Quake 5. Then again from the blog post "Blizzard isn't easily swayed", so I'd think if Blizzard really wanted to do it, Activision Blizzard may let them.

                            I do find it odd that it's the other way around. Activision has been around for way to long to let that happen. I remember when they split from Atari! It's probably the reason Vivendi let them keep the name actually.

                            While I do appreciate the free software, I do recognise the need to keep some software under wraps. When I get into game design, I'll be the same way, because releasing the code just allows for other people to make their own forks (look at how many there are for Q1 and Q2!), meaning the forks have to change their netcode around, or people can cheat with a modified program. There's also the copy protection issue though, and I think the license key works well for online, but it's inadequate. There needs to be some kind of new optical media that can be tested for authenticity, but whenever there's protection, there's always someone that breaks it.
                            Being seen as ungrateful, hackers, and people who want everything for free. There are people like that, but it's a stereotype in my eyes. I certainly don't fit that profile. Most people that play commercial games don't.

                            "As far as I'm concerned, we paid for it, it's ours to f*** with." (Author Unknown)
                            Last edited by me262; 07-09-2008, 11:14 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Thetargos View Post
                              Now those are some news, indeed! Activision is also the publisher of choice for id and they don't mind them releasing their games commercially for Linux (nor their engines as GPL code)
                              Heh... Are YOU going to tell one of the mainline Independent studios that can self-publish if they so saw fit, take it to ANY publisher they see fit to do so, that they CAN'T do what they've done? I wouldn't, even if I was Vivendi. It's just not a good thing to do.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X