Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32

Thread: AMD/ATi + Blizzard

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote 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.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL, USA
    Posts
    175

    Default

    Quote 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.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Mexico City, Mexico
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Quote 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)

    Quote 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]
    Quote 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 at 09:57 PM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL, USA
    Posts
    175

    Default

    Quote 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; 07-10-2008 at 12:14 AM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote 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.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by me262 View Post
    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)
    Heh... Guess what...that's what they view us as. That's WHY we have some of the issues that we do finding people willing to give us commercial games. When you have more pirated copies of LGP titles than they've sold, it confirms that in their minds.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Mexico City, Mexico
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Svartalf View Post
    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.
    I know, what I meant (before I read how was the whole deal) was that if several of these studios under the same roof could take the hint from those other bigger studios and experiment with Linux releases and stuff... Seeing as how the deal was played out, I seriously doubt it that even if one such [independent] studio did so, they'd still block it all the same (like they did with Blizzard... And look who is it we're talking about! Alas, Blizzard is "property" of Vivendi, and now with its new name will have even greater exposure and presure)

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL, USA
    Posts
    175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thetargos View Post
    Alas, Blizzard is "property" of Vivendi, and now with its new name will have even greater exposure and pressure)
    I think Vivendi is just the publisher, otherwise we would have been seeing a Vivendi Universal logo in the company movies, instead of an inconspicuous spot on the box.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Mexico City, Mexico
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by me262 View Post
    I think Vivendi is just the publisher, otherwise we would have been seeing a Vivendi Universal logo in the company movies, instead of an inconspicuous spot on the box.
    Not according to Vivendi, however Blizzard's own profile would suggest otherwise. Strange.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Bulgaria
    Posts
    269

    Default

    What happened to the possiblity that Mark Shuttelworth will try to push Blizzard into doing their games for Linux?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •