Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Icculus Provides An Update, But No UT3 Or Games

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,093

    Default Icculus Provides An Update, But No UT3 Or Games

    Phoronix: Icculus Provides An Update, But No UT3 Or Games

    It's been a while since last hearing anything from Icculus, a.k.a. Ryan Gordon, about any games or other software that he has been porting to Linux...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NzYwNg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    197

    Default

    UT3 ? what was that again ?...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tares View Post
    UT3 ? what was that again ?...
    Epic games has financial problems. Icculus ported Unreal II to Linux too but would not hand it over because Epic didn't pay him and UT3 is the same problem. Epic is going to try to port over UT4 to Linux themselves.

    Oops is that inside info that should not have leaked? Oops... Yeah I don't give a shit I am not under an NDA and waited for them to do something about it. They didn't. I don't know people that I got that info from anymore so yeah.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Perth, Scotland
    Posts
    439

    Default

    Just yesterday, Ryan fixed the SDL ALSA bug I've been experiencing for some time. Thanks, man.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
    Posts
    640

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    Epic games has financial problems. Icculus ported Unreal II to Linux too but would not hand it over because Epic didn't pay him and UT3 is the same problem. Epic is going to try to port over UT4 to Linux themselves.

    Oops is that inside info that should not have leaked? Oops... Yeah I don't give a shit I am not under an NDA and waited for them to do something about it. They didn't. I don't know people that I got that info from anymore so yeah.
    then why not posting in detail how much money Epic would have payed him for posting that ?

    if it's not THAT much people might be willing to donate via paypal and finally one day we'll be able to play UT3 or {insert other ported game} on Linux

    dunno if that's realistic ...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
    then why not posting in detail how much money Epic would have payed him for posting that ?

    if it's not THAT much people might be willing to donate via paypal and finally one day we'll be able to play UT3 or {insert other ported game} on Linux

    dunno if that's realistic ...
    That's because I do not know how much Epic would have payed him. I also do not see why I should pay extra for being able to play this on Linux and I doubt that Epic would approve that.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
    then why not posting in detail how much money Epic would have payed him for posting that ?

    if it's not THAT much people might be willing to donate via paypal and finally one day we'll be able to play UT3 or {insert other ported game} on Linux

    dunno if that's realistic ...
    I think this is not feasible because, until Epic pays him, Ryan has the copyright on his work; but on the contrary the only entity allowed to legally ship an official modified client is Epic itself. That's a deadlock!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by panda84 View Post
    I think this is not feasible because, until Epic pays him, Ryan has the copyright on his work; but on the contrary the only entity allowed to legally ship an official modified client is Epic itself. That's a deadlock!
    Epic could have made a call for selling "pre-release" linux clients, against a promise a money-back is not enough is collected to pay Ryan.
    After all, that would be fair and smart for everyone : you pay for the specific linux client, that cost far less to Epic, Ryan is sure to be paid.
    And we'll never know, but I'm quite sure that the missing success around UT3 can't be disconnected from the lack of linux client...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Columbus, OH, USA
    Posts
    323

    Default

    Not much of note? News on SDL 1.3 is plenty, thanks. As for UT3, isn't Epic rolling money? Enough that they're opening a branch in Japan, at least.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fixxer_Linux View Post
    Epic could have made a call for selling "pre-release" linux clients, against a promise a money-back is not enough is collected to pay Ryan.
    After all, that would be fair and smart for everyone : you pay for the specific linux client, that cost far less to Epic, Ryan is sure to be paid.
    I'm inclined to write the original post from Vincent off as rumour mongering without anything more substantial. The failure to deliver a UT3 Linux client has irritated quite a few people, and I can certainly see that creating motive to smear their name.

    I can also remember earlier accounts had the issue as being a dispute with a third party over middleware licensing. This is not consistent with the unsubstantiated rumour.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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