GameTree Linux Is Trying To Be Its Own Steam-Like Platform

[L33F3R]

no but these are 2 of the most anticipated PC games that we have ever seen. It only goes down hill from here. UT3 had about the same performance as crysis, Dont get me started with how shit ETQW did, and it was linux native later on.

You are guessing, and nothing more about how many people you think play video games. All that matters to the publishers is the fucking numbers. Not the numbers they can expect to see but the numbers they actually see.

Only a few % of people use linux on the desktop. thats X0,000 people on a million sale game. If that game gets the publisher $30 on average total profit, which is bullshit high, we are looking at hundreds of thousands of dollars potential profit. Thats seriously low for the likes of major publishers. Thats on $30 of total profit to the publisher, they dont stand to make nearly that much. Not even close.

You could argue that linux users are more technically incline however thats just stereotyping at that point. Not all mac users are homosexuals and not all black people like chicken. Ask Torvalds how much he likes blackops. Lemme take a guess and say he doesnt play many games.

And yes, a few extra bucks is nice, but noone is going to take risks in the current economic climate.

[Svartalf]

I understand coders can work on either OS, but im sure you dont code for nickels and dimes svartalf. More code generally equals more time and people dont work for free. If some magical programmer could port a game like blackops in a year, and receive a decent wage (higher than 75k), activision would need to pull in over 1500 copies to pay for his labor alone. Therefore, my point of them catering to Linux for the fuck of it, sends them at a loss. I think you are getting confused as to me saying that they would lose money as a whole on a linux port, this is false. There is infact money to be made in linux. Im just saying that major publishers dont give a fuck about having people switch to linux.

Heh... You're still presuming things...

1) That a coder can't code for more than ONE platform.
2) That the bulk of the game code is EXPLICITLY specific to that one platform

Neither of which is even remotely accurate.

If they're porting to MacOS...then there's pretty much NO good reasons (that're acceptable... ) to not do a Linux version since the bulk of the differing code for that platform is so close to the same these days as to almost not matter. If you're putting a bit of dev effort into that...you've done the work in the large for Linux.

[Svartalf]

lcms is the pile of elephant turds here. Oyranos is a fairly good free CMS but no one packages it. Most studios that have the man power that use Linux, write their own CMS tools because of the asstastic nature of the "free" tools that you are arguing support for.

Proof? You asked me for citations... >:-D

Deanjo already corrected you on that. Believe it or not, quite a few people don't have a problem paying $700 for a program and $1300-$2000 for the suite of programs that surround it.

IF they have a USE for it and have the cash. I can assure you that there's a lot more pirated copies of Photoshop in use than you or deanjo are implying. If you honestly believe all the people out there that're using Photoshop plunked down $700 for it...I've got some nice oceanside property on the Florida coast to sell you...doesn't have TOO many gators in it...

As much as I hate wiki: [citation needed], Mr. Cox provided better sourcing for his argument against porting than you.

Heh... You've got to be kidding me...

[Wyatt]

no but these are 2 of the most anticipated PC games that we have ever seen. It only goes down hill from here. UT3 had about the same performance as crysis, Dont get me started with how shit ETQW did, and it was linux native later on.

Why are you still talking about individual title performance? Think bigger. The investment in technology and platform support staff isn't so they can go unused.

I've taken the relevant variables into account and made an alternate projection of potential based on the methods used previously by another individual in this very thread. So no, it's not about how many people I think play video games.

And you're right when you say it's all about numbers, but you haven't really presented yours, now have you? If you want to attempt a projection of your own, go ahead; this sort of thing is sort of amusing. What I'd prefer you not do is berate me for profiling while ignoring my methodology. Cheers.

[L33F3R]

Heh... You're still presuming things...

1) That a coder can't code for more than ONE platform.
2) That the bulk of the game code is EXPLICITLY specific to that one platform

1. I have stated that i understand this. I responded by stating that it still takes (some) man hours.
2. Never have i said this or have even dreamed of such.

please no straw man.

[L33F3R]

Why are you still talking about individual title performance? Think bigger. The investment in technology and platform support staff isn't so they can go unused.

Understood and agreed.

And you're right when you say it's all about numbers, but you haven't really presented yours, now have you? If you want to attempt a projection of your own, go ahead; this sort of thing is sort of amusing. What I'd prefer you not do is berate me for profiling while ignoring my methodology. Cheers.

Actually i have presented numbers based on total game sales. These are numbers that can actually be researched and confirmed. Total linux user base is hard to confirm but we can be pretty sure based on several sources that its 1-3%. Profit per title is hard to confirm, however in my numbers i have greatly overestimated just to seem fair. I acknowledge your methodology however i am perfectly free to object to it.

At the end of the day, if money was to be had then it would already be done, trust me, good companies are good at what they do, and thats making money (or else they wouldnt be in business long). Actually dont trust me, look at eve online, or every fucking AAA game in the last 3 years, with the wealth of linux titles.

seems like im battling religion, so im just going to stop trying. I have presented my case.

[Wyatt]

Actually i have presented numbers based on total game sales. These are numbers that can actually be researched and confirmed.

Likewise. In fact, I already did the research.

Total linux user base is hard to confirm but we can be pretty sure based on several sources that its 1-3%

opinions on this will differ. Casual observation has the lower end only looking at the US and still counts machines sold with Windows licenses as windows machines. I think actual usage is definitely above 3% personally, but we're going to have to disagree.

Profit per title is hard to confirm, however in my numbers i have greatly overestimated just to seem fair.

Are numbers directly from NPD so suspect? 0.43 digital/ .57 physical. So a game that retails for $60 would actually generate more than $30 revenue for the publisher at retail and my own estimate is low.

At the end of the day, if money was to be had then it would already be done, trust me, good companies are good at what they do, and thats making money (or else they wouldnt be in business long). Actually dont trust me, look at eve online, or every fucking AAA game in the last 3 years, with the wealth of linux titles.

seems like im battling religion, so im just going to stop trying. I have presented my case.

I'm looking and seeing that, as usual, the larger the business, the stronger the risk-averse behaviour. Or rather, companies lose agility when they gain more than 500 share-holders. I'm looking at people that are on the cusp of taking the plunge but lacking in appreciable knowledge of the domain required to make a real resolution.

Why must every shred of potentially meaningful discourse on the internet be reduced to "trolling" or "religion"? Please don't assume I'm unwilling or unable to change my projection; I'm just going to need evidence that's based on more than isolated incidents.

[devius]

Very interesting discussion we're having here. I think it's safe to say that we all agree that if there were good AAA titles with a linux port at launch time (and not 4 years later when hardly anyone cares about those games anymore), we would all appreciate the move and would probably even buy some. Or, at least someone out there would.
Now, the question is that some here believe it's perfectly viable to do a linux port when there is already a Mac port, or even without one, with a somewhat higher initial investment. It can even mean less and less investment in the long run for the specific linux port, if the company starts porting all its title's. On the other hand some believe that it isn't viable to do a linux port, or else some big company would already have done it.
I think no one, even specialist market research companies, really knows what would happen in the event of a big game company releasing a major title with all the main pc ports (windows, mac and linux) at once. It could be a success, or a failure. If it was a failure it's not too surprsing, because it wouldn't be a single game that would make everybody switch to linux. It would take a continuous stream of new releases to really kick off the market. Probably the contributions that indie developers are making to the linux game scene will open up this market in the long run.

[W3ird_N3rd]

im speaking on terms of people switching to linux because quality games finally exist for it. That is key to my point. COD Black Ops prolly doesnt work very well on wine so thats a decent example. If Joe is heavy into BlackOps but prefers linux, he needs to pick whats more important, not unlike yourself. So lets say he decides to play his game and get stuck with windows. A common choice. He buys 1 windows title and 0 linux titles (also assuming he is only buying the game for personal use). If a linux version existed, on the principal that he is not a fucking retard, he will buy 0 windows titles and 1 linux title. Assuming both versions cost the same, say, $49.99, Activision stands to make no more money then they would have if they only supported windows. In this example i am not factoring in people already using linux, I specifically respond in respect to those who are using windows but would use linux if games existed.

While you are right, isn't that sort of.. obvious?

What I was talking about is that releasing a game for more platforms WILL increase sales and you can't say it won't, suggesting it would only shift sales from Windows to Linux.

Take another look at GTA IV. Before it was ever announced, everybody already knew it was going to be big. The game already cost over $100 million to create. $500 million in sales were made in the first week.

On a game that sells that many copies, I refuse to believe that they couldn't have made more money by also making a Mac and Linux port available. First of all, the game was already crossplatform (PS3/X360/Win) so adding two more platforms shouldn't have been rocket science. Second, once ported to Mac (which is quite big in the USA), the port to Linux would have been relatively cheap. Third, on this number of sales, the extra sales that could be made by being available for Mac and Linux would have also been big and should have very quickly made up for the porting costs and bring in profit.

..so why didn't they? In fact, why does it look like Red Dead Redemption might just never even make it to Windows, let alone Mac of Linux?

[yogi_berra]

Proof? You asked me for citations... >:-D

Personal experience with the use of both lcms and Oryanos d-;

IF they have a USE for it and have the cash. I can assure you that there's a lot more pirated copies of Photoshop in use than you or deanjo are implying.

But fewer pirated copies than what you imply.

If you honestly believe all the people out there that're using Photoshop plunked down $700 for it...I've got some nice oceanside property on the Florida coast to sell you...doesn't have TOO many gators in it...

How many acres are we talking about here? I'm in the mood for a good real estate scam.

Heh... You've got to be kidding me...

You appear to be arguing from an emotional perspective that the platform has no problems, he is arguing from the pragmatic perspective that the platform has issues that very few are effectively touching and until those are addressed (along with the market issues) its not worth spending the money to port.

So no, not really kidding d-;