Croteam Incubator's IHRB Gets Linux Support

[starshipeleven]

I may not have a source, but I know a lot of people were complaining that they couldn't get the Kickstarter Battletech game to run without connecting to the internet first, and that the most common explanation was that the Unity analytics ping that happens on first run (and periodically thereafter) was causing the game to crash. (From what I understand it's a pretty typical indie-studio XCOM clone anyway, so I haven't bought it to confirm.)

So, are you saying that the most common explanation for that behaviour was a bug in their analytics "phone home" logic?

I'm not strawmanning here, that's what I read from that but I'm unsure, so I ask.

[kpedersen]

No wait, I'm pretty sure it was only for the development environment, while the game does not require activation from Unity servers.
Got any source for that statement?

How do you think a game can be maintained on a modern platform without a suitable development environment? Do you think Doom 1 would be playable on Linux now if we could only use the original version of Watcom C for DOS to build it and if they shut down their DRM servers?

Unfortunately with Unity we *are* locked down to a single toolchain vendor which is crazy! And you will need the development environment (and the DRM) to be able to port / build the game on modern platforms.

For example Unity currently supports Linux kernel 3.x. You cannot even run a Unity game on an older glib / Kernel 2.6.x. Unity also requires a current Mesa. So from this, it is very easy to project that in the future an old compiled game binary will break compatibility with the latest Linux kernel, Mesa, Glib, everything! Just like trying to run an old Unreal Tournament 2004 or Neverwinter Nights binary on modern Linuxes without emulation / compatibility layers... it wont work.

Times change.. This old legacy idea of relying on single tool vendors on a single platform for a single set of processors is simply not future proof. Chuck in some retarded DRM scheme and it is guaranteed to not be future proof.

Just say no kids!

(and yes... the "free" version of Unity also requires online activation).

[starshipeleven]

How do you think a game can be maintained on a modern platform without a suitable development environment?

Do you think developers support the game beyond 2 years from release at all? Also indie developers?

They don't need that. They don't need for their game to be taken over by someone else while they don't gain any $$$ over its sales. That's all a game is, a product.

Do you think Doom 1 would be playable on Linux now if we could only use the original version of Watcom C for DOS to build it and if they shut down their DRM servers?

Yeah, emulators are a thing, you know.

Because most games are never released as opensource, so they are needed anyway.

Unfortunately with Unity we *are* locked down to a single toolchain vendor which is crazy! And you will need the development environment (and the DRM) to be able to port / build the game on modern platforms.

First of all you would also need the source, the IP of the names or brands used in the game, and then the money to actually do so, which are bigger obstacles than that. DRM can just be cracked with little issues if the parent company is dead.

Usually it's more effective allocating resources into emulation or virtual machines with GPU passthrough (or Glide API on OpenGL wrappers), and just running the same binaries into that.

So from this, it is very easy to project that in the future an old compiled game binary will break compatibility with the latest Linux kernel, Mesa, Glib, everything!

Not possible for kernel and glib because they use versioned API, less possible for Mesa, definitely possible for other OS components (like sound support).

Just like trying to run an old Unreal Tournament 2004 or Neverwinter Nights binary on modern Linuxes without emulation / compatibility layers... it wont work.

Fuck Neverwinter Nights, btw.

Times change.. This old legacy idea of relying on single tool vendors on a single platform for a single set of processors is simply not future proof.

It never was, games were never supposed to be future-proof (they are not supposed to be even now). They are VERY cost-sensitive projects, so anything that decreases the time-to-market or allows tiny teams to publish their game idea will always win over something that is just future-proof.

What changed now is that you can ship mostly self-contained applications that don't need to be maintained, with little additional effort. Android applications, Flatpack, and also the Windows store apps (UWP I think)

[creative]

I bought it immediately. Another nice game for my Ryzen 2400G HTPC.

Just looked up the 2400G that looks like one nice CPU.

[kpedersen]

Unity is rarely used for open-source projects because everyone involved knows that it will be gone in a few years. It is not worth the time and effort. Where I worked, the superficial and temporary nature of Unity also drove us away. This is why Unity has not broken through into the AAA industry in any big way. Hobbiests and "prosumers" do not think about these kind of things.

As for games, it is unacceptable to think of them as temporary things... This idea will disappear in the future once digital preservation becomes a bigger thing. Currently the industry and consumers are a bit immature as far as this is concerned.

Not possible for kernel and glib because they use versioned API, less possible for Mesa, definitely possible for other OS components (like sound support).

This is exactly my reason! Which is why the toolset (in this case Unity) *must* be available in order to maintain a game on a newer version of Linux. And which is why Unity being full of DRM is simply the weakest link in keeping this stuff alive. It will *not* be around in the years to come. Game engines are extremely short lived things. No decent developer, using their professional due diligence would choose to use Unity (non-technical corporate bean counters, it is a different matter).

No. Emulators are not a thing when it comes to running games. They are a nice idea but running natively is what consumers will buy. That's why companies can charge almost full prices for a port re-release. Try porting a Unity game in 20 years. It will be impossible. Not hard. Impossible.

Usually it's more effective allocating resources into emulation or virtual machines with GPU passthrough (or Glide API on OpenGL wrappers), and just running the same binaries into that.

This topic is actually quite close to my PhD topic. And yes, it could work to an extent but only if GPU passthrough could be made platform agnostic or would be supported on old operating systems such as Windows 95. That said, there is zero money in this and companies like Oracle/VirtualBox already stated that they are barely interested in even keeping Windows 95 running, let alone implementing a virtual GPU. Now, you might be wondering why I am interested in Windows 95 and the answer to that is again, pretty much projection. In 20 years, Windows 10 will be in the same boat as Windows 95 is today and that boat is... pretty covered in old dog shit . Unfortunately we need to clean off the dog shit in order to run our awesome games! It was actually whilst writing this paper: (https://www.springerprofessional.de/...cture/15514286), I realized how much of a crap situation we are putting ourselves in from a very early stage of a development project by simply choosing a proprietary tool with a limited lifespan instead of an open standard. I really like the idea that people can play my game even once I am unable to maintain it myself.

To summarize. If companies in the 90s were all twits and used toys like Unity; we wouldn't have access to them any more. For example, any of these: https://github.com/videogamepreservation

[oooverclocker]

Just looked up the 2400G that looks like one nice CPU.

It is, capable to run almost every game. Only with Rise of the Tomb Raider I had to decrease the render quality significantly so it didn't look that much like fun anymore. But for simple, casual and quite pretty 3D games the performance is absolutely sufficient.