The future of linux gaming?

[deanjo]

Well my take on it is that no uber engine can make up for lack of professional grade creative content. The closest I have seen to remotely giving that polished look and feel that didn't feel like a Win 98 era game in opensource is the two Battlestar Galactica games based on the freespace engine. It's that extra spit and polish to the eyecandy that people see and base their decisions on. Without that refinement the opensource games become just another FPS/RTS/etc etc that has nothing really special that matters to the gaming die hards.

[Svartalf]

Better than straight-up static worlds, but not good enough. Game developers will instead license Gamebryo or RAGE (neither of which have ever appeared on Linux in any form) and make back the license costs on development time saved by having an engine that handles the streaming for them.

Heh... I'll point out that your info on at least ONE of those engines isn't QUITE correct. Gamebryo is from NDL who got recently bought out. Gamebryo is the latest version of a codebase originating with a product from them called NetImmerse.

Here's a link to their products listing from 12/15/2000.

"Linux" is very prominently mentioned in that list.

Moreover, there's nothing IN Gamebryo that precludes Linux support right now. Sound's handled by someone else. Miles. FMOD. So on and so-forth. Guess what- those are supported. Gamebryo supports interchangeable backends and supports amongst other things, MacOS. Mac usess OpenGL.

While I agree there's an impediment, yes. It's not what's keeping gaming from being on Linux. And it's not an impediment to indies to go and use Dragonlord's or anyone else's engine to "not have streaming". Have you EVER looked at the engine licensing on Gamebryo or RAGE? Unless you've got a publisher backing you up, you're NOT buying it as an indie studio.

[Svartalf]

Well my take on it is that no uber engine can make up for lack of professional grade creative content. The closest I have seen to remotely giving that polished look and feel that didn't feel like a Win 98 era game in opensource is the two Battlestar Galactica games based on the freespace engine. It's that extra spit and polish to the eyecandy that people see and base their decisions on. Without that refinement the opensource games become just another FPS/RTS/etc etc that has nothing really special that matters to the gaming die hards.

That'd also be my take on it as well.

[superppl]

I would like to point out that even if the engine had a native linux port, the good people might not support just because. Look at Prey for example. The id tech 4 engine has always had a linux port, but the devs had no intention of bringing the game to linux for a long time.
Of course, this could be solved by stating in your license that the devs must either (a) provide a linux port, or (b) allow the *community* to provide it. But such a blunt statement would turn off many prospectors. Another option is to make the dev kit automatically spit out mac and linux clients along side the windows client. Of course, I can imagine the shock of the developer when they discover that they have to deliver, like it or not.

[Svartalf]

I would like to point out that even if the engine had a native linux port, the good people might not support just because. Look at Prey for example. The id tech 4 engine has always had a linux port, but the devs had no intention of bringing the game to linux for a long time.

Actually, that's not fair to 3DRealms, Human Head, or Ryan Gordon.

The port's been done for quite a while now (Heh...how long, I can't say...) and the delay in question has less to do with those individuals and more to do with other things going on. They had the intention, they just didn't have the permission from the right parties.

[Hephasteus]

I don't think you can take linux as a gaming platform seriously for at least 2 more years. It needs better X. It needs complete comprehensive tightly integrated Simple Direct Layer.
Sorry but Linux has to go from stone age to cutting edge as far as hardware support. We've seen sound, wireless, video support come along way but it still needs 2 more releases to just get all the innovation that has been done so far wrapped up. It will probably reach a point where it's considered a port possibility to get about game machine performance.

You gotta understand that emerging markets won't work like america or europe worked. America we engineer too much junk. Emerging markets won't stand for that. If they want 2 people on a computer they will add keyboard, mice and video panel to a single linux computer. In america we would buy 2 computers and hook up router. They will DVR video onto a computer instead of buying $500 piece of junk motorala dvr.

I think it would all work better if we kept big fast multiple core computers and made laptops out of a 19" screens with speakers and keyboard, mouse, and game pad plugins run off of laptop batteries with power bricks all cabled with an advanced form of HDMI with added USB functionality. Sort of the old X-term client on steroids. A family could browse internet, play a decently advanced game and watch a movie all at the same time. Bring on the hyper threaded quad core cpu's, 16gb ram chips, quad raided laptop drives pushing 260mb/sec and integrated GPU with 2 or 3 discrete gpu systems. An american game system or a business work group or family all in one system.

Lotta work but seems to me the only other alternative is thin clients or shrunk down systems the size of a book ala nvidia ION or that even taken more extreme like dual core cpu's with dual graphics segements and an i/o chip stuck in picoITX box that's half computer, half DVD drive.

I'm afraid they are going to shrink process size and it won't mean anything. They won't clock faster and they will leak even more current than they do now unless they are clocked down to 1.6 1.8 ghz range. It all won't fit into the big players grand schemes of things so let's just do stupid things instead.

[Svartalf]

I'm afraid they are going to shrink process size and it won't mean anything. They won't clock faster and they will leak even more current than they do now unless they are clocked down to 1.6 1.8 ghz range. It all won't fit into the big players grand schemes of things so let's just do stupid things instead.

Think something other than X86 and you'll have most of what you're talking about showing on the scene as of right now.

People don't care about "Windows" they just want their computer.

Many vendors are fielding netbook-like functionality in laptops where there's two CPUs, etc. in the machine. The instant on extreme low-power mode uses an ARM11 (and soon a Cortex-A series device...) and Linux. People are using it and liking it. And...Atom and Nano need not consider to apply- they're 3-4 times more power hungry for not much more performance.

What fits in the "players" grand scheme of things?

Nokia fielding an OMAP3 web tablet with more CPU than is sane in a handheld, coupled with credible GPU power for a handheld.

TI backing a community project, called Beagleboard, that is fielding a seriously SMALL computer that does most of what everyone needs out of a computer. Windows need not apply.

There's more on the way. ION's neat, but in the grand scheme of things, it's still X86 and while it rules the desktop roost, it's not the only CPU and it's not anywhere near a consumer electronics device, really. Atom and Nano are trying to make portable a framework that is ill-suited to portability really.

Windows need not apply. It won't fit in the space.

But...Linux will. It's already there in all sorts of things you didn't know had it in there (HD TV sets, Media players, GPS units, that sort of thing...) and that's not changing any time soon.

[deanjo]

Think something other than X86 and you'll have most of what you're talking about showing on the scene as of right now.

People don't care about "Windows" they just want their computer.

Many vendors are fielding netbook-like functionality in laptops where there's two CPUs, etc. in the machine. The instant on extreme low-power mode uses an ARM11 (and soon a Cortex-A series device...) and Linux. People are using it and liking it.

Netbook makers would disagree with you. Less and less netbooks are being made available with linux even as an option. In fact HP in the UK just recently REMOVED it from availability there on the product that was supposed to have it. People do care about windows on their systems. The linux based systems are experiencing a massive return ratio not because of hardware but because of the software.

Nokia fielding an OMAP3 web tablet with more CPU than is sane in a handheld, coupled with credible GPU power for a handheld.

TI backing a community project, called Beagleboard, that is fielding a seriously SMALL computer that does most of what everyone needs out of a computer. Windows need not apply.

Windows may need not apply but Joe Smith down the street doesn't care about items like the beagleboard. They are not a developer, they are not a DIY hacker. If they want a small device to handle specialized tasks they generally go for the cheapest readily available solution available which more times then not has not necessarily windows but an other propriatary solution.

There's more on the way. ION's neat, but in the grand scheme of things, it's still X86 and while it rules the desktop roost, it's not the only CPU and it's not anywhere near a consumer electronics device, really. Atom and Nano are trying to make portable a framework that is ill-suited to portability really.

I think your missing the whole point and appeal to these devices. It allows people to have small solutions without having to learn something new or foriegn with somewhat a feeling of reassurance that it will be supported for a long term as well as utilize their existing product with it.

Windows need not apply. It won't fit in the space.

Oh but that is changing. Windows 7 for example does run rather well on a atom board. Don't think MS is going to just sit back and let the competition have a unchallenged growing market.

But...Linux will. It's already there in all sorts of things you didn't know had it in there (HD TV sets, Media players, GPS units, that sort of thing...) and that's not changing any time soon.

I don't think anybody would argue that linux is a very appealing as a appliance OS. Unfortunately, because of nitpicking and harrasment from the likes of the FSF, many of those devices are now going back to a propriatary solution that they can licence without having to worry about giving away their enhancements to their competitors to use.

[Dragonlord]

Better than straight-up static worlds, but not good enough. Game developers will instead license Gamebryo or RAGE (neither of which have ever appeared on Linux in any form) and make back the license costs on development time saved by having an engine that handles the streaming for them.

-E- Ugh that sounded really shallow. There's other things at play here. The primary advantage in using a commercial engine (vs writing your own or using a community developed engine) is if you get stuck, you can have the guys that wrote the thing on the phone in 30 minutes during business hours. So if you get stuck, you have very knowledgeable people ready to bail you out. At least that's the theory, but people seem to buy into it. A lot. There's also a stigmatism against open source solutions; commercial game developers tend to hear a lot about how they're "dated" and "unstable" and "hard to work with" from people selling their own, commercial engines, and no matter how much salt that's taken with, that's the only voice that's being heard these days.

-E2- I should state the point. Yeah, an open source engine comes with an up-front AND per-unit price tag of exactly $0, but we gotta do better than that. We can't match the support of commercial engines, or silence the naysayers in high places, so we have to not only do it free, but deliver a superior product. It's tough, but I'm confident we could do it.

Dragonlord: I actually asked about SVN because I wanted to see the code in action and maybe help your project along

Erm... what do you want? What's difficult on:
1) using the editor to create the entire world as one large piece ( no streaming knowledge required )
2) subclassing with your own AI code ( base class does all the streaming already )

I doubt any AAA engine is simpler to use than that. You don't understand the principle behind my game engine ( again, it's a dynamic engine NOT a static engine ). The entire streaming system is in place using game scripts. If it fits your plans, use it, done in a minute. If you need something different rewrite the scripts to do what you need. But I really don't know how simpler than that it could be.



EDIT: Try not to think in "features". This is an old thinking and works only on static game engines. This is a dynamic one. Everything related to streaming for example is not a feature of the game engine it's a feature of the "Scripting Module" that the developer choses. If you need streaming, use a module supporting it ( as the default one does ). If you don't you can use something else.



EDIT: EDIT: Maybe I should clarify a bit more so people can understand why this feature thinking doesn't work with this. For this see the GLEM description on the Game Engine Wiki.

Engine Layer: The game engine does resource management including loading and saving resources asynchronously. It does not provide an explicit streaming implementation except exposing a system that can be used to implement any kind of streaming implementation.

Module Layer: The current Scripting Module "DragonScript" provides a full implementation of a streaming system on top of the game engine which is deploy-and-forget. The IGDE editors support this streaming implementation by default since it is the most used one ( and most simple one to use ). You do not have to code anything to get this streaming working. Just subclass from the right classes and you are all set and done.

So as you see the game engine itself does not provide a full streaming system but the module layer does ( if required ). Hence streaming is not a feature of the game engine and this is why the feature thinking is not working on this particular game engine. Maybe it's now clearer.

[Dragonlord]

I would like to point out that even if the engine had a native linux port, the good people might not support just because. Look at Prey for example. The id tech 4 engine has always had a linux port, but the devs had no intention of bringing the game to linux for a long time.

What if the Linux support is none of your business? How would developers decide if they know that using engine XYZ the support is not their problem since the support is on the engine level already?