Polykarbon
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2003
- Messages
- 411
- Reaction score
- 0
sigh...the endless garbage. continues.
Half-life linux client?
- Thread starter Sanius
- Start date
CrazyHarij
Party Escort Bot
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2003
- Messages
- 10,075
- Reaction score
- 1
Polykarbon said:
No shit, sherlock..
Well i usually go on average of internet explorer browsers installed and have vistited different sites and i usually do an average and i go on indepenant surveys aswell. And stuff from CNET and the other tech sites thats how i get my averages.
(And thats probably not acurate because lots of windows users use firefox)
See i usually dont take the word of people seriously who use sayings like M$ guess what redhat earns a fair bit (i belive last time i checked was in the $100mil mark) and it isnt exactly free anymore for there premier OS not fedora i don't see people jumping from the rooftops going OMG redha$ corporation they are not linuxzorss.
Ok i just reread the thing about the %40 thing.
let's say they did only go on retail boxes sold the last figure i read was 190 million XP retail (not counting oem) boxes sold. That's offical figure which can't be twisted now lets look at http://counter.li.org/ this site he "GUESSES" that there are 18 million linux users you do the maths on percentages Another point. How many of theese supposed 18 million linux users use nothing but linux? how many of those 18 million would buy HL2? How many of those 18 million have windows boxes or partitions who would be willing to get HL2?
Now do you see why there wont be a linux client for HL2?
(And thats probably not acurate because lots of windows users use firefox)
See i usually dont take the word of people seriously who use sayings like M$ guess what redhat earns a fair bit (i belive last time i checked was in the $100mil mark) and it isnt exactly free anymore for there premier OS not fedora i don't see people jumping from the rooftops going OMG redha$ corporation they are not linuxzorss.
Ok i just reread the thing about the %40 thing.
let's say they did only go on retail boxes sold the last figure i read was 190 million XP retail (not counting oem) boxes sold. That's offical figure which can't be twisted now lets look at http://counter.li.org/ this site he "GUESSES" that there are 18 million linux users you do the maths on percentages Another point. How many of theese supposed 18 million linux users use nothing but linux? how many of those 18 million would buy HL2? How many of those 18 million have windows boxes or partitions who would be willing to get HL2?
Now do you see why there wont be a linux client for HL2?
Tadashi
Newbie
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2004
- Messages
- 165
- Reaction score
- 0
Look here:
http://counter.li.org/reports/machines.php
only approx. 27% percent of the registrated user have one account on their box and approx. 26% use their box as a toy. That would indicate, that 20% to 25% of all users registrated there could have a dual-boot system. And maybe these dual-boot systems are only for gaming, as there are no native ports of a special game.
The 18 million user are only estimated, it could be rather higher.
You can say everything, but not, that there isn't a noteworthy base of possible Steam gamers.
And the 190 million sold Win XP retail boxes:
http://www.winnetmag.com/windowspaulthurrott/Article/ArticleID/42538/windowspaulthurrott_42538.html
8% aren't so bad, huh?
Now we need a survey option for Steam, so there are more exact numbers.
http://counter.li.org/reports/machines.php
only approx. 27% percent of the registrated user have one account on their box and approx. 26% use their box as a toy. That would indicate, that 20% to 25% of all users registrated there could have a dual-boot system. And maybe these dual-boot systems are only for gaming, as there are no native ports of a special game.
The 18 million user are only estimated, it could be rather higher.
You can say everything, but not, that there isn't a noteworthy base of possible Steam gamers.
And the 190 million sold Win XP retail boxes:
http://www.winnetmag.com/windowspaulthurrott/Article/ArticleID/42538/windowspaulthurrott_42538.html
The corporate sold boxes don't count here, as they aren't game PCs.
8% aren't so bad, huh?
Now we need a survey option for Steam, so there are more exact numbers.
18 million is estimated it could also be rather lower
Im not going to bother going on the technical merits of each OS anymore theres no point arguing with the linux elite with that. But i will argue that there will be no HL2 linux client coming out.
Can you clarify something do you mean that linux has 8% of the market share? Because if you think that is the case your number are terribly wrong.
Ok i must of read wrong with the retail box selling but still. Let me work out the math here.
210 vs 18 so let's look at that as an installed userbase(lets not forget we are not counting any other of the windows operating system like 2000 etc other wise the number would be WAY higher)
Bottom line is it's not worth valves time too bother with the R&D for a linux client drop a whole bunch of graphical features for what? 1% more revenue? not going to happen.
Im not going to bother going on the technical merits of each OS anymore theres no point arguing with the linux elite with that. But i will argue that there will be no HL2 linux client coming out.
Can you clarify something do you mean that linux has 8% of the market share? Because if you think that is the case your number are terribly wrong.
Ok i must of read wrong with the retail box selling but still. Let me work out the math here.
210 vs 18 so let's look at that as an installed userbase(lets not forget we are not counting any other of the windows operating system like 2000 etc other wise the number would be WAY higher)
Bottom line is it's not worth valves time too bother with the R&D for a linux client drop a whole bunch of graphical features for what? 1% more revenue? not going to happen.
Dougy
Newbie
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2003
- Messages
- 1,336
- Reaction score
- 0
Any1 moaning about valve needing to port to linux should seriously shut up and go buy a gaming machine.
seriously your outnumbered and outgunned give it the hell up.
*ive not read any of this thread so this isnt directed at any1 in particiular*
seriously your outnumbered and outgunned give it the hell up.
*ive not read any of this thread so this isnt directed at any1 in particiular*
Tadashi
Newbie
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2004
- Messages
- 165
- Reaction score
- 0
Even if only 1%(10,000) of all Steam users have Linux, it would be worth.
Why should they do it themselves/alone?
They could work together with the Wine/WineX developers or have the guys from the linux server working at it, if they haven't just much to do.
It isn't such a hot thing to port it as you make it up.
Only replace winAPI calls/using wineLib and replace DirectX/3D with SDL/OpenGL.
And what graphical features would be drop?
@JimmehH
What a bad joke...
^Ben said:
Why should they do it themselves/alone?
They could work together with the Wine/WineX developers or have the guys from the linux server working at it, if they haven't just much to do.
It isn't such a hot thing to port it as you make it up.
Only replace winAPI calls/using wineLib and replace DirectX/3D with SDL/OpenGL.
And what graphical features would be drop?
@JimmehH
What a bad joke...
Dougy said:
Oh god shut the hell up. You don't know what you are talking about.
I can just buy windows xp. My dad doesn't mind me getting it, atleast he told me. but he doesn't want to buy it himself (which makes sense), but I just need a way to get $105 and get it from newegg.
Tadashi
Newbie
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2004
- Messages
- 165
- Reaction score
- 0
^Ben:
Good, tell us the facts. What would it cost to port HL2? Why should much of the graphic features drop?
Tell us why you know it better.
Sanius:
Win98 should still work for HL2. And it doesn't cost 100$ look at ebay.
Stef:
I have Win XP? I never knew that O__o
A Windows retail box has generally just one license^^ You would by a >1 Version only for some reason.
Good, tell us the facts. What would it cost to port HL2? Why should much of the graphic features drop?
Tell us why you know it better.
Sanius:
Win98 should still work for HL2. And it doesn't cost 100$
look at ebay.Stef:
I have Win XP? I never knew that O__o
A Windows retail box has generally just one license^^ You would by a >1 Version only for some reason.
Polykarbon
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2003
- Messages
- 411
- Reaction score
- 0
I believe you and I are speaking of different things--
Im not even going to carry this conversation on.
There WONT be a client for linux plain and simple for the reasons i have said.
But because im bored ill answer you "points" 1) From what you've said winex only supports up to directx 7 there you go you miss out on all the pixel shaders and lots of other graphical features.
I obviously don't know the costs but i can tell you valve have obviously done a risk assment and decided linux is not worth it. So obviously they thought it was too costly for the little return it would probably bring.
Please take of your rainbow coloured linux glasses and look at the buisness side of it and you will come to the same conclusion. That linux isn't worth the hassle for HL2 and as microsoft are putting directx9 as a new graphics stand and i have read that some of the usual game developer that port to linux E.G. Epic i have only seen announcments of directx 9 engines so i would actually expect the supply of "decent" linux games too dwindle in the future.
And before you bring the Carmack engine argument to the table, He has said he will do one more engine and he will be retiring for game development. So who knows maybe his next engine will be a directx9 engine, maybe his succesors engine will be directx9 based? While wine is only capable of emulating directx 6-7. So that leaves the linux games player up the provebial creak without a paddle.
There WONT be a client for linux plain and simple for the reasons i have said.
But because im bored ill answer you "points" 1) From what you've said winex only supports up to directx 7 there you go you miss out on all the pixel shaders and lots of other graphical features.
I obviously don't know the costs but i can tell you valve have obviously done a risk assment and decided linux is not worth it. So obviously they thought it was too costly for the little return it would probably bring.
Please take of your rainbow coloured linux glasses and look at the buisness side of it and you will come to the same conclusion. That linux isn't worth the hassle for HL2 and as microsoft are putting directx9 as a new graphics stand and i have read that some of the usual game developer that port to linux E.G. Epic i have only seen announcments of directx 9 engines so i would actually expect the supply of "decent" linux games too dwindle in the future.
And before you bring the Carmack engine argument to the table, He has said he will do one more engine and he will be retiring for game development. So who knows maybe his next engine will be a directx9 engine, maybe his succesors engine will be directx9 based? While wine is only capable of emulating directx 6-7. So that leaves the linux games player up the provebial creak without a paddle.
Tadashi
Newbie
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2004
- Messages
- 165
- Reaction score
- 0
Wine/WineX has full DirectX 8 support and DirectX 9 already begun,
WineX support for HL2 will be top priority and the succesor engine to Doom 3 will be by 100% not DirectX9, because DirectX would already have a new version.
To the Carmack thing, maybe Linux rises more and more and he wouldn't even use DirecInput. The glass is half full or half empty. It's a point of view.
I'd like to see any newer argument than "porting would cost more than it would bring".
WineX support for HL2 will be top priority and the succesor engine to Doom 3 will be by 100% not DirectX9, because DirectX would already have a new version.
To the Carmack thing, maybe Linux rises more and more and he wouldn't even use DirecInput. The glass is half full or half empty. It's a point of view.
I'd like to see any newer argument than "porting would cost more than it would bring".
Why do you need another argument that IS the reason it's not being ported.
If valve thought they would make a decent amount of money off linux they would have already made a linux client.
I will pull up sales figures on linux games tommorow. But for now sleep.
Maybe you will have a cut down HL2 experience but you wont get a native client anytime soon.
If valve thought they would make a decent amount of money off linux they would have already made a linux client.
I will pull up sales figures on linux games tommorow. But for now sleep.
Maybe you will have a cut down HL2 experience but you wont get a native client anytime soon.
Johan_Tayn
Newbie
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2004
- Messages
- 487
- Reaction score
- 0
I've discovered that if you pay for what you get and don't try to take any "shortcuts", Windows XP works fine. I run XP Pro, and it "NEVER" crashes. Back when I "used" Linux, I never saw the shut down screen because it ALWAYS CRASHED. This was Mandrake 8.1 and such. They can look good, but as for real desktopping(with games), you need Windows. I personally enjoy all these DX9 games such as Deus Ex:IW, Thief3, and soon to be DOOM]|[ and HL2.
I currently dual boot linux and winxp. i use winxp for games... nothing else. I do software development and I find linux to be a far better environment for this. also the ability to customize your to such an extent makes me a lot more productive... and it looks a hell of a lot better than winxp
i don't think there will be a HL2 client for linux. a DX game would be way too much work to port. iD releases linux binaries so often because their games are all done in opengl. while i find it nice not to have to reboot to play ET or Q3, it isn't a huge deal. the fact that i have no choice of OS when paying games however, does kind of get to me.
also, fwiw, i can run half-life and counterstrike under wine with no problems. works great and runs at the same speed as it does in windows.
i don't think there will be a HL2 client for linux. a DX game would be way too much work to port. iD releases linux binaries so often because their games are all done in opengl. while i find it nice not to have to reboot to play ET or Q3, it isn't a huge deal. the fact that i have no choice of OS when paying games however, does kind of get to me.
also, fwiw, i can run half-life and counterstrike under wine with no problems. works great and runs at the same speed as it does in windows.
Johan_Tayn said:
Mandrake tends to be one of the less stable Linux distros, especially back then. This because they like to have the newest software that is less tested and therefore less stable. If you went with something like SuSe it would NEVER crash.
Anyways, I DO us Mandrake and it is pretty stable (a crashes a month, especically when doing crazy things anyways), far more than my win 2000 Pro I am dual booting with for games.
And I don't think that a Linux build would be profitable for Vavle, most linux gamers are forced to dual boot to play some of their games, so most linux users will get Half-Life 2 with or without Linux suppoort. It's just slightly annoying to reboot to play games, and incredibly annoying to reboot only to have it crash, or for it to run slow because you are using something as bloated as XP.
Dr. Freeman
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
- Messages
- 6,785
- Reaction score
- 2
this debate is pointless right now.. Valve have not leaned toward a port to Linux (yes i am dissapointed) but its not to say the port won't happen ever..
lets just see to it that the game is released first.. and what the overall reaction to the game is.. then afterwards, who knows.. maybe the developers of Winex will approach Valve about a port to Linux? its good to think its possible... and lets face it, not all decisions are based soley on finances and such.
lets just see to it that the game is released first.. and what the overall reaction to the game is.. then afterwards, who knows.. maybe the developers of Winex will approach Valve about a port to Linux? its good to think its possible... and lets face it, not all decisions are based soley on finances and such.
Brian Damage
Tank
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
- Messages
- 8,310
- Reaction score
- 3
Side topic, from earlier:
Wasn't the Nintendo 64 only called the "64" because it had a 64-bit internal bus (Not processor)? I don't believe that it counts as a true 64 bit machine anyway. Same goes for the "128-bit" Dreamcast.
Wasn't the Nintendo 64 only called the "64" because it had a 64-bit internal bus (Not processor)? I don't believe that it counts as a true 64 bit machine anyway. Same goes for the "128-bit" Dreamcast.
Mountain Man
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2003
- Messages
- 2,248
- Reaction score
- 0
All you folks who claim that Linux crashed on you all the time, was the OS crashing, or was it just the software? I've played with unstable software that crashes, but I've never seen a program crash bring my whole system down. In fact, such crashes are generally indicitive of a misconfigured system. Once you have a stable Linux box, you can literally leave it running for years. It won't slowly and inexplicably degrade over weeks or months like Windows.
As for playing Half-Life 2 on Linux, it would be awesome, but I doubt Valve is going to port it. If it ships with an OpenGL renderer then it will definitely be possible. Far Cry, for instance, runs without a hitch in Linux and it looks great to boot. However, if HL2 is Direct3D only then we may have a problem, although one may be able to run it in one of the earlier DirectX modes. The biggest hassle will probably be getting Steam to work, but it seems the Linux community almost has that one licked.
As for playing Half-Life 2 on Linux, it would be awesome, but I doubt Valve is going to port it. If it ships with an OpenGL renderer then it will definitely be possible. Far Cry, for instance, runs without a hitch in Linux and it looks great to boot. However, if HL2 is Direct3D only then we may have a problem, although one may be able to run it in one of the earlier DirectX modes. The biggest hassle will probably be getting Steam to work, but it seems the Linux community almost has that one licked.
K
Koldfire
Guest
Valve are smart; they realize that linux is an incompetent os SO WHY BOTHER?
Those of you complaining about windows crashing should learn how to configure it. Jesus christmas, it's not that hard people.
Those of you complaining about windows crashing should learn how to configure it. Jesus christmas, it's not that hard people.
Mountain Man
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2003
- Messages
- 2,248
- Reaction score
- 0
Because a native version is always better than an emulated one, and it is in our and Valve's best interest to diversify their platform support.^Ben said:
Koldfire said:
Okay, linux is not a stupid os, and it can do simple tasks. So Incompetent is a word that you whipped out of your ass. this whole "WELL ONLY 1% OF DA GAMERS IN DA WORLD USE LINUX" is complete and utter bullshit. The reason that there are not many linux gamers (but what a surprise! actully, there are), is because companies are not willing to get off their asses and support linux. I think that valve, and other companies should. But I guess all they want to do is swim in green.
poseyjmac
Newbie
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2003
- Messages
- 4,766
- Reaction score
- 0
companies can't support everything or else they wouldn't have the funding and time required to make a quality game!
its bad enough that developers need to design PC games with many hardware configs in mind. id rather valve spend time tuning and polishing hl2 for windows then making a linux port that will benefit far fewer people.
its bad enough that developers need to design PC games with many hardware configs in mind. id rather valve spend time tuning and polishing hl2 for windows then making a linux port that will benefit far fewer people.
DreamWraith
Newbie
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2003
- Messages
- 188
- Reaction score
- 0
to everyone complaining about XP activation:
the only reason to absolutely hate it is if your to cheap to pay for what your using. setting it up on a second computer IS against the law. You buy one license for ONE computer. If you format the hard drive of computer A and want to install on computer B, its no problem, all you have to do is call their activation hotline to get a new activation number. It works really easy. I've done it. The people on the phone don't even know anything much other than they are giving you a number. Serious one time i did it, and they didn't even ASK how they could help, they just asked for my #. Second time they asked, i just told them i got a new PC and they said ok no problem blah blah blah etc etc gave me number end of story.
Anyways, to conclude, if you can't take 5 minutes to activate your copy of windows to prevent piracy, then it's pretty clear that A) you think everything in life should be free B) you have a pirated copy of windows C) your are one of the laziest people in existence, or D) you are a linux fanboy who thinks anything restricting how many computers on which you install a given license is bad, because its not open source.
the only reason to absolutely hate it is if your to cheap to pay for what your using. setting it up on a second computer IS against the law. You buy one license for ONE computer. If you format the hard drive of computer A and want to install on computer B, its no problem, all you have to do is call their activation hotline to get a new activation number. It works really easy. I've done it. The people on the phone don't even know anything much other than they are giving you a number. Serious one time i did it, and they didn't even ASK how they could help, they just asked for my #. Second time they asked, i just told them i got a new PC and they said ok no problem blah blah blah etc etc gave me number end of story.
Anyways, to conclude, if you can't take 5 minutes to activate your copy of windows to prevent piracy, then it's pretty clear that A) you think everything in life should be free B) you have a pirated copy of windows C) your are one of the laziest people in existence, or D) you are a linux fanboy who thinks anything restricting how many computers on which you install a given license is bad, because its not open source.
DreamWraith
Newbie
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2003
- Messages
- 188
- Reaction score
- 0
no. i hate microsoft just as much as anyone else. i hate the fact that microsoft has a monopoly on the gaming world. i agree windows XP isnt the best os. i also agree windows crashes too much. i dont agree with people pirating/buying software and complaining about activation. its just lame. if you don't like it don't use/pirate it. i also don't like people being completely blind to facts. although windows isnt perfect, semanticly speaking it is more secure than linux. the only reason you dont see more linux users getting virus' and getting hacked is because 90% of the worlds 'standard user population' (people who buy computers from online/phone/tv retailers) use windows. thus virus writers and hackers target windows. if everyone used linux, the hackers and virus writers would use windows to write virus and hack linux.chimpmunk said:
linux only appears to be more secure because it isn't targeted as often as windows.
the real sad thing is, you could root a linux server far faster than a windows server.
I'm curious, those who say Linux crashed on them, Can you tell me the error/what was displayed(it could also be the screensaver than emmulates the standard Windows screensaver: BSOD). Those that cannot have likely never used Linux. I've been using Linux regularly since RedHat 5.1, and only once did it crash. It was also my fault. If you look at the servers running, there are a whole bunch of Linux servers. If you look at each of those as a person who would like to see HL2 run on Linux, there are a whole bunch of fans that are going to be disappointed. Of course most of them will have a second(or dual boot) machine running Winduhz, so they will be able to play the game.
