Why Linux will never be a gameing platform

[mrchimp]

First of all, I'm not saying Linux is useless or that games can not be run on it. What I am saying is, even if every game supported Linux and 90% of all hardware had drivers for linux, people still wouldn't use it except those with the time, determination and knowledge to do it.

1 week ago I decided to install linux mandrake 9.2 to take advantage of the free software, security, KDE and so I simply knew how to use it, oh and so I wasn't using constantly using an illegal OS. After downloading it, I booted up drakX (the install program) which is where the problems began, I won't describe all of them I'll just skip to the serious ones. The first serious one being ATi's drivers (which still are a problem), although they were there they didn't have any default "screen's" which meant when I booted up into Linux the GUI (KDE by default but there are others) could not be displayed, leaving me (linux super n00b) with a console.

So I had to use windows to get onto the ATi website and find out how to get my graphics card to work. After installing the new ATi drivers and setting up some "screen's" I managed to get the GUI to work but with no 3D acceleration (more on that later).

The first thing I went about doing was getting my internet connection to work, which was in comparison to many other things quite easy to do. After fiddling with some of the software included with the mandrake distro', I found that some of my requirements were not met. For example there weren't any programs that supported the new msn messenger protocol, so I did some searching for a program that did. To cut a long story short I found a program that did have support and I realised I had to download it's source code, then compile it myself as the RPM's (installation files) were not going to work. Now I'm no expert but if a simple program has to be compiled on each and every kernel/distro' in order for it to work on that particular set-up, then shouldn't games have to undergo the same process or something similar, well I don't think so but compatibility between Kernels could certainly be a problem.

Compiling a program isn't particularly hard, unless of course it has ?dependencies? which never ever ever ever seam to be installed to begin with, instead you have to drag your ass through a whole load of crap (if your a n00b) just to get your hands on that programming library's source code only to find that the dependency has a dependency and that you need to download that as well, plus compile it. Even if you do manage to install that fat load of bollocks, you proberly havn't configured it properly and the compiler won't realise it's there, unless of course you change some ?enviromental variables? which you can easily find helpful documentation on IF you know where to look or who to ask.

At this point i think the casual gamer would have just given up and would now be back in the safety of windows, happily playing there favourite game or chatting on msn /whatever while listening to mp3's and most importantly not having to compile a single thing to get there. Not only that but if they feel the need to change a program file they don't have to navigate a file system that uses names like 'bin' 'opt' and 'etc' . Lets be honest, to make Linux work to an acceptable level you need to do a lot of reading and trouble shooting, you need one shit load of patience and you have to welcome the challenge of learning linux.

If your one of these very lucky people who managed to get UT2003 working within an hour of installing Linux without any effort, then you better hope luck doesn't balance it's self out.

Linux experts/fanboys will proberly flame me to death, but they proberly don't realise most people don't enjoy configureing a Kernel only to find it won't compile, when all they want to do is get 3D acceleration.

BTW I havn't given up yet and I think linux is great but it's never going to be for gamers, just techies.

 

[The Dark Elf]

I'm not a fan of Linux, any OS that you spend more time fiddling with it than your apps is a waste of time IMO, and its good to see someone with the same feelings but doesn't say it in a nasty way


betcha get flamed for it though, its the way of the linux thread

 

[The Mullinator]

Windows would have the exact same problems if Microsoft didn't spend so much time and effort making its OS's as n00b friendly as possible. Linux doesn't have some sort of anti-n00b thing in its source code, Linux developers just havn't spent as much time trying to make it as n00b friendly as windows.

As of right now Linux won't be taking the game market by storm, but right now Linux is still young, it hasn't grown up yet. It still has a long way to go but that doesn't mean it will never get there.

 

[No Limit]

There is no way Linux can be a OS for the everyday person at this time, but that's ok as Linux was not set up for that. Personally I have no clue why anyone uses is it on their home computer, its complete waste of time. I use Linux for all my servers as its more stable than Windows and doesn't have as many security flaws; however, for anything else I am not touching that with someone else's computer. If someone is using it for their home computer please tell me why as this is a mystery to me. You don't have very good driver support, most games don't work on it, many programs you probably need also don't run on it, and everything takes a much longer time to set up because of the way Linux works. To me it simply does not make any sense, but if you feel better using Linux then please do by all means. I think many people that use Linux for their home computer think they are 1337 for doing so, in my eyes you are not 1337, you are stupid . Also, I am not saying that Linux is bad, it's simply inconvenient. If you have a spare computer laying around I would definitely recommend you install Linux to play around with as that knowledge might help you in the long run and you will simply feel smarter and can join discussions about why Linux sucks for home use .

Windows would have the exact same problems if Microsoft didn't spend so much time and effort making its OS's as n00b friendly as possible

They are not only helping the n00bs out there, Microsoft simply makes things a lot more convenient which is what people should look for when installing an OS.

 

[The Mullinator]

Convenience, and being "n00b friendly" are often the same thing.

People often install Linux on there home computers simply because they don't want to use any Microsoft products, they want to help build up the competition so that Microsoft will have have a true competitor. Right now its a monopoly and as a result the customers are not necessarily recieving the best service they could be getting.

Thats why I have 2 hard drives, one for Linux, and one for Windows.

 

[No Limit]

There is a very good reason why Microsoft has a monopoly over the OS industry, the reason is simply that their product is better for every home user out there. If someone wants to give competition to Microsoft they will need a better program, this obviously is easier said than done. However, I will not waste my time and become fraustrated simply because Microsoft has a monopoly. It really isn't the end of the world and more good has come out of it than bad. Can you imagine games having to be developed for 5 or 6 different platforms? This would cause huge problems with updates and the fact that smaller companies would not be able to create games for that many platforms and stay within their budget unless they would make cut backs in other places which would make the quality of the game suffer. I remember when Mac had the edge on the competition, Microsoft came out with a much better product with a much smaller budget and they have ruled the industry since for a very good reason.

 

[The Mullinator]

Microsoft did not become the dominating OS simply because it was better, it became the most powerful due to a business deal with IBM. Whether it was the best is very debatable. Fact is the reason no one has displaced Microsoft yet is because of there monopoly, that is basically what the whole debate over Microsofts monopoly is all about. It is virtually impossible to create an OS that could truly compete with Microsoft no matter how good it is.

What is needed to make an OS that is better than any windows OS is money and support from software companies, money is not the problem, its support. No OS could ever hope to replace Microsoft no matter how much better it would be simply because Microsoft has a monopoly and therefor won't let them.

I agree that having multiple standard OS's would be a big problem for software designers, but that is another problem on its own.

 

[Maxi]

Wow a sensibel mature conversation, first time ever ^_^ you guys win teh cookie!!11

 

[Echelon]

did u ever think, DOS might become a gaming plat form?

 

[FictiousWill]

It was, for a while!

 

[Shuzer]

Originally posted by Echelon
did u ever think, DOS might become a gaming plat form?

Doesn't NASA still use DOS? :cheese:

(Sarcasm doesn't show too well through the internet lol)

 

[mrchimp]

Well I'm useing Linux as my home computer because i wanted to know how to use it and despite the fact I'v had alot of trouble getting programs to work (and i still havn't got my new Kernel to boot properly) the actuall OS hasn't crashed once.

Also the only thing I can't do In linux that i can in windows (at this moment in time) is play games, I can write documents, play music, chat on msn, IRC, do picture/video editing, look at this webpage, watch DVD's, program in c++, pascal (I can't compile in pascal yet) and customize the desktop untill my hearts content.

It took alot of effort to get to this point though and thats why i was saying it will never be main stream.

 

[Antti]

Originally posted by Shuzer
Doesn't NASA still use DOS? :cheese:

(Sarcasm doesn't show too well through the internet lol) [/QUOTE

NASA uses Amiga 1200 computers even today. I know.

And to mrchimp, You have done well. You have chosen good basic distribution to your self.

Most GNU/Linux distriputions don't come with acclerated drivers to 3dcards and that is some times very hard,(even for me). but updating drivers is more efficent than in windows and easier too.(in some point, if we don't include killing and initializing XFree86 Server.)

I do play games at Linux platform and I do have got games like Half-Life,(+Steam) and Warcraft III working on at linux.(using WINE or WINEX platforms.)
I have also got Native binary games working like Unreal, Unreal Tournament, UT2k3 and Unreal2 + Quake series + Doom series + Command & Conquer + Smaller games like chess, and cards. then there are those emulators like XMAME and XMESS + other emus too.
Most Dos Games work under Linux when using FreeDOS.
Gamers positions in GNU/Linux OS is fair more better than couple years ago. The developers have done moust of the Dirty work and they have started to think n00bs too. They have made a lot's of programs that help n00bs in linux. the MAN or LDP are "the users guide of GNU/Linux".
:cheers:

Do you have used alt.os.linux news channel?
That is actually a Support of GNU/Linux.
If you need phone support then buy a distripution like RedHat, SuSe or this ManDrake.

But the basic idea in linux is that it is free and it is better than commercial software.
Like some one said in this forum, Linux needs a software that people need, also that language setting is other. I bet that you choosed mandrake because of it supports your native language.
Or at least that was one of the main reasons.

I think that GameDevelopers should support Linux so that commercial games can be available to GNU/Linux, that would rise the popularity of GNU/Linux and that could speed Linux speading on home machines.
ASk your self: "What does the home user wants?"
It dosen't want all nice tricks or some magix software. It wasn't that system works, And if no one normal homeuser dosen't know how to use system they don't use it. I think that GNU/Linux is in a phase were home user can try it and I belive that after 10 years Linux will have more home-users than M$ Windows has.
But this is the one of the miracle times.

:cheers:

 

[mrchimp]

I found updateing windows drivers alot easyier, all i had to do was click next untill the installation screen disapeared and windows restarted.

On linux however I have to build a module for the Kernel which under my circumstances means compileing the entire kernel so the "source headers" match the currently running Kernel. Thats not easy atall in my opinion, especially when i get error's that mean nothing to me.

I'v found it hard to find relevant information for my particular problems in linux aswell, often I have a problem that no FAQ or HOWTO that I can find covers.

 

[MooCow]

Replace linux with PC's and windows with consoles and suddenly this all sounds very familiar.

 

[Dr. Freeman]

Originally posted by No Limit
There is a very good reason why Microsoft has a monopoly over the OS industry, the reason is simply that their product is better for every home user out there. If someone wants to give competition to Microsoft they will need a better program, this obviously is easier said than done.

if everyone thought "Microsoft has a monopoly and for good reason.. because it has "A" and "B" oh and don't forget about "C" and what about "D" its the most important reason why theres a monopoly right now" then there would be no competition whatsoever.. granted that Linux doesn't give much competition right now, but its getting better looking over the years..

maybe its not that time yet where competition by Linux will have Microsoft at their toes, looking to improve their O/S in every way and provide the very best service... but with the improvements over the years, Linux has come a long ways and in a few years may even bring Microsoft to the level of competition where the end user benefits the most.. HOWEVER..

this would not be possible with the "if everyone thought" scenerio... like they say..

"never say never" especially not in the computer industry where new tech is released every year.

 

[RoyalEF]

Microsoft "fears" competition from Linux for the same reason that Sun & IBM do - the SERVER market. Only people marketing Linux and Linux fanboys believe Linux has a shot at the desktop.

Linux is much harder to use and setup than Windows 3.1 was--anybody feel like rolling back the clock? When an operating system asks you to become a programmer and compile their code for you the home user tosses the OS disks in the trash. People say the kernel never crashes--who gives a shit--the GUI is the only thing the user will ever be able to use. The GUI can NEVER crash, NEVER fail to appear. If it goes away, people aren't going to know what to do with a command prompt. The GUI... not just the OS... needs to be bulletproof, unfailing, and self-updating.

Second obstacle is the availability of programs. WHile people say I can type a document. Whoopie! I can open Notepad on Windows 3.0 and type a document. However I need to edit a MS Project 2003 file, I've got some Adobe Photoshop files that I need to fix, A Word 2003 doc to proof, and a composition In Quark to assemble, print, proof and get to a printer by friday. Can I get 100% guaranteed compatibility on all this from a linux product--cause I don't want to waste time tweaking everything cause StarOffice doesn't EXACTLY do interpret things the same was as native Word. For home user's I'm gonna need Quicken, those games you all talk about for teenagers, and a bunch of games for younger kids. What? None Available? AOL, Messenger, Real Player, Media Player, Jukebox (i'm got a library of songs in there already), Agent, Outlook (what do you mean I can't move my outloofk folders, calendar & email history over).

And emulators have never flown well. Despite better compatibility there is always a performance hit. And why bother running a WIndows emulator inside Linux when most of us would end up running more WIndows programs than Linux.

I've got no love for Microsoft, but I see it is obvious why their hold on the desktop will be around for the next 5-10 years. Maybe if their was a Linux monopoly and only one Linux and everybody had to use and support that one single distro of Lunix--Linux might have a fighting chance.

 

[Brian Damage]

Originally posted by Antti
NASA uses Amiga 1200 computers even today. I know.

YOU SAID THE MAGIC WORDS!:bounce:

I still have one of those. I still use it.:E

 

[mrchimp]

Originally posted by RoyalEF
Microsoft "fears" competition from Linux for the same reason that Sun & IBM do - the SERVER market. Only people marketing Linux and Linux fanboys believe Linux has a shot at the desktop.

Linux is much harder to use and setup than Windows 3.1 was--anybody feel like rolling back the clock? When an operating system asks you to become a programmer and compile their code for you the home user tosses the OS disks in the trash. People say the kernel never crashes--who gives a shit--the GUI is the only thing the user will ever be able to use. The GUI can NEVER crash, NEVER fail to appear. If it goes away, people aren't going to know what to do with a command prompt. The GUI... not just the OS... needs to be bulletproof, unfailing, and self-updating.

Second obstacle is the availability of programs. WHile people say I can type a document. Whoopie! I can open Notepad on Windows 3.0 and type a document. However I need to edit a MS Project 2003 file, I've got some Adobe Photoshop files that I need to fix, A Word 2003 doc to proof, and a composition In Quark to assemble, print, proof and get to a printer by friday. Can I get 100% guaranteed compatibility on all this from a linux product--cause I don't want to waste time tweaking everything cause StarOffice doesn't EXACTLY do interpret things the same was as native Word. For home user's I'm gonna need Quicken, those games you all talk about for teenagers, and a bunch of games for younger kids. What? None Available? AOL, Messenger, Real Player, Media Player, Jukebox (i'm got a library of songs in there already), Agent, Outlook (what do you mean I can't move my outloofk folders, calendar & email history over).

And emulators have never flown well. Despite better compatibility there is always a performance hit. And why bother running a WIndows emulator inside Linux when most of us would end up running more WIndows programs than Linux.

I've got no love for Microsoft, but I see it is obvious why their hold on the desktop will be around for the next 5-10 years. Maybe if their was a Linux monopoly and only one Linux and everybody had to use and support that one single distro of Lunix--Linux might have a fighting chance.

I agree with you on some points, but there is no shortage of fully functional linux programs that can do anything a desktop user would want to do. It's just installing them and making them work which is the problem.