"Linux is the future of gaming"

[Nicola_M]

The only concern I have with Steam is I played MW3 on it, and the constant having-to-be-online and logged-in with them was a bit of a pain. That's not even taking into account if their servers are ever hacked, which is a bit too often for my liking.

Something not great about buying a product and getting it home, but before you can use it you have to go online, register an account and stay online all the time. Broadband hiccups and you're kicked out and have to start all over.

Don't know about anyone else, but I steer clear of anything involved with Steam now.

[Mario Donick]

register an account and stay online all the time.

 

Steam has an offline mode.

[BWolf7]

I have personally never had any problems with the DRM on steam... For me, being connected to the internet isn't really a problem. My city has google wifi

If you want to see a real example of stupidly complicated always online drm, you should check out this really cool game called SimCity.

 

100s of dollars of experience to back it up, of course I only use it to play DCS  http://i.imgur.com/dPeAK2R.png

[pryoski]

I just don't like Steam ... old fashioned I guess .. but a 'unified' Linux environment for game developers is not a bad thing.

[Ben Russell]

Skip the article, read the comments:

 

http://www.polygon.com/2013/10/12/4826190/linux-only-needs-one-killer-game-to-explode-says-battlefield-director

[Ben Russell]

And then there's this:

 

http://blog.kier.pe/technology/why-i-moved-from-linux-to-mac-os-x/

 

 

...which pretty much describes exactly how I feel about it all.

[Ben Russell]

 

http://www.nicholasreese.com/problem-clients/?utm_source=getresponse&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=downloads&utm_content=How+to+Avoid+Problem+Clients

 

 

Don't be the extreme left. It's boring.

[MarRog]

From linux.com :
 

Valve’s Steam for Linux is the best opportunity to help the Linux desktop, he said. They’ll do this by setting a standard for Linux distributions that want to enable gaming on their platforms.

[Ben Russell]

Great logic, except for one thing, most people won't use it as a desktop. They just want a dumb set top box. That's why the console market exists at all.

 

We don't buy them for the powerful hardware which has been a step behind cheaper desktops for a long time now. 

 

We buy them 'cause they're an appliance, like a toaster.

[fastaviationdata]

I think they buy parts by parts and set it up to make it cheaper and most of the desktop are using windows operating system.

[Ntr09]

Great logic, except for one thing, most people won't use it as a desktop. They just want a dumb set top box. That's why the console market exists at all.

 

We don't buy them for the powerful hardware which has been a step behind cheaper desktops for a long time now. 

 

We buy them 'cause they're an appliance, like a toaster.

"Linux Desktop" doesn't really mean what it sounds like it means in the context of that sentence, what they mean by it is the "Linux Desktop OS" which is a pretty general term and doesn't necessarily mean the hardware it's intended for is a desktop.

[MarRog]

From X-Plane Developer / X-Plane platform breakdown / Comments :
 

I certainly hope that SteamOS will set a new standard for being ‘game ready’ (meaning having the problems of audio, graphics and input hardware be solved by the OS distro completely) since it is being built by gamers for gamers. That might help the other “friendly” distros (e.g. mint, Ubuntu) to figure out what they need to do.

And, yes, I have read the rest too, about the 2% and so on...

[Ben Russell]

"Steam machines are pointless and Valve is struggling to keep SteamOS relevant"

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2014/01/24/steam-machines-are-pointless-and-valve-is-struggling-to-keep-steamos-relevant/

 

 

 

I think there's a lot of very valid points in the above article.

[hobofat]

I think there's a lot of very valid points in the above article.

 

Variable pricing and the ability to upgrade hardware kills it for me. Desktop gamers just use their desktops, console gamers want consoles. Consoles shouldn't be treated like desktop systems...

[theluckyone17]

From the speculation I've heard, Valve's concerns aren't focused on bringing Linux to the masses. If it helps standardize Linux distributions a bit, that's fine and dandy, but it'll be as an indirect effect. I understand that Valve is more concerned with reducing the need to rely on Microsoft. I imagine that the Windows Store might have something to do with that, as one could view it as an attempt to bypass Valve's distribution stream.

 

That controller, though... ick.

[ilias.tselios]

I thought that Linux was a good idea. Very noble... but idea. I tried but the reality is very hard. If at the end I have to pick the hardware based on what might be supported from Linux... why at the end not build a hackintosh?  The pain will be the same and at the end will have the best OS in the world!

[Abburo]

 Linux for gaming is simply not possible. The reason? Quite simple. There are so many distributions, there are so many custom kernels there are so many... that for game developers will be hard, if not even imposibile to maintain properly. A way forward is to have a specific distribution for which all game developers are aware about changes (like the STEAM version), but that's will simply make no difference than a MS Windows machine... the "monopol" will be back... just to other company. Why should we be so enthusiastic for this?

[theluckyone17]

Airfighter: OS X is the best OS in the world? Define best. I'll bet you and I will have differing definitions. Not that it's a bad thing, us disagreeing. We're likely not using our computers for the same purposes, and have different preferences. You do your thing, I'll do mine. Life is good.

 

Abburo: Linux for gaming is possible. I'm doing it. Three Gentoo boxes at my house. One's used for X-Plane (a sim, but I digress), Minecraft, and Steam (Kerbal Space Program, X3, and a few others). The other two are hosting Minecraft servers. I'm tempted to pick up Rust, when it looks a little less "Early Access". It's not Valve's responsibility to make Steam work with any given distribution. That's placed upon the shoulders of those rolling the distribution. Not to nitpick, but if your distribution is rolling a kernel that prevents you from gaming with it... you might want to be looking at another distribution. Either they've got a different goal in mind (a distribution tailored for something other than gaming, such as SELinux) or the dev's rolling the distro are incompetent.

[Ben Russell]

Rust is absolute rubbish. Pure crap. The worst game I have _ever_ purchased.

 

Even considering that it's Alpha Pre Release it's still woefully bad.

 

It loads 1 in 100 times.

 

Then, when you finally get it to load, the player community is absurd. The game mechanics are completely broken and the experience is horrible.

 

I'd rather fill my eyeballs with sand and vinegar than ever EVER go near that piece of crap again.

 

 

Watch this video and you will get an infinite amount more enjoyment out of Rust than you ever will "playing" it.

 

 

 

Avoid like three week old sun-rotten fish.

[ilias.tselios]

Airfighter: OS X is the best OS in the world? Define best. I'll bet you and I will have differing definitions. Not that it's a bad thing, us disagreeing. We're likely not using our computers for the same purposes, and have different preferences. You do your thing, I'll do mine. Life is good.

Disagreeing is not bad. But there are some qualities that define what is a good operating system like... stability, ease of use, advanced features, support and many more. The one that compines the most of the is the best. Simple logic. Since I have used the 3 most common (plus Amiga Workbench!), the conclusion is that Mac OS X is the best. Not saying that Linux is not worth. But no one can deny that has great drawbacks.

My point is this. I'm looking to build a $1500 computer, since I cannot spend 3000 for a Mac Pro. If I go to a store and buy those parts, how sure I should be that everything will work out of the box? Are they going to be supported by any linux distro/kernel? I know that is not case.

Edited February 1, 2014 by airfighter

[theluckyone17]

Again, you're defining what's best. Your definition of best does little good if I'm running a business relying on ProEngineer (hint: It doesn't support OS X). Going out and buying a Mac would be a bad idea for me, and I can throw your definition of "best operating system" out the window.

 

Your point makes little sense to me. If I understand you correctly, you can't afford to purchase a Mac Pro. Instead of buying $1,500 worth of off the shelf PC hardware bits and putting Windows, Linux, or another operating system on it (which most likely supports that hardware), you're going to make a "Hackintosh" by slapping a copy of OS X on it? The same operating system that in turn doesn't officially support the hardware you're running it on? The same operating system who's legality of running it on that PC hardware isn't clear, since it's a clear violation of the EULA? The same operating system that has a history of instability when run on anything but Apple hardware?

 

Sure. 

 

I believe you either have little experience with operating systems despite your claims, or a pretty poor troll. Either way, I wish you luck, but I also wish you wouldn't spew misinformation.

Edited February 2, 2014 by theluckyone17

[sqrt(-1)]

But there are some qualities that define what is a good operating system like... stability, ease of use, advanced features, support and many more. The one that compines the most of the is the best. Simple logic. Since I have used the 3 most common (plus Amiga Workbench!), the conclusion is that Mac OS X is the best.

 

For my work, I have found exactly those qualities in a clean (not preload) installs of Win7 and Win8.x.  After nearly 8 years and 6 Mac machines (incl. Pros), I have again settled on Windows.  It was the days of Windows Vista that drove me to give OSX a chance.  However for my tastes and needs, OSX has lost its luster and going back to Windows was like re-acquainting myself with an old friend.  This was almost 4 years ago and I have not seen a BSOD* or had a malware problem since then.

 

Again, it's the proper application of tool to task.  For some OSX is best, for others, not.

 

 

Note*:  The only time I ever see a BSOD is during the development of overclock settings.

Edited February 2, 2014 by SqrtOfNegOne

[theluckyone17]

I'll second that, Sqrt. I haven't seen a BSOD that I haven't been able to attribute to anything but either malware (rootkits, especially) or failing hardware. Same goes for kernel panics in Linux or OS X. I may not be the biggest fan of Windows from a preference stand point, but I'm more than willing to admit that.

 

Ben, I missed your earlier post on Rust. I saw that same video when I was researching it a bit. Not sure if it says more about the game or the player base, to be honest. My way of looking at it? There are so many ways I've burned $20 quicker and in less enjoying ways than Rust. Even if it's a total flop. But then again, I'll admit to having actually paid for a copy of Duke Nukem Forever, too... now that I do regret.

[ilias.tselios]

Again, you're defining what's best. Your definition of best does little good if I'm running a business relying on ProEngineer (hint: It doesn't support OS X). Going out and buying a Mac would be a bad idea for me, and I can throw your definition of "best operating system" out the window.

 

Your point makes little sense to me. If I understand you correctly, you can't afford to purchase a Mac Pro. Instead of buying $1,500 worth of off the shelf PC hardware bits and putting Windows, Linux, or another operating system on it (which most likely supports that hardware), you're going to make a "Hackintosh" by slapping a copy of OS X on it? The same operating system that in turn doesn't officially support the hardware you're running it on? The same operating system who's legality of running it on that PC hardware isn't clear, since it's a clear violation of the EULA? The same operating system that has a history of instability when run on anything but Apple hardware?

 

Sure. 

 

I believe you either have little experience with operating systems despite your claims, or a pretty poor troll. Either way, I wish you luck, but I also wish you wouldn't spew misinformation.

 

Since you like to put labels to people, I can say that your argument that Mac OS X does not support that ProEngineer program and from that that OS is crap, is one of the silliest ever heard of.

 

 

You lost my point completely. I'll try to make it clearer, may be you understand this time. The frustration to build a good running Linux PC is that same if you try to build a Hackintosh. You have to choose the hardware that it is supported by the OS and not the opposite. Is that clear to you? And you get the same level of support... Community forums! Oh... and about legality issues, an EULA is not a law and may be it can be against the law, depending where you live. Here is Europe you can find stores that sell that staff (check PearC in Germany). Now, IF I build a Hackintosh and blow of in my face, I know that is should not ask Apple for... help! Which is the same with any other OS!

[theluckyone17]

Since you like to put labels to people, I can say that your argument that Mac OS X does not support that ProEngineer program and from that that OS is crap, is one of the silliest ever heard of.

 

 

You lost my point completely. I'll try to make it clearer, may be you understand this time. The frustration to build a good running Linux PC is that same if you try to build a Hackintosh. You have to choose the hardware that it is supported by the OS and not the opposite. Is that clear to you? And you get the same level of support... Community forums! Oh... and about legality issues, an EULA is not a law and may be it can be against the law, depending where you live. Here is Europe you can find stores that sell that staff (check PearC in Germany). Now, IF I build a Hackintosh and blow of in my face, I know that is should not ask Apple for... help! Which is the same with any other OS!

Reading comprehension. It's a good thing.

 

I didn't suggest OS X is crap. I said it may be the best operating system for you, Joe Schmoe, and  the guy on the corner, but if my business is centered around the use of ProEngineer, OS X is not the best operating system for me. ProE does not support OS X (http://www.ptc.com/WCMS/files/77552/en/proewf5.pdf), so if I replaced all the workstations in my office with Mac's, and all my business critical data is sitting in ProEngineer's format, I'm hosed. Ergo, it's not the best operating system FOR ME. Applying "simple labels" to define what's "best" in the real world does not work.

 

I'm also going to strongly disagree with your comparison of Linux specifically to Hackintosh. One is not like the other. Now you're implying that anyone can buy $1,500 worth of PC hardware off the shelf, slap it together, and just expect Windows to work on it? That's not necessarily true. Sure, it's a reasonable expectation, but the devil is in the details. There is hardware out there with a shoddy reputation for working on Windows, much less anything else. There's older hardware that's not supported on the latest version of Windows, as well. So making a blind assumption whenever you're upgrading/installing ANY operating system or hardware is a bad idea, and likely to get you burned at some point down the road.

 

If I want commercial support under Linux, I've got Redhat, Canonical, and a host of third party providers. Judging from the experience I've had with Microsoft's tech support in the past, I'm going to guess that Linux support is on par on a quality level as well (it's hard to get much worse). I don't have to resort to community forums if I choose not to. Which is more than I can say for hackintoshes. Psystar Corporation tried that. Apple sued them out of existence. PearC works in Germany, so far. If Apple decides it's profitable to sue PearC, and negate their legal argument that the EULA is a post-purchase restriction on the use of OS X, all Apple has to do is provide a copy of the EULA with the software prior to purchase. Poof, there goes PearC's argument and their business model. They must be comfortable with that. PearC can't do much to support the actual operating system, as well. If there's a bug in OS X? They have no access to the source code. They install an unmodified version of OS X. They can't provide the same level of support that other companies can. I can't see you getting much support from Apple, either. "Hi, I have a problem with XYZ in OS X. No, I didn't buy the system from Apple... I bought it from PearC... But they told me to call you..."