On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:49:14 -0600, ray <ray@zianet.com> wrote:

>Strange. I don't reacll crying for 'steam' at all. In fact, I don't have
>the foggiest idea in the world what it is, and, quite frankly, I don't
>give a ****.

Consider yourselves lucky not to have had a run in with our resident
lunatic till now. STEAM is an online game delivery and authentication
system. Its a totally voluntary thing to use, but its existence seems
to have sent him off the deep end.

At this point, he's just trying to suck in anyone he can into the
goofball discussions he creates. He's not quite a troll, since he's on
topic for most forums, but he is 100% asshole.

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:08:43 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, magnate
wrote:

>> >>> I'm dangerously close to agreeing with pcgames here. There are
>> >>> hundreds of games which run perfectly under linux,
>>
>> >> With the majority of them being just plain crap.
>
>By what measure? My guess here is that you mean "the majority of them
>don't use the latest resource-hogging eye candy" - which has little to
>do with the quality of gameplay. To many of us at least.

By the measure of "Circus Linux" and "Gnobots." By sheer numbers, there are a
*ton* of games for Linux, but they are not, for the most part, even up to the
standards of 5-years ago, let alone state-of-the-art, "resource-hogging eye
candy."

Instead, they're a motley selection of 500 board sokoban sets, Mahjong titles,
Windows Entertainment Pack clones and things like FRAPS, MAME, DOSBox, zDoom
and ScummVM.

In other words: 1997 called, and they want their games back. ;^)

To be sure, it's enough to keep you busy. I personally love FRAPS (Free
"Abuse") and all the community board sets.

But if you want *modern* games on Linux, you've got a choice of about 10 titles
that are native (iD software based stuff, Introversion, and UT mostly), or
messing about with WINE and Cedega which is NO picnic. It makes much more sense
for Linux users to dual-boot into XP than to mess with WINE/WineX/Cedega.

Most Linux games are just casual games, which is fine, if you're not a gamer.
If you are, there are few games that even take advantage of 3D cards (!), let
alone do so fully with all the current OpenGL shaders and extensions.

Salt liberally with the sound backend mess (OSS vs. ALSA), and you have an
unfriendly platform for dedicated gamers and developers alike.

I dual boot, and as much as I *love* playing games in Linux, I prefer Windows
because the experience is more varied and just plain easier. <G>

--
Zag


"The Ends Justify The Means" ~Niccolo Machiavelli, c. 1550

"The Means Justify The Means" ~George W. Bush, c. 2000

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:40:42 +0200, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Hadron wrote:
>As Linux becomes more popular
>> the game companies will begin writing Linux versions of their catalog.
>
>I don't think they will. It's a catch 22. People don't want Linux for
>home because already it is dead as a gaming platform.

Oh, Linux isn't dead at all. It's alive and kicking.

DOS is dead as a gaming platform.

All Linux needs is a good, *consistent* set of developer tools and an audience.

Right now it has neither.

--
Zag


"The Ends Justify The Means" ~Niccolo Machiavelli, c. 1550

"The Means Justify The Means" ~George W. Bush, c. 2000

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:13:02 +0000 (UTC), in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, Davorin
Vlahovic wrote:

>On 2007-07-31, pc games <pcgamer23708******.com> wrote:
>> Linux users CRYING cause they don't have STEAM!
>> Simply PATHETIC!
>
>aburn {afrodita}[~] $apt-cache search steam
>steam - Environment for cooperative knowledge management
>steam-lib - Environment for cooperative knowledge management (libs)
>
>'nuff said.

But why would anyone apt-get a side-along replacement for apt-get? <G>

--
Zag


"The Ends Justify The Means" ~Niccolo Machiavelli, c. 1550

"The Means Justify The Means" ~George W. Bush, c. 2000

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:49:14 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg, ray wrote:

>On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:38:11 -0700, pc games wrote:
>
>> Linux users CRYING cause they don't have STEAM!
[znip!!!]
>
>Strange. I don't reacll crying for 'steam' at all. In fact, I don't have
>the foggiest idea in the world what it is, and, quite frankly, I don't
>give a ****.

Steam is heated water.

--
Zag


"The Ends Justify The Means" ~Niccolo Machiavelli, c. 1550

"The Means Justify The Means" ~George W. Bush, c. 2000

* magnate:

>>>>> I'm dangerously close to agreeing with pcgames here. There are
>>>>> hundreds of games which run perfectly under linux,
>>>> With the majority of them being just plain crap.
>
> By what measure? My guess here is that you mean "the majority of them
> don't use the latest resource-hogging eye candy" - which has little to
> do with the quality of gameplay. To many of us at least.

No, I'm not talking about eye candy. I'm talking about games that share
gfx, gameplay and controls of mobile phone games from two years ago.
Lots of Linux games are more or less some kind of remake of any ancient
(classic) game from the ATARI/Amiga/DOS aera, and they also look that way.

>>> When I was running my two-months Linux-only trial, I played a lot of
>>> quite good, free games - particularly FPS. Two things I noticed:
>>> (a) The vast majority of these games used Quake 3 as they engine (not
>>> mods, standalone games)
>
> This is the source of my guess above. I'm primarily a strategy fan, so
> eye candy is less important to me.

I don't give too much on eye candy, too. But hey, it's 2007, and even
the most crap-ass el-cheapo PC has some kind of 3D gfx. I don't want
some C64 gfx any more. Besides that the gameplay of most Linux games is
just a copy of some old classic. There's rarely something new.

>>>>> thousands more
>>>>> which run perfectly in DosBox,
>>>> Yeah, right. DOS games.
>>> Gotta LOL at that. :)
>
> Why? They must be crap because they run in DosBox? We clearly have
> totally different concepts of quality. Many superb games run in
> DosBox: X-Com, MoO, MoM, Fallout ...

Yeah, how great. I already played them when DOS was current, and the
replay value of even the best games is finite.

Sadly, that's all regarding games on Linux: dozens of copies and remakes
of homecomputer-aera and mobile phone games and ways to play DOS games.

>>>>> and still more which run with varying
>>>>> degrees of success under WINE.
>>>> With usually a lot of fiddling and with very limited performance.
>>> Some people swear that many games run better in Linux via WINE due to
>>> the lower overhead in Linux compared to Windows.

Sure. People swear a lot if they just believe hard enough. That's what
snake oil is for ;-)

And no, Linux doesn't have a "lower overhead" than Windows. That's just
wish-thinking.

> This thread - and indeed quite a lot of debate about Steam - seems to
> be of interest mainly to people who want FPS eye candy games.

Don't think so. It's not about eye candy but that people aren't appealed
by mobile phone quality games any more, and also not by playing old DOS
games.

> The Linux community doesn't need to attract games companies. Linux is
> free (both gratis and libre), and it would make little sense to try
> and attract games companies who want/need to make a profit. There are
> a ton of open-source games, which are the sort most ideologically
> suited to the Linux environment, and of course the sort that run best
> on Linux and have the best support.

That describes the Linux attitude quite well - ignoring the end user
wishes. Another reason why Linux on the desktop hasn't been the
breakthrough it was expected by the Linux community for several years now.

Benjamin

* waterskidoo:

> Linux from a technical aspect is an excellent gaming platform

Why should that be the case?

> however
> with the exception of a few of the big games like Quake, gaming
> under Linux is well behind Windows. As Linux becomes more popular
> the game companies will begin writing Linux versions of their catalog.

Yes, sure. That has been believed by the community for almost a decade
now. Still most game developers don't give a **** on that niche system.

It's probably even more appealing to develop for the Mac ;-)

> The potential performance increases under Linux would certainly make
> this worthwhile.

Which "potential performance increase"?

Benjamin

On Jul 31, 4:38 am, pc games <pcgamer23...******.com> wrote:
> Linux users CRYING cause they don't have STEAM!
> Simply PATHETIC!
>
> STEAM represents everything Linux fights against
Linux has has had collaborative gaming almost since it's inception.
Granted, Empire wasn't exactly real-time 3D animation, and it took a
while for hardware to catch up to BZ-Flag, but these are two very good
examples of ways that Linux users have been able to join others in a
"Community Game".

Sure, it's a bit like Jabber or IRC servers. There are directories of
servers offering the game, and the registries are mirrored, which
means that it might take a day or two for a new server to hit the
registry mirror, but once it's online, it's not that hard to find.

Creating collaborative game servers isn't all that difficult. You
have game clients, you have game servers, and you have a registry.
You could use UDDI (a wide-open Standard used in SOA applications for
business), or you could have your client connect to an LDAP server (or
have your LDAP server contact the game server's LDAP server. The
servers register themselves with the registry server, and clients
contact the registry to see which servers have the game they want to
play.

> STEAM is PROPRIETARY, Linux is Open Standards
> STEAM is RESTRICTIVE, Linux gives FREEDOM
> STEAM is EXPENSIVE, Linux is AFFORDABLE
> STEAM is MONOPOLISTIC, Linux gives CHOICE and creates COMPETITION
> STEAM represents DICTATORSHIP, Linux represents true DEMOCRACY
> STEAM is the "Windows", and Valve the "Microsoft" of PC Games and
> yet...

STEAM is also a registered trademark.

> YET Linux users are CRYING like Babies cause TYRANT RUTHLESS DICTATOR
> VALVE will not make a Linux version of STEAM!

It's certainly their choice to make STEAM a Windows only product. But
then again, there is nothing to stop some college sophomore from
taking the public description of public protocols described in the
paragraph above, create an Open Source registry, and let Linux users
register their game servers. FreeCiv, BZFlag, Poker, or whatever
else, all available for community play.

The games can be implemented using OpenGL code, which means that the
games can be played on Windows, Sony, Nintendo, Linux, and Mac.

Remember that company (Microsoft) who wanted to restrict their search
engine to "Windows Only" users. And this other company (Google)
decided that they would make ANYBODY's content searchable? How did
that turn out?

;-)

If the publisher wants to limit STEAM to "Vista Only" it's their
choice.
Of course, there are risks and consequences to that kind of choice.

Benjamin Gawert wrote:
> * waterskidoo:
>
>> Linux from a technical aspect is an excellent gaming platform
>
> Why should that be the case?

>> The potential performance increases under Linux would certainly make
>> this worthwhile.
>
> Which "potential performance increase"?

I think he's referring to the lower overhead of a typical Linux install
compared to a typical Windows install. Less resources used by the
operating system = more of the games, or something like that.

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:40:42 +0200, Hadron wrote:
(snips)
> The last benchmarks I saw, saw DirectX under XP crucifying OpenGL under
> Linux in the framerate stakes. Which is not surprising since the games
> companies put a lot more effort into optimising Dx support structures
> than they for OpenGL since that's where the money is.

In the last benchmarks I saw Vista was crucified by XP. Up to a 30% loss
in fps rate. So much for optimising Dx and an "upgrade". Another reason
to give Vista a miss.

> A modern game takes 10s if not hundreds of people to design, write, QA,
> localise and distribute. There is simply no market for games by current
> Linux users unfortunately.

Unfortunately. If a decent Linux native game comes out I buy it. The
game writers more often release server binaries.

Christopher Hunter wrote:
> It's funny to see the astonished looks on the faces of Windows users when
> you show them multiple instances of their favourite games all running
> simultaneously on the sides of a 3D cube, when their over-priced, over
> specified Windows computer can only (just) manage one instance!

If you're talking 3D games I'd love to see that myself, u got a link?

> It's funny how each newer, shinier, "better" version of Windows
> actually /worsens, the user's experience!

Hmm, I'll give you Windows ME and maybe Vista (too early to tell but it
certainly looks that way right now). Most other versions of Windows
fared ok in that regard.

Christopher Hunter <chrisehunter@NOSPAMblueyonder.co.uk> writes:

> Benjamin Gawert wrote:
>
>>> and still more which run with varying
>>> degrees of success under WINE.
>>
>> With usually a lot of fiddling and with very limited performance.
>
>
> It's funny to see the astonished looks on the faces of Windows users when
> you show them multiple instances of their favourite games all running

What windows users favourite games are you talking about? Considering
that most wont run on Linux?

> simultaneously on the sides of a 3D cube, when their over-priced, over
> specified Windows computer can only (just) manage one instance!

Fool. You embarrass yourself and other Linux users.

>
> It's funny how each newer, shinier, "better" version of Windows
> actually /worsens, the user's experience!

Only for Linux zealots. Windows is an excellent gaming
platform. Sorry. But its true. And the gaming market seems to back it
up.

http://www.lokigames.com for more details.

dapunka <dapunka@googlemail.com> writes:

> On 31 Jul, 19:58, WDS <B...@seurer.net> wrote:
>> On Jul 31, 11:24 am, waterskidoo <water.ski...******.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Linux from a technical aspect is an excellent gaming platform however
>> > with the exception of a few of the big games like Quake, gaming
>> > under Linux is well behind Windows. As Linux becomes more popular
>> > the game companies will begin writing Linux versions of their catalog.
>> > The potential performance increases under Linux would certainly make
>> > this worthwhile.
>>
>> The gaming companies don't care a bit about that. They look at one
>> thing, how many copies am I going to sell (i.e., how much money will I
>> rake in) compared to the cost of producing those copies? Right now
>> that is marginal at best for games for Macs and non-existant for
>> Linux. And actually, the action right now is in console games because
>> the money is better.
>
> Yes... Linux home users generally use software that's free (as in
> beer), which is no good to the games software manufacturers. And, as
> has been pointed out many times before (but never by me, until now),
> hardcore gamers generally use consoles for gaming.

Wrong. "Hardcore" gamers use PCs.

Family "platform consoley type games" are generally played on Consoles.

Tim O <timo56********.com> writes:

> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:49:14 -0600, ray <ray@zianet.com> wrote:
>
>>Strange. I don't reacll crying for 'steam' at all. In fact, I don't have
>>the foggiest idea in the world what it is, and, quite frankly, I don't
>>give a ****.
>
> Consider yourselves lucky not to have had a run in with our resident
> lunatic till now. STEAM is an online game delivery and authentication
> system. Its a totally voluntary thing to use, but its existence seems
> to have sent him off the deep end.
>
> At this point, he's just trying to suck in anyone he can into the
> goofball discussions he creates. He's not quite a troll, since he's on
> topic for most forums, but he is 100% asshole.
>

He would fit in very well in C.O.L.A.

Never let the facts get in the way of a good tirade and a few lies.

"CoinSpin" <coin^spam^spin********.com> writes:

> "Hadron" <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in message
> news:qhps28e7rp.fsf@googlemail.com...
> | waterskidoo <water.skidoo******.com> writes:
> |
>
> <snip>
>
> |
> | What are these potential performance increases of which you speak?
> |
> | The last benchmarks I saw, saw DirectX under XP crucifying OpenGL under
> | Linux in the framerate stakes. Which is not surprising since the games
> | companies put a lot more effort into optimising Dx support structures
> | than they for OpenGL since that's where the money is.
> |
>
> And the last benchmarks I saw showed OpenGL under Linux with some of the new
> unified shader video cards brutalizing DX10 under Vista... But hell,
> that's

DX10? you mean with the almost no games using it and the late drivers?
Yup. Possibly.

> not hard, most games run faster under XP than Vista (unless of course you
> are using proprietary Vista hardware/software combinations not available in
> XP, yah I know, extinguish the flames before they start). The point is that
> MS is releasing bloatware OS packages that keep getting more and more
> bloated, while Linux keeps the overhead minimized...

You clearly dont know what Dx10 is all about. They tightened up the
security and redesigned the pipelines resulting in a loss of performance.

>
> But most people will never know or care because MS has done a great job of
> cornering the market when it comes to a PC operating system, which means
> that if you want to make money you program towards the platforms with the
> most numbers - consoles and Windows. Can't see Linux ever getting
> through

Good. We agree.

> the chokehold MS has on the market and getting out there as a true
> mainstream platform without something pushing it there... A killer
> Linux

There was a reason. MS worked with the API developers and the HW
manufacturers from day one.

> app, or something that would give it some appeal other than the "fun for the
> enthusiast or tinkerer" moniker that it gets stuck with now.

But who will invest the money? no one will buy it.

>
> It's just too bad... There is so much potential lurking there in Linux,
> just waiting to be tapped.

No doubt. But it missed the boat IMO.