GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Like many people here i grew up playing computer games, but not one of those games was open source. Given that kids these days play a lot of games don't you think a really good game could be an excellent introduction to the virtues of open source ?
Yes and no. Sure thing, a good, exclusive game would made Linux more attractive to teenagers, thus, more popular. It works like that with everything: Food, clothes, computers, games... If it appeals for teenagers, it simply sells.
However, we don't want see Linux turned in a cash cow, now do we? Most of the big trademarks out there are piece of junk, as Nike or Sony and even McDonald's to some extend.
Look at PS2: crappy hardware, but still get the most games, because developers get a hell cash from there. Later, they release a few of their games with improved graphics and playability to other platforms (GTA for PC or Xbox, anyone?).
True is, I'd love to see Linux popular, but not a cash cow as PS2 is. I for one, started to be a bit upset with Linux right now because of the community. Please, don't take this as an offense for this forum, because it's great and I rarely have had problems here. What I mean is, the Linux community is eventually being taken by a bunch of teenages-hackers-punk-hip-pop wannabe and that's making me look into something else as Solaris and FreeBSD...
I'm also against exclusive titles for a single platform. As an old gamer, I always wanted to play my favorite games (Sonic, Mario, Megaman) in one single console and I never could because of "exclusive" licenses. I felt hurt in my pockets for investing way more money in consoles, then the games itselfs....
Linux more popular? You bet. Appealing for teenagers? Do that and I'm out...
Last edited by Mega Man X; 11-27-2004 at 12:41 AM.
face it, this it a capitalistic world, and gnu/linux is a anti-capitalistic OS (anything thats free in a capitalistic society is anti capitalistic)
theirs little to no money that can be made by developing in open source, or making games for linux ... all the money is in windows, a crappy OS that it, and its company, is a true example of capitalism, so thats were game developers can sell games, and make money
if you want more games for linux, feel free to make your own, there are some good project that have a descent game base for other to build games off of ... but there not to many game developers ......
Game programming is no joke. It is a tremendous task that involves time, effort, money and a lot of talented individuals who pour a lot of sweat into their work. Not only programmers, but graphic artists, music composer, animation experts... so many individuals involved. To give away a game AND its source code for free would be heart wrenching for its developers.
But of course, as you said, there are quite a few open-source games out there already. Just a few though: not a lot.
Distribution: Gentoo 2004.2: Who needs exmmpkg when you have emerge?
Megaman X has a good point, but I think Linux is a bit safe in the fact that many of the teenagers in question would give it a try then be turned off from it when they found out that their installation of the ATi drivers STILL gave them nothing but text mode . However, being a teenager myself, Linux appeals to me, but the last thing we need is it, as you said, being a cash cow... The last thing we need is more crackers-hiphop-pop people... Sometimes I'm a bit ashamed about how shallow most of my age group can be .
Last edited by LavaDevil94; 11-27-2004 at 12:00 AM.
True is, I'd love to see Linux popular, but not a cash cow as PS2 is.
I hear what you're saying megaManX but its not easy to have both. Thing is i'd like to see linux much more popular. Theres heaps of software that we can't use in linux and that software will never get ported as long as it stays a minority operating system. If increasing the user base means we have to put up with (a minority) of so called 'hackers-punk-hip-pop wannabe' then so be it, but i personally i don't find that a problem, i simply use linux because i like it and it works.
thats exactly the problem H2O-linux, without the source codes all it can do is work on systems the military wants it to, no one can use the game to help them, or to learn from it .. its just a hunk of bits on a system that can only be used for 1 purpose
I'm sorry i just have to point out that hackers are the people that develop things like linux and as LavaDevil94 correctly said twats that try and break stuff are crakers. Here check this http://catb.org/esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html
games cant be opensourced. unlike OS's and programs, they require VERY high-end hardware, a consistant storyline, years of work, one-on-one collaboration and millions of dollars.
making a game like hl2 for example would be pretty stupid. there is no longer a reason to play it. by the time the game is done and bug-free you would have already been through every nook and cranny while "testing" it in its unfinished state.
games like pong can be opensourced because they have no story, no meaning, and no surprises. but i think we can all agree that pong is NOT a decent game.
I always detect a whining attitude among people who criticize open-source. We all know that opensource developers give away their TIME and EFFORT for FREE, meaning that they do it for:
1. A feeling of satisfaction and gratification.
2. A belief that they're doing it for the good of the community.
3. A sense of belonging among their peers and appreciation.
Game programming cannot be a ten-man volunteer effort. It requires YEARS and YEARS of effort, lots of talent (which doesn't come free) in both graphics, multimedia, 3d and animation (all of which cost heaven and earth).
The sheer effort and cost of game programming make it out of reach for the common developer who is doing programming in the Open Source world. He cannot afford to put 100% of his time and effort in making free software. He has a paying job which feeds his family. He only can develop in his spare time...
Have some consideration, folks, before you criticize open-source games as being lame or useless. It is the attitude of so many who criticize open-source as crap that they think that the world is made for their pleasure and all the people are there to serve them.
How many people derive benefit and enjoyment from even simple pleasures? Everybody wants more and more for less and less. It's simply impossible. Against the law of physics... and economics, by the way.
I hear a lot of people talk about how Linux needs this or that to be the next big OS. But I think Steve Jobbs got it right when he said "Microsoft won the OS wars a long time ago". (note that I am not trying to drag ms into this, nor am I saying they are superior) The point is that games shouldn't be ported to Linux just to lure people away from some other OS. If people want to start porting existing games into Linux or make new games for it, more power to them. But as has been mentioned before, It's a lot of work that costs a lot of money.
On the other hand, I was always under the impression that things like operating systems took a lot of work and a lot of money to develop.
Anyway, short of some massive community driven game development system, where most of the people playing the game contributed to creating it, there by lightening the work load for all involved, most games will probably be auctioned off to the most popular OS.
And as for teenagers turning Linux into the hax0rs l33t 05, well, as a teenager I started using it because it was free (as in beer). I like to think that the community and freedome inspired me to learn and caused my computing needs to mature.
Originally posted by LavaDevil94 Are you saying that opensourced games are usually bad ones? I must disagree. DooM (not 3) is opensourced. Quake I and II are open, and Quake III is going to be very soon. So are the Wolf engines.
those are not opensourced games. they are propriety games. when a newer, better engine is develped, they gave out het old one.
the is a huge difference between opensourcED games and opensource games.