Linux, being an open source o/s, IMO has inherent problems when dealing with commercial software. The problem is that it is very dynamic, and so a product created at a particular point in time for a specific Linux distribution, can easily become non-usable with other distributions or future releases of the specific distribution.

If I was given a choice between purchasing a Linux HL2 and a Windows HL2 that is runnable on Wine or Cedega, I would choose the Windows version. All the games I own are Windows games and I play them solely on Linux. I do not wait or wish for Linux ports.

However, I do think that the gaming infrastructure under Linux must be improved. This includes things like positional audio, force-feedback, etc.

This may all be a rumor, but with the scandal of the theft of the game's source code some time ago, it was said that there were rudimentary OpenGL sections through out the code for the renderer... Only rumor, though.

In any case, Valve has the last word and they have clearly stated they're not going to make a port for Linux of the game.

In case it was misunderstood, I want all my games in linux. I just have found that the amount of time required to hope on the Cedega crew or personal interest getting into me to tweak out and get the game(s) running....I rather just have a dedicated wintendo box. It's a sad thought, I know...but really...use windows for what you find it good for and nothing else :)

Yeah, I know they have some good points, but it's the general way the but Linux/MAC outisde that bugs me. Just curious on how they would respond to a mail like this to see if it's totaly out of the question, though I heard about a lot of people that have mailed them without luck...

You're welcome :p

Good points, I've been there... it's annoying and confusing when different problems accure on different distros...

I've tried HL2 on Cedega (the demo with the anoying watermark), it didn't run as fast as I wished and it had some problems with the licens agreement texts.

What if game developpers made games more compitable with Cedega? It already runs fearly good...

Me too :)

I don't have Windows so it is out of the question, though I'm happy with the games I have released on Linux :)

From personal experience, most of the fatal issues suffered by games when ran on Cedega result from incomplete or non-conforming implementations of the Windows API. Resolving these issues is a matter of time and resources. It's unlikely that game developers would agree to "dumb down" their source. TG should (and do) "smart up" Cedega.

Other fatal issues result from internal bugs in the games' binaries. Such bugs when they do manifest themselves on Windows get fixed. Those that only manifest themselves on Cedega will probably not get patched up by the game's developers. Perhaps this is an area where game developers can assist.

Performance issues are a different type of problem. New graphics hardware is programmable which means that differences between DirectX and OpenGL are less of a problem with newer games. HL2, I am guessing, does make extensive use of programmable shaders. It is my understanding that TG does upgrade its DirectDraw implementation, but no longer updates the public CVS. Hence, it is impossible for anyone on the outside to analyse these performance issues.

man
 

ok now the reason vavle isnt porting to linux is because i think steam is written with active x controls but i am not sure. they want you to use steam so they can keep tabs on their property. well you can run hl2 wiht opengl so i dont think that. also the .net framework is incorperated into steam as well
well i dont know.

Quality read, thanks man.

Steam works fine with mozilla active X extension in wine. You can read it in wine hq in supported apps list. I think half life 2 is not working properly in Linux because it is not as modular as Id's software, so it is much more difficult to port it to other os'es. There might be a lot of code which needs to be rewritten for Half Life to work, especially in networking section due to the difference between Windows and Linux.

Why do you want a port of that game for Linux? There're _way_ better games out there, even for Linux. Valve has already made clear that they want Linux to be kept as a server only. It started with them not porting the over-hyped game HL1 and CS1 to Linux, despite a lot of requests. It's relatively easy to port HL1 to Linux, since it use also OpenGL for rendering the graphics and it's also a modified engine from Quake 1 and 2 (which has Linux binaries and it's open source today).

With the release of HL2, Valve makes it even more clear that Windows, ATI and DirectX is the way they are going. I bought HL2 and while it was an OK game, it's a one time run-through game. There's nothing in there that you will want to see again. No unlockables, no exploration. There's not even a noticeable increased challenge when playing on Hard difficult. There's also no plot along the way whatsoever. Heck, Freeman does not say a single word the whole game. Wasn't he curious to know what happens after HL1? What happened to him? To G-man? To Dr. Breen? To Barney?. Nope. Nothing. Not a single breath sound. Even Wolfenstein 3D protagonist had sounds for when being shot or trying to open a locked door. The plot is: Run from A to B and blast everything with innacurate, unrealistic weapons (machine gun is horrible). That is the plot of half of the game. The other half you will speding time trying to drive a boat or a car which controls horribly, when compared to UT2004 or even Halo vehicles.

I understand that the mods are attractive for some. I had high hopes to play CS:S, since Counter-Strike has at least 1 person cheating on every server (according to some statistics, from 16 players on a server, 1 is cheating). I've tried to play CS:S for two days. The first day was annoying. Most of the servers out there forces you to download a bunch of sounds from other games (as Quake and Unreal) which does not fit the game at all. I found a way to block those files for being downloaded on the Steam forums. You have to create and edit a file (autoexec.cfg) on the root of the game to disable that. There's not way to do so through the game menu (ET, a better, older and free game has that option on the menu/player profile).

Once I got that thing fixed, I went to a server. The fastest one for me was swedstrike. 2 minutes playing that game (on a VAC server) and a guy called King1 had hack speed (moving like Flash or Superman) and a shotgun, killing everybody. Nobody kicked him out of the server... Once more on the horrible childish Steam forums I found the answer that players cheating would not be banned by VAC. It should take a time for them to ban the player. Why? It's clearly it does not work. Before steam we had other options, such as CD to combat cheaters. VAC never worked and still does not...

On the top of it, you have Steam: A shame of program that wants to show you more of Valve new releases and update your games without you saying that you want it to or not. And what exactly is it being updated? Most of the players out there still have problems with Stuttering.

Again, why do you want that horrible excuse for a game to be ported to Linux? Try to get Activision, Lucas Arts or Electronics Arts to make games for us. Let Valve and it's steampowered junk die a horrible dead among Windows and DirectX...

End of my rant

You are voting for "Play my games on Windows and wouldn't bother with Linux", right?

I think what bento wishes to know is what Linux users want as far as the HL2 Linux port is concerned. All the rest is interesting, but for some POV's I am not even sure which of the 5 options they would choose and why.

Mega Man X, you simply can't state that this game is not worthy playing another time because you didn't like it. There are plenty of people who like it. And how did it manage to become number one game of 2005 if it is only "one time run-through game"? Personally, I liked HL2 very much due to its 1984 atmosphere.

Indeed I can. I'm as much entitled to dislike this game as you are to like it. I'm not saying either that it's not worthy playing again because I did not like it. I've posted a few reasons why I don't think this game is worth replaying(despite the fact that steam and Valve and HL disgusts me): Too linear, too predictable. No replay value whatsoever (as unlockables or different endings). Come on, even cheap games as the Fantastic Four had a lot of unlockables and things/places to explore. Unlockables ranged from great interviews with Stan Lee up to 2 unlockable levels. HL2 did not even had a multiplayer when it came out. Graphically speaking, I was ratter unimpressed with HL2 as well. The facial muscles for NPC were great. However, the body of every character had the exact same build, except for the "main" NPC as Alyx and Barney. The textures were cheap and stuttering is still a problem for most players. The only thing I could applaude was the water reflection, but that has been done before.

I also would have appreciated if you had been more descriptive telling me where I was wrong. Just saying that it's worthy playing because of the 1984 feeling didn't say much. I still don't understand what you mean. 1984? A lot of things happened in 1984:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984

Still, my biggest problem with HL2 is Steam. Having to ask Valve to "authorize" me to play a game that I've paid retail price for is also a pain. When a company starts to hurt the paying costumers to protect their software at the cost of my privacy, something went wrong and they don't realize that. A few days before the official release of HL2 there were copies of the game flying the net as torrents and fully operational.

And best game of the year titles mean nothing. It's a known fact that a lot of websites give good reviews to game so the game publishers can put their names/sites on the retail box. Gamespot started that way and today is considered even a respected source of reviews for games.

Get a better game as Doom 3 or Quake 4. It uses a real API (OpenGL) and the company behind those state-of-art games respect the few Linux users out there releasing the source as GLP when the engine gets relatively old. There's also Bioware and Atari that release games for Linux once in a while...

I didn't vote. My choice would be: I couldn't care less about where Valve ports (or not) their games. I can't stand their policies and find their games to be highly over-rated.

You make an excellent point. We need a new option for the vote. The choices would be:

1. Don't play games
2. I play games but have no interest in HL2
3. Play my games on Windows and wouldn't bother with Linux
4. Sure, if we get all the features from Windows I would use it
5. Cedega works fine for me
6. Use Cedega, but would rather use a native version

You would choose number [2] then, right?

This option would be very interesting, because while HL2 is the 2005 GOTY it is not necessarily
GOTY for Linux gamers.

Perhaps bento can add this new option, declare a fault with the voting so far, reset all votes and open the thread for new votes.

I talked about this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four
It's a matter of choice. Personally, I didn't like Doom 3 at all. I found it stupid to crawl in the dark through all the game with only a torch (which was nearly useless) in your hand in order to see smth. Somehow it was impossible to have both the torch and the gun so you had to decide what is better (to be dead or not to see). Shooting around and around in the dark wasn't really interesting. As of Quake 4, I haven't played it so I can't comment this game. Talking about open source, GPL'ed source does not show quality of the game. Of course, I respect ID software for this but it doesn't make quake any better.

BTW, if you had played Lost Coast, you would have seen what the real HL2 graphics are.