The Case For Linux Gaming - Darker Nemesis

The Case For Linux Gaming
July 31, 2008 2:08pm in gaming

The Linux Operating System has recently been gaining ground even for those who aren't exactly, how should we say it...tech saavy. One of the things that Linux lacks and can prevent people from moving over entirely, including myself are computer games. Yes the consoles have started to put PC gaming seemingly in the background, but there are still many who swear by gaming with the keyboard and mouse. Wine, the popular Linux software that allows you to run Windows apps under Linux, including games has improved tremendously lately, but it still doesn't do a good enough jobs for enough games to truly allow for it to be a 100% go-to option. It's compatibility list is growing but still not where it needs to be to make Linux a truly viable platform. There are some games that are built for Linux and allow a native install like Unreal Tournament 2004 and Quake 3, but the few games that can hardly be counted as the norm.

The Case For:

Unreal Tournament 2004, Quake 3, and others have shown that popular 3D games can be built to natively run under the Linux OS.
Linux has become more of a truly viable platform for the PC in both laptops and desktop computers.
The OpenGL libraries are already in place in most Linux desktop environments so 3D games are entirely possible without having to build everything from scratch.
There are plenty of proven cases where proprietary software can be natively installed on Linux without divulging the source code, so game makers don't have to worry about their source code being released.

The Case Against:

Linux, while it has gained ground in marketshare, still only makes up a small percentage of the PC Operating System market making it less appealing for game developers to build on while selling enough to make up for the cost of development.
There is no central graphics interface, like DirectX to allow for a uniform utilization of the graphical power of computers.
Piracy has hurt the PC gaming industry and to put funds into developing for another platform that already doesn't match the marketshare of Windows may not seem cost-efficient for companies to put money into.

What Needs to Be Done:

The development of a central platform like DirectX, only for Linux should be developed. Creating it will allow for a central library for developers to use to make the development of games easier for the game developers.
Word needs to get out more on Linux, to show companies that Linux can indeed be a viable platform for game companies to develop software and games for.

To say that we will start seeing games being developed for Linux tomorrow is of course wishful thinking, but the possibility and plausibility of introducing a new platform to the mix should not be taken lightly. If Linux continues to gain marketshare and catches the attention of say companies like EA or Activision, then maybe other companies will start to really consider developing even just part of their library for Linux. Maybe even Indie game companies looking into Linux development might have an effect too. I may be overly hopeful and overly naive in hoping for this, but as someone who wants to ditch Windows entirely, but still wants to play the occasional PC game, bringing more games to the Linux platform will help me wipe Windows for the last time.

Tags: linux, opensource, tech

Comments (3)

Calinazaret on July 31, 2008 7:09pm

"for those who aren't exactly, how should we say it...tech saavy."

Oh, you must mean dummies like me! Well, yes. This is true.

Also, I'm not sure if there's any way to totally get rid of Microsoft. It's kind of like AIDS.

GBGames on August 04, 2008 11:40pm

While there isn't an official DirectX, OpenGL + libSDL is pretty close. If libSDL isn't to your liking, there are other libraries such as Allegro, and there are always the X11 dev libraries. But maybe the fact that there are so many options makes it difficult to decide which one to use? I think it is probably as simple as picking one and going with it.


Chris on August 19, 2008 8:33pm "There is no central graphics interface, like DirectX to allow for a uniform utilization of the graphical power of computers." Though you just said a few lines above that: "The OpenGL libraries are already in place in most Linux desktop environments so 3D games are entirely possible without having to build everything from scratch." OpenGL is very much just as capable for "uniform utilization of the graphical power of computers" as Direct3D, especially if you aim for specific vendors and the extensions they provide (as most developers do). In some cases, OpenGL is even superior to D3D (OpenGL has built-in stereo rendering, for example.. D3D9 is lacking it; OpenGL also allows you to access D3D10 features, on capable hardware, without needing Vista). The non-graphical components of DirectX also has suitable equivilants.. For DirectSound3D, there's OpenAL (which funny enough is gaining ground in Windows because Vista killed DSound acceleration).. for DirectInput, you can use X11 directly or something such as SDL or OIS).. Miles Sound System and Bink, which are used quite a bit in Windows apps, are available on Linux, as is FMOD (however non-free they may be).. in place of Havok, we have Bullet, and it's possible PhysX support may come (nVidia owns PhysX, accelerates it on GF8 cards, and is rather friendly towards Linux). As a bonus, most of this stuff (OpenGL, OpenAL, Bullet, SDL, etc) is cross-platform. So they can be used on Windows as-is, and get Linux and OSX for very little change. So really all that needs to be done is to "show companies that Linux can indeed be a viable platform for game companies to develop software and games for" and make money from.

Post a Comment

	Home Blog Photos Podcast DN Media