Good news, if this goes in this trend we might see a new rise in Linux and we will be having to pay $100 less for our new computers with having free operating systems that are more efficient then Windows or Macs. If some of the Linux developers are able to smooth out the experience for less tech savy people, we might see windows slide from its throne if they keep going down a slippery slope.
Originally posted by Thebigthrill I also read that this would all but eliminate small indie developers.
Microsoft would be nothing without the software industry making all the nice little things that we like to use. I cant see them being too happy having to give MS a cut. If I was one of them, I would be quite tempted to make sure that my softare didnt work with windows 8.
Imagine if they all did
edit: they also tried to pull this crap with the Microsoft flight and it sure didnt work out well, They killed a legendary franchise for themselves.
Basicly, you know how console games cost say £45 and pc games cost about £30. If Microsoft get their way you will end up paying console prices.
Consoles are really cheap compared to pcs, because Microsoft, Sony and nintendo sell them for minimal profit, and then make the money back by taking a cut from game sales. Now this is fine with consoles, as they build the kit, but Microsoft isn't building your pc for you and selling it for minimal profit, the only bit they supply is the OS, which unlike the x box they make a tidy profit on anyway.
This is why the likes of valve are getting into supporting Linux.
Originally posted by Purutzil Good news, if this goes in this trend we might see a new rise in Linux and we will be having to pay $100 less for our new computers with having free operating systems that are more efficient then Windows or Macs. If some of the Linux developers are able to smooth out the experience for less tech savy people, we might see windows slide from its throne if they keep going down a slippery slope.
At the risk of going off topic, you know what the problem with Linux is?
They cant make up their god damn minds. There is no uniform framework for anything.
That And applications have to be built with a simple 90's mindset so the system as a whole is always 'rock solid'.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Lets hope that all of that leads to developers releasing for games on Linux, preferably without DX and with OpenGL instead. You know, OpenGL doesn't need any special drivers or APIs, as GFX-cards can interpret OpenGL natively.
Back in the days the first shooters like DOOM1 where done in OpenGL aswell, and there was no troubles porting them to Linux.
So yeah, pretty please can we have all games for Linux and in OpenGL for the future
Originally posted by Yalexy Lets hope that all of that leads to developers releasing for games on Linux, preferably without DX and with OpenGL instead. You know, OpenGL doesn't need any special drivers or APIs, as GFX-cards can interpret OpenGL natively.Back in the days the first shooters like DOOM1 where done in OpenGL aswell, and there was no troubles porting them to Linux.So yeah, pretty please can we have all games for Linux and in OpenGL for the future
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology, Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
One more issue I forgot to mention about the certification process is that besides Microsoft asking a cut of every program / game / 'app' sold through the store, the certification process includes fees.
Each time you patch a game and change code, or someone makes a mod and wants to release it, it has to be done through the store, and each time a code change happens, the developer gets another fee from Microsoft they have to pay. Currently Notch can just change the code of his game and release it, not so in the Windows 8 store, every code change has to be approved by Microsoft and has to be paid for. (it's around $500 per code change, not a lot for a big developer, but a lot for an indie, which is why Notch mentions indie developers in his complaint a few times)
The Linux angle of the discussion is interesting, Vavle has vowed to support Linux through Steam. While I didn't think Linux was ready a few years ago, I do think Linux has come a long way the last years, dependency on the terminal and drivers have improved substantially. I am currently writing this from Linux Mint, which for me is just as friendly as Windows, but I do still use Windows because of the games of course. I think Linux will benefit from both Windows 8 and Valve's support, if it's enough to convince the massses to take a jump into the unknown I don't know.
Originally posted by CalmOceans One more issue I forgot to mention about the certification process is that besides Microsoft asking a cut of every program / game / 'app' sold through the store, the certification process includes fees.Each time you patch a game and change code, or someone makes a mod and wants to release it, it has to be done through the store, and each time a code change happens, the developer gets another fee from Microsoft they have to pay. Currently Notch can just change the code of his game and release it, not so in the Windows 8 store, every code change has to be approved by Microsoft and has to be paid for. (it's around $500 per code change, not a lot for a big developer, but a lot for an indie, which is why Notch mentions indie developers in his complaint a few times)
Do you have a link to that for personal interest?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Originally posted by Yalexy Lets hope that all of that leads to developers releasing for games on Linux, preferably without DX and with OpenGL instead. You know, OpenGL doesn't need any special drivers or APIs, as GFX-cards can interpret OpenGL natively.
Back in the days the first shooters like DOOM1 where done in OpenGL aswell, and there was no troubles porting them to Linux.
So yeah, pretty please can we have all games for Linux and in OpenGL for the future
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology, Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
I know that there's no DX for Linux, that's the reason why developers should develop their games based on OpenGL, which is open source and integrated in any GFX-card driver allready.
And before you say anything... Yes OpenGL has basically all the features DX is offering.
Originally posted by Yalexy Lets hope that all of that leads to developers releasing for games on Linux, preferably without DX and with OpenGL instead. You know, OpenGL doesn't need any special drivers or APIs, as GFX-cards can interpret OpenGL natively.
Back in the days the first shooters like DOOM1 where done in OpenGL aswell, and there was no troubles porting them to Linux.
So yeah, pretty please can we have all games for Linux and in OpenGL for the future
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology, Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
I know that there's no DX for Linux, that's the reason why developers should develop their games based on OpenGL, which is open source and integrated in any GFX-card driver allready.
Your forgetting that OpenGL is just a graphics api. It does not handle anything else.
Directx handles input, output, and a multitude of other necessary functions.
To get your game or application working on linux you will need several different frameworks and api's to handle all facets of your program. Developing for linux and opengl is time consuming and a hassle thats why devs moved to directx years ago.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Originally posted by CalmOceans One more issue I forgot to mention about the certification process is that besides Microsoft asking a cut of every program / game / 'app' sold through the store, the certification process includes fees.
Each time you patch a game and change code, or someone makes a mod and wants to release it, it has to be done through the store, and each time a code change happens, the developer gets another fee from Microsoft they have to pay. Currently Notch can just change the code of his game and release it, not so in the Windows 8 store, every code change has to be approved by Microsoft and has to be paid for. (it's around $500 per code change, not a lot for a big developer, but a lot for an indie, which is why Notch mentions indie developers in his complaint a few times)
Do you have a link to that for personal interest?
Not a direct link from the top of my head. The whole process is done through the Windows software certification kit, available through an SDK, the cossts of publishing the app and the costs of updating the app have never officially been detailed by Microsoft afaik, and I believe only select developers have access to the details atm. What I do know is that the 30% number is correct unless you go over $25000 iirc, meaning if you make more than $25000 on your "app", some of the costs are lowered, but by how much is again not detailed anywhere afaik.
Originally posted by Nitth Originally posted by Yalexy Originally posted by Nitth Originally posted by Yalexy Lets hope that all of that leads to developers releasing for games on Linux, preferably without DX and with OpenGL instead. You know, OpenGL doesn't need any special drivers or APIs, as GFX-cards can interpret OpenGL natively.Back in the days the first shooters like DOOM1 where done in OpenGL aswell, and there was no troubles porting them to Linux.So yeah, pretty please can we have all games for Linux and in OpenGL for the future
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology, Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
I know that there's no DX for Linux, that's the reason why developers should develop their games based on OpenGL, which is open source and integrated in any GFX-card driver allready.
Your forgetting that OpenGL is just a graphics api. It does not handle anything else.
Directx handles input, output, and a multitude of other necessary functions.
To get your game or application working on linux you will need several different frameworks and api's to handle all facets of your program. Developing for linux and opengl is time consuming and a hassle thats why devs moved to directx years ago.
It's no more hassle to code a game based on OpenGL these days then it is for DX actually. OpenGL has made their API more userfriendly during the years aswell, and input-devices are having no issues with Linux aswell.
The only reason for why DX is more poular is because of the money and support coming from M$.
Originally posted by Enigmatus Mildly offtopic, but is Bill Gates himself a control freak? He WAS the CEO before he stepped down from full time IIRC.
Go watch the movie "Pirates of Silicon Valley". While it takes some liberties with how it all actually happened, it does portray a relatively accurate picture of the personalities of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs (aswell as Woz and Ballmer).
Originally posted by Yalexy Originally posted by Nitth Originally posted by Yalexy Originally posted by Nitth Originally posted by Yalexy Lets hope that all of that leads to developers releasing for games on Linux, preferably without DX and with OpenGL instead. You know, OpenGL doesn't need any special drivers or APIs, as GFX-cards can interpret OpenGL natively.Back in the days the first shooters like DOOM1 where done in OpenGL aswell, and there was no troubles porting them to Linux.So yeah, pretty please can we have all games for Linux and in OpenGL for the future
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology, Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
I know that there's no DX for Linux, that's the reason why developers should develop their games based on OpenGL, which is open source and integrated in any GFX-card driver allready.
Your forgetting that OpenGL is just a graphics api. It does not handle anything else.
Directx handles input, output, and a multitude of other necessary functions.
To get your game or application working on linux you will need several different frameworks and api's to handle all facets of your program. Developing for linux and opengl is time consuming and a hassle thats why devs moved to directx years ago.
It's no more hassle to code a game based on OpenGL these days then it is for DX actually. OpenGL has made their API more userfriendly during the years aswell, and input-devices are having no issues with Linux aswell.
The only reason for why DX is more poular is because of the money and support coming from M$.
Hate ti dissappoint, but at the moment DirectX is actually better than OpenGL.
The guys behind OpenGL pretty much didn't bother updating it properly and making it userfriendly for developers between 2000 and 2008 - Only recently did they start catching up again with DirectX.
They were better than DirectX, but only before DirectX 8 which came out in 2002 or so. At that point, Microsoft's very strong marketing department finally won out over the OpenGL people as far as development was involved, simply because OpenGL was slacking off a LOT. Standards were not embraced, developing for it became far more difficult and support was nearly non-existent. Against this you had DirectX which finally became pretty damn fast in it's own right, easy to develop for and it had a LOT of support from Microsoft themselves. Nvidia and Ati also started dropping OpenGL more and more around this time, leading to the current situation where Ati (now owned by AMD) has pretty much no real OpenGL support and even Nvidia, the king of OpenGL at some point, only made it a secondary concern.
Since OpenGL 4 they finally started making a comeback, but at this point DirectX 11 is simply a better API. It's easier to program for, has more support and is simply faster. OpenGL has a few years to go before it can compete at the same level again, imho (Even John Carmack, the guy who basically made OpenGL big in the 90's, said this at Quakecon this year).
While I agree that the whole Windows 8 store conundrum is a lot of BS, but the Metro UI is nothing to worry about. Microsoft is not trying to fully replace the regular desktop with Metro, which is a common misconception. In Windows 8 you have the option of using either a regular desktop UI or the Metro UI. I am sure most people will be using the regular UI primarily, and the next Windows OS will probably put very little emphasis on Metro. The only reason you are hearing so much about the Metro UI is because Microsoft is excited about creating a tablet and smartphone worthy UI. They are not trying to replace the regular UI on PCs. They just want to show it off because they just made it. I see nothing wrong with that. Metro will be great on the PC for people who are inept with computers.
Originally posted by Yalexy Originally posted by Nitth Originally posted by Yalexy Originally posted by Nitth Originally posted by Yalexy Lets hope that all of that leads to developers releasing for games on Linux, preferably without DX and with OpenGL instead. You know, OpenGL doesn't need any special drivers or APIs, as GFX-cards can interpret OpenGL natively.Back in the days the first shooters like DOOM1 where done in OpenGL aswell, and there was no troubles porting them to Linux.So yeah, pretty please can we have all games for Linux and in OpenGL for the future
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology, Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
I know that there's no DX for Linux, that's the reason why developers should develop their games based on OpenGL, which is open source and integrated in any GFX-card driver allready.
Your forgetting that OpenGL is just a graphics api. It does not handle anything else.
Directx handles input, output, and a multitude of other necessary functions.
To get your game or application working on linux you will need several different frameworks and api's to handle all facets of your program. Developing for linux and opengl is time consuming and a hassle thats why devs moved to directx years ago.
It's no more hassle to code a game based on OpenGL these days then it is for DX actually.
OpenGL has made their API more userfriendly during the years aswell, and input-devices are having no issues with Linux aswell.
The only reason for why DX is more poular is because of the money and support coming from M$.
I personally think your mistaken.
Its much easier to work with one api that does it all rather that work with many.
Which brings me what i was saying earlier, If they 'got stuff together' and developed a standard much the same as directx which handles input and output but is open sourced/Cross platform....
Then it would be a very good day for linux and its developers.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Microsoft "Futurists" often talk about the inevitable shift of operating systems to a remote-based model. To hear them wax poetic on it makes it sound like the second coming of Jesus, Buddah, and Elvis crossed with a three week supermodel orgy. I personally dread the possibilty of a cloud based OS, even without a monthly fee.
We do not yet live in a world with 100%, always-on, always reliable broadband, and the LAST thing I need is a computer that won't work if the damn 'net is down. Combine that with the recent rumblings from broadband providers about throttling or sur-charging for large useage and the whole thing will go tits up faster than Pam Anderson in a swimming pool. If I have Time Bloody Warner threatening to throttle me for playing too many MOGs, what are they going to do when I have to use bandwidth to even function?
Microsoft seems to have fogotten that you can't just magically wave your hands and conjure a broadband connection out of thin air. In the USA, we are already screwed by being forced to pay 4, 5 or even 10 times as much for a connection as people in Europe and Asia, and we get a much slower connection for our money. The infrastructure here can't seem to handle the current load on the system, is MS going to pay the billions necessary to upgrade the nation? No, they would just release a cloud-based OS and assume everythiing will work fine.
Anyway, that, to MS at least, "Holy Grail" of computing, the cloud-based OS, is a ways out if there is any justice in the world. MS thinks that this would be a great advance in computing, but I for one will resist to my dying breath any attempt to take hold of my rig so much that I don't even have control over my own OS. As far as Win 8 goes, I've seen it, I've played around with it, and it strikes me as an attempt to generate a universal OS, one that will work on desktops, laptops, tablets, and phones. I just don't think that's a practical idea. Specialized operating systems tailored to the needs of the physical platform they run on just make sense.
If MS went the the closed OS route it could be the best thing to ever happen to Linux.
I could see game developers switching to open GL and a linux based OS, as well as pachaging a copy of the OS with the games at first to get people using it. People would be pissed at first because they wouldn't understand what was going on, but as long as the instal was as simple as put the disc on the cd rom and or clck a couple of buttons after the download, I don't see them saying no to the game if that's what it takes to play it.
I don't think people put up with paying MS to play games online on the 360 because they don't mind. A lot of people I know that do actually don't like that they have to pay, but they don't want to spend money on another system that the people they game with don't have.
MS just keeps getting greedier and greedier. They seem to think that just because they have a monopoly on the PC OS market that people will tolerate it because they think they have no other option.
And if the PC gaming industry isn't big enough to get linux OS's on PC's then MS will just end up being the last nail in the coffin of PC gaming. Not like the same people making PC games aren't making console ones as well. Hell, it could result in a lot more Sony console exclusive games.
Originally posted by AvsRock21 While I agree that the whole Windows 8 store conundrum is a lot of BS, but the Metro UI is nothing to worry about. Microsoft is not trying to fully replace the regular desktop with Metro, which is a common misconception. In Windows 8 you have the option of using either a regular desktop UI or the Metro UI. I am sure most people will be using the regular UI primarily, and the next Windows OS will probably put very little emphasis on Metro. The only reason you are hearing so much about the Metro UI is because Microsoft is excited about creating a tablet and smartphone worthy UI. They are not trying to replace the regular UI on PCs. They just want to show it off because they just made it. I see nothing wrong with that. Metro will be great on the PC for people who are inept with computers.
Right.
I have tried Windows 8 (both the consumer and developer preview). Most of the desktop is still there, I do stress "most", because I disagree with people who say that Windows 8 offers the same desktop as Windows 7.
The changes are that you don't have a start button (clicking your start button ends you up in the Metro interface), and some settings which were accessible before in the desktop are not only accessible through metro (some Wi-Fi, LAN, driver settings in particular), closing your computer now happens through the "charm" bar on the right.
While Metro might look intuitive, I asked my mom to try it and she was incredibly confused, mind you, my mom is not tech savy.
Personally I will stick with Windows 7 and Linux, I have made a nice partition to have the best of 2 worlds so to say, I will weather out the storm and see what happens.
Originally posted by Uhwop If MS went the the closed OS route it could be the best thing to ever happen to Linux. I could see game developers switching to open GL and a linux based OS, as well as pachaging a copy of the OS with the games at first to get people using it. People would be pissed at first because they wouldn't understand what was going on, but as long as the instal was as simple as put the disc on the cd rom and or clck a couple of buttons after the download, I don't see them saying no to the game if that's what it takes to play it.
I would hate to develop 'installers' for the vast variations of Linux and its distributions..
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
(I forgot to mention that you also don't "boot" into the desktop in Windows 8, you can only boot into Metro, and I believe there is no way around this atm)
Originally posted by ChromeBallz Originally posted by Yalexy Originally posted by Nitth Originally posted by Yalexy Originally posted by Nitth Originally posted by Yalexy Lets hope that all of that leads to developers releasing for games on Linux, preferably without DX and with OpenGL instead. You know, OpenGL doesn't need any special drivers or APIs, as GFX-cards can interpret OpenGL natively.Back in the days the first shooters like DOOM1 where done in OpenGL aswell, and there was no troubles porting them to Linux.So yeah, pretty please can we have all games for Linux and in OpenGL for the future
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology, Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
I know that there's no DX for Linux, that's the reason why developers should develop their games based on OpenGL, which is open source and integrated in any GFX-card driver allready.
Your forgetting that OpenGL is just a graphics api. It does not handle anything else.
Directx handles input, output, and a multitude of other necessary functions.
To get your game or application working on linux you will need several different frameworks and api's to handle all facets of your program. Developing for linux and opengl is time consuming and a hassle thats why devs moved to directx years ago.
It's no more hassle to code a game based on OpenGL these days then it is for DX actually. OpenGL has made their API more userfriendly during the years aswell, and input-devices are having no issues with Linux aswell.
The only reason for why DX is more poular is because of the money and support coming from M$.
Hate ti dissappoint, but at the moment DirectX is actually better than OpenGL.
The guys behind OpenGL pretty much didn't bother updating it properly and making it userfriendly for developers between 2000 and 2008 - Only recently did they start catching up again with DirectX.
They were better than DirectX, but only before DirectX 8 which came out in 2002 or so. At that point, Microsoft's very strong marketing department finally won out over the OpenGL people as far as development was involved, simply because OpenGL was slacking off a LOT. Standards were not embraced, developing for it became far more difficult and support was nearly non-existent. Against this you had DirectX which finally became pretty damn fast in it's own right, easy to develop for and it had a LOT of support from Microsoft themselves. Nvidia and Ati also started dropping OpenGL more and more around this time, leading to the current situation where Ati (now owned by AMD) has pretty much no real OpenGL support and even Nvidia, the king of OpenGL at some point, only made it a secondary concern.
Since OpenGL 4 they finally started making a comeback, but at this point DirectX 11 is simply a better API. It's easier to program for, has more support and is simply faster. OpenGL has a few years to go before it can compete at the same level again, imho (Even John Carmack, the guy who basically made OpenGL big in the 90's, said this at Quakecon this year).
There's tons of demos showing Unigine Heaven on Linux with OpenGL4 in comparison to Windows on DX11 and OpenGL is only missing the tesselation, which can aswell be done via CUDA for example.
There's really nothing about modern games that couldn't be done without DX without loosing anything.
Sure, OpenGL needs better support, but that's all.
Comments
Microsoft would be nothing without the software industry making all the nice little things that we like to use. I cant see them being too happy having to give MS a cut. If I was one of them, I would be quite tempted to make sure that my softare didnt work with windows 8.
Imagine if they all did
edit: they also tried to pull this crap with the Microsoft flight and it sure didnt work out well, They killed a legendary franchise for themselves.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Consoles are really cheap compared to pcs, because Microsoft, Sony and nintendo sell them for minimal profit, and then make the money back by taking a cut from game sales. Now this is fine with consoles, as they build the kit, but Microsoft isn't building your pc for you and selling it for minimal profit, the only bit they supply is the OS, which unlike the x box they make a tidy profit on anyway.
This is why the likes of valve are getting into supporting Linux.
At the risk of going off topic, you know what the problem with Linux is?
They cant make up their god damn minds. There is no uniform framework for anything.
That And applications have to be built with a simple 90's mindset so the system as a whole is always 'rock solid'.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Lets hope that all of that leads to developers releasing for games on Linux, preferably without DX and with OpenGL instead. You know, OpenGL doesn't need any special drivers or APIs, as GFX-cards can interpret OpenGL natively.
Back in the days the first shooters like DOOM1 where done in OpenGL aswell, and there was no troubles porting them to Linux.
So yeah, pretty please can we have all games for Linux and in OpenGL for the future
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology,
Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
One more issue I forgot to mention about the certification process is that besides Microsoft asking a cut of every program / game / 'app' sold through the store, the certification process includes fees.
Each time you patch a game and change code, or someone makes a mod and wants to release it, it has to be done through the store, and each time a code change happens, the developer gets another fee from Microsoft they have to pay. Currently Notch can just change the code of his game and release it, not so in the Windows 8 store, every code change has to be approved by Microsoft and has to be paid for. (it's around $500 per code change, not a lot for a big developer, but a lot for an indie, which is why Notch mentions indie developers in his complaint a few times)
The Linux angle of the discussion is interesting, Vavle has vowed to support Linux through Steam. While I didn't think Linux was ready a few years ago, I do think Linux has come a long way the last years, dependency on the terminal and drivers have improved substantially. I am currently writing this from Linux Mint, which for me is just as friendly as Windows, but I do still use Windows because of the games of course. I think Linux will benefit from both Windows 8 and Valve's support, if it's enough to convince the massses to take a jump into the unknown I don't know.
Do you have a link to that for personal interest?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I know that there's no DX for Linux, that's the reason why developers should develop their games based on OpenGL, which is open source and integrated in any GFX-card driver allready.
And before you say anything... Yes OpenGL has basically all the features DX is offering.
Your forgetting that OpenGL is just a graphics api. It does not handle anything else.
Directx handles input, output, and a multitude of other necessary functions.
To get your game or application working on linux you will need several different frameworks and api's to handle all facets of your program. Developing for linux and opengl is time consuming and a hassle thats why devs moved to directx years ago.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Not a direct link from the top of my head. The whole process is done through the Windows software certification kit, available through an SDK, the cossts of publishing the app and the costs of updating the app have never officially been detailed by Microsoft afaik, and I believe only select developers have access to the details atm. What I do know is that the 30% number is correct unless you go over $25000 iirc, meaning if you make more than $25000 on your "app", some of the costs are lowered, but by how much is again not detailed anywhere afaik.
Tyvm
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology,
Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
I know that there's no DX for Linux, that's the reason why developers should develop their games based on OpenGL, which is open source and integrated in any GFX-card driver allready.
Your forgetting that OpenGL is just a graphics api. It does not handle anything else.
Directx handles input, output, and a multitude of other necessary functions.
To get your game or application working on linux you will need several different frameworks and api's to handle all facets of your program. Developing for linux and opengl is time consuming and a hassle thats why devs moved to directx years ago.
It's no more hassle to code a game based on OpenGL these days then it is for DX actually. OpenGL has made their API more userfriendly during the years aswell, and input-devices are having no issues with Linux aswell.
The only reason for why DX is more poular is because of the money and support coming from M$.
Go watch the movie "Pirates of Silicon Valley". While it takes some liberties with how it all actually happened, it does portray a relatively accurate picture of the personalities of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs (aswell as Woz and Ballmer).
Playing: WF
Played: WoW, GW2, L2, WAR, AoC, DnL (2005), GW, LotRO, EQ2, TOR, CoH (RIP), STO, TSW, TERA, EVE, ESO, BDO
Tried: EQ, UO, AO, EnB, TCoS, Fury, Ryzom, EU, DDO, TR, RF, CO, Aion, VG, DN, Vindictus, AA
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology,
Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
I know that there's no DX for Linux, that's the reason why developers should develop their games based on OpenGL, which is open source and integrated in any GFX-card driver allready.
Your forgetting that OpenGL is just a graphics api. It does not handle anything else.
Directx handles input, output, and a multitude of other necessary functions.
To get your game or application working on linux you will need several different frameworks and api's to handle all facets of your program. Developing for linux and opengl is time consuming and a hassle thats why devs moved to directx years ago.
It's no more hassle to code a game based on OpenGL these days then it is for DX actually. OpenGL has made their API more userfriendly during the years aswell, and input-devices are having no issues with Linux aswell.
The only reason for why DX is more poular is because of the money and support coming from M$.
Hate ti dissappoint, but at the moment DirectX is actually better than OpenGL.
The guys behind OpenGL pretty much didn't bother updating it properly and making it userfriendly for developers between 2000 and 2008 - Only recently did they start catching up again with DirectX.
They were better than DirectX, but only before DirectX 8 which came out in 2002 or so. At that point, Microsoft's very strong marketing department finally won out over the OpenGL people as far as development was involved, simply because OpenGL was slacking off a LOT. Standards were not embraced, developing for it became far more difficult and support was nearly non-existent. Against this you had DirectX which finally became pretty damn fast in it's own right, easy to develop for and it had a LOT of support from Microsoft themselves. Nvidia and Ati also started dropping OpenGL more and more around this time, leading to the current situation where Ati (now owned by AMD) has pretty much no real OpenGL support and even Nvidia, the king of OpenGL at some point, only made it a secondary concern.
Since OpenGL 4 they finally started making a comeback, but at this point DirectX 11 is simply a better API. It's easier to program for, has more support and is simply faster. OpenGL has a few years to go before it can compete at the same level again, imho (Even John Carmack, the guy who basically made OpenGL big in the 90's, said this at Quakecon this year).
Playing: WF
Played: WoW, GW2, L2, WAR, AoC, DnL (2005), GW, LotRO, EQ2, TOR, CoH (RIP), STO, TSW, TERA, EVE, ESO, BDO
Tried: EQ, UO, AO, EnB, TCoS, Fury, Ryzom, EU, DDO, TR, RF, CO, Aion, VG, DN, Vindictus, AA
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology,
Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
I know that there's no DX for Linux, that's the reason why developers should develop their games based on OpenGL, which is open source and integrated in any GFX-card driver allready.
Your forgetting that OpenGL is just a graphics api. It does not handle anything else.
Directx handles input, output, and a multitude of other necessary functions.
To get your game or application working on linux you will need several different frameworks and api's to handle all facets of your program. Developing for linux and opengl is time consuming and a hassle thats why devs moved to directx years ago.
It's no more hassle to code a game based on OpenGL these days then it is for DX actually.
OpenGL has made their API more userfriendly during the years aswell, and input-devices are having no issues with Linux aswell.
The only reason for why DX is more poular is because of the money and support coming from M$.
I personally think your mistaken.
Its much easier to work with one api that does it all rather that work with many.
Which brings me what i was saying earlier, If they 'got stuff together' and developed a standard much the same as directx which handles input and output but is open sourced/Cross platform....
Then it would be a very good day for linux and its developers.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Microsoft "Futurists" often talk about the inevitable shift of operating systems to a remote-based model. To hear them wax poetic on it makes it sound like the second coming of Jesus, Buddah, and Elvis crossed with a three week supermodel orgy. I personally dread the possibilty of a cloud based OS, even without a monthly fee.
We do not yet live in a world with 100%, always-on, always reliable broadband, and the LAST thing I need is a computer that won't work if the damn 'net is down. Combine that with the recent rumblings from broadband providers about throttling or sur-charging for large useage and the whole thing will go tits up faster than Pam Anderson in a swimming pool. If I have Time Bloody Warner threatening to throttle me for playing too many MOGs, what are they going to do when I have to use bandwidth to even function?
Microsoft seems to have fogotten that you can't just magically wave your hands and conjure a broadband connection out of thin air. In the USA, we are already screwed by being forced to pay 4, 5 or even 10 times as much for a connection as people in Europe and Asia, and we get a much slower connection for our money. The infrastructure here can't seem to handle the current load on the system, is MS going to pay the billions necessary to upgrade the nation? No, they would just release a cloud-based OS and assume everythiing will work fine.
Anyway, that, to MS at least, "Holy Grail" of computing, the cloud-based OS, is a ways out if there is any justice in the world. MS thinks that this would be a great advance in computing, but I for one will resist to my dying breath any attempt to take hold of my rig so much that I don't even have control over my own OS. As far as Win 8 goes, I've seen it, I've played around with it, and it strikes me as an attempt to generate a universal OS, one that will work on desktops, laptops, tablets, and phones. I just don't think that's a practical idea. Specialized operating systems tailored to the needs of the physical platform they run on just make sense.
If MS went the the closed OS route it could be the best thing to ever happen to Linux.
I could see game developers switching to open GL and a linux based OS, as well as pachaging a copy of the OS with the games at first to get people using it. People would be pissed at first because they wouldn't understand what was going on, but as long as the instal was as simple as put the disc on the cd rom and or clck a couple of buttons after the download, I don't see them saying no to the game if that's what it takes to play it.
I don't think people put up with paying MS to play games online on the 360 because they don't mind. A lot of people I know that do actually don't like that they have to pay, but they don't want to spend money on another system that the people they game with don't have.
MS just keeps getting greedier and greedier. They seem to think that just because they have a monopoly on the PC OS market that people will tolerate it because they think they have no other option.
And if the PC gaming industry isn't big enough to get linux OS's on PC's then MS will just end up being the last nail in the coffin of PC gaming. Not like the same people making PC games aren't making console ones as well. Hell, it could result in a lot more Sony console exclusive games.
Right.
I have tried Windows 8 (both the consumer and developer preview). Most of the desktop is still there, I do stress "most", because I disagree with people who say that Windows 8 offers the same desktop as Windows 7.
The changes are that you don't have a start button (clicking your start button ends you up in the Metro interface), and some settings which were accessible before in the desktop are not only accessible through metro (some Wi-Fi, LAN, driver settings in particular), closing your computer now happens through the "charm" bar on the right.
While Metro might look intuitive, I asked my mom to try it and she was incredibly confused, mind you, my mom is not tech savy.
Personally I will stick with Windows 7 and Linux, I have made a nice partition to have the best of 2 worlds so to say, I will weather out the storm and see what happens.
I would hate to develop 'installers' for the vast variations of Linux and its distributions..
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
There is no directx for linux as its a Microsoft technology,
Opengl doesn't need anything hey? Yeah that not true.
I know that there's no DX for Linux, that's the reason why developers should develop their games based on OpenGL, which is open source and integrated in any GFX-card driver allready.
Your forgetting that OpenGL is just a graphics api. It does not handle anything else.
Directx handles input, output, and a multitude of other necessary functions.
To get your game or application working on linux you will need several different frameworks and api's to handle all facets of your program. Developing for linux and opengl is time consuming and a hassle thats why devs moved to directx years ago.
It's no more hassle to code a game based on OpenGL these days then it is for DX actually. OpenGL has made their API more userfriendly during the years aswell, and input-devices are having no issues with Linux aswell.
The only reason for why DX is more poular is because of the money and support coming from M$.
Hate ti dissappoint, but at the moment DirectX is actually better than OpenGL.
The guys behind OpenGL pretty much didn't bother updating it properly and making it userfriendly for developers between 2000 and 2008 - Only recently did they start catching up again with DirectX.
They were better than DirectX, but only before DirectX 8 which came out in 2002 or so. At that point, Microsoft's very strong marketing department finally won out over the OpenGL people as far as development was involved, simply because OpenGL was slacking off a LOT. Standards were not embraced, developing for it became far more difficult and support was nearly non-existent. Against this you had DirectX which finally became pretty damn fast in it's own right, easy to develop for and it had a LOT of support from Microsoft themselves. Nvidia and Ati also started dropping OpenGL more and more around this time, leading to the current situation where Ati (now owned by AMD) has pretty much no real OpenGL support and even Nvidia, the king of OpenGL at some point, only made it a secondary concern.
Since OpenGL 4 they finally started making a comeback, but at this point DirectX 11 is simply a better API. It's easier to program for, has more support and is simply faster. OpenGL has a few years to go before it can compete at the same level again, imho (Even John Carmack, the guy who basically made OpenGL big in the 90's, said this at Quakecon this year).
There's tons of demos showing Unigine Heaven on Linux with OpenGL4 in comparison to Windows on DX11 and OpenGL is only missing the tesselation, which can aswell be done via CUDA for example.
There's really nothing about modern games that couldn't be done without DX without loosing anything.
Sure, OpenGL needs better support, but that's all.