ID it's much more respected company than Epic. They may lefted behind for some years now but they really respect and help the Open Source comunity. Epic never done anything. And you know what... respect and support payed back to ID. The port of Doom 3 and Quake 4 where done by the Open Source comunity they haven't payed any bills for it.
Epic and MS...
- Thread starter haramanai
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
The advancement of OpenGL stopped in 1996 and was abandoned in 1999. It was later when the OpenGL 2.0 standard came out in 2004, then in 2006 2.1.
OpenGL 3.0 API was due in 2007. Open GL used to be king, about a decade ago. Today it has a lot of catching up to do. It's got a history of very long development cycles. For something that should be constantly pressing forward as a rendering API it is very discouraging for developers that want to push for the next big thing. Nearly every game I've bought for the last 6yrs only uses D3D, long before any OS level opengl emulation layer was announced. In short, whatever API is cutting edge is the one that gets used most.
OpenGL 3.0 API was due in 2007. Open GL used to be king, about a decade ago. Today it has a lot of catching up to do. It's got a history of very long development cycles. For something that should be constantly pressing forward as a rendering API it is very discouraging for developers that want to push for the next big thing. Nearly every game I've bought for the last 6yrs only uses D3D, long before any OS level opengl emulation layer was announced. In short, whatever API is cutting edge is the one that gets used most.
Last edited:
I don't think any rational Linux users feel entitled to have a client at the same time as everyone else, since for most games we don't get a client at all. It's expected. What makes this situation galling is Epic said we would have one. I'm not pissed at Valve for no Linux client for Half Life 2. They never "tricked" me into buying it with a promise of a timely Linux client. Epic did.As I said before, a round of applause for idiot Linux Fanboys who are convinced that if a game isn't out for their system at the same time (or even the same year) as it is for an OS with far more users and a far more attractive user base, that it's a MS Conspiracy/Buyoff.
Now I'm more than happy to attribute it to stupidity instead of malice
But my point is that I am not unhappy about not having something, I am unhappy about not having something that I was told I would have. You can grasp this subtle difference I trust? Getting the game ten months after I thought I would will be nice, but is still not ideal.I know that's less a serious question than an attempted zing, but yes, [nerd]I'm actually hex booting at the moment, with two versions each of three operating systems.[/nerd] Two of those are of course Windows. As you note, it comes with being a Linux user and a gamer. I'm just annoyed that about the only game I play regularly right now that requires Windows is UT3, and nine months ago Epic was saying that wouldn't be the case for long.
Anyway, I wouldn't dismiss Linux fans of UT too quickly. UT3 hasn't been the greatest success, but being one of the few big games on Linux (someday, according to Epic) it would receive a disproportionate amount of attention from users of that operating system. If it doesn't live up to some ideal or prebuilt notion, we can't just abandon it for COD4 or Crysis or Flavor of the Week. If we had a client, the average Linux UT3 player would be slightly more attached to it than the average Windows UT3 player, and I don't see how that could be bad with the way UT3 seems to be limping along right now. A group of people thankful to have it (unlike Crysis or COD4 or Flavor of the Week) and dedicated to playing it would be a good thing.
So very true. But is a Linux user more likely to buy a console from Microsoft or one from Sony, on which they can run Linux?Godfrey.Payans said:
But you're correct. Mac users, users of less powerful machines, and even Linux users are increasingly turning to consoles for gaming. I haven't yet, as I would miss ubiquitous keyboard and mouse controls, and the ability to mod things. For me modding stuff ends up being more fun than the game half the time.*EDIT*
Just glanced under my avatar. Realized what I was posting about and where it says I'm from. Yes, I really do live in Wyoming.
Last edited:
Dark Pulse
Dolla, Dolla. Holla, Holla.
I'm not dismissing the smart fans who play UT on Linux, I'm talking the idiots who are convinced it's a "conspiracy" like that guy said. Stupid remarks like that are why I insulted him.I don't think any rational Linux users feel entitled to have a client at the same time as everyone else, since for most games we don't get a client at all. It's expected. What makes this situation galling is Epic said we would have one. I'm not pissed at Valve for no Linux client for Half Life 2. They never "tricked" me into buying it with a promise of a timely Linux client. Epic did.
Now I'm more than happy to attribute it to stupidity instead of malice
I know that's less a serious question than an attempted zing, but yes, [nerd]I'm actually hex booting at the moment, with two versions each of three operating systems.[/nerd] Two of those are of course Windows. As you note, it comes with being a Linux user and a gamer. I'm just annoyed that about the only game I play regularly right now that requires Windows is UT3, and nine months ago Epic was saying that wouldn't be the case for long.
Anyway, I wouldn't dismiss Linux fans of UT too quickly. UT3 hasn't been the greatest success, but being one of the few big games on Linux (someday, according to Epic) it would receive a disproportionate amount of attention from users of that operating system. If it doesn't live up to some ideal or prebuilt notion, we can't just abandon it for COD4 or Crysis or Flavor of the Week. If we had a client, the average Linux UT3 player would be slightly more attached to it than the average Windows UT3 player, and I don't see how that could be bad with the way UT3 seems to be limping along right now. A group of people thankful to have it (unlike Crysis or COD4 or Flavor of the Week) and dedicated to playing it would be a good thing.
They are still working on it, but Ryan Gordon is only one man, and who knows how long it will take... probably a lot longer than Epic would like. I think a great deal of the problem is that UE3 is very, very intensive on CPUs and Videocards, and basically they have to convert what's probably ****tons of D3D code into OpenGL - and that can't be an easy task by any stretch of the imagination. Right now, there's no OpenGL renderer, it's strictly D3D9, and that's going to take quite some time for one person and one person alone to translate and get working even remotely good.
Believe me, I don't dismiss the Linux fans one bit. I just can't stand the elitists who think MS is the plague, and Epic "sold out" like that guy implied. Trust me, if Linux became the dominant OS overnight, people would be hacking it like no tomorrow. It's not better, it's not safer, it's not more secure... and if it is, it's through obscurity, not better design. Every OS does things different, and they all have strengths and weaknesses. No OS is exempt from this, and yet guys like him have this "Holier-than-thou" attitude because they use Linux and it really pisses me off.
To be dead honest, if Linux were a better platform for gaming, I'd drop it in a heartbeat myself. But the fact of the matter is, Linux is a catch-22 right now - to grow, it needs more developers to make stuff for it, but for developers to make stuff for it, they need to justify the cost with a userbase. Now, a lot more things are being made workable on Linux, and that's good, but right now and for the foreseeable future, Windows will still be the OS of choice, so you basically have three options:
1) Set the systems to Dual Boot. This way, you have Linux for most of your stuff, and can run Windows only for Windows-only apps and/or games that aren't supported natively in Linux.
2) Stick with Linux, and wait patiently, while keeping fully in mind some games will likely never have a Linux port.
3) Go back to Windows.
Again, I don't hate on the Linux fans, not at all. It's just that guys like him really set a bad example, and they do a good job of spreading the misconception that all Linux users are elitist, whining snobs who complain and yell conspiracy/sellout the second a game of theirs doesn't work out of the box.
Epic has said that it is under progress, but very slow progress, so just sit and wait, really, or install a minimal Windows XP partition to play the game off of. I have a fairly good feeling that it might show up in Patch 1.4 or 1.5, since now the staff that aren't working on GoW can focus exclusively on UT3 now that the 360 version is out.
(Apologies for this post being so long. It's slightly tangental and I digressed quite a bit.)
This Wikipedia article has a comparison of OpenGL to Direct 3D.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_OpenGL_and_Direct3D
One interesting thing I've seen repeated from time to time is that the PS3 uses a form of OpenGL, so as UT3 has already been released on the PS3, you'd think that some of the D3D to OpenGL conversion required for a Linux port has already been done. In fact you'd think that a lot of the analysis required to get off other MS components (input, audio, etc.) has been done as well.
Unless Epic decide to become MS-only on consoles, they must have to keep OpenGL in mind when they design each iteration of the engine, because they need it for the non-MS consoles.
Dark Pulse
Dolla, Dolla. Holla, Holla.
Where have you seen that the PS3 is OpenGL-based? I know it can SUPPORT OpenGL ES 2.0, but that doesn't necessarily mean the API is OpenGL.
That Wikipedia article mentions it, but you're right, it just says that OpenGL is available on the PS3, not that it's the default API. It does say this, though:
"With the exception of Windows and the Xbox, all operating systems that allow for hardware-accelerated 3D graphics utilize OpenGL as their primary 3D graphics API."
Searching the pipes with Google brings up a lot of articles that mention it, and some narrow the API down to a modified version of OpenGL ES 1.0.
Looks like it is
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archives/2006/01/27/possession_and_the_art_of_ps3_programming.html
http://ps3dev.info/content/view/12/26/
The UE page wiki also attests OGL use for PS3.
Why would Epic hire Icculus to do that when UE has always had OGL? They would have done it themselves. Icculus was hired to port the game to the linux platform, not do engine work
Yes. When it came out in 2004 it looked pretty good.
OpenGL is much easier to work with as a programmer. The nature of it being oss makes it so. The incredibly large time (years) between updating the API to optimize and add new features is what is causing more devs to choose D3D.
Fact is unless you have a programmer capable of dividing by zero w/o destroying the universe (Carmack), OpenGL is not going to be your first choice if you want the game to look the best it can.
Dark Pulse
Dolla, Dolla. Holla, Holla.
Throw in the fact that D3D is the Windows API of choice and it's rather a no-brainer.
For all we know, the PS3 version of UT3 could simply be running in a translation mode with rendering hacked to map the D3D calls to OpenGL ones. It doesn't look as crisp or good as the PC one, for sure.
Ok we may have to wait and see the new engine by Carmack. If even this one is not going to run under Linux then the Vista no OpenGL plan can be marked as successful.
I abandoned windows from my PC before 3 years. The reason I bought PS3 is for gaming. I bought Unreal for PS3 only cause it suports user generated content and that it was going to be a Linux editor and client.
I abandoned windows from my PC before 3 years. The reason I bought PS3 is for gaming. I bought Unreal for PS3 only cause it suports user generated content and that it was going to be a Linux editor and client.
It sounds like new hardware features are available quickly with OpenGL, but only through extensions that take a long time to standardise, so developers wind up having to code differently for each version of an extension.
In theory both APIs should be capable of getting the same results out of the hardware, with differences coming down to the vendor's driver.
Carmack is a classic case of a person that can be respected for their principles as well as for their technical accomplishments or their money-making skills.
Codetechnical Linux is waaaay better, and safer. Just for the record: we do not need to restart our computer when we install something. We don't have the some awesome registry system that makes the OS go slow after using the computer more then 36 hours. We have a system that respects permissions on files and folders which is one of the reasons it DOES make it way more safe.
[sarcasm]Oh no wait, I was kidding. Your right: On the German hackers conference challenge Windows Vista was hacked* in 30 minutes, which is awesome, compared to the 90 minutes of OSX and the still standing Linux after one day...[/sarcasm]
Spread the lies somewhere else plz.
*by hacked was meant acces to the users personal files
Last edited:
but we do find it necessary to recite this at any given opportunity even if it reflects poorly in that "if I say it enough I'll believe it one day" way. Zealotry is lost here, especially on a subject everyone knows. While we're at it let's start a campaign for raising the awareness of the benefits of dihydrogen oxide.
I prefer zealot elitist prick, over a lie thank you.but we do find it necessary to recite this at any given opportunity even if it reflects poorly in that "if I say it enough I'll believe it one day" way. Zealotry is lost here, especially on a subject everyone knows. While we're at it let's start a campaign for raising the awareness of the benefits of dihydrogen oxide.
I really don't care if you want to use Windows. And there are a lot of viable reasons to use it. Just don't lie a reason up for yourself. A lot of people have worked really hard and with passion to get it as far as it is now. Most of the Linux crowd is also passionate about it (like me). It is indeed true that it usually ends up in a lot of MS bashing, and I also don't agree with the statements of Mangopork. If we don't try to remain objective and respectful to each other this isn't going to get any better. So please if you do want to bash Linux or Windows, do it at least in a respectable way.
Last edited:
Make a search with google : epic unreal microsoft . Enter the first site from the search with the title : Boycott Novell » Speculation: Is Microsoft Causing Epic’s Unreal ...
This is the reason I begun this thread. Thoses are rumors but... anyway it's agood read.
This is the reason I begun this thread. Thoses are rumors but... anyway it's agood read.
Not really. One person speculated that Microsoft could buy Epic, which lead to a bunch of other people writing articles about it.
It's really very simple. Linux just doesn't yet have the market share for Epic to dedicate a large amount of resources to it. Both Ryan Gordon and others at Epic have confirmed multiple times that they are still working on it.
Of course, much of the recent bashing of MS is based on Vista, mainly because it tried to address some of these weaknesses.
Dark Pulse is wrong (who would have guessed), but you aren't right either.
It's really very simple. Linux just doesn't yet have the market share for Epic to dedicate a large amount of resources to it. Both Ryan Gordon and others at Epic have confirmed multiple times that they are still working on it.
If you are going to accuse someone of spreading lies, it helps to not do so yourself. No decent software in Windows has required a system restart for quite some time. There are plenty of problems with the registry, but slowdowns after 36 hours isn't one of them. Uptime for Windows 2000 or XP can easily be months if you don't want to update your drivers. And Windows can enforce ACLs on files just fine, with more control than Linux has by default. That users are all administrators by default on XP is a separate issue.
Of course, much of the recent bashing of MS is based on Vista, mainly because it tried to address some of these weaknesses.
Dark Pulse is wrong (who would have guessed), but you aren't right either.
Last edited: