One Year Later There's No UT3 Client For Linux
- Thread starter GreatEmerald
- 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.
Obviously developing for a different OS or platform ain't that easy or else they would have done it already. It took weeks and months to prepare it for PS3 and X360. Time they could have spent on gameplay and content instead. Apparently they have been working on the Linux port forever by now and still nothing. That ain't time well spent.
Last edited:
I played UT2K4 exclusively on Linux, starting with RH 8 and continuing up until FC6 when UT3 came out. I was always able to play online with everyone. It was the same exact everything, GUI and all.
If you read the other posts in this forum thread, you can piece together what has happened to date. The holdup was not something they expected. One of the middle ware vendors refused to license their code for Linux and MAC use. So, a work around had to be used to avoid any legal problems. That is what is taking so long. Again, one person is doing both ports as well as other projects at the same time, so it was going to take a while from the onset. It's really only one person doing the port, icculus, and not epic at all.
Dark Pulse
Dolla, Dolla. Holla, Holla.
UT1 was made by Loki, and they've been out of business for nearly a decade.
2k4 was also done by icculus.
2k4 was also done by icculus.
The actual culprit is TOP SECRET and EPIC et al, are not talking. It's very likely microsoft, through an outside agent, is pulling the strings. It's very likely they, microsoft, had this planned from the beginning and made sure the contracts/licenses had all the correct language to make it happen exactly this way. Industrial sabotage.
We know it's not PhysX or GameSPY. The PhysX was/is free, but the cards that run it are not. Free because they want game developers to use it, which means users/gamers buy the cards. First the Ageia PhysX cards and now the nvidia cards. GameSPY has nothing to do with the game code, it's just the login and master server stuff. It must be something the client requires, but not the server. Something very integral to the game.
Dark Pulse
Dolla, Dolla. Holla, Holla.
It wouldn't be DirectX. The PS3 runs more or less on OpenGL, and obviously there's a PS3 version of UT3.
It's .NET.
In case you've not noticed, UT3 requires components of the .NET framework
At least I'm sure it does.
This was back when icculus worked with Loki, so it was probably made by both or either of them.
Nothing is ever "free", there is always a cost or price paid at some level. The cost paid by society for protecting and defending a monopoly like microsoft is of course a matter of debate. Modern Economics teaches that Monopolies are not good for free markets and capitalism, they are Fascist in nature. When there is no competition, no prize to win, and no reason to make the better mouse trap, then your stuck with what the monopoly delivers, good and bad.
I had no clue what .NET was, so I looked it up and found this interesting bit of info in Wikpedia;
"While Microsoft and their partners hold patents for the CLI and C#, ECMA and ISO require that all patents essential to implementation be made available under "reasonable and non-discriminatory terms". In addition to meeting these terms, the companies have agreed to make the patents available royalty-free.
However, this does not apply for the part of the .NET Framework which is not covered by the ECMA/ISO standard, which includes Windows Forms, ADO.NET, and ASP.NET. Patents that Microsoft holds in these areas may deter non-Microsoft implementations of the full framework."
Actually, I have no clue to exactly what all that that means, but the last sentence does give the bottom line.
The entire Wikpedia article is here,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.NET_Framework
This is really smart. You won't be able to port anything using .NET to Linux or any other OS unless you have the actual source code for the application. Epic won't give that away, ever, so basically you are completely stuck.
I was joking about buying Microsoft, as in buying a company, but you should have figured that out somehow since Microsoft ain't selling.
I was joking about buying Microsoft, as in buying a company, but you should have figured that out somehow since Microsoft ain't selling.
Last edited:
Are you saying that I should be against monopolies like Microsoft because _you_ can't use Linux?
Sure Adobe and Microsoft applications cost a lot if you actually buy their stuff...
Maybe the time has come once again to force Microsoft to release source codes for vital frameworks, like .NET this time around?
Sure Adobe and Microsoft applications cost a lot if you actually buy their stuff...
Maybe the time has come once again to force Microsoft to release source codes for vital frameworks, like .NET this time around?
Last edited:
I agree, a totally brilliant way of preventing anyone from playing unless they want them to. You know, if the microsoft guys were running ENRON, it would never have failed, it would be the largest and most powerfull energy company on the planet. The state of California would have collapsed into anarchy and 3rd world poverty, due to the artificial energy shortages, brown outs, and price manipulation. All gas and oil companies would now be owned by ENRON and Iraq would be selling the US record amounts of oil for pennies on the dollar. Dick Cheney would likely be president and only those persons who get paychecks would pay taxes.
Neither of these exist on the PS3, do they? That might be why people were suspecting it had something to do with Gamespy. What else would have to be in a Linux version that isn't required on the PS3?
There is always an obvious danger with monopolies. Windows is clearly the most sophisticated technology ever invented and accepted by the majority. So far we have been relying on Microsoft to deliver functional solutions and we have received such at a price. Alternatives are quite satisfying also. Can we rely on Microsoft to keep the evolution going? Do we need better operative systems and applications or is faster hardware enough?
Porting UT3 to Linux should be easy. There should be substitutes for each and every single component. Software restrictions like the ones speculated above should not even be legal.
Of course, we will never see Adobe or Microsoft develop anything substantial for Linux, just the regular viewer applications, effectively pulling people back to Windows.
Windows is nearly impossible to mimic with all it's different components, extensions, libraries, protocols, etc. Them not being open source and available in other operative systems proves to be a huge disadvantage for non-mainstream operative systems. This is rarely hardware related, mostly just a way to force users to work with Windows, basically servers as the foundation of the Microsoft and other propertarian companies cartel.
The only way for something like this to stand is the lack of plagiarism due to the wast abuse of copyrighted material. This cartel is still alive and making money because of the many illegal warez consumers that keep second grade open source solutions way behind. If software weren't that easy to reproduce identically and fully functional there would be more and cheaper alternatives.
Porting UT3 to Linux should be easy. There should be substitutes for each and every single component. Software restrictions like the ones speculated above should not even be legal.
Of course, we will never see Adobe or Microsoft develop anything substantial for Linux, just the regular viewer applications, effectively pulling people back to Windows.
Windows is nearly impossible to mimic with all it's different components, extensions, libraries, protocols, etc. Them not being open source and available in other operative systems proves to be a huge disadvantage for non-mainstream operative systems. This is rarely hardware related, mostly just a way to force users to work with Windows, basically servers as the foundation of the Microsoft and other propertarian companies cartel.
The only way for something like this to stand is the lack of plagiarism due to the wast abuse of copyrighted material. This cartel is still alive and making money because of the many illegal warez consumers that keep second grade open source solutions way behind. If software weren't that easy to reproduce identically and fully functional there would be more and cheaper alternatives.