One Year Later There's No UT3 Client For Linux

[oldkawman]

Copyrights and middleware was what Ryan said. A middleware company, one of the copyright holders listed on the startup screen, is the problem. No clue which one it is. But, Ryan and UT3 cannot use copyright stuff without that companies permission and they are not giving it. There have been no details since that initial leak that I am aware of.

The mailing list is a waste. Just a bunch of BS. I think I will unsubscribe.

I wonder if we will ever get the real scoop on this?

 

[JaFO]

Is there any Gamespy-client/compatible game for Linux ?
It's either that or PhysX ... which when considering that it relies on patented/copyrighted drivers wouldn't be that odd, unless PhysX-drivers have been released for (one of the million) Linux-flavours available.

And what about Steam ? Another possible Windows-only feature that may make it difficult to port a game to Linux for various copyright/patented male bovine excrement.

 

[GreatEmerald]

Well, all Unreals used GameSpy servers for Master Servers, although UT3 might be more affiliated with GameSpy.
By the way, I guess that notice you see just as you launch UT3 might give us some more options...

 

[Alhanalem]

Can you run UT3 through Wine, as much as that would blow?

 

[Dark Pulse]

Can you run UT3 through Wine, as much as that would blow?

I don't think Wine has PS2.0 and 3.0 tech, which is what UT3 would really need.

 

[-Jes-]

I know I'm quoting a long gone post, but still..

And why? Everyone basically has x86_64 PCs and software. And UT3 is something that really needs performance boost!

Everyone?
Let's see Steam's Jan '09 survey, shall we:

Windows XP 32 bit (-1.79%) 65.39%
Windows Vista 32 bit (+0.55%) 24.47%
Windows Vista 64 bit (+1.26%) 8.79%
Windows 2003 64 bit (0.00%) 0.76%
Windows 2000 (-0.02%) 0.26%
Windows XP 64 bit (0.00%) 0.25%
Other (+0.01%) 0.09%

Again, everyone?!

. . .

As for Wine support, I know UT3 can run WITHOUT* PShader3, though it'd probably not run well in any form. Without PShader2, however.. That's a VERY long stretch.

*my old tower's fx5900 can run it, though at lowest of low with 50% screen size and it STILL gets 10fps tops.

 

[GreatEmerald]

Wine has some bugs, unfortunately... The worst Unreal Engine bug is that you can rotate your view only while your pointer is on the screen, thus creating a "box rotation" effect - you can rotate only 360 degrees to the same side, not more... And as it's an emulator, it uses more resources for emulating than a native program would.

Jes, OK, I'll change "everyone" to "everyone that knows that dual core PCs are meant to be on x64 systems".

 

[shoptroll]

Windows XP 32 bit (-1.79%) 65.39%
Windows Vista 32 bit (+0.55%) 24.47%
Windows Vista 64 bit (+1.26%) 8.79%
Windows 2003 64 bit (0.00%) 0.76%
Windows 2000 (-0.02%) 0.26%
Windows XP 64 bit (0.00%) 0.25%
Other (+0.01%) 0.09%

Again, everyone?!

32-bit OSes run on 64-bit CPUs. I don't think Intel or AMD has made a new 32-bit desktop processor in 4 years.

Can you even get Vista x64 via an OEM like Dell? The issue will be moot in 4 years anyways, since Windows 7 is supposed to be the last version of Windows with 32-bit binaries (Windows Server 2008 R2 is 64-bit only). The biggest problem with 64-bit windows at this point is 16-bit legacy apps and drivers for niche purposes. 64-bit drivers are available for most mainstrea hardware now.

 

[Dark Pulse]

As for Wine support, I know UT3 can run WITHOUT* PShader3, though it'd probably not run well in any form. Without PShader2, however.. That's a VERY long stretch.

*my old tower's fx5900 can run it, though at lowest of low with 50% screen size and it STILL gets 10fps tops.

That's less than a game and more of a glorified slideshow.

 

[dc]

One year later and still nobody cares about Linux as a mainstream operating system.

 

[Beelzebud (Satanas)]

One year later and still nobody cares about Linux as a mainstream operating system.

Here's the scoop, troll. If more companies would release Linux binaries, there would be a hell of a lot of interest in Linux as a mainstream OS...

If it weren't for gaming, I'd have ditched MS's crap a long time ago.

 

[dc]

Here's the scoop, troll.

If more companies would release Linux binaries, there would be a hell of a lot of interest in Linux as a mainstream OS...

Nope. The very very very large majority of people don't even know what Linux is, nevermind want to/have the knowledge to deal with setting it up and getting it to work properly with all of their hardware.

 

[JohnDoe641]

crampiel the troll. :c

lol

 

[Phopojijo]

Nope. The very very very large majority of people don't even know what Linux is, nevermind want to/have the knowledge to deal with setting it up and getting it to work properly with all of their hardware.

Buttt the reason why THAT is true is because there's no software for the common person, therefore no need for the developers to make it more user friendly. Apple had the need, so they made BSD user-friendly... any Distro developer could do the same... but they don't because there's no need.

See, it's a cycle.

 

[dc]

Buttt the reason why THAT is true is because there's no software for the common person, therefore no need for the developers to make it more user friendly.

I don't think that's entirely true. Linux devs WANT the OS to go mainstream (Look at Ubuntu+Dell) and are making a lot of progress in making the OS itself more user friendly, but it still isn't there yet. It will take a long time.

 

[GreatEmerald]

If there were more people interested in Linux, there would be more companies interested in Linux, there would be more support for Linux and thus even more people interested in Linux. As you can see, it's also a cycle. But I have to say that it's really getting better and sooner or later Linux will overwhelm Windows. Already Wine can emulate pretty much any program you have. Next year the emulation will probably be so advanced that there will be no point in having Windows.
Personally last year I barely used Linux at all because only a few programs (and especially games) were compatible, there was also no support for NTFS file systems etc. And nowadays I basically spend an equal amount of time in both OSs (both x64 by the way). Some programs that were created for Windows run even better on Linux (which I'm using ATM by the way), for example, Heroes of Might and Magic IV. On Windows, the maximum resolution it can get is 1024x768, while on Linux I can get up to 1280x1024 (my screen resolution is 1680x1050, so on Windows it thinks it won't fit because of the window borders, while on Linux Wine completely ignores border limitations and allows a higher resolution to be displayed).

 

[oldkawman]

Linux is just not ready for prime time. 95% of the public is totally clueless with windoze computers --> can you guess what that means for Linux?

What is Linux missing? I will use Fedora since that is what I know. Here are 2 big ones, there are more, but these are critical.
#1 - an easy to install media player that is supported by the distro and can actually play popular media. All those ones like totem are just bad jokes.
#2 - wifi that does not require a computer science degree and a team of network engineers to make work on a desktop computer.

It does not matter if it's free, secure, stable, has all types of free software included like OpenOffice, GIMP, GQView, Project Management, etc. It also does not matter that the latest releases can encrypt your file system to protect all your info.

Most people still think Linux means the command line and typing long cryptic commands and that X windows is some scifi movie with special ability mutants.

 

[Raynor.Z]

...

Most people still think Linux means the command line and typing long cryptic commands and that X windows is some scifi movie with special ability mutants.

And very big chance is that you are gonna do that since there's always some things that won't work otherwise

 

[oldkawman]

And very big chance is that you are gonna do that since there's always some things that won't work otherwise

Yes, there are always reasons to use a terminal. I always have to edit certain files, for example;
fstab - for mounting hard drives automatically of to a specific configuration
inittab - for booting to a command line vs X to install or update nvidia driver
xorg.conf - for advanved stuff like to setup dual monitors, twinview, monitor specific resolutions and frequencies
ssh_conf - to make ssh work right you need to make Forward_agent and Forward_X11 be set to yes on fedora for some reason

Then there are other things like the JRE plugin (java), mplayer, nvidia drivers, and others that do not have an automatic or clean install process.

It's easier than it was, but not easy enough for the general public..

 

[GreatEmerald]

What is Linux missing? I will use Fedora since that is what I know. Here are 2 big ones, there are more, but these are critical.
#1 - an easy to install media player that is supported by the distro and can actually play popular media. All those ones like totem are just bad jokes.
#2 - wifi that does not require a computer science degree and a team of network engineers to make work on a desktop computer.

1: Amarok + VLC Player. Amarok is already a lot smarter than WMP, and VLC has more options.
2: Not sure about wireless, but wired internet works really well in OpenSUSE. I mean, we had internet that went through a modem into the PC, OpenSUSE enabled it out of the box. Then we got a router, spent 2 days trying to configure it on Windows, and in Linux it got detected automatically again! And now we have optical cable internet without a modem, and again Linux had no problems with it.

As for the terminal, yes, you need it sometimes, but really rarely. Taking your example: to edit all those files, you could just open Konqueror in Super User mode through the K (in OpenSUSE - chameleon) menu, navigate to /etc and click on fstab or anything else. No terminal needed at all, but it's simply faster. And comparing Linux terminal with Windows Command Prompt, well, the Prompt is just a ludicrous copy that can do nothing at all.