One Year Later There's No UT3 Client For Linux

[GreatEmerald]

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.

True, but what we will see is Novell or the GIMP team developing a lot of substantial software for Linux, effectively pulling people to Linux. The curse of Linux is the never-ending wheel: not enough people use Linux because there aren't enough applications for it, companies won't make enough applications for Linux because there aren't enough people using Linux. Though this will be eventually countered by actually making enough applications through hard work, emulation and other means. And there should also be software that would be made especially for Linux and that Windows users wouldn't have access to. Actually, there already are a few programs like that (I really wish I had KPDF and the latest beta of SuperTux here), but not enough...

Yeap, it's hard to recreate it, but you don't really need to. I'm surprised why Epic used .NET and stuff like that, I mean, Unreal, UT, etc. are all very easily ported to Linux as they were made OS-independent. I'm sure we would also be able to port Unreal II to Linux if only we had the headers.

This also reminds me of what Microsoft did to their Office: create the new strange .***x format, just to make it harder for alternatives such as OpenOffice to decrypt them. And what happened? After a few months OpenOffice could open them without any difficulty whatsoever, while people with old Offices had to download an add-on so they could read those new types and waste their time. So in the end Microsoft accomplished nothing but frustration of their clients...

 

[oldkawman]

Maybe because XBOX requires the .NET framework (according to what I have read)

 

[Fuzz]

Epic produced Gears of War with Microsoft wheb their new UE3 engine was developed. Of course Microsoft had .NET included in some way in the finalized product. The same code was used as a base for UT3. Maybe Microsoft earn royalties for every UE3 license sold?

 

[Sir_Brizz]

The reason people don't use Linux has little to do with professional application support. It doesn't really matter what Novell or GIMP do, they will never produce something that people will want to move to Linux for, and that is a fact.

I think most gamers would prefer Linux to Windows simply because the OS is freely available and open to installation on multiple machines. The fact that games don't work, or have terrible support if they do work, on Linux puts off almost the entire market that Linux aims for, which is a sad tale. PC gamers by nature are tweakers and hackers, something Linux is well suited to, but they can't get nearly any of that market share.

 

[Dark Pulse]

I think most gamers would prefer Linux to Windows simply because the OS is freely available and open to installation on multiple machines. The fact that games don't work, or have terrible support if they do work, on Linux puts off almost the entire market that Linux aims for, which is a sad tale. PC gamers by nature are tweakers and hackers, something Linux is well suited to, but they can't get nearly any of that market share.

Indeed. It's a Catch-22 for Linux: They want developers to include more linux support, but the developers want enough of a base there to justify the expense.

I'd be using Linux if it had better gaming support. Things like Cedega are starting to take off, though, and that's promising.

But there's simply too many apps and too many things that right now are windows only to really justify it. And I'm not into dualbooting.

 

[GreatEmerald]

The reason people don't use Linux has little to do with professional application support. It doesn't really matter what Novell or GIMP do, they will never produce something that people will want to move to Linux for, and that is a fact.

Care to explain what you mean?

 

[thegreatcamper]

It also doesnt help the fact that opengl, the standard in gfx for linux is way behind direct3d. And revision 3.0 of opengl was an utter dissapointment to linux devs, since the khronos group held back many promised features to cater to their dear CAD market.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Care to explain what you mean?

Umm.... is it that hard to figure out what I'm talking about? There is a lot mor than graphics manipulation software keeping Linux from being a viable platform. There are things like Visual Studio, Maya, QuickBooks and billions of other programs that will never be ported to Linux and will always keep people from moving to Linux professionally. So anything Adobe and GIMP do isn't going to make any difference in the long run (and Adobe products are never going to make their way to Linux, either).

Was that really a hard conclusion to come to based on what I said?

 

[GreatEmerald]

It also doesnt help the fact that opengl, the standard in gfx for linux is way behind direct3d. And revision 3.0 of opengl was an utter dissapointment to linux devs, since the khronos group held back many promised features to cater to their dear CAD market.

Hmm, in what way is DX better than OpenGL? I understand that DX10 and DX11 are better, but most programs run on DX8/DX9, and I don't see much of a difference between them and OpenGL?

Umm.... is it that hard to figure out what I'm talking about? There is a lot mor than graphics manipulation software keeping Linux from being a viable platform. There are things like Visual Studio, Maya, QuickBooks and billions of other programs that will never be ported to Linux and will always keep people from moving to Linux professionally. So anything Adobe and GIMP do isn't going to make any difference in the long run (and Adobe products are never going to make their way to Linux, either).

Was that really a hard conclusion to come to based on what I said?

Yeah, you need to give us more examples, just saying "it has nothing to do with this" doesn't make too much sense. But I get your point of view. Though the programs you mentioned also have Linux alternatives: Maya -> Blender, Visual Studio -> KDevelop (you don't really need Visual Studio for Linux anyway ), QuickBooks -> GnuCash/SQL-Ledger/KMyMoney2. So even though those companies aren't willing to create products for Linux, Linux users don't need them as they can use free alternatives.

 

[thegreatcamper]

Hmm, in what way is DX better than OpenGL? I understand that DX10 and DX11 are better, but most programs run on DX8/DX9, and I don't see much of a difference between them and OpenGL?


Yeah, you need to give us more examples, just saying "it has nothing to do with this" doesn't make too much sense. But I get your point of view. Though the programs you mentioned also have Linux alternatives: Maya -> Blender, Visual Studio -> KDevelop (you don't really need Visual Studio for Linux anyway ), QuickBooks -> GnuCash/SQL-Ledger/KMyMoney2. So even though those companies aren't willing to create products for Linux, Linux users don't need them as they can use free alternatives.

Well, im not a developer, so i dont know (or care) about the technical aspects, but I think directx is generally much more well documented and better supported than opengl is. And revision 3.0 of opengl was supposed to give openGL directx10 level of sophistication, but the promises fell flat with that lackluster 3.0 release by the khronos group, the admins of opengl.

 

[GreatEmerald]

Phoronix is now trying to investigate what is actually going on:

The Future Of UT3 On Linux Appears Uncertain

<...>

Well, to try to find out the status, we went directly to Epic Games. Asking Tim Sweeney, the founder of Epic Games, about the Unreal Tournament 3 Linux client status, he said, "That's a great question! I'm not sure of the Linux status, so let me pass this on to Unreal Tournament 3 designer Steve Polge, who will be delighted to answer your question." We just heard back from Mr. Polge and the news isn't too promising.

Slow progress continues on the Linux client (as well as the Mac client). This work is being done by an external contractor, as we don't have available internal resources with the right expertise. We certainly would love to see this completed, but given the amount of time it has taken, we aren't confident about when that might happen.



So what the heck is going on? Ryan says he is fixing bugs and Epic Games is not too sure about the situation. Ryan Gordon's game development background on Linux goes back to Loki Software and has been responsible for the Linux work on earlier Unreal Tournament engines... It shouldn't take this long. There has also been a rumor that the Unreal Tournament 3 Linux client might be canned entirely due to financial cutbacks. Evidently no one is sure about the Unreal Tournament 3 Linux client, and if they do have information, they are not informing their customers.

This situation has certainly become a bloody mess and we are losing hope that the Unreal Tournament 3 client for Linux will ever be released. On top of this situation, there is a possibility that America's Army 3.0 may come to Linux, which is based upon the UT3 engine, after the Linux/Mac clients were earlier dropped.

Full story:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NzE5NQ

 

[Sir_Brizz]

I've already received correspondence to the same fact. Phoronix likes to post something about UT3 every couple of months to keep it on everyone's mind or something. Nothing has really changed from a year ago.

 

[TurdDrive]

Don't open your eyes. Epic can do no wrong.

they made UT 3 didnt they

 

[Dark Pulse]

I love how "External contractor" + "we aren't confident about when that might happen" = HOLY GODDAMN **** THE THING MIGHT NEVER EVER COME OUT

It'll happen sooner or later, guys. The legal snags didn't help, and the one-man porting machine called icculus probably has so much other **** on his table.

Here's a hint: Epic's still got him contracted out, don't they?

 

[GreatEmerald]

Continuing their quest of reminding people about UT3 and Linux, Phoronix writes:

550 Days Later, UT3 Linux Appears Dead

If you follow Phoronix or the Linux gaming scene at all you will know the mess that has become to be known as Unreal Tournament 3. Last month when we asked Epic Games about the status of the Linux game client, they were not even sure.

Back in March the developer responsible for porting the UT3 client and server to Linux, Ryan Gordon, claimed to be still working on it and was just optimizing and fixing annoying bugs. Well, it's certainly taken a while with the Windows version of this game being released over a year and a half ago. In fact, today marks the point of 550 days since the game was released and there still is no native Linux client or any sign of it.

As we shared in our Unreal Tournament 3 piece last month, it looks like UT3 Linux may have been axed over financial cutbacks with Epic Games and their dismal sales. It looks like this is becoming the more likely outcome. Though we hear there may be something to be announced next month. Good news would be nice, but at this point it looks like the Linux (and Mac OS X) client for Unreal Tournament 3 will likely never see the light of day.

Full story: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NzI4Mg

 

[Sir_Brizz]

nice intro there

 

[T2A`]

Who's Phoronix and why is his website so poorly designed?

 

[TurdDrive]

how many people use linux these days?

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Here come the turds!

 

[Wormbo]

Linex? Probably nobody. What is that anyway? And how is it related to this thread?