Poll: 2013...The year for Ubuntu gaming?

[Gabanuka]

I was so confused when I read that title; Ubuntu is the name of the horrible cola me and my friend drink to appear anti-conformist

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I'm not ashamed to say I do not know what 'Ubuntu' is and even after reading the OP I'm still not very sure.

 

[DoPo]

Well, most games are done on multi platform engines, because of the consoles.

That doesn't really mean much. The consoles (and Windows) can use DirectX and a lot of games do that, while Linux only has OpenGL. While similar in function, the two are not compatible. The indie games are mostly done in OpenGL, hence why they are cross platform.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Heh, heh... HA HA, AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Whoo, man that was good one dude. Unbuntu gameing.. ha... oh... you were serious... you poor, poor soul.

For various reason, not the least of which is that selling games on Ubuntu would be frowned upon and the difficulty of translating a game to Linux without something like a cross platform engine, it's unlikely that open source OSs will ever be a major gaming force. The fact that they compose an almost negligible silver of the market for OSs also makes most groups unwilling to even try (Unless everyone went open source in the last few years).

Well, most games are done on multi platform engines, because of the consoles. And how will selling games on Linux be frowned upon? Steam's doing it. And Linux guys pay more than any others on the humble bundles.

Yes but most engines aren't programmed to run on a Linux system. That needs to be specifically programmed during engine design. Perhaps I should have been more specific.

Selling anything for a profit on Unbuntu and many distributions of Linux is frowned upon. Open source people want software to be free and available for everyone. Games are sold and closed source.

 

[thesilentman]

Well you actually bring good arguments and i am concerned about the direction that windows is heading with windows 8, i have to admit that i was thinking too much in the short term. (as in Windows 7)
And like you said, many people will stay with windows 7 but windows 8 will be the main example of what microsoft does from now on.

You actually brought a good point here. Just cause MS is going ahead with Windows 8 doesn't mean that people are going to go with MS unless they force the customers to jump ship. It's going to tough for MS, as there's people still running Office 2003 and XP Professional.

About the amount of ram and such, the hardware market has adjusted to the demands, for example RAM is very cheap,
(to the point that the price diffference between 2gb and 4gb's of ram is often about 5 euro/dollar (depending on ramspeed, but for standard users this is not important) so are 1tb hdd's. i get your point that it should be able to be lighter and less demanding, i truly do but hardware has become cheaper and faster while the performance demand has stayed the same since windows 7 came out. and windows 8 doesn't add to the demands.

I considered everywhere that Windows is used for the hardware issue. Everywhere from businesses to schools. The costs needed to replace hardware is rather boggling, especially if we add in Office and latest Windows. Here's how it adds up for a nice good 8 gig system (doesn't run any games, but powerful enough to be upgraded with RAM):

- CPU (Lets say the Core 2 Quad Q9400): 30 USD
- GPU (AMD HD 7850): 170 USD
- MB: 100 USD
- RAM: 50 USD for 2 8 gig sticks
- Extras (Case, HDD and such): 150 USD
- Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit: 200 USD
- Office 2010 Professional: 350 USD

Total: 1050 (??!!) USD

This is the parts and such that I calculated on the spot for a build for business/school. The reason that I included Office Professional as small businesses and schools do use Publisher, and small businesses use Access. Windows 7 Professional is also included as no Home version of Windows will cut it when it comes to joining domains and using the group policy editor.

The reason that I bring this up is to show why businesses and schools don't upgrade. At all. The cost of Windows (and Office)is too high. A smart PC builder will notice that in the cost that Windows and Office come in, he can build another (good budget built) PC as a bonus.

The reason that people care about small memory footprints and the like is for reasons like this. Upgrading technology can be a nightmare. Us gamers are okay as we only need to pay once for the base system and no more for a couple of years until it's time for an upgrade. Businesses and schools don't have that luxury. My school is still running 32-Bit XP Professional for god's sake, and it's unlikely they'll move to 7 just because of the costs that go into revamping the computer experience.

This is why I was worried a bit about the requirements of Windows 7/8's memory and disk space. Little things like that add up for businesses and schools. Hence why Linux works for those fields.

Sorry if that seemed a little Wall of Text-ish to you. I just wanted to explain my thinking when I mentioned the hardware issues with Windows.

Heh, heh... HA HA, AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Whoo, man that was good one dude. Unbuntu gameing.. ha... oh... you were serious... you poor, poor soul.

I honestly believe that you need a sarcasm tag. Here, let me give one to you.

...

Heh, heh... HA HA, AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Whoo, man that was good one dude. Unbuntu gameing.. ha... oh... you were serious... you poor, poor soul. /sarcasm

There's already games for Linux that people are interested in. See the Humble Bundles. See also anything that runs in OpenGL, for example, Amnesia: the Dark Descent.

For various reason, not the least of which is that selling games on Ubuntu would be frowned upon and the difficulty of translating a game to Linux without something like a cross platform engine, it's unlikely that open source OSs will ever be a major gaming force. The fact that they compose an almost negligible silver of the market for OSs also makes most groups unwilling to even try (Unless everyone went open source in the last few years).

This is a big nice citation needed here. Exactly why would selling games on Ubuntu would be frowned upon? They do it already. It's similar to us gamers on piracy, if you like it, pay for it. I know piracy's a crime, but I've heard people who immediately throw money at the guys who made such awesome work even though they pirated it. I don't support piracy, but I do appreciate giving a donation to, say, the guys working on GIMP.

And translating a game to Linux is only difficult if you use DirectX. Anything with OpenGL works flawlessly in Linux. Go read the Steam for Linux team's post that's in the 2nd footnote of my first post. Boom! Instant performance boost. This won't matter for uber gaming PC rigs, but for modest rigs like my own, it's perfect. It's good marketing too.

And Linux isn't negligible in the way you're thinking. Sure, two years ago they were, but now, Steam's going there. Which has now resulted in many people knowing about the Steam for Linux client. Want to know one way to get people excited for this? Tell them that their Windows 8 rig which may sputter and die on Windows' games will kill the Linux games.

Valve is leading a change in the PC gaming industry by going to the so-called "OS for nerds". Due to Windows 8 starting to show a change in the priorities of MS, there has to be something that follows up to the market position that Windows was. Yes, was.