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

[Fireprufe15]

So it seems Ubuntu are really pushing for more space in the mainstream. They're even releasing Ubuntu smartphones.

This is making think more and more, Windows really has to die and make way for Ubuntu. I would like to see it being the gaming OS of choice, rather than Windows. This should be good...

Captcha: Open Season...why yes that is apropriate.

 

[XMark]

Poll question is different from the subject line, so you're not really gonna know who's answering what with the poll results.

My thoughts: Ubuntu is currently not a good platform for gaming because all the big guys in the PC gaming market are developing exclusively for Windows-based PCs.

I liked Ubuntu when I used it on my last laptop, but I was basically just using my laptop as a terminal for web access. If I had anticipated using it for gaming, I would have been very disappointed.

So 2013...The year for Ubuntu gaming? No
Would I play on linux if most games supported it? Yes

 

[Hazy992]

I voted no cause I didn't realise the question was actually different from the title ¬_¬

So yeah I'd use Ubuntu if it actually had good game support but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

 

[Esotera]

Eh, I'd say Android is more likely to get the ball rolling with gaming on Linux. There's a larger number of games available than something like Ubuntu, and hopefully with a bit of time the two kernels and OS environments will converge.

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

I don't think we're going to see a massive shift towards Linux gaming any time soon. While linux has improve dramatically recently in regards having a modest selection of quality games, Ubuntu (and the other linux OSs also) still have a long way before they can really take over windows or even macs as the go to gamer OS. Android will likely be of some help to raise awareness of Linux, but then I don't think most Android users are aware of the Linux connection.

As regards the poll, Linux Mint is my primary operating system which I do most of my usual pc activities on. If I can play it natively on linux or run in wine with no extra hassle I will happily play games on Linux as it lowers my need to reboot into windows to play certain games.

 

[Doom972]

I'd definitely give Linux a try if enough games that I like become available on it, but I can only see myself moving to Linux only when I can use it exclusively and still have the programs I need.

 

[thesilentman]

As usual, question is different from poll, blah blah blah.

OT- Lemme fix a couple of somethings for you:

So it seems Linux are really pushing for more space in the mainstream. They're even releasing Linux smartphones.

This is making think more and more, Windows really has to die and make way for Linux. I would like to see it being the gaming OS of choice, rather than Windows. This should be good...

Captcha: Open Season...why yes that is apropriate.

Not to make myself a prick, but there's a reason why I bolded Linux and axed Ubuntu.

See, the Linux community consists of more than just Canonical, the Ubuntu guys. There's people like Novell, Red Hat, and the whole open source community who want the nice games. Some people don't like Ubuntu for reasons that go past Unity[footnote] At this point, it's very usable, but rigid in cases. But it's not like the Ubuntu 11.04 and 11.10 days where Unity was a steaming pile of shit.[/footnote]. They'd like games to go to their distro, be it distros like Fedora and OpenSuSE or the most esoteric of the esoteric distros.

Hence, gaming will get a head start on Ubuntu, but won't get anywhere unless the open-source communities stand up and make this happen. There's already a huge movement happening. See the sales of the Humble Bundles, which had Linux users outpaying the Mac users one year (forgot the year that happened, but I may be wrong about this) and the Valve Linux guys, who have reported optimizing L4D2 to perform better on Linux in less than the time it took to optimize the Windows version[footnote] Link: [link]http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux/faster-zombies/[/link][/footnote] for proof.

Just a sorta minor nitpick, but I'd thought that I should explain my actions before I get slammed by both parties.

Anyway, Ubuntu is going to get better as a game platform which will then evolve into a Windows competitor.

In theory. It will only work if the big companies decide to make a Linux version of the games that they distribute. This is something that I'm not worried about, give the position Valve is in right now. Also, with Windows going the route of the closed UEFI dud[footnote]Secure Boot can go fuck right off. That's the nicest way I can say it. I like the OS itself (most of the time), but the direction that MS is taking by copying Apple, starting by locking the boot on OEM PCs, is worrying. Hope they snap out of it for Windows 9 Blue.[/footnote], it's safe to say that Linux will only get better as a gaming platform.

Captcha- flux capacitator

I hope the captcha realizes that Linux isn't as bad as it was a couple of years ago. Heck, it's perfectly possible to get a Linux box fully working in 30 minutes, as opposed to 1 hour or more for Windows.

 

[DoPo]

Poll question - yes.
Thread title quesion - hell no! I've said it before recently in another thread but basically UbuntuLinux as a serious gaming platform, to the point where it could push away Windows, at least a bit, is a possibility, yes. But not a close possibility - it would take quite some time. I'm saying an arbitrary 5 years right now, and that would be the time to seriously review the situation and make another prediction based on, like, any facts. Right now, we have none - nothing at all to tell us if Linux gaming is going to topple...anything off its seat or not - we can only speculate.

Also, for comparison, Steam went on Mac almost 3 years ago now. Mac gaming still haven't taken over anything. Nobody even talks about it much.

 

[ohnoitsabear]

Snippety-snip

Basically, this. Although I do want to make a correction; Linux users consistently outpay both Windows and Mac users for Humble Bundles by a large margin. Actually, Humble Bundles are a really good indication that there is a market for games on Linux, considering that the amount of people that get Humble Bundles on Linux is usually comparable to how many get it for Macs. It's just a matter of several groups pushing for it to happen, which might be happening with the Steam for Linux push.

 

[nexus]

Also, for comparison, Steam went on Mac almost 3 years ago now. Mac gaming still haven't taken over anything. Nobody even talks about it much.

Well, because Mac is just another Windows, a really bad Windows as far as gaming is concerned.

Linux is free, anyone can develop on it, and they don't try to nickel and dime.. or should I say c-note you every 2 years for a new OS that isn't even designed for a desktop.

The contracts and licensing wouldn't be so authoritarian and cringe-worthy on Ubuntu, too. No one is asking for one to "topple" the other off it's throne, we just want alternatives. You're right though, it would take some time before efficiency, performance and such would be acceptable over Winblows.

 

[DoPo]

No one is asking for one to "topple" the other off it's throne

Except OP does. Which is why I even said that.

What Linux needs is just more games and more attention from the gaming itself. Steam are doing the right thing to push Linux right now. Basically, the more games it has, the more somebody can convince fucking ATI to make drivers that are not cringe worthy. And maybe, just maybe, even move over to open source drivers. Nvidia might do the same, too. So, with better video driver support, you can get more of the serious games on there. Well, OpenGL would also need to be considered but it's not as much an issue. But again, we get back to needing more games, so people can bother with this. Used to be a vicious circle - you need to provide better graphics to get more games, but to get those, you need some games to actually bother... Now Valve broke this by actually giving more games on Linux. Or at least the very good opportunity for more games on Linux. Also, they are collaborating with video card manufacturers, too - so they are pushing on two fronts.

It can happen, it just needs time. It can even take over Windows gaming. Well, there is a possibility but not one we can seriously discuss at this point in time. Microsoft still have a say on the matter and they could do stuff, too. They could make it easier or harder for other platforms to compete, depending on how they would react. Although...well, recent actions of theirs would suggest...not much initiative, really - not initially at least.

 

[eternal-chaplain]

And maybe Windows 7 could even lighten up and let average people install Ubuntu to their Hard Drives...

 

[Yopaz]

It's too early to say, but I doubt it will be the year for Linux. While I have used Ubuntu, Mepis, Debian, Red Hat and Gentoo it's not easy. Driver support is still an issue, I'm getting issues with wifi and there's still a long way to go for it to reach up to the established Windows when it comes to game support.

As for the poll question I think I would. I kinda like Linux and I think it's fun to use if a little harder than Windows.

 

[Fireprufe15]

Okay, I know Linux is much more than Ubuntu, I just said Ubuntu because I came from watching the video where they show off the Ubuntu superphone. And as far as I know it's the biggest one and also the one making the biggest push for gaming. Although I'm really not educated in this.

 

[G32420NL]

can you first explain why windows needs to die, it has evolved into a stable platform (general opinion) with large amount of driver support. sure it is not as open as linux but we are now talking about games and the ability for the os to support it.
As for windows beeing bloated and resource heavy, any recent pc wont break a sweat running it, i whould think that it is wasting resources making games for an os that itself is much lighter but has drivers that have to catch up alot. (Ati for example)

I see little gain in having to switch over to another os when there is no real need, a choice is one thing, replacing is another.

"this should be good" is not an argument.

Edit: what i mean to ask is: what are the advantages of using linux instead of windows as main development platform. keep in mind that you will have to introduce the mainstream and even many pc fanatics to an new os and it's own usermanual

 

[thesilentman]

Okay, I know Linux is much more than Ubuntu, I just said Ubuntu because I came from watching the video where they show off the Ubuntu superphone. And as far as I know it's the biggest one and also the one making the biggest push for gaming. Although I'm really not educated in this.

No fault there. There's thousands upon thousands of Linux distros that exist, I just wanted to point this out as I assumed that you only knew about Ubuntu as Linux. My mistake there.

can you first explain why windows needs to die, it has evolved into a stable platform (general opinion) with large amount of driver support. sure it is not as open as linux but we are now talking about games and the ability for the os to support it.
As for windows beeing bloated and resource heavy, any recent pc wont break a sweat running it, i whould think that it is wasting resources making games for an os that itself is much lighter but has drivers that have to catch up alot. (Ati for example)

I see little gain in having to switch over to another os when there is no real need, a choice is one thing, replacing is another.

"this should be good" is not an argument.

Warning- Wall of Text ahead.

Just putting it out there that Microsoft is quite anti-competitive and rules the desktop PC space for now. But this is changing due to Windows 8 starting to go in the direction of the closed UEFI box. Proof? Secure Boot is a good start for MS. Yeah, let's lock down PCs yeah!

I know many people are going to stay with Windows 7 for now, but what happens when MS forces us to switch? What would happen if MS locks us into their ecosystem for good?

Now, MS take your meds and think: the interesting position that Windows has in the market, one of being closed yet open enough to develop for, surely you aren't going to gamble that, are you? But they are, because they're copying Apple, who have been succesful and have shown a load of ignorance when it comes to developers.

Don't believe me? Xcode, one of the development tools on Macs, only has the latest version on the new Mac OS. This becomes a problem with developers that have old Macs that they use for development as no one in their sane mind is going to drop 2,000 on a decently spec'd Mac each time a new OS comes out. Apple is also ridiculously ignorant when it comes to supporting old hardware on new OSes.

And yes; Windows is still bloated. When an OS takes up more than 20 gigs of hard drive space and still idles at 1 gig of RAM (I still run 32 bit Windows, along with other people that can't get a handle on affording Windows 7/8) there's something wrong. I can squeeze all the applications that I'll ever need in my entire education on a 4 gig Ubuntu flash drive. I cannot fathom what MS is doing with 20 gigs. And don't get me started about the registry. From a design standpoint, Windows is so flawed that it's not funny anymore.

I lived through this joke on XP (before SP2), Vista, and 7, and I'm not ready for another one. I can handle Linux as some problems that may arise come from the user mucking around in the distro, not issues that stem from design issues caused by the team working on the OS. No offense to those guys, but Windows is slowly going to die if this keeps up. I like all three OSes; in Windows, everything just works, in Mac, it's easy to use and in Linux, it's very customizable. But I see myself going to a different OS if Window continues to deliver such performance as this, especially since Windows 8.

 

[G32420NL]

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.

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.

The problem with my argument is that i'm thinking of windows 7 as the status quo, and i should be thinking about windows 8, an os that in my opinion is miserable in it's standard form.
It amused me to see an commercial for windows 8 where they used angry birds as an example for gaming -.-'

I hope this will be another vista/7 story, a.k.a windows 8 will be balls and the next windows will actually work well with pc's that don't have touchscreens again. in others words the majority of desktops. unfortunatly still a one step forward, two steps back kinda deal.

 

[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).

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well we may see a rise in ported games but that is about it.

You see most people have no fucking clue what Linux is or rather that it exists at all, and once you get them up to speed you need to explain there are about 20 major OS releases to consider in that branch alone and that all are different... if not before this is where their brain shuts down and tries to think of happy things instead.
Microsoft spends billions on pushing all things open source out of the public view so even if they completely stopped today we would still need 5-10 years before the market evens out and we can start talking competitive alternatives, sad as it may be that is the reality.

 

[Fireprufe15]

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.