open All Channels
seplocked Linux
blankseplocked meh
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

8uCCan33r
Posted - 2007.12.16 02:08:00 - [1]
 

<disappointed rant>
well, the launch of the linux client brought me back to the game...

but probably not for long. OK I have an ATI card - but so do half the population, so it's no excuse to have a client that doesn't work with ATI stuff.

Cedega are a joke. OK it was a quick fix, but jeezus, you should have just developed trinity as an opengl client and EVERYONE could of played the game properly.
</rant>

ccp - PLEASE look at yourselves as true technology leaders and start showing how to do things right. eve runs on stackless python (awesome AND cross platform) and connects ridiculous numbers of people in the same game space - two truly pushing the envelope achievements. now finish the job and make it so anyone who wants to play can - even if they can't afford/don't wish to support the microsoft tax.

Adel Sorra
Posted - 2007.12.16 07:26:00 - [2]
 

Originally by: 8uCCan33r
OK I have an ATI card - but so do half the population, so it's no excuse to have a client that doesn't work with ATI stuff.

i bet on linux its not near 50/50. sorry. but i hear they get better from month to month.

Originally by: 8uCCan33r
you should have just developed trinity as an opengl client and EVERYONE could of played the game properly.

well.. yeah. rewriteing the whole client would have been an option Wink

farfrael
FP Enterprise
Posted - 2007.12.16 11:25:00 - [3]
 

There is hope for ATI still since they were bought by AMD and released the specs for their graphics cards
Give it a few months and there is a good chance ATI cards will work better on Linux with open drivers than Nvidia cards with their binary blob

NightKhaos
Gallente
Relative Quantum Limited
Posted - 2007.12.16 15:52:00 - [4]
 

As I understand it, they rewrote the entire graphics engine ANYWAY, which sadly no one in Linux gets to see because Premium Content isn't supported. Spending an extra man-year or two changing the implementation to OpenGL would have been with in the technical possibilities of CCP. They have worked miracles before, why not now?

Sevarus James
Minmatar
Meridian Dynamics
Posted - 2007.12.17 02:32:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: NightKhaos
As I understand it, they rewrote the entire graphics engine ANYWAY, which sadly no one in Linux gets to see because Premium Content isn't supported. Spending an extra man-year or two changing the implementation to OpenGL would have been with in the technical possibilities of CCP. They have worked miracles before, why not now?


Actually they didn't. They re-wrote the underlying game engine (TRINITY), and they updated a TON of gfx to newer shader models. If you look at EVE with a critical eye post "update", its like they've skinned a lotta stuff with new shiny bling, but the planets, the background, ancillary effects and stuff are still the same old eve gfx and models. (POS's anyone?)

A better way of looking at it: An engine rewrite. A Graphics "update".

This is being done as an evolving change (see gallente stations for the lack of quafe interiors) and things will be changing more as we go along.

M1AU
Gallente
Posted - 2007.12.17 09:23:00 - [6]
 

I, for some reason, have to agree with the op.
A wrapped EVE client is most likely the cheapest way for CCP to give Linux and MacOSX support, but in the end a real native port is imo the only way to go.

Snowcrash Winterheart2
Gallente
Concordia Discors
Posted - 2007.12.17 14:33:00 - [7]
 

Rather than ranting on forums, lets take a serious look at a "Native" client. First of all you have migrating from DirectX to OpenGL, you also have the fact that going platform agnostic means loosing a lot of the "Windows" stuff (DirectAudio, BITS and so on). But there exist libraries out there which work on all three platforms and do the same thing (mono = 'some' .net for example). You run in to the problem that Windows actually has **** poor OGL support and usually engines end up being wrapped in DX (the Doom 3 engine as an example).

It a lot of leg work and potentially book hitting for programmers; hey I don't know the CCP dev's skill sets, they could all know OpenGL or could just be pure D3D people. Add on top of that learning to do GTK and CoCoa stuff to allow the game to run in a window and such it becomes a major evolution.

CCP are on record as saying it ain't gonna happen. So how do we change their minds? Keep in mind even if we do that a native client wouldn't appear until the next major GFX/Engine overhaul (Trinity III?). Because lets be honest devs who've just crunched out Trinity II are not going to be happy to redo the whole sodding lot in a totally different language and tweak all of the models (current and those still in progress) to accommodate it at super crunch speeds.

Get all your Linux and OS X using friends to download and install EVE, sign up on these forums and post. Obviously pay subs as well. If it becomes obvious that there is a significant market to be had from an actual native client then they will do it; sooner ('Trinity III') or later ('EVE 2: Electric Caldari').

What we don't want is for us lot to appear as some uncoordinated rabble baying for blood demanding the impossibly expensive and offering not even a sniff of a reason for doing so. Throwing nerf darts at the Transgaming users is fine, they throw them at the wine brigade Razz

As an aside, to CCP, if EVE is reporting basic OS stats back to you, take a look at the PCM/WaveOut devices... see how many times the word "wine" is mentioned with a Windows version of Win2k (wine default).

Adel Sorra
Posted - 2007.12.17 19:16:00 - [8]
 

Very well said snow

And also:
Originally by: M1AU
A wrapped EVE client is most likely the cheapest way for CCP to give Linux and MacOSX support

...which is the one and only reason why we now have an officialy supported client for linux and mac (and not just in 5 years or so)

Atm, the market simply answers NO to the question wherever you should support other operating systems than windows.

A nice summary about the why and the ways to change things can be found at winehq.com, especally interesting in this context is the Chicken-and-egg part.

I think nobody is _against_ a native client, but, its just not reallistic Wink

Suki Kamir
Posted - 2007.12.17 19:41:00 - [9]
 

Yeahbut you have to look at it from both sides of the fence. Currently Linux users are paying the same amount of money as windows users for Eve, so in essence us Linux users are subsidising directx developments which we will never be able to use.

I agree it is a step forward but frankly making excuses to continue to support a twice convicted monopolist (at least twice) ::Read Microsoft:: doesn't cut it. As paying users or customers as we are normally referred to in the commercial world; do we not have the exact same consumer rights as the Window's users? If Windows users pay the same money as Linux users and get access to premium graphics, do Linux users not have that equal right?

We are not talking about putting Linux users above Windows users, we are talking about putting us on a level footing with Windows users. As paying customers we should be afforded exactly the same product opportunities as every other paying customer, despite what operating system we are using.

I am a sociologist and I focus on how technologies impact society at all levels including economic, academic, social and commercial impact. I also pay a great deal of attention to the Digital Divide and whether we like to admit or not, the gaming industry is a digital chasm as opposed to digital divide, and it takes a lot more than some wrapping paper (cedega wrapped client) to build a strong and stable bridge across that chasm to provide equal opportunity for all.

So yes, it might be a lot of work to switch to openGL or create a Linux native client, but the fact remains, as paying customers, it is actually our right to demand to be treated equally. We have no reason to be nice about it (we are nice about it because we are generally nice people), we actually have the right to be treated equally and we also have every right to be annoyed when we are not being treated equally.

I really enjoy playing Eve, despite the hurdles. But I can't sit here and say I am happy about paying the same money as Windows users and getting less for it and I should never be expected to. Neither should I be happy that my money is subsidising development for a platform produced by a company that has been convicted in the US and the EU for breaking the law. Antitrust laws exist for a reason and the gaming market at the moment is a direct (excuse the pun) example of what those laws are supposed to prevent. In my mind DirectX itself is in violation of antitrust laws given the fact that it is a closed system which uses its position in the market to force developers to program in DirectX in order to reach the largest market share.

Suki

Adel Sorra
Posted - 2007.12.17 21:49:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Suki Kamir
big post

I do agree that the current situation is bad (games, os, everything). Everyone how doesn't at least agree on this has probably missed whats going on, didnt listen to the possible scenarios, or just doesn't believe something bad can happen despite the probablility, the power and impact of those scenarios (those ignorant idiots! YARRRR!! ... [cut offtopic speech for lenght])

But, (i know you waited on that one)
the division of non-windows desktops is growing [1] [2] [3], microsoft gets his butt sued big time, and, eve-online releases official linux and mac clients!

Its nothing new, it won't change the world. But the signs look good, now it needs some time to grow.

CCP could have done nothing, but they choose to change. That is a lot already, and makes them forerunners in yet another field. But you oviously cant spend all your money on a small group of costumers.

And also
Originally by: Suki Kamir
If Windows users pay the same money as Linux users and get access to premium graphics, do Linux users not have that equal right?

Right now, Transgaming is working on it, eta is first quarter 2008

In a near future (eve linux client v1.0 stable) the only difference between the win and linux client will be some frames per second. It doesn't matter how its done, but its one key application more avalible on linux.

Again, everyone should read the ultimate FAQ about wrapped windows software on winehq.com when interested in this topic

Suki Kamir
Posted - 2007.12.17 22:21:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Adel Sorra
Originally by: Suki Kamir
big post

equally big post



Oh I am not disputing that or disputing that this is a good positive step, which is why I support it and pay to play. I was merely illustrating the reality behind it all rather than just ranting that cedega is evil, wine rocks blah blah you have heard it all before type scenario.

As someone with a 17 year background in the technology industry and now a sociologist studying the impacts of technology I can see it from many angles. I have been a developer, I have been a consultant, I even did a stint working on games waaaay back when Codemaster's had only just moved out of selling games on the schoolyard for the spectrum.

The commitment CCP have made is welcomed, but a native client would have been even more welcome and would have had a larger effect. I appreciate their efforts, but that doesn't mean they have been perfect, it is a middle ground, hopefully if we meet them halfway the playing field will expand somewhat.

Suki

Adel Sorra
Posted - 2007.12.17 22:41:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: Adel Sorra on 17/12/2007 22:47:07
Originally by: Suki Kamir
I appreciate their efforts, but that doesn't mean they have been perfect, it is a middle ground, hopefully if we meet them halfway the playing field will expand somewhat.

I'd say even if we 'promote' differenty, we're can agree on the basis Very Happy

Gilbert T
Gallente
Gladiators of Rage
Posted - 2007.12.18 16:51:00 - [13]
 

Designing a program that is platform-independent is only a small amount more work than developing one for a single operating system, providing you know a good language and/or development framework for it.

Taking a program that was designed for one platform and making it platform-independent is more difficult, but does not require completely rewriting the software as some have suggested unless the original code was written using some kind of non-standard proprietary language. It simply involves going through the thousands and thousands of lines of code and replacing every non-portable function call with a portable call that you implement differently for each platform. It can even be done gradually as the code is revised, and for all we know, it is being done and the cedega wrapper is just a temporary measure.

I agree with the fact that we are also paying customers and we deserve equal treatment, and it's my opinion that CCP should not have deployed Trinity until everything was finished and ready with all of the "premium graphics" working on all 3 "supported" platforms with all of the major bugs worked out. I remember seeing people asking in the help channel "When will Trinity be here?" and the response "When it is ready and not a minute before." but it seems that it was released many minutes before. In the future I can only hope that they will really wait until it is ready to deploy it.

Maybe today's update will fix everything - let's all hope so.

Snowcrash Winterheart2
Gallente
Concordia Discors
Posted - 2007.12.18 18:54:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Adel Sorra
Very well said snow

And also:
Originally by: M1AU
A wrapped EVE client is most likely the cheapest way for CCP to give Linux and MacOSX support

...which is the one and only reason why we now have an officialy supported client for linux and mac (and not just in 5 years or so)

Atm, the market simply answers NO to the question wherever you should support other operating systems than windows.

A nice summary about the why and the ways to change things can be found at winehq.com, especally interesting in this context is the Chicken-and-egg part.

I think nobody is _against_ a native client, but, its just not reallistic Wink


Companies tend to be very risk adversive, this is understandable as they want to make money. However, if shown that a profitable market segment is being untapped they will seriously consider moving in to it.

People brought Doom 3 and Quake 4 simply because there were Linux binaries available; some of them even said they were buying it for that reason even though their computer couldn't play it. The original Neverwinter Nights is still selling... I'd love to see the number of unique downloads of the Linux binaries there. Conversely a lot of people didn't buy the second Neverwinter game because it didn't have OS X & Linux clients available.

So some companies are already saying 'Yes' to supporting non-Windows OS's. All we need to do is show CCP that their answer should be 'Yes' followed by 'eventually' and that their is a reward waiting for them to trailblaze... which is exceptionally easier said than done with out the wallet opening of LOTS of linux people to pay subs.

Durethia
Blackwater USA Inc.
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2007.12.18 21:28:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Durethia on 18/12/2007 21:28:23
ATI sucks.

Their hardware seems nice on paper, but ATI seriously lacks in the Software Engineering department. The only ATI cards that are remotely "stable" are the ATI Rage128s (old cards). Infact, a Rage128 was defacto-standard graphics chipset in any mission-critical server well into the Radeon/GeForce era. The only reason why, was because the drivers for the Rage128 were as solid as they can be.

As for most other ATI cards, including their most recent releases, ATI has had a long long history of buggy drivers and SDKs (Again, the Rage128 being the only exception and theirs probably a good reason for this too, such as ATI outsourcing development or the chipset not being 100% ATI etc).

Nvidia nearly sunk ATI, in short notice, seemingly overnight. Nevermind the fact that ATI never really bounced back until they started officially supporting alternate operating systems like Linux, or the fact Nvidia had supported the OSS community since day one. These two, could be coincidental, however ATI never really fully recovered from the explosive market acceptance of Nvidia.

Even today, a Linux user see's Nvidia logo on a motherboard or graphics card, it's virtually a visual garuntee that it will work as advertised on Linux. If I were to buy an ATI card, I would feel compelled to do some homework.

This doesn't exognerate CCP or Transgaming of any real bugs when running on ATI hardware. However, it is a little insight into the strong possibility that it's probably ATI's buggy drivers, as it has been in the past. For example, RMR via wine/cedega on ATI hardware had major graphical problems (and we all remember doom3 not being able to play at all on ATI hardware)... that is, until ATI released a new driver release with large amounts of bug fixes.

I'm sorry... ATI sucks. John Carmack should just come out and say it, but ATI would probably sue him as his opinion alone can strongly effect the market.

Sevarus James
Minmatar
Meridian Dynamics
Posted - 2007.12.19 05:33:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Durethia

This doesn't exognerate CCP or Transgaming of any real bugs when running on ATI hardware.


Why is there any exoneration needed for this? BEFORE the official client was released it was announced VERY CLEARLY that ATI is NOT considered supported under linux for the EVE linux client. Period.

Why? ATI's drivers are buggy and not up to par on the linux side and it is NOT the responsibility of a game producer to write VIDEO DRIVERS. Back in the olden days this wasn't the case, but it is now.

I agree with your post Durethia, but this is a point of contention with me. Users never read the requirements. (for the most part. There's a reason "RTFM" came to be a tech term.)

CCP was VERY clear and up front about what WAS and what was NOT supported. So in this, I don't feel they need to be 'cleared'.


Snowcrash Winterheart2
Gallente
Concordia Discors
Posted - 2007.12.19 15:37:00 - [17]
 

On the ATi side of things... I wouldn't touch ATi with the front boom of an Incursus, I've had too many odd things happen in Windows with their drivers and too much hair pulling in Linux to really consider them as nothing more than something to show me the BIOS.

The unfortunate thing for a person lumbered with such a device is; it really is hit or miss if things work either via Cegeda or a wine build.

Durethia
Blackwater USA Inc.
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2007.12.19 20:45:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Snowcrash Winterheart2
On the ATi side of things... I wouldn't touch ATi with the front boom of an Incursus, I've had too many odd things happen in Windows with their drivers and too much hair pulling in Linux to really consider them as nothing more than something to show me the BIOS.

The unfortunate thing for a person lumbered with such a device is; it really is hit or miss if things work either via Cegeda or a wine build.


Like I said, ATI drivers have always been overwhelmingly buggy. Linux, MacOS, Windows, it never mattered what platform.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only