Guest yamamushi Posted April 25, 2007 Report Share Posted April 25, 2007 I dug up an old thread asking about whether or not there would ever be a linux server for UC, and the response was that derek would never do something as stupid as mess with linux for gaming. It's now 3 years later, and nobody can deny that linux has gained a huge amount of market viability. Despite the fact that there are tons of games that don't work with linux, there are several very succesful games that work on linux, albeit not native (except with Enemy Territory), WoW works, Quake Works, Eve Online works, pretty much every game in my library works with some form of emulation easily but UC (which took quite a bit of effort, too much for the average user to do easily). I am in no way suggesting that there ever be linux support with UC. But I would like to see a dedicated server for linux distributed, where I could just fire it up in a console and logoff the server. And if someone wants to argue that the stability of linux to windows isn't there, I'm just going to go ahead and say that you've probably never used linux before. I work for a MAJOR managed hosting company here in the states as a linux administrator, and even our best windows technicians will admit that linux is more stable. Combined with the fact that SOE's backend runs off *nix, WoW's backend runs off *nix, most major online games have some sort of backend that runs off *nix based servers. (And I'm sure I'm not the only one who's ever dreamed of a GPL'd Universal Combat one day... but when it comes to money versus seeing what the community could expand the game into, money will always win) For someone in Mensa, I'd think that derek would appreciate the philosophy of open source. sigh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest $iLk Posted April 25, 2007 Report Share Posted April 25, 2007 I would assume technical issues may very well prevent this. If Derek does not use an Open API that Linux supports and instead makes direct calls to the DirectX API or Windows API for inputs, etc. - that would prevent a linux server. Appreciating open source has nothing to do with technical hurdles that would basically involve a rewrite of a signifigant portion of the game if he's already used the tools that Microsoft has opened up for developers on Windows. With a game already created for a niche audience - I fail to see why he would expend signifigant effort to cater to an even more niche audience - the few people who would bother running a dedicated linux server for a niche game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yamamushi Posted April 25, 2007 Report Share Posted April 25, 2007 Even if it was as simple as moving to an OpenGL based system, getting UC to run on linux would be 10x easier. I'm not saying that there should be a linux client or anything, just a small simple dedicated server. How much overhead could the windows server possibly be? Not to mention that there are tools out there that can port windows apps to linux from source with relative ease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supreme Cmdr Posted April 25, 2007 Report Share Posted April 25, 2007 quote:Originally posted by yamamushi: It's now 3 years later, and nobody can deny that linux has gained a huge amount of market viability. Rubbish. At least for games. Linux will never - ever - compete with the likes of Windows. As to your question. No, I'll never - ever - support gaming on Linux is any way, shape or form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yamamushi Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 I said market viability, I didn't necessarily say for gaming. No one can deny that Linux is taking away from Microsoft's grasp on the server market (if Microsoft even ever really had a grasp on it). The company I work for is a billion dollar one, and over half of our revenue stems from Linux products. But I understand that gaming on Linux probably won't ever take off, however even John Carmack gave props to the Linux gamers out there when he released Doom 3 with native Linux support. Even companies that released games without Linux support, work closely with the likes of Transgaming Corp. to get their games running with emulators like cedega and wine. (ie blizzard and valve). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalshion Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 Yamamushi, I strongly advise that you not push the subject. Just some friendly advise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest $iLk Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 iD Software, Blizzard Entertainment, and Valve Software all have millions of dollars to splurge with on each title. I am sure that if it was cost effective and made sense business wise to support two versions of the server client (Linux/Windows) then it would make sense to support both. But if you've only got a few people willing to run a dedicated Linux server - why would Derek want to spent time making upgrades and supporting two different server versions? Much easier to set your requirements as a single server/single client. I'm sure your 'billion dollar company' made the decision to support Linux because it made sense from a free market perspective. They didn't become a 'billion dollar company' by making decisions that didn't make sense market-wise. I know you're all like "MiKKKro$oft SI EVIL!" with the Linux fanboism, but don't let your faith in open source software cloud your vision that Linux is not for everyone and doesn't make sense in every situation. A small independant developer with a niche fan base means that Linux is a bit out of the mainstream of his target audience. If it costs a few ms in lag while playing MP - I'd say that it is an even trade-off as opposed to having to spend time supporting a separate server version of the game. For instance - Neverwinter Nights had a Linux client. Neverwinter Nights 2 does not - even though they share virtually the same code base. This is because the changes that were made to the engine were made with DirectX enhancements - and rewriting the server to support both didn't make sense of Obsidian or Atari - especially with Atari's financial woes. The more of the client that is reliant on Microsoft developer tools, the more work it is to rewrite and support a version that will work for Linux. I speak as someone who in programming loves to use the little tools that make my programs work with Windows while ignoring Linux compatability. I do this not because I dislike Linux - but because virtually nobody in my target client base uses Linux. You don't know how much work it is or isn't to support a second server client. It depends on how deeply ingrained in the Windows/DirectX/etc. API the current client is - and even if it isn't that much work - the time that Derek spends working and supporting a second version takes time and money away from more important things - like game enhancements and other projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supreme Cmdr Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 Some people have NO idea what programming entails. Thats the gist of it I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingray Posted April 26, 2007 Report Share Posted April 26, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: Some people have NO idea what programming entails. Thats the gist of it I think. Judging from the customers (that's the clueless staff that's supposed to use the in-house developped software) and the devs at work, I think I have a slight idea of what you are going through. One half has no idea what it's talking about and the other doesn't know what it wants or really needs. And then they have the nerve to act all surprized that the devs are frustrated and that the deadlines can't be met... Software engineering, another interesting theory. OSes and computers are like politicians... the only difference is the smell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yamamushi Posted April 27, 2007 Report Share Posted April 27, 2007 I had no intention of this turning into a forum fight. Derek, would you be inclined to take legal action if say someone were to hack up some linux server code? If you're fine with it, I'd like to start working on something. And yeah, I know it's not something that can be done in a short amount of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supreme Cmdr Posted April 27, 2007 Report Share Posted April 27, 2007 There is a big difference between a fight and a debate. Feel free to figure out the difference. As far as hacking up a linux server. Apart from the fact that it simply cannot be done without source code, that would be reverse engineering and a violation of the DMCA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yamamushi Posted April 27, 2007 Report Share Posted April 27, 2007 Actually you're wrong in that respect, check out EQEmu. They made an entire Everquest server emulator with nothing more than listening to network traffic and writing a server to mimic what they saw. The same with the Ultima online servers all over the internet. Neither of these projects used code from the original games, which protects them from the DMCA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yamamushi Posted April 30, 2007 Report Share Posted April 30, 2007 All things considered, having Derek's approval or boycotting won't affect my decisions. As far as the coding side goes, I don't have to recreate the server down to every last detail, you said it yourself, I just have to mimic the real thing. And if thats the case, it would end up being extremely minimalistic. And as far as reading from the TCP/UDP stream, if it has to be communicated for the server and client to work together, it can be reverse engineered. No doubt it will take a few months, but who's to say I don't have time? And if newcomers end up buying UC to just use the linux server, or show the slightest bit of interest in it, that's still sales marks for Derek. What does he care what people do with the game once they buy it, as long as their not pirating it? It's not like he's charging for subscription fees or anything. I've already convinced 20+ people to buy the game just to help coding the linux server. If anything it will be a fun project. As far as 'mathematical aspects' go, unless all of the network data is encrypted, it will only take time (of which I have plenty of). People reverse engineer device drivers all the time by reading data go back and forth between the bus and the hardware (how do you think a lot of these linux devices get supported?). Even the arugment about hosting my server in a different country is flawed, since I wouldn't be distributing the game, only providing a server for people to connect to. I'll even open source the whole project so that anyone can see for themselves there's going to be no code stolen from any of the games. Compared to games like WWII Online, UC seems like a piece of cake to RE. Try writing a writing an emulated server for a game that does everything from model the air temperature in an airplane engine to the shrapnel flying from a mortar, all in real time with 10k+ people playing on one real-time map. Unless UC's physics engine goes so far as to have air temperature affect the speed of an aircraft, or the weather affect the angle a bullet flies, you're not doing a great job at convincing me it's impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supreme Cmdr Posted April 30, 2007 Report Share Posted April 30, 2007 Wrong. Again. On all counts. 'nuff said. Plus, your comparison of Everquest to a real-time and twitch based program like my games, is laughable and just goes to show that you really - truly - don't know what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yamamushi Posted April 30, 2007 Report Share Posted April 30, 2007 Coming from someone who beats up coke machines, that doesn't really mean much. But where should I get my advice, a forum full of people who's philosophy is "It's a feature, not a bug", or software developers who make GOOD software? Every argument in this thread basically narrows down to "If you're not Derek, it can't be done", well if Derek was responsible for writing all of our software, planes would randomly fall out of the sky "because they were designed to do that". See everyone in 8 months with full sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supreme Cmdr Posted April 30, 2007 Report Share Posted April 30, 2007 Well that didn't take long, did it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest $iLk Posted April 30, 2007 Report Share Posted April 30, 2007 Is this a bad time to ask about a Windows 3.1 server? I'm building one with matchsticks and a potato. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supreme Cmdr Posted May 1, 2007 Report Share Posted May 1, 2007 LOL!!! You're on your own with that one bud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkling Posted May 1, 2007 Report Share Posted May 1, 2007 quote:Originally posted by $iLk: Is this a bad time to ask about a Windows 3.1 server? I'm building one with matchsticks and a potato. Maybe you can build an E&B server out of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now