58 replies to this topic

[Dymitry]

True but, by how much? And that is the first thing I found. By all means look for more and get back, I got http://www.phoronix....win7_2010&num=4 from the same site, and results are more towards linux.
Also, check please my step 2. Wine support. Wine works with directX games!
Now we could go on and on, or start talking about monolithic vs micro kernel, scheduler implementations, and why although openGl is an open standard, directX has got so much penetration.

But I rather talk about Urbanmech.

[Lightdragon]

dude.. are you stupid or something... all of these articles you are showing us only show an improvement in performance at primitive crt resolutions.. once you get to normal lcd resolutions above 1200 its the same or less than windows

[Vulpesveritas]

Yeah... Windows is looking better for modern LCDs than Linux is right now.

[Dymitry]

Vulpesveritas, on 14 August 2012 - 02:38 PM, said:

Furthermore, DirectX is currently superior to Open GL in terms of graphical effect controls, such as active lighting.
For an idea of what DirectX 11 + CryENGINE 3 does, you get this;

I honestly don't know of any Open GL game engine which is readily available with graphics on this level.

As for the superiority of directX, I have my doubts. in the same generation, OpenGL is usually faster and has at least the same feature set of directx, and they even implement newer stuff earlier than MS (tesselation first thing coming to mind). MS dev team has done a great job of making the X api a very good and viable alternative and even to push innovation from time to time, and the propapaganda marketing team has been even better to achieve such a diffusion.
When directX 1/2/3/5 was out, it was absolute rubbish but games where developed over it, and it was not like that devs did not care about having screaming hot graphics back then.
On the bright side Valve is porting the Source engine which to me is THE engine to openGL (and linux), and they have the biggest pc gaming platform, so that is going to be interesting.

Lightdragon, on 14 August 2012 - 02:49 PM, said:

dude.. are you stupid or something... all of these articles you are showing us only show an improvement in performance at primitive crt resolutions.. once you get to normal lcd resolutions above 1200 its the same or less than windows

have you bothered to check the other pages of the benchmark as well? Never mind.

http://www.extremete...even-on-windows

And BTW It was not a best performance contest, but a viability one. What benchmarks prove us is that gaming on linux is doable. End of story.

Gotta go back to Urbie topics.

Edited by Dymitry, 14 August 2012 - 03:11 PM.

[Lightdragon]

why do i even bother... no matter how much you try to reason with apple and linux zombies they are too dumb and stubborn to admit that their precious toys are less than something mainstream

[Vulpesveritas]

Dymitry, on 14 August 2012 - 03:06 PM, said:

As for the superiority of directX, I have my doubts. in the same generation, OpenGL is usually faster and has at least the same feature set of directx, and they even implement newer stuff earlier than MS (tesselation first thing coming to mind). MS dev team has done a great job of making the X api a very good and viable alternative and even to push innovation from time to time, and the propapaganda marketing team has been even better to achieve such a diffusion.
When directX 1/2/3/5 was out, it was absolute rubbish but games where developed over it, and it was not like that devs did not care about having screaming hot graphics back then.
On the bright side Valve is porting the Source engine which to me is THE engine to openGL (and linux), and they have the biggest pc gaming platform, so that is going to be interesting.

Sure source is big, easy to use... but has crap for graphics.
You might have big awesome framerates, but the two game engines for graphics quality right now to my knowledge are CryENGINE 3 and Frostbyte 3... both of which are DirectX only to my knowledge.

Once an Open GL alliterative with a AAA graphics level is out, then we can talk frame rate differences, until then we're still talking about only 'meh' graphics quality for Open GL.

[Lightdragon]

Vulpesveritas, on 14 August 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

Sure source is big, easy to use... but has crap for graphics.
You might have big awesome framerates, but the two game engines for graphics quality right now to my knowledge are CryENGINE 3 and Frostbyte 3... both of which are DirectX only to my knowledge.

Once an Open GL alliterative with a AAA graphics level is out, then we can talk frame rate differences, until then we're still talking about only 'meh' graphics quality for Open GL.

lets not forget how antiquated the source engine is... been around since 2003 with little or no improvement games that are made on it are usually blah with the same bland textures and props everywhere

[Arisaema]

verybad, on 14 November 2011 - 01:10 PM, said:

They already said it will be using DirectX9-11.

Linux isn't a big platform for gaming, and it's expensive to devlop for Direct X and Open Gl.

I've got nothing against Linux, but you can quote me here. If I'm wrong I'll eat my own shoes.

"There will be no Linux clent, it's counterprofitable."

Lol...considering that in the near future there will be a linux steam client those words are a little hard to believe.

[Dymitry]

Vulpesveritas, on 14 August 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

Sure source is big, easy to use... but has crap for graphics.
You might have big awesome framerates, but the two game engines for graphics quality right now to my knowledge are CryENGINE 3 and Frostbyte 3... both of which are DirectX only to my knowledge.

Once an Open GL alliterative with a AAA graphics level is out, then we can talk frame rate differences, until then we're still talking about only 'meh' graphics quality for Open GL.

Yeah, I read somewhere that maybe unreal 4 was being given an openGl renderer as well (mostly for osX compatibility), that does not look the case.

[Vulpesveritas]

Dymitry, on 14 August 2012 - 03:15 PM, said:

Yeah, I read somewhere that maybe unreal 4 was being given an openGl renderer as well (mostly for osX compatibility), that does not look the case.

Thanks for reminding me, I had forgotten about unreal 4. Then again there aren't any games out with it quite yet. lol

[BlackAbbot]

Dymitry, on 14 August 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

On the bright side Valve is porting the Source engine which to me is THE engine to openGL (and linux), and they have the biggest pc gaming platform, so that is going to be interesting.



have you bothered to check the other pages of the benchmark as well? Never mind.

http://www.extremete...even-on-windows

And BTW It was not a best performance contest, but a viability one. What benchmarks prove us is that gaming on linux is doable. End of story.

Gotta go back to Urbie topics.

As that article mentions in passing, the Steam client for linux is going to have a massive run on positive effect for gaming on linux in general by simply improving the quality of graphics drivers through Valve's preferential relationship with the card manufacturers. Having Valve pushing through bugfixes and tweaks should see a massive jump in the performance of the proprietary drivers in short order. The benchmarks posted on here today aren't the ones that are going to count, come back in a month and post the ones for the new multithreaded Nvidia drivers mentioned in the article.

[Lightdragon]

no matter how much you preach linux windows will always be the platform of choice everyone uses it not marketing to it would be foolish wasting extra time on os's not many people use it just a waste of manpower and resources that could better be used to improve mwo

[BlackAbbot]

Lightdragon, on 14 August 2012 - 03:49 PM, said:

no matter how much you preach linux windows will always be the platform of choice everyone uses it not marketing to it would be foolish wasting extra time on os's not many people use it just a waste of manpower and resources that could better be used to improve mwo

Clearly, as an industry expert your word is gospel on this. Perhaps you should let Gabe Newell know too.

That said, see my previous comments on no linux client due to exclusivity agreement with Microsoft.

[Exilyth]

The more operating systems are catered to, the more people can be reached by a game as possible customers.

Personally, I'm running Win7* atm, but when I'll have to in a few years, I'll definately switch to Linux instead of Win 8.

I was dual booting Win XP and Ubuntu on my old box, it was great, best of both worlds.
Might be because I'm mostly using open source software anyway, but after a while, there's not much difference.


*reminds me... I still have to choose a linux distro to install on my current box.

BlackAbbot, on 14 August 2012 - 04:00 PM, said:

no linux client due to exclusivity agreement with Microsoft.

If that's really true, this topic would be moot.
Could someone please provide an official source proving/denying such an agreement?

[BlackAbbot]

As I stated previously, this was stated in Jordan Weisman's original post on the Smith & Tinker blog stating that he had done a deal with Microsoft to licence back the original FASA properties from Microsoft. Sadly that post has gone the way of the dodo, but if you want to search on the wayback machine or something, that's what you want to look for. According to wikipedia the post was dated 2007-10-15.

Edited by BlackAbbot, 15 August 2012 - 04:30 PM.

[Graphite]

A linux client would be nice, but can't see PGI spending the money to do it :-(

Lightdragon, on 14 August 2012 - 03:49 PM, said:

no matter how much you preach linux windows will always be the platform of choice everyone uses it not marketing to it would be foolish wasting extra time on os's not many people use it just a waste of manpower and resources that could better be used to improve mwo

Maybe, but I personally wouldn't risk any money on that "always". Valve are spending money on Linux right now to hedge against Windows8+ closing up like iOS/OSX.

Vulpesveritas, on 14 August 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

Sure source is big, easy to use... but has crap for graphics.
You might have big awesome framerates, but the two game engines for graphics quality right now to my knowledge are CryENGINE 3 and Frostbyte 3... both of which are DirectX only to my knowledge.

Once an Open GL alliterative with a AAA graphics level is out, then we can talk frame rate differences, until then we're still talking about only 'meh' graphics quality for Open GL.

Well, there was idTech5, but I guess that's more of a comparison with CryEngine2 than CryEngine3.
We'll have to wait for Unreal4, or the next offering from id or valve

Dymitry, on 14 August 2012 - 03:15 PM, said:

Yeah, I read somewhere that maybe unreal 4 was being given an openGl renderer as well (mostly for osX compatibility), that does not look the case.

Epic has already announced Unreal4 is running on a bunch of systems, which means there must be an openGL version.
http://loudmouthedga...-about-by-name/

Edited by Graphite, 16 August 2012 - 01:44 AM.

[Mylar]

Lightdragon, on 14 August 2012 - 01:16 PM, said:

linux and osx are worthless for gaming anyways just go out and pick up a copy of windows and stop your ********

Left 4 Dead 2 runs better on linux than windows.
Valve finally proved to the general population that Linux is not inferior for games.
The problem is the people who make up that general population.
Inferior users stick to windows, and thats the bulk of the market.

That said, I agree that a specifically built linux port is not likely to be cost effective or needed. A bit of dev support with wine compatibility is all that would be needed.

[Dymitry]

Mylar, on 16 August 2012 - 06:31 AM, said:

The problem is the people who make up that general population.
Inferior users stick to windows, and thats the bulk of the market.

This kind of judgements are what fire up trolls and flames.

[Lightdragon]

ill cave to the point of allowing wine... but only so people stop WHINING about the lack of linux support sorry couldnt resist the use of the words lol