i look at steam as a console replacement more then something i run on my workstation. i have a workstation box and an entertainment box. there not the same thing any more. i'm not going to buy another console unless its open box and i can upgrade the hardware. consoles have set back game innovation 4-5 years form where they should be because microsoft/sony have distribution monopoly and its locked into these totally obsolete systems. if all the games are downloads now and i have one simple interface to buy games like steam why would i buy a console that is going to be obsolete in 2 years but will not be upgraded for 7,8,9 years. its crazy i don't want anything to do with that sort of thing. its as ridiculous as buying music cd's and a stereo that only plays cd's when you can just buy downloads and play it through itunes etc.
might as well get rid of windows to. just don't need it. linux is fine now for games movies and the net. ill run a dual boot until they get most of the games on linux. but for the most part the system will run linux and ill buy games on linux instead of windows.
A new lecture from the Ubuntu guys. At about 13mins the Valve guy comes on. It's pretty interesting.
One question that came up, which I never thought about, was whether the source engine will have a version for linux. It got me thinking, if we want to develop an indie title for Linux with Steam, what are our options?
I don't believe UDK can be run and publish on Linux. Is there anything else out there? What about Cryengine?
Unity 4 can publish games to Linux though you can't run the editor on it as far as I know.
Other than that 2nd easiest option is to code your games to use Mono (open source version of .net) + MonoGame (open source clone of XNA) or some other .net game framework like SFML2.net.
One question that came up, which I never thought about, was whether the source engine will have a version for linux. It got me thinking, if we want to develop an indie title for Linux with Steam, what are our options?
I don't believe UDK can be run and publish on Linux. Is there anything else out there? What about Cryengine?
If Valve is smart, they will make Source available on Linux. It might put pressure on Crytek and id to put out their own Linux client for their tools. This would mean more Linux games in the Steam store from the most innovative people in the industry: indie developers. With the big three engines running on Linux, Steam stands a good chance of catalyzing a Linux market for games.
That's actually what the guy said in that video. Or at least that's how I understood it, that Source is coming for Linux. I was just wondering if there's anything current.
Looks like Unity is one. And that Mono stuff which I'll take a look at.
Still, I wish something like UDK (maybe UDK4?) and/or Crytek would do it too. I can't recall anything recent being done with the Source engine by non-valve groups.
the fact that source comes to linux doesnt mean that the tools will be available for linux. there's a big difference between porting the game logic and translating the renderer and making the tools work. usually tools are hacked together way more than the game code since avg joe doesn't have to deal with it.
the fact that source comes to linux doesnt mean that the tools will be available for linux. there's a big difference between porting the game logic and translating the renderer and making the tools work. usually tools are hacked together way more than the game code since avg joe doesn't have to deal with it.
except if you listened to what the guy said in the video, it's pretty clear that Valves focus going forward is going to be developing games for linux with the view of leaving such "closed" systems as windows behind.
the biggest argument from autodesk, adobe, etc. about not making software for linux has been consistently "there's no money in it, all the major developers use windows".
so if valve, arguably one of the biggest developers AND distributors out there not only starts developing for linux, but also pushing their client base to make linux versions of their games... surely that might at least turn the heads of autodesk and the like?
either way... as soon as max, zbrush, and photoshop... hell, even just zbrush and photoshop (i can always learn blender!) become linux native, i'll leave windows behind FOREVER and not look back... i might even just do that now and run those programs through WINE until they become native.
as a post note... i actually don't see 3ds max ever becoming linux native. autodesk are stalwartly refusing to do a ground up re-write of max for a customerbase that they already have, and have been asking for it for years. so i can't see them investing in doing so for a new platform... and i dread to think how buggy it would be if they simply ported it over.
there are opensource photoshop alternatives that might not be quite as powerful, but are still pretty viable. the only big one for me is zbrush, it's the most important part of my workflow... and strangely enough, i can actually see Pixologic embracing linux if valve push hard enough.
oh well, all speculation. but i'll be thinking about running linux and letting you all know how awesome it is.
I would imagine programs that already have native mac versions (Zbrush, Modo) would be easier to 'port' to linux?
Regardless Valve pushing for linux is quite exciting. It's really good that lots of indie titles are supporting it too - I'd love to see more openGL games (Speaking of engines that run on linux, iDtech anyone?) and if my main programs (modo / zbrush) supported linux I'd make the switch and finally bother learning the OS properly. Of course it's not going to happen overnight, especially with all the small support programs artists use (marmoset, nDo, other plugins) that would need to be updated.
im going to have an Ubuntu adventure later on today, will document it and post it up, so people can see how easy/how much of a ballache it is to switch.
im going to have an Ubuntu adventure later on today, will document it and post it up, so people can see how easy/how much of a ballache it is to switch.
Ubuntu is probably the easiest flavor of Linux to transition to. The live disc makes it easy to try, but you can even install Ubuntu into Windows and it will run as a dual boot setup without disturbing your Windows installation. If you decide you've had enough of it, you can just uninstall as you would any Windows application.
That said, I hope Valve succeeds in bringing Linux gaming into the mainstream. The one thing that has been holding me back from dumping Windows entirely has been the ability to play my games without WINE or "Play on Linux". I'm generally excited about what this might bring and I'm very impressed by the performance of their Source games (L4D2) compare to Windows: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/118882-Valves-Source-Engine-Runs-Better-on-Linux-Than-Windows
im going to have an Ubuntu adventure later on today, will document it and post it up, so people can see how easy/how much of a ballache it is to switch.
Actually, I don't recommend using Ubuntu since the user interface is not the greatest. I would go with the KDE version of Linux Mint. The user interface is closer to Window 7's, and anything that works on Ubuntu will work on Mint (from my experience).
Actually, I don't recommend using Ubuntu since the user interface is not the greatest. I would go with the KDE version of Linux Mint. The user interface is closer to Window 7's, and anything that works on Ubuntu will work on Mint (from my experience).
They're not making Steam available to anything but Ubuntu, so there'd be no point if your purpose is to find out what kind of Steam experience you would get on Ubuntu. I'm not a fan of the Unity interface either, but it's best not to introduce too many variables to the test.
Actually, I don't recommend using Ubuntu since the user interface is not the greatest. I would go with the KDE version of Linux Mint. The user interface is closer to Window 7's, and anything that works on Ubuntu will work on Mint (from my experience).
a quick google search reveals many themes/interfaces for Ubuntu, including some that are almost identical to windows 7...
the GUI is almost completely customizable in a fairly user friendly way, too. very similar to designing a web-page.
I would imagine programs that already have native mac versions (Zbrush, Modo) would be easier to 'port' to linux?
There actually was a Linux beta version of Modo back in the day. I think around the 101 or 201 release. Luxology scrapped it because there wasn't a big enough audience to warrant its development. It seems these days more studios are transitioning to Linux workstations, if there was enough demand I have no doubt Luxology would start rolling out a Linux version to cater to them.
It seems like a weird chicken and the egg thing. On the one hand myself, and many others I know, keep saying we'd love to ditch windows and go for Linux development, but the problem is the tools. No engine, no Max/Maya/Modo, no zBrush, and Gimp is not quite up to par with Photoshop. Then on the other hand the devs keep saying they don't want to support a version of their stuff for Linux because there aren't enough people working with it. This is why I'm hopeful that this move by Valve will break that dam.
Also, I had this random thought, but did it occur to anyone else to have the studios themselves develop these tools? I know in my studio we keep complaining about certain things in the pipeline and how they could be better. Autodesk even has that user-voice thing for Max. Instead of paying thousands of dollars per seat for a Max license, why not hire some programmers to add those features to Blender? I know it sounds idealistic. But since it's open-source, you're not just getting the benefit of what your programmers are doing, but also what other studios are doing to it, assuming more studios adopt this approach.
I know it sounds pie in the sky and idealistic, but it really does sound cheaper and more efficient than hoping Autodesk does the right thing. Hell, we already have it to an extent in the form of free plug-ins and scripts for Max/Maya.
It seems like a weird chicken and the egg thing. On the one hand myself, and many others I know, keep saying we'd love to ditch windows and go for Linux development, but the problem is the tools. No engine, no Max/Maya/Modo, no zBrush, and Gimp is not quite up to par with Photoshop. Then on the other hand the devs keep saying they don't want to support a version of their stuff for Linux because there aren't enough people working with it. This is why I'm hopeful that this move by Valve will break that dam.
Also, I had this random thought, but did it occur to anyone else to have the studios themselves develop these tools? I know in my studio we keep complaining about certain things in the pipeline and how they could be better. Autodesk even has that user-voice thing for Max. Instead of paying thousands of dollars per seat for a Max license, why not hire some programmers to add those features to Blender? I know it sounds idealistic. But since it's open-source, you're not just getting the benefit of what your programmers are doing, but also what other studios are doing to it, assuming more studios adopt this approach.
I know it sounds pie in the sky and idealistic, but it really does sound cheaper and more efficient than hoping Autodesk does the right thing. Hell, we already have it to an extent in the form of free plug-ins and scripts for Max/Maya.
That actually makes a lot of sense. It also gives the studio much more control over the tools they use. If there's a feature you need, just code it in. That's better than waiting for Max/Maya to implement those features in their next version. If studios started putting effort into making them better (and shared at least some of their breakthroughs with the community), it would create a positive feedback loop that would likely lead Blender to outpace Autodesk.
The key to open source succeeding is really just participation. The more people involved, the faster it will go. It sure would be nice to see Windows/Autodesk dominance broken.
It seems like a weird chicken and the egg thing. On the one hand myself, and many others I know, keep saying we'd love to ditch windows and go for Linux development, but the problem is the tools. No engine, no Max/Maya/Modo, no zBrush, and Gimp is not quite up to par with Photoshop. .
This is wrong. Maya and softimage have linux versions. I use them everyday. To run modo you install wine 1.4 instead of 1.5 and it works fine. For zbrush i run it in a virtual machine and its the same performance as under win7. I use the native linux mudbox most of the time instead, however.
And gimp? Imo 2.8 is a beast. I use it even on windows machines.
Replies
might as well get rid of windows to. just don't need it. linux is fine now for games movies and the net. ill run a dual boot until they get most of the games on linux. but for the most part the system will run linux and ill buy games on linux instead of windows.
A new lecture from the Ubuntu guys. At about 13mins the Valve guy comes on. It's pretty interesting.
One question that came up, which I never thought about, was whether the source engine will have a version for linux. It got me thinking, if we want to develop an indie title for Linux with Steam, what are our options?
I don't believe UDK can be run and publish on Linux. Is there anything else out there? What about Cryengine?
Unity 4 can publish games to Linux though you can't run the editor on it as far as I know.
Other than that 2nd easiest option is to code your games to use Mono (open source version of .net) + MonoGame (open source clone of XNA) or some other .net game framework like SFML2.net.
Or code with HaXe + NME.
http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page
https://monogame.codeplex.com/
http://www.sfml-dev.org/
http://www.haxenme.org/
If Valve is smart, they will make Source available on Linux. It might put pressure on Crytek and id to put out their own Linux client for their tools. This would mean more Linux games in the Steam store from the most innovative people in the industry: indie developers. With the big three engines running on Linux, Steam stands a good chance of catalyzing a Linux market for games.
Looks like Unity is one. And that Mono stuff which I'll take a look at.
Still, I wish something like UDK (maybe UDK4?) and/or Crytek would do it too. I can't recall anything recent being done with the Source engine by non-valve groups.
http://www.terathon.com/c4engine/index.php
except if you listened to what the guy said in the video, it's pretty clear that Valves focus going forward is going to be developing games for linux with the view of leaving such "closed" systems as windows behind.
the biggest argument from autodesk, adobe, etc. about not making software for linux has been consistently "there's no money in it, all the major developers use windows".
so if valve, arguably one of the biggest developers AND distributors out there not only starts developing for linux, but also pushing their client base to make linux versions of their games... surely that might at least turn the heads of autodesk and the like?
either way... as soon as max, zbrush, and photoshop... hell, even just zbrush and photoshop (i can always learn blender!) become linux native, i'll leave windows behind FOREVER and not look back... i might even just do that now and run those programs through WINE until they become native.
as a post note... i actually don't see 3ds max ever becoming linux native. autodesk are stalwartly refusing to do a ground up re-write of max for a customerbase that they already have, and have been asking for it for years. so i can't see them investing in doing so for a new platform... and i dread to think how buggy it would be if they simply ported it over.
there are opensource photoshop alternatives that might not be quite as powerful, but are still pretty viable. the only big one for me is zbrush, it's the most important part of my workflow... and strangely enough, i can actually see Pixologic embracing linux if valve push hard enough.
oh well, all speculation. but i'll be thinking about running linux and letting you all know how awesome it is.
Regardless Valve pushing for linux is quite exciting. It's really good that lots of indie titles are supporting it too - I'd love to see more openGL games (Speaking of engines that run on linux, iDtech anyone?) and if my main programs (modo / zbrush) supported linux I'd make the switch and finally bother learning the OS properly. Of course it's not going to happen overnight, especially with all the small support programs artists use (marmoset, nDo, other plugins) that would need to be updated.
Still, exciting times.
Ubuntu is probably the easiest flavor of Linux to transition to. The live disc makes it easy to try, but you can even install Ubuntu into Windows and it will run as a dual boot setup without disturbing your Windows installation. If you decide you've had enough of it, you can just uninstall as you would any Windows application.
That said, I hope Valve succeeds in bringing Linux gaming into the mainstream. The one thing that has been holding me back from dumping Windows entirely has been the ability to play my games without WINE or "Play on Linux". I'm generally excited about what this might bring and I'm very impressed by the performance of their Source games (L4D2) compare to Windows: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/118882-Valves-Source-Engine-Runs-Better-on-Linux-Than-Windows
Actually, I don't recommend using Ubuntu since the user interface is not the greatest. I would go with the KDE version of Linux Mint. The user interface is closer to Window 7's, and anything that works on Ubuntu will work on Mint (from my experience).
They're not making Steam available to anything but Ubuntu, so there'd be no point if your purpose is to find out what kind of Steam experience you would get on Ubuntu. I'm not a fan of the Unity interface either, but it's best not to introduce too many variables to the test.
a quick google search reveals many themes/interfaces for Ubuntu, including some that are almost identical to windows 7...
the GUI is almost completely customizable in a fairly user friendly way, too. very similar to designing a web-page.
There actually was a Linux beta version of Modo back in the day. I think around the 101 or 201 release. Luxology scrapped it because there wasn't a big enough audience to warrant its development. It seems these days more studios are transitioning to Linux workstations, if there was enough demand I have no doubt Luxology would start rolling out a Linux version to cater to them.
Also, I had this random thought, but did it occur to anyone else to have the studios themselves develop these tools? I know in my studio we keep complaining about certain things in the pipeline and how they could be better. Autodesk even has that user-voice thing for Max. Instead of paying thousands of dollars per seat for a Max license, why not hire some programmers to add those features to Blender? I know it sounds idealistic. But since it's open-source, you're not just getting the benefit of what your programmers are doing, but also what other studios are doing to it, assuming more studios adopt this approach.
I know it sounds pie in the sky and idealistic, but it really does sound cheaper and more efficient than hoping Autodesk does the right thing. Hell, we already have it to an extent in the form of free plug-ins and scripts for Max/Maya.
That actually makes a lot of sense. It also gives the studio much more control over the tools they use. If there's a feature you need, just code it in. That's better than waiting for Max/Maya to implement those features in their next version. If studios started putting effort into making them better (and shared at least some of their breakthroughs with the community), it would create a positive feedback loop that would likely lead Blender to outpace Autodesk.
The key to open source succeeding is really just participation. The more people involved, the faster it will go. It sure would be nice to see Windows/Autodesk dominance broken.
This is wrong. Maya and softimage have linux versions. I use them everyday. To run modo you install wine 1.4 instead of 1.5 and it works fine. For zbrush i run it in a virtual machine and its the same performance as under win7. I use the native linux mudbox most of the time instead, however.
And gimp? Imo 2.8 is a beast. I use it even on windows machines.