Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Mar 2014 14:13 UTC
Games

We're initially going to be launching our Linux support on GOG.com with the full GOG.com treatment for Ubuntu and Mint. That means that right now, we're hammering away at testing games on a variety of configurations, training up our teams on Linux-speak, and generally getting geared up for a big kick-off in the fall with at least 100 Linux games ready for you to play. This is, of course, going to include games that we sell which already have Linux clients, but we'll also be bringing Linux gamers a variety of classics that are, for the first time, officially supported and maintained by a storefront like ours.

...and the Linux gaming news just keeps on coming. I remember how dismissive many people were back when Valve announced its Steam Machine initiative, stating Microsoft's hold would never ever be broken.

Makes them sound like Nokia and BlackBerry during the iPhone's launch, doesn't it?

Thread beginning with comment 584733
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
przemo_li
Member since:
2010-06-01

I do!

But we talk about complex stuff here.

Very complex.


So apps can do 2 things:
Pack all the dependencies and install them alongside of the game (and each game have its own bundle).

Or

Use what is already installed.
(But then some minor differences can become so annoying, and with Linux there are dozens of major distros each with possibly different version of the lib You relay on)


Valve solved that puzzle buy standardizing on common bundle of "base libraries" which game can target. (So they target one target only ;P )


Imagine MS releasing Windows each year, and with different DX and .Net, and VS runtime for each for at least 6y. That is how bad it can be for Linux.


(And that is how bad it will be for OSX/Win when free/cheap OS upgrades kick in)



On the other hand need driver solution. Valve solution is fully open (anyone can contribute, and Valve code is FLOSS), so e.g. GOG also can standardize on it. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 5

Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Well, Microsoft have at least something to teach to Linux : a very, well, I mean, VERY... **VERY** strong API and ABI interface !

A 1999' Windows 2000 program can still run on Windows 8. Can Linux say the same ? Microsoft learned a lot with the Windows 95/98 DLL's Hell, and solved it almost completely.

Kochise

Reply Parent Score: 4

intangible Member since:
2005-07-06

Sure, why wouldn't it?

X11 is notoriously backwards compatible and even an a.out binary from 1992 will run on the latest Debian.

Dynamic linked libraries are often the problem, but that's hardly Linux unique... If you can't find the libraries anymore or the specific library you want to use has a newer version that isn't compatible with the older version, you could have some headache.

If your binary is statically compiled, (often the case of proprietary software especially on Windows) you should be fine. For the really complicated scenarios, you can go the chroot route.

Reply Parent Score: 5

djame Member since:
2005-07-08

that's so true. Today, you cannot even compile a qt app on ubunut and run it on another similar distro without having a GLIBC Number error. That's so fucking lame. And it was the same during the loki games and corel wordperfect era.

As much as I used to love my linux station, third party commercial apps are simply a no go in the linux world. yeah, yeah, compile the source and stuff. But if I want to play any old linux loki games on a recent distro, I'm better of grabbing a windows cracked version and run it with crossover or transgaming (or whatever name they have those days)

Reply Parent Score: 2

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Some programs from windows 2k will run, but not all of them.

Why do you think there are a number of companies stuck on windows XP?

Take a look at this:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/ms788708.aspx

Great VB 6 programs will work on windows 8! Hooray! Oh wait, not all libraries will... Never mind.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Some would say that this far-reaching backwards compatibility is a drawback in terms of, among other things, code complexity and security.

Reply Parent Score: 3

TechGeek Member since:
2006-01-14

Well, Microsoft have at least something to teach to Linux : a very, well, I mean, VERY... **VERY** strong API and ABI interface !

A 1999' Windows 2000 program can still run on Windows 8. Can Linux say the same ? Microsoft learned a lot with the Windows 95/98 DLL's Hell, and solved it almost completely.

Kochise



Absolutely. I just installed Return to Castle Wolfenstein on Fedora 20. Many WIndows 95/98 games do NOT play well on Windows 7 or 8.

Reply Parent Score: 3

tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

The Linux kernel ABI has been basically unchanged since the 1.x days, you just need to compile a kernel that can execute 32-bit a.out files for that to work properly. Don't depend on the layout of /proc or /sys, and bundle your dependencies, and Linux programs can last a long ass time.

Reply Parent Score: 3

boudewijn Member since:
2006-03-05

"Imagine MS releasing Windows each year, and with different DX and .Net, and VS runtime for each for at least 6y. That is how bad it can be for Linux."

Yes, but that's what happens right? You always have to package the msvc runtime you built with because otherwise your app won't run. And there's a new one every year. I've always found that quite a pain.

Reply Parent Score: 3