Note: This is a really old article, if you're here, I do suggest you read this article "Why The Porting Method Doesn't Matter For Linux Games".
Thanks to the recent fiasco of The Witcher 2 I wanted to write down some thoughts on why we shouldn't accept bad quality ports from developers.
Only in recent years have we had so many damned games in our Linux libraries that you now see comments from Linux gamers like "I've got too many games already!" which I imagine now sounds familiar to a lot of you. We have never before seen so much attention from developers thanks to Valve & Steam.
Also thanks to the push from developers we are seeing ports come along that are quite frankly lazy or just downright buggy to the point of being unplayable for a majority of people.
The problem is if we keep accepting ports at a sub-par quality then Linux will gain a reputation for having low quality games. Think about that big picture for a moment, seriously.
Imagine if you will that AAA developers started pushing out more games for Linux using technology like this "eON" that was used to port The Witcher 2. Let's say we have a lot of them and it suddenly looks like Linux has a lot of big-name games. You then have plenty of people trying out Linux, and seeing that their games run with terrible performance on the exact same hardware giving them the impression that Linux itself is bad for gaming. That's not good for anyone.
I've seen many people say "the toolkit used to port doesn't matter?". That in my eyes is a very naive statement to make. Of course it matters, it can mean the difference of light and day in the quality of a game on Linux. Which directly goes back to my point above about the perception of Linux gaming.
You can still say the toolkit doesn't matter and use whatever comparison/analogy you fancy, but if the toolkit is the root cause of the issue, like it will be 99% of the time when we are talking about computer software then yes, it does of course matter.
I've seen comments now from other major websites stating we should just accept them and be thankful we have them at all. That is an idiotic statement from people who don't look at the bigger picture.
Think about the developers and publishers who will see it as acceptable to push terrible Linux ports out the door and call it a day with only profits in mind. The consumer perception of Linux gaming would worsen yet again with even more bad quality ports.
I am all for ports from developers, of course I am I run this site after-all. I as a customer however do not want to pay for games that would work on Windows, but run like a snail on Linux, why should I? Why should you?
Final added point: You should never attack a developer when they reach out to the community having issues, that's not acceptable. Feedback is fine, but name calling is childish and makes Linux again look bad. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Thanks to the recent fiasco of The Witcher 2 I wanted to write down some thoughts on why we shouldn't accept bad quality ports from developers.
Only in recent years have we had so many damned games in our Linux libraries that you now see comments from Linux gamers like "I've got too many games already!" which I imagine now sounds familiar to a lot of you. We have never before seen so much attention from developers thanks to Valve & Steam.
Also thanks to the push from developers we are seeing ports come along that are quite frankly lazy or just downright buggy to the point of being unplayable for a majority of people.
The problem is if we keep accepting ports at a sub-par quality then Linux will gain a reputation for having low quality games. Think about that big picture for a moment, seriously.
Imagine if you will that AAA developers started pushing out more games for Linux using technology like this "eON" that was used to port The Witcher 2. Let's say we have a lot of them and it suddenly looks like Linux has a lot of big-name games. You then have plenty of people trying out Linux, and seeing that their games run with terrible performance on the exact same hardware giving them the impression that Linux itself is bad for gaming. That's not good for anyone.
I've seen many people say "the toolkit used to port doesn't matter?". That in my eyes is a very naive statement to make. Of course it matters, it can mean the difference of light and day in the quality of a game on Linux. Which directly goes back to my point above about the perception of Linux gaming.
You can still say the toolkit doesn't matter and use whatever comparison/analogy you fancy, but if the toolkit is the root cause of the issue, like it will be 99% of the time when we are talking about computer software then yes, it does of course matter.
I've seen comments now from other major websites stating we should just accept them and be thankful we have them at all. That is an idiotic statement from people who don't look at the bigger picture.
Think about the developers and publishers who will see it as acceptable to push terrible Linux ports out the door and call it a day with only profits in mind. The consumer perception of Linux gaming would worsen yet again with even more bad quality ports.
I am all for ports from developers, of course I am I run this site after-all. I as a customer however do not want to pay for games that would work on Windows, but run like a snail on Linux, why should I? Why should you?
Final added point: You should never attack a developer when they reach out to the community having issues, that's not acceptable. Feedback is fine, but name calling is childish and makes Linux again look bad. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
First of all let me say this port is "kinda" playable for me. Now some more background info:
- i have the game as a box and on steam cause i support CDPR for their effort to bring DRM free games back than and nowadays
So after i saw it finally launched on steam i was realy realy happy. What happend:
1.) The configuration tool didn't suggest any useafull settings (all was set to low). I suspect this is cause of the local bug in the tool since my system locale is not english
2.) I started the game like 10 times till i figured out that because of this locale bug all my other settings where screwed too << keyboard & gamepad
3.) Once i figured and was able to set the gamepad to default i was finally able to play and bugged out on the tutorial ... i couldn't put a mutagen cause the raised skills wasn't mutable << at this time already 2h where spend i still had no real running game.
4.) Ok i restarted again and ignored the tutorial -> finally i was able to play
5.) Somewhere during the tutorial (i don't remember where) the framedrop was again so high , so i needed to adjust my settings once more
6.) After i got throu the prolog -> flotsam ... damm nothing again goes anymore frames so low that it hurts -> again change the setting
Now i compare this to windows .... setup the game on my even older pc configuration -> run the game with all settings beside uber.
I'm someone who uses pc's (dos / os2 wrap if someone reminds / windows / linux) for a long term and i'm often asked to help from my friends and family. Would i suggest them to buy the on linux -> omg no. Why i wouldn't? Cause basically , while i was able to fix and get it running and don't mind a reduced quality i can't expect that from them. Can i warn all the steamos user (later steambox buyers) that this game is not optimal for their system -> i can't! Do i want steamos and steamboxes be successfull -> i want! What does it mean for this game? No matter how much i want it / no matter how much i love cdpr for different reasons / no matter how much i wanna encourage cdpr to make more ports , i basically can't allow them to be as bad as this one.
To all the people who defending this port as a effort. Think a moment about the following ->
The xbox 360 cost around 100 to 150 bucks + the game it might be 120 to 170 bucks. A steambox might be 500 bucks + the game = 520 bucks. The out of the box experience on a system which cost 1/3 of a steambox is right of now much much better.
With that said if you defend this kind of ports you take away any good argument for linux being a viable gameing platform. If you don't mind picture quality you get for 1/3 of the price the game. If you mind picture quality you get for the same price a stressfree experience on windows. On this point we need to be honest ... the nerds won't make linux successfull (we are just a few) but the day to day user can make it successfull and for this people there is no reason to choose linux with such quality ports (even if they agree with loosing a few frames , which i doubt the powergamers which complains if they don't get 60fps will do! I have even read someone complaining for not geting 120fps cause a 120hz screen on linux).....
I totally agree with liam .. the dev is the wrong person here to attack but we realy need to find a way to show the overall picture. I hope that there will be enough business behind steamos end of this year so not we customer need to point this out but the business itself regulates this. Right of now it's hard to be a customer (which f... got a realy bad product) and a linux ethusiast (which at least got a product and so can show he want products).
In the end i know where i stand ... as much as i love linux ... this is a business and it's a contract i made when i payed. I can play a game and the publisher / dev delivers the game. Right of now the contract isn't fullfilled by the publisher / dev ... crashes , not working config tools and a performance which puts a shame on the product. If people still go for the other route ... welcome to what ea is doing on windows (take a look on the release of bf4 and all the problems).
I think you got me so i stop here ... all points are made, thanx to the people who make it down to this words.
- i have the game as a box and on steam cause i support CDPR for their effort to bring DRM free games back than and nowadays
So after i saw it finally launched on steam i was realy realy happy. What happend:
1.) The configuration tool didn't suggest any useafull settings (all was set to low). I suspect this is cause of the local bug in the tool since my system locale is not english
2.) I started the game like 10 times till i figured out that because of this locale bug all my other settings where screwed too << keyboard & gamepad
3.) Once i figured and was able to set the gamepad to default i was finally able to play and bugged out on the tutorial ... i couldn't put a mutagen cause the raised skills wasn't mutable << at this time already 2h where spend i still had no real running game.
4.) Ok i restarted again and ignored the tutorial -> finally i was able to play
5.) Somewhere during the tutorial (i don't remember where) the framedrop was again so high , so i needed to adjust my settings once more
6.) After i got throu the prolog -> flotsam ... damm nothing again goes anymore frames so low that it hurts -> again change the setting
Now i compare this to windows .... setup the game on my even older pc configuration -> run the game with all settings beside uber.
I'm someone who uses pc's (dos / os2 wrap if someone reminds / windows / linux) for a long term and i'm often asked to help from my friends and family. Would i suggest them to buy the on linux -> omg no. Why i wouldn't? Cause basically , while i was able to fix and get it running and don't mind a reduced quality i can't expect that from them. Can i warn all the steamos user (later steambox buyers) that this game is not optimal for their system -> i can't! Do i want steamos and steamboxes be successfull -> i want! What does it mean for this game? No matter how much i want it / no matter how much i love cdpr for different reasons / no matter how much i wanna encourage cdpr to make more ports , i basically can't allow them to be as bad as this one.
To all the people who defending this port as a effort. Think a moment about the following ->
The xbox 360 cost around 100 to 150 bucks + the game it might be 120 to 170 bucks. A steambox might be 500 bucks + the game = 520 bucks. The out of the box experience on a system which cost 1/3 of a steambox is right of now much much better.
With that said if you defend this kind of ports you take away any good argument for linux being a viable gameing platform. If you don't mind picture quality you get for 1/3 of the price the game. If you mind picture quality you get for the same price a stressfree experience on windows. On this point we need to be honest ... the nerds won't make linux successfull (we are just a few) but the day to day user can make it successfull and for this people there is no reason to choose linux with such quality ports (even if they agree with loosing a few frames , which i doubt the powergamers which complains if they don't get 60fps will do! I have even read someone complaining for not geting 120fps cause a 120hz screen on linux).....
I totally agree with liam .. the dev is the wrong person here to attack but we realy need to find a way to show the overall picture. I hope that there will be enough business behind steamos end of this year so not we customer need to point this out but the business itself regulates this. Right of now it's hard to be a customer (which f... got a realy bad product) and a linux ethusiast (which at least got a product and so can show he want products).
In the end i know where i stand ... as much as i love linux ... this is a business and it's a contract i made when i payed. I can play a game and the publisher / dev delivers the game. Right of now the contract isn't fullfilled by the publisher / dev ... crashes , not working config tools and a performance which puts a shame on the product. If people still go for the other route ... welcome to what ea is doing on windows (take a look on the release of bf4 and all the problems).
I think you got me so i stop here ... all points are made, thanx to the people who make it down to this words.
0 Likes
Quoting: FutureSutureQuoting: fedsoWhat about Valve's ToGL? Considering all of Valve's games that are on Linux now and run pretty damn fine, using ToGL sounds like a much better approach than eON.Quoting: FutureSutureHow much would a native port have cost as compared to whatever was done here? I am rather curious. It's not like the game is from over a decade ago and it's not like the source code isn't available either.Definitely MUCH more (both in money and time) than the wrapper since they would have to port the engine first.
That's what I've been asking as well.
Without knowing the actual numbers and prices, I wonder if a native port by "the well-known porters" wouldn't have been the better alternative. I don't see why this has to be necessarily more costly.
Having a look at the "Virtual Programming" website, they feature an upcoming port of "Dirt Showdown". It says upcoming release in Q3 and it's currently in beta. So this obviously takes quite some time and - (surprised face) testing. Hard to believe this is "cheap".
0 Likes
Quoting: entropyQuoting: FutureSutureThat's what I've been asking as well.Quoting: fedsoWhat about Valve's ToGL? Considering all of Valve's games that are on Linux now and run pretty damn fine, using ToGL sounds like a much better approach than eON.Quoting: FutureSutureHow much would a native port have cost as compared to whatever was done here? I am rather curious. It's not like the game is from over a decade ago and it's not like the source code isn't available either.Definitely MUCH more (both in money and time) than the wrapper since they would have to port the engine first.
Without knowing the actual numbers and prices, I wonder if a native port by "the well-known porters" wouldn't have been the better alternative. I don't see why this has to be necessarily more costly.
Having a look at the "Virtual Programming" website, they feature an upcoming port of "Dirt Showdown". It says upcoming release in Q3 and it's currently in beta. So this obviously takes quite some time and - (surprised face) testing. Hard to believe this is "cheap".
you can simply look up the reasons why ToGL is not suitable for wine. it is very limited to what valve needs and nowhere near complete
still, even if they used ToGL, you're left with videos, files, sound...
0 Likes
What I do not understand is the assumption that AAA developers need to be baby coddled while Indie developers do not. With Indie games we expect quality native ports and by and large receive them, but when a AAA developer shows up suddenly we are all supposed to accept a sub-par effort from a company with far more resources than those Indie developers. This makes no sense to me.
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: AnonymousQuoting: entropyyou can simply look up the reasons why ToGL is not suitable for wine. it is very limited to what valve needs and nowhere near completeQuoting: FutureSutureThat's what I've been asking as well.Quoting: fedsoWhat about Valve's ToGL? Considering all of Valve's games that are on Linux now and run pretty damn fine, using ToGL sounds like a much better approach than eON.Quoting: FutureSutureHow much would a native port have cost as compared to whatever was done here? I am rather curious. It's not like the game is from over a decade ago and it's not like the source code isn't available either.Definitely MUCH more (both in money and time) than the wrapper since they would have to port the engine first.
Without knowing the actual numbers and prices, I wonder if a native port by "the well-known porters" wouldn't have been the better alternative. I don't see why this has to be necessarily more costly.
Having a look at the "Virtual Programming" website, they feature an upcoming port of "Dirt Showdown". It says upcoming release in Q3 and it's currently in beta. So this obviously takes quite some time and - (surprised face) testing. Hard to believe this is "cheap".
still, even if they used ToGL, you're left with videos, files, sound...
Sorry, my comment might have been a bit misleading as it wasn't specifically targeted at ToGL - in particular not with respect to WINE/WINELIB - but a native port.
For the "videos, files, sound", it looks like _all_ middleware used in TW2 is available for Linux, so that shouldn't be a big issue.
0 Likes
I really don't care how the game is ported as long as it works and the performance is good. System Shock 2 "feels" native to me. Witcher 2 "feels" native to me, it runs like any other game and it picks my xbox 360 controller up with ease. If they can get more games on Linux that work and don't require tons of configuration, then I'm don't mind. Better than a developer telling you just to run the game on wine (example: The developer of Retro City Rampage).
Nevertheless, it sucks that others are having performance problems, and I hope they can fix it will all the feedback from that particular thread on the steam forums.
Nevertheless, it sucks that others are having performance problems, and I hope they can fix it will all the feedback from that particular thread on the steam forums.
0 Likes
Its perhaps better if there is a game studio dedicated to do ports for Linux.
A group of people willingly to support Linux by helping other studios to port over their games so that they can only focus on their projects.
Porting games and working on other IP's isn't going to work especially for 3rd party studios that do console ports and PC and Mac ports. It takes time.
A group of people willingly to support Linux by helping other studios to port over their games so that they can only focus on their projects.
Porting games and working on other IP's isn't going to work especially for 3rd party studios that do console ports and PC and Mac ports. It takes time.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: AnonymousIts perhaps better if there is a game studio dedicated to do ports for Linux.
A group of people willingly to support Linux by helping other studios to port over their games so that they can only focus on their projects.
Porting games and working on other IP's isn't going to work especially for 3rd party studios that do console ports and PC and Mac ports. It takes time.
Yes, it might be time for a rise in professional porting houses again. At least for older titles that were not developed with cross-platform in mind.
Back in the day Loki Software made stellar ports of some very Linux unfriendly games. What they lacked was an effective means of distribution. That is not a problem anymore.
0 Likes
QuoteWhat about Valve's ToGL? Considering all of Valve's games that are on Linux now and run pretty damn fine, using ToGL sounds like a much better approach than eON.
They didn't run fine at the beginning and actually some still have game breaking bugs, I've never been able to complete HL: OF because of this bug: https://github.com/ValveSoftware/halflife/issues/917
According to jaycee1980 from the Steam forum: "Actually, we've had plenty of help and feedback from Valve...". So it would seems Valve does consider eON a valid solution.
0 Likes
What exactly is the fiasco? I purchased Witcher2 on Friday on sale, and I've played it all weekend on Fedora 21 with no trouble. What have been the issues?
0 Likes
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me