YouTube videos require cookies, you must accept their cookies to view. View cookie preferences.
Direct Link
Direct Link
We have a real lack of tactical FPS games, and I would really welcome Insurgency on Linux. I've been looking forward to it since their initial Steam store page mentioned Linux before the release, and then it was taken off a while later.
Newest confirmation is from August 1st:
QuoteWe didn't recieve CS:GO Linux code, our programmer is working on a different solution. The Linux support is still planned.
About the game (Official)
Take to the streets for intense close quarters combat, where a team's survival depends upon securing crucial strongholds and destroying enemy supply in this multiplayer and cooperative Source Engine based experience. The follow-up game to the award-winning Source mod, Insurgency is highly competitive and unforgivingly lethal, striking a balance between one-life gameplay and prolonged action.
Thanks for letting us know Ben. 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.
Quoting: MGOidWow. After reading all this, now I understand why so many indie developers try to build their own engine.
Yep.
0 Likes
Quoting: loggfreakwhat people need to understand is that the source engine is heavily reliant on Havok for physx and related stuff, which is what the developpers mean with 'hidden licencing costs' since Havok's licencing is a bit cringeworthy
Quoting: MajorLunaCSo, when deciding which game engine to use, you can go with Source, which has tons of very expensive HIDDEN licensing fees that you pay even before you start developing, and has less and less support especially for multi-platform, being quite outdated anyway, and even more so being restricted to being used ONLY with Steam. ...
Why is anyone even developing using the Source Engine anymore when you stuck with bastardly crap like this. It's an insane joke. Steam/Valve, much like Micro$oft Window$, is just a money exploiting scheme, squeezing as much money from consumers as possible in every way possible, including influencing development of games used through their systems, and putting as little work as possible into making and supporting the products. Thus, it should be known and referred to as Valve'$ $team.
t's not valve that's getting the licencing fees, source is not outdated, it's been updated multiple times and the engine now is a lot different from the source engine when it was first released, and it's not tied to steam, otherwise titanfall would be on steam, since it runs on the source engine
there's a reason valve is developping their own physx engine for source2 instead of again relying on Havok to do the physics
Heh... So many don't have the moxie to do the physics themselves (not knocking the devs, mind...) that they trend to want to grab their own off the shelf solution (no different with the big-boys either...)- but Havok, while it's "great" to get you there, the multi-target expenses is brutal. And...they don't have to do that to themselves.
http://www.geeks3d.com/20100330/physx-vs-bullet-vs-havok/
The only scary thing there is that Bullet has "limited game support" - which really and truly means that it has few titles using it, even though it's supposed to be a pretty good answer. Many follow what everyone else is doing (Nobody got fired for...). Doesn't have to be that way.
0 Likes
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me