Quoting: natewardawgOne is using a few 100% native calls, but using non-native names in the code, the other is translating non native calls for an entire OS at runtime, it's a huge difference.

Not huge, because another is not translating the entire OS unlike what you say. Wrappers like Wine don't emulate the whole Windows kernel for instance. They simply translate a given list of calls into ones that provide similar functionality through native means. It's far from providing entire OS at runtime. That's why for instance Wine won't work for Windows hardware drivers as far as I know.

So the difference between static and dynamic translation is purely nominal. The result is simply a chain of calls into native functions. Wine naturally should implement Windows calling mechanism I suppose, to actually be able to translate Windows binary calls. Source wrappers don't need that.

What you are describing on the other hand, is already something like ReactOS which indeed provides a whole Windows like operating system. Wine is nowhere aiming at such functionality.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: natewardawgSo when the game goes to render DX11 stuff, your "DX11" code actually makes OpenGL calls.

This is obviously a simplified version, but should hopefully get the point across. :)

Same thing happens dynamically, except calls are translated at runtime. Even at source level, the wrapper needs to retrofit completely foreign API into another one that is native. It's a hack, not a proper software design to begin with. But as long as it produces a working result cheaper, some don't care if it's a hack.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: natewardawgI have to agree 100% here, wrapping an entire OS compatibility system is much different than adding some functions that are named the same as those of a Windows API so that it will call a non Windows one instead.

I don't see a big difference. They still need to translate calls, translate shaders and etc. Just because one is done at compile time and another at run time doesn't make first one not translate them.

The only benefit I can see here is that static translation offers more tools for correctness checking and etc. Without having the original code you have to deal with results as is.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: ShmerlBinary or source, it's still wrapping. One isn't much better than another.

To me as a software developer as well as to me as a Linux user, that's a huge difference. Wrapping binaries on a different OS would be the very last resort if totally necessary. And it's not necessary for me in case of gaming. While wrappers for source is a common design pattern [External Link].

If it runs in the end with acceptable performance, I don't see how it matters. And they are both not native. If you are a purist from development perspective, you can't say one is OK while other is not. It's still translating calls (statically or dynamically).

And, as a Linux user I'd even say the opposite - FOSS dynamic translation is already better than static closed one, just because it's FOSS (as long at they are comparable performance wise of course).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: ScooptaAlthough Feral does seem to put quite a bit of work into their ports I would like more info on exactly how much wrapping vs porting they're doing.

VP and WINE are doing binary wrapping, while Feral is doing source wrapping. The first runs Windows binaries in Linux, the second creates pure ("native" ) Linux binaries. Do we need way more information?

Binary or source, it's still wrapping. One isn't much better than another. So if someone objects to wrapping in general, there shouldn't be a difference to what wrapping. I don't object to it. Wrapping simply is cheaper than proper rewrite, that's why many resort to it. Surely, a proper native version is always the best way to do it, but it can be also the most expensive.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PlintslîchoThe artwork by Jakub Różalski is fantastic!

He has some nice works based on The Witcher series:

https://www.artstation.com/artwork/68adO [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I see some clear Freelancer inspiration here. Hopefully it will come out DRM-free. Though I suppose it can be simply built from source?

Developers also can simply post ready builds on their own site, or use itch.io if they can't handle hosting.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: cRaZy-bisCuiTFunny, the artworks look like they got inspired by the Board Game Scythe [External Link]!

It's made by the same artist: https://www.artstation.com/jakubrozalski [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Nice to see actual progress! It's something to show to skeptics who can't accept that Linux gaming is actually growing.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

One proposal - may be remove March 2017 from the stats, so graphs will start from April 2017 and there wouldn't be such curve there, caused by the start from 0 (I'm talking about trends page).

Also, if possible - in the trends and graphs, can you show number of users in addition to percentages (when you hover over a dot)? It will help understand them better. Abstract percentages can be misleading.

View this comment - View article - View full comments