Search Unity

Linux Support :D

Discussion in 'Wish List' started by FelixAlias, Nov 14, 2005.

  1. MikeHergaarden

    MikeHergaarden

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    Posts:
    986
    I really want to be able to run linux servers too.

    Mac servers are no option to me, and I don't really prefer windows servers either.
     
  2. osa70

    osa70

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Posts:
    1
    eeePC uses Linux.

    It would be awsome to play Unity games on an eeePC with Linux.

    There are also many small laptops like eeePC and they often uses Linux because its a small operating system.

    And many people also uses Ubuntu Linux so Unity should also be ported to Ubuntu.
     
  3. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,603
    well it mainly uses Linux because the hardware is that useless that XP, Vista and OSX wouldn't run on it usefully. I would be crazy enough to assume that the iPhone outperforms the eee gamewise.
     
  4. MatthewW

    MatthewW

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    Posts:
    1,355
    I used an EEE for an entire month while unicycling through Vietnam. My machine runs XP, and has RAM upgraded to 2GB. The EEE has a GMA900 and actually runs Splume rather well. Raptor Safari's intro runs at ~15fps, but the CPU eats it when the game itself starts (900MHz).

    That said, though, I don't think there's a market for EE users, and Linux in general isn't worth the resources to support...
     
  5. Dragon Rider

    Dragon Rider

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Posts:
    280
    @taumel:

    > > > All stats i have indicate that linux users are fond of downloading but not so fond of paying < < <

    Duh! ANYONE YOU CARE TO NAME is alot more fond of free download, free usage software than Pay-2-play stuff.

    > > > As crossplatform tools like BlitzMax has shown the driver situation can be much more worse than the openGL side on windows so... < < <

    That's because the driver was not developed for Linux.

    > > > Actually Linux was the only system which ever crashed one of my harddrives due to the buggy NTFS implementation. < < <

    Again, because it's not Linux-native.

    > > >Actually OSX is what Linux could have been: a nice Unix were all the unhandy stuff is hidden. < < <

    I actually prefer being able to see every part of my Unix as opposed to OSX which hides all the handy stuff.

    @Leepo:

    > > >I don't care about playing games on unix though. < < <

    OSX is Unix.
     
  6. StarManta

    StarManta

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Posts:
    7,169
    Obviously we all like free stuff. What taumel was saying is that, each platform has a certain percentage of users who are willing to pay for quality software (as opposed to either pirating it or simply not having it). The OSX user base has a reputation for having a very high purchase rate, Windows is somewhat lower but due to its ubiquity is still substantial. In terms of payment, Linux users are scarcely a blip. That's why it gets ignored.

    I would third the request for a headless Linux server build option, though. Perhaps implementing some sort of API to make it easy to run commands remotely for it. (If one doesn't exist in Mono already)
     
  7. Dragon Rider

    Dragon Rider

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Posts:
    280
    @ Taumel:

    No offense intended. I just tend to get excitable in this area. :wink:

    @ StarManta:

    > > >In terms of payment, Linux users are scarcely a blip. That's why it gets ignored. < < <

    True. But that's because most Linux developers don't charge for their software. As far as I know, a lot of people would prefer to run their commercial games (WoW for one) on Linux if they can avoid Windows. That's why we want a Publish to Linux option. We can Publish to Windows and Mac, so why not Linux? Such an option wouldn't really have any "economic viability" for Otee, but neither does Publish to Windows. It does, however, increase the target audience for people developing with Unity. I'm not asking for a Linux IDE ( although it would *probably* be easier to do than a Windows IDE ). If I need a Mac to actually develop Unity games, then hey, I'll get a Mac. No problem. But the option to run those games on Linux is a much-wanted feature.
     
  8. bigkahuna

    bigkahuna

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Posts:
    5,435
    Even better than a "publish to Linux" option would be a Linux Web player IMHO. Might be worthwhile for adver-games and other non-paying uses for Unity on the Internet.

    Slightly OT: Ubuntu 8.04 has been released and apparently (haven't tried this myself yet) is easier than ever for Windoze types to try out. The OS on a CD is not only bootable (live CD) but now also has something called "Wubi" which allows you to install Ubuntu from Windows just as you would an application. No HD partitioning required, now that's a great idea!

    Further OT: Anyone else here (besides me that is) ever tried creating a 3D game using Blender?
     
  9. HiggyB

    HiggyB

    Unity Product Evangelist

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    6,183
    That's incorrect. Publish to Windows offers economic viability for the tool as without that ability we'd have significantly lower numbers of people using Unity as it would only target the Mac user base for content development. The cost of the Windows player effort therefore generates significant sales revenue and so it does offer "economic viability". Adding Linux player support will cost us quite a bit in terms of both implementation and ongoing support, yet it's not yet completely clear that it will generate a sufficient increase in sales to justify the effort and expense. This is obviously a topic that begs constant attention as the Linux user-base is growing, demand for Linux support is higher than in years past, our multiplayer support would benefit from a Linux run-time, etc. So we're keeping a close eye on this and will make the move if/when the time is right for Unity as a whole.

    @bigk: once we do a web player then doing stand-alone executables is a comparably small addition as the vast majority of the work is already done. So if we go that far then we might as well just finish the job.
     
  10. Marcel

    Marcel

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Posts:
    1
    But now that your are using much more Mono and Unity-made games run on Mono, maybe Linux port isn't crazy talk, or still is crazy talk?
     
  11. merkoth

    merkoth

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Posts:
    2
    I just signed up to be able to post a reply here.

    My problem is that I'm getting sick of people bashing Linux users because "they don't pay for software". We are not cheapskates. We pay for our software if necesary, hell I've paid quite a few dollars buying games that I know I won't be able to play on my favourite platform.

    Moreover, some of us don't use Linux just because it's free, we use it because we actually like it. Despite what most consumers would think, you can't apply the "you get what you paid for" to Linux. I haven't paid a dime and yet I got a full-featured, stable and modern OS. I would happily pay for it. Or maybe I already did, using my time to try betas, report bugs and helping people on forums and/or IRC. I'm pretty sure I've invested more than a few thousand dollars of my time devoted to Linux or Linux-related matters. I have donated money to more than one project too. Hard earned money btw, contrary to what most people thinks, most Linux users don't live in their parent's basement. I got my own basement, heh ;)

    But you know what? I can't buy games for Linux if developers don't produce them. So please, cut the crap about "Linux users don't buy stuff". Most of you haven't even tried.

    I'm not asking anything, I know the Linux userbase is probably way too small to make porting Unity worth the hassle. I'd love to see the authoring tools running on Linux though, even without a native player. I hate working on Windows and I can't afford a Mac, but I like Unity and I'd buy it without any doubts.

    And sorry if I sound agressive, I don't want to offend anyone. But I'm sick of people bashing Linux users out of their own ignorance.

    PS: I'm a professional game developer by the way. I know how much work is required to port engines between platforms and I know how difficult Linux deployment can be. I've done both :)
     
  12. Aras

    Aras

    Unity Technologies

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Posts:
    4,544
    Unity engine is still written in C++. Why do you think we "use much more Mono now"? We use it much more to write the new Editor GUI in the upcoming Unity 2.5, but the underlying engine is still the same. The same with Unity-made games. They don't run on Mono, they run on Unity engine that uses Mono for game scripting.

    A Linux port is not crazy talk, but we aren't actively doing it right now. Miguel de Icaza is working on it occasionally.
     
  13. HiggyB

    HiggyB

    Unity Product Evangelist

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    6,183
    Disclaimer: that is Miguel tinkering away and it is in no way an official Unity project nor are there any guarantees his work will be used in any way.

    </covering our a**es>
     
  14. jeffcraighead

    jeffcraighead

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    Posts:
    740
    I do believe that several people on the forum have had Unity builds for Windows run successfully under Wine. And seeing how Spore was ported to the Mac by including the Wine binaries with it, I'd say it's a valid method if you need to get a Unity app running in Linux for the time being.
     
  15. RPGKHFan

    RPGKHFan

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Posts:
    51
    Most people who own a Linux computer also own another operating system, too. The only people using Linux aren't using it for games, surely. Although this would be cool, as I am trying to build a server for my MMORPG in Unity, but I want to run it on a Linux server.
     
  16. PauloBarbeiro

    PauloBarbeiro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2008
    Posts:
    15
    Well well...

    First of all, yes, a web plugin for Linux would be greate!

    As soon as bought my Unity licese, I recieved a welcome mail from Tom, and I asked him about a web plugin for linux.

    I am Linux user too - Ubuntu - and I really enjoy it. I just have a Mac because there aren't good tools for graphic design work available on Linux.

    In this topic I've read some nice points and some absurd points too. I will give my opinion.

    If Unity was designed to be "the tool for web games" - I've heard that from OTEE CEO in the lectures video on Unity's site - Yes I think a web plugin for linux should be available. The majority of business plan for webgames are based on advertisement, and even that linux is a small percentage of the market, it means money, the same money you are gonna get from Mac and Win players.

    Ok, linux users profile are not based on gamers... but Unity itself neither!! I mean, Unity is focused to casual games, as far I can see. In the day Unity announces Xbox or PS3 support, I'll change my opinion about this! And trust me... I really want to change my opinion! :) So, it don't sounds odd to me some guy, who is a Linux user, during his job try to relax a bit and access some game portal to play... and, some add are gonna to be shown, and voilá... webgame business happens!

    And thinking a little bit in the future... Developing Countries... that seems to be the next boundaries for business, even in games! - ckeck the latest Ubisoft acquisition in a period of world crisis - I don't know the reality in all of them, but I can tell you that here in Brazil, lot of initiatives in introduce people to digital world are been done on LINUX!!! and a huge number of public Internet access available runs, guess what... LINUX!!

    And just to mentioned one of the most important thing that web developers have in mind: KEEP YOUR CONTENT AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE!

    so, those are the reasons I think that, Unity web plugin for linux, should be taken in account!

    cheers!
     
  17. AngryAnt

    AngryAnt

    Keyboard Operator Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Posts:
    3,042
    In Miguel we trust :wink:
     
  18. absolutebreeze

    absolutebreeze

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2009
    Posts:
    490
    I'd love to see a Linux port. I use both Linux and Windows (vista for my sins and XP).

    As for linux users not paying for software - that is untrue.

    Oh and PS3 runs on Linux... so perhaps its not that far fetched an idea to suggest a port.

    Maybe a version that can run under WINE or CEDEGA would be a good enough compromise.

    http://www.transgaming.com/products/cedega/6.0/
     
  19. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,207
    There have been a couple ports of Linux to the PS3 (which don't have access to all the hardware features), but that's not what it runs on.

    --Eric
     
  20. absolutebreeze

    absolutebreeze

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2009
    Posts:
    490
    oh my mistake... sorry to mislead anyone.

    I'm sure I read that it was 'Nix based though.

    Despite that - it would be nice to see if Cedega can run unity games though.
     
  21. King InuYasha

    King InuYasha

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2009
    Posts:
    3
    I'm a Linux user, and I would like to see Unity brought to Linux.

    The biggest arguments I have seen so far against supporting Linux are that the multitude of distros make it have a high cost to support, and that Linux users have a tendency to want only free stuff.

    The best way I can refute misconception number one is to point to the most popular distros on Linux. The top five distributions are based on Debian or Red Hat Linux. Linux Standards Base, which is supported by Debian and Red Hat based distros, brings a level of standardization for developing on Linux. The OpenSUSE Build Service helps for making packages for various distros.

    However, it isn't really necessary to target no more than three major types of distros: Debian-based, Red Hat/Fedora-based, and Source-based. Source based distros are probably the easiest to target, simply make a distro neutral installer (e.g. BitRock InstallBuilder, InstallJammer, IzPack). Debian based distros are the next easiest. Unlike Source based distros, Debian provides a unified package management system, which is the preferred method of installation. All Debian based distros use exactly the same package nomenclature, so it is very easy to handle dependency checking on Debian packages. Simply make sure it works on the latest stable of Debian, and you will be fine. All Debian-based distros are package and binary compatible with the latest Debian stable, because of how much care is taken into making sure the packaging is standardized well. Red Hat/Fedora based distros are the hardest, but not by much. By targeting Fedora, generally the RPM can work on all RPM based Linux distros if special care is taken to use macros and such that make it work properly on all RPM-based distros, which isn't really that difficult. The only major issue is the nomenclature of dependencies. SUSE tends to use Debian-style package names, while Fedora follows the Red Hat conventions.

    By creating three different packages, you cover a majority of Linux distros.

    Official support might be a problem, but most distros follow similar enough conventions that it isn't too difficult to move back and forth. The biggest differences come in internal configuration (/etc/*) style. Most of the time, applications never have to deal with that, so it doesn't matter.

    Misconception number two is a bit more difficult to refute. It is true that Linux users tend to look more towards free stuff, but its really more of a chicken and egg problem. Also, providing a Linux version generates a lot more publicity, and brings in more Windows and Mac users too, simply because of the security of supporting Linux as well. The reality of the problem is that Linux isn't proven as a gamers' platform yet.

    The Gallium3D Framework, which is being used to help bring FOSS X11 drivers up to OpenGL 2.1 support, can potentially support Direct3D on Linux as well if someone were so inclined to write a state tracker to support it. Granted, it isn't likely to happen and I'm getting off track, so back to the the topic at hand :). Seriously though, Gallium is cross platform, working on both Windows and Linux, allowing for optimized GLX and WGL through LLVM as well as OpenCL. In the near future, this might help encourage people to develop for Linux, because right now, OpenGL support SUCKS compared to OS X and Windows (even though Windows OGL is deliberately rather crappy too). GStreamer could be used for handling A/V on Linux, since it is a unified and stable interface, similar to DirectShow. There are a bunch of other components that are generally provided in all Linux distros that can be used together to provide the necessary interfaces, but the issue is picking the right ones.

    As for the free thing, the problem is that as long as Linux is never seen as a viable platform to make anything on, nobody will ever try. These next few years may actually make Linux a bit more visible on the desktop sector, but meh. Another problem is that the big studios that can afford to take risks don't and wait for the smaller studios to do that and see if they survive it. If it turns out to be even a bit viable, then bigger studios turn their heads and actually start making games for Linux. This is the chicken and egg problem I mentioned earlier. The thing is, it isn't going to go away. Linux will probably not get a Linux client because of this problem, and so we won't see development of Linux Unity based games until someone is crazy enough to reverse engineer the methods and routines of the Unity engine and write an engine for Linux. I actually don't want to see that, since it just validates what everybody in this forum have been saying. I would much rather see Unity port the IDE and the engine to Linux and offer it. Unity is not a bad platform, and it makes it easy to develop games without knowing all the crazy programming language stuff. I just don't plan to buy Unity3D until I see a solid plan for supporting Linux, since I play all of my games on Urd and Skuld, my Linux laptops. Yggdrasil, my Windows desktop, is mainly for web browsing and recording TV shows.

    Now, I have noted that people are asking for Wine and Cedega support. While this would be the easy way out, it would be preferred to see native binaries. Probably a stopgap measure until a full port could be introduced is to use Winelib to compile the Windows source with the wineloader and wine components to make it act like a native Linux binary. If Unity Windows sources use Visual Studio project files, winemaker can now read those and create makefiles for building against Winelib.

    I can't think of much more, so I'm done ;)
     
  22. grumpytoad

    grumpytoad

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Posts:
    1
    wanted to chime in, being a flash developer and doing some 3D work, looking for a way out, because flash is just not fast enough. The new javascript VM's and recent mutterings of an API to the OpenGL ES spec is a possibility. Silverlight is also interesting, at least non-javascript based versions which are more performant. Lots in the flash community are eyeing Unity as an upcoming web gaming platform, but lack of Linux support unfortunately for me at least is a signal that Unity is not interested in playing along with the diversity of the web..
     
  23. jeffz

    jeffz

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2009
    Posts:
    1
    Hi there

    Unity support for Linux would be cool, but otherwise as a infrequent contributor to Wine (bug reports, patches, etc) I've noticed that standalone Unity produced games (tried the Monster Trucks Nitro demo) seem to work ok under Wine (1.1.20 with a geforce 8).

    However the web player is a bit spotty and the IDE is non functional at the moment.
     
  24. Vivian

    Vivian

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Posts:
    5
    Hello, whats about support for Android?
     
  25. rasq

    rasq

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Posts:
    51

    percentage of os users are dependent on theme of perticullar webpage.

    On my webpage i have somthing like this:

    60% windows
    40% linux
    0% other

    for 2000 hit per m


    but statiscics for my company webpage are very diiffrent:
    40% windows
    40% linux
    2% mac
    14% other unix
    3% other

    for 6000 hit per m.
     
  26. rasq

    rasq

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Posts:
    51
    android is linux...
     
  27. King InuYasha

    King InuYasha

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2009
    Posts:
    3
    Not quite. Android uses the Linux kernel, but the stack above the kernel is quite different. There is no Xserver, no GUI toolkit like Qt or GTK+, etc.

    Android is a whole other platform....
     
  28. rasq

    rasq

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Posts:
    51
    i dont write GNU/LINUX, but only linux, linux = kernel, GNU/Linux = kernel + gui + other stuff.

    and if you dont know android is linux and have many elements from GNU/Linux, and it is possible to use android software on ubuntu or other gnu linux.
     
  29. Mars Attacks

    Mars Attacks

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Posts:
    3
    Hi!
    I just wanted to add some thoughts about this topic:
    -Linux users base is growing (mostly with people running away from Windows, others because of their principles or because administrations -i.e. schools- are using it more often)
    -Linux users base would grow faster if it had a better game market (there are a lot of people that just ask: "but can I play X game in Linux?")
    -My PC developer thought: the more platforms it supports, the more possibilities will the engine have (mostly because of these scholar kids that will grow with Linux).
    -If Unity doesn't support Linux, let's gonna try Torque instead.

    So, move your a**es or you will get out of the market in a few years by others that made their homework and thought less in the current market and more in being one step ahead the rest.

    Sorry about my English.
     
  30. bodobo

    bodobo

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Posts:
    7
    I totally agree with Mars Attacks.

    The activity of this thread is there to prove it.

    Common guys do something about it...
     
  31. Aras

    Aras

    Unity Technologies

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Posts:
    4,544
  32. bodobo

    bodobo

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Posts:
    7
    With pleasure
     
  33. Romarius75

    Romarius75

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Posts:
    1
    The main reason I would like to have Unity3D on Linux: Many Server are running Linux. It would be realy powerfull if you can run a Multiplayer Gameserver on a Linux machine. Multiplayer Gameserver could run on the same Machine the Webserver runs.
     
  34. Cobalt

    Cobalt

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Posts:
    3
    Well i was using Dos, then Windows up until XP, didn't want to go with Vista, and I'm 100% sure that Windows 7 will be the same failure.
    I tried Linux many times, with many different distros, but Linux was very bad with multimedia in the past.

    Today i run Ubuntu 9.04, my surround sound is working, my HD Satellite card is working, my tablet is working, music is working, movies are working, HD content and DVDs are working, everything is working actually.
    And I'm as happy as a PC user can be.
    I use Wine so i can run Starcraft, Warcraft and Red Alert 3.
    I don't have any Anti virus and the HDD is not roaring every time i try to use the OS.
    It's so peaceful it feels like heaven.

    I wrote all this because i wanted you to know that Linux is moving, and with the help of Ubuntu people are finding the change to Linux more attractive.
    Your observations are Wrong !
    People don't use Linux because most of the software out there doesn't have Linux support.
    Linux users DO buy games but are forced to use them with Wine, and what doesn't work with Wine, they don't buy or play.

    I assure you that Linux in the near future WILL be the future OS of a great deal of users, and ignoring Linux will simply be impossible, like many software developers are starting to support the OS with Native Linux clients.

    In the meantime, enjoy your anti viruses eating CPU and HDD time ;) for the Windows users.
    For the Mac i have nothing to say ... i really don't know why Mac exists.
    All best wishes :) hope to see Linux Unity3d soon.
     
  35. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,603
    You mean with the help of the Mandriva developers.
    Ubuntu upgrades the OS too often in a counter productive way and tends to break too much at its bi yearly releases, while Mandriva is a single ongoing process, exactly how OS should be, new things are patched in, giving you a stable AND current system, not either the one with long term stable or the other with current kernel and updates.
     
  36. Cobalt

    Cobalt

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Posts:
    3
    dreamora ok sir i will right away download your Live-cd i hope there is one, and see if everything i mentioned works on your distro.

    Oh btw i forgot to mention the Blender Game engine, i'm so ashamed *blushes*
     
  37. Cobalt

    Cobalt

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Posts:
    3
    dreamora, well unfortunately Mandriva didn't even boot from the USB after being installed with Unetbootin, and i don't have the time to figure out why the loading bar hangs.
    Anyway it doesn't matter really.

    The facts are that there are more Ubuntu users, and more information on how to make things work under ubuntu, and more developers have Ubuntu packages for their software.
    Which concludes to the statement i made.It's Ubuntu and not Mendriva nor Fedora or any other Distro that's making this possible for more users who are starting or switching over to Linux.
    Anyway Distro fights are way off-topic here i think :)
     
  38. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,603
    Main problem with your conclusion is that Mandriva supports debian, ubuntu and redhat, fedora packages out of the box, normally without any handwork. have my doubts that it is possible to have more packages than the 4 major distributions from the professional and home user sector.


    why did I mention the long term stability: As UT develops closed source software only targeted at regular users, not Linux pros, the effort to support a self breaking "distinct incompatible version" distris like Ubuntu would be significantly higher than a long term updated platform and keeping a player working, stable and bugfree already on such a long term stable platform is already a pretty heavy undertaking.


    I don't know of many applications in the sub multi thousand USD sector that ever approached Linux as a platform so I guess if linux deploy support would happen then only to Pro (as Windows deploy originally) or a pro + linux special version so linux supporters can cover the financial aspects their desire (3-5 times as high costs as for a corresponding OSX / Windows player especially if it shall run on more than one distri thanks to the standardization *haha* even on simple things like the window system).
     
  39. kevin067

    kevin067

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Posts:
    22
    Not to add fuel to the fire. But I do write quite a bit of software for the Casino gaming industry, and they all use Linux because of issues with security and the cost of licensing an OS. All those games you see on the casino floors are more than just slots are running Linux. Last time I checked there are over 200 companies writing gaming software for Linux.
    And that's just the Casino industry. There are plenty more commercial entertainment devices and stand up machines, kiosk's, and attraction devices, museum demonstrators, etc that run Linux.

    So instead of a hobbyist you would instantly attract professional groups that would jump on a integrated gaming development packages such as Unity3d because right now, it is all custom game development. And each of these companies would buy dozens of Unity Licenses for a single group without blinking an eye.
     
  40. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,603
    Question is how many of those boxes are somewhere well enough equipped.
     
  41. AchipA

    AchipA

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2009
    Posts:
    19
    It will be interesting to see how much market share Nokia's Maemo will capture, as I think there is a much higher appeal for commercial games for linux on mobile devices than on the desktop. I happen to have a N900 prototype at hand, it certainly isn't a 'hackers only' device like it's predecessors, and you can bet Nokia isn't going to make just a thousand of these.
     
  42. blendenzo

    blendenzo

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    Posts:
    1
    I read most of this thread through, and I noticed a few trends, especially earlier on. First, claims were made that Linux users don't buy games, second, that Linux users are cheap, and third, that Linux users make up too small of a market share to be worth the effort.

    A recent "study" done by 2dboy (creators of World of Goo) shows that all three claims are opposite of the truth. 17% of sales during the World of Goo "Pay-what-you-want" birthday sale were made to Linux users (the actual number is around 14,000 Linux copies sold in 13 days). The percentage of Mac sales was only 1% higher (18% of total sales). Linux users decided of their own free will to pay more money on average for the game than either Mac or Windows users did. You can see the statistics for yourself in the article below, but I think the message is very clear: There is a large and thriving Linux gaming community which is eager to spend money on games which support their OS.
    Source

    I've been a Linux user for about 2.5 years now, and I've purchased and played many games. Unfortunately, the majority of them show up as "Windows" sales, because I often play games in WINE when there is no Linux version available. However, I'm becoming more pro-active in purchasing games which specifically offer a Linux version. I just purchased Machinarium a few days ago, and I thoroughly enjoyed the game. I can say with very little doubt that I would not have purchased it were there no Linux version available.

    As a game developer, I can also tell you that I will probably not consider developing professionally with Unity until there is support for Linux.
     
  43. maxfax2009

    maxfax2009

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Posts:
    410
    well when Google bring their Linux based operating system "Chrome OS" - I hope Unity at lease support the Chrome browser.

    No one knows how much market this new OS will get, but we should have at lease web game running in the Google browser if not the OS.

    just my 2 cents...
     
  44. ColossalDuck

    ColossalDuck

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Posts:
    3,246
    Getting unity3d to run on Linux might not be such a bad idea, lots of people use Linux and it is a fun OS to play around in. But we should definitely have support for unity games on Linux, that would be really awesome. :D
     
  45. kevin067

    kevin067

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Posts:
    22
    Been thinking about this, and it seems a lot simpler for the Unity guys if they just have the ability to create a build on Linux. I have no desire to actually use Linux as my development platform since everything that I want to use it on is a custom device with no keyboard and mouse. I only care about the end result on the target system.

    So as long as OpenGL is installed for Linux they should just figure out how to create a Linux binary from Windows. And have a Linux-unitycore lib they can link into it.

    There are tons of commercial products that either run linux or are slated to run linux. And all of them run on custom 3D/2D libraries done in-house. Would be a revolution for them to actually have a standardized way to create entertainment systems using Unity3D.

    Seems to me the next logical (easy) platform for Unity to support. And these linux box developers are in the business to make money, and they will buy multiple seat licenses without thinking twice.

    I myself know a few of these companies that if this ever happened they would be all over it.
     
  46. AchipA

    AchipA

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2009
    Posts:
    19
    The problem is there is no realistic way to measure the size of the Linux gamer market. Linux gamers will often be shown as part of the windows market share. The publishers take the easy conclusion - until you don't buy windows titles (and run them via dual boot or wine) they don't really care about you as the windows version already covers you as a customer.
     
  47. kevin067

    kevin067

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Posts:
    22
    Linux is not popular because it is for the average home user. It is used in embedded products that you never hear of. Such as all those casino machines, computerized Kiosk's, museum demonstrators. It powers some of those larger networked coin-op machines and bar games. It is even used in Yachts and luxury cruise line entertainment systems. I write that stuff and can tell you it is always a custom and a tedious job since your doing everything yourself. So there is several industries that could use this.

    It is first choice to any company that doesn't want to shell out the cost of a license per machine, and/or needs to know exactly what the OS is doing when it is hooked to the network. So you will never hear from those people because they don't know Unity3d exists. But there is another world out there that in my opinion would be much bigger (as far as unity selling licenses) than appealing to the average hobbyist wanting a single license to develop a PC or IPhone games.
     
  48. AchipA

    AchipA

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2009
    Posts:
    19
    I presume from the context you wanted to say NOT for the average home user. The point is that there you have to take into account target audience. For example if you looked at netbooks, you'd see an order of magnitude larger market share for Linux than on 'regular' desktops, and the people running Linux have a lot more in common with the average gamer target (age, gaming habits, etc) than a generic windows user. Also, on Linux you don't have the competition of other titles/engines so if you DO know who to target, there is an untapped market of several millions Linux boxen, not to speak the upcoming Linux mobile phones that I mentioned above. Obviously it's a business choice - it's up to Unity to decide when it's potential Linux sales can justify the additional development and support cost, the trouble being hard to estimate the number of Linux machines/devices and the percentage of it's users actually willing to buy a Linux version and who otherwise would have not bought a Windows one.
     
  49. HiggyB

    HiggyB

    Unity Product Evangelist

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    6,183
    But it's not that simple. Linux is still a bit of a "wild west" environment right now, there are many distributions and little to standardize on (says the guy fully aware of the Windows configuration nightmare!). Linux is a relatively small market compared to Mac/Win and one that's tougher to target due to the multiple distributions and various flavors that are out there. It's just something that's difficult to tackle in a general consumer sense.

    As to Linux support on a specific device, that may happen but it would be more about the device and less about the OS in particular. And in those cases the problem is much tighter in scope, the OS flavor and hardware both get fixed and that's far easier to target than a general "we support Linux" approach.
     
  50. HiggyB

    HiggyB

    Unity Product Evangelist

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    6,183
    Which will be roughly _zero_ as we're simply not considering a move of authoring to Linux. The player would be the first port and we have to make that initial decision based on zero dollars in direct revenue. Like all features (the new FMOD audio in 2.6, upgrades to networking code, etc.) it's about whether that feature offers enough "bang" (feature value add) for the "buck" (cost of development). The Linux player question for us isn't about direct to Linux user sales, I just wanted it to be clear that so far moving authoring simply isn't on our radar nor in our minds.
     
unityunity