Looks like Linux is built for games after all

blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux/

Good Read

 

Who say Linux was not built for game ???
The system perf is always better (except 3D driver which are not always top).
Opengl is always faster than Direct3D. It's a little more low level API, so it needs more works...
You will get the same result a lot faster in direct3D and hardware driver support are better than Opengl (less bug even on some exotic 3D card).
That's why directx is so popular among dev.

Linux is a great paltform but the market is still 100 times smaller than windows...
But it's the new trend, so I hope it will be better served in a few years.

 

Some may shrug off what I'm about to say, calling me a Windows fanboi, but given the recent press regarding Valve's thoughts on Windows 8 (Windows RT in particular, Metro, etc) and the Windows Store - the complaints, etc, etc, etc...

...I'd probably take anything that Valve says in this sense, with a grain of salt.

Yes, I understand that what I'm saying here is implying that Valve has done this on purpose - cooked the books - so to speak, but they're far from impartial given their recent statements on Windows 8.

It's their game. They tweaked the Hell out of it for OpenGL working with the hardware vendor - they did the same when implementing the game in Ubuntu.

What results would you expect otherwise?

Direct3D version that's meant to work with a myriad of GPU hardware.
Then they work with hardware vendors to fine tune an OpenGL version. It runs faster? Well, no S***.
They continue that with a specific version for a specific version of Ubuntu with a specific version of OpenGL drivers for specific hardware. It runs faster? Well, no S***.

They made L4D2 - nVidia GTX 680 Ubuntu Edition! Um, yay?

How does that version run with other nVidia cards? How does it run with AMD/ATI cards? How does it run on other Linux operating systems? How does that run in comparison to the Windows Direct3D version?

It's just funny after they came out badmouthing Windows 8...crying about the Windows Store in Windows RT...Windows 8 on ARM, because Microsoft's closed that off. The majority of folks will be running Windows 8 on x86 - so there will still be access to a Windows desktop and regular Win32 applications and not just the WinRT limitations one will find on Windows RT (Win8 on ARM).

If a third party had announced such results, after doing actual testing on a broad spectrum of hardware...well hey, that would be pretty nifty. It's not though, it's Valve blogging about Linux being better than Windows after coming out against Windows 8 - and - it's all over the place on various sites. Such garbage, lol...

As an aside though, we're getting Linux deploy with Unity 4.0...but still no Linux client.

 

Well... I can say it, I guess...

It is DirectX that is build for games. And DirectX is reason Windows became popular when other OSes like OS2, Linux, MacOS or even Windows NT - not. Linux exist right there for years. And people know about it. And they know it is for free. And still stay away from it. There must be a reason

Windows offers united API for all hardware Windows is working on. And DirectX offers API for graphics, sound, net, input devices... And one exe is working everywhere. What offers Linux? And OpenGL?

 

ZeroByteDNA +1

One game, on one 'flavor'. with one specific set of software versions, with specific hardware, with tons of high quality dev time... != linux is built for games.

It's an interesting start, and if valve continue their efforts it'll be interesting to see what fruit is bone, but this is still very early days. Hell, even if/when Linux has dozens of AAA games and tens of millions of players they'll just be *starting* to mature.

 

You seem to have a very biased opinion ^^. Maybe what you said was true back in DX9 prime time... With DX11 practially all of what you said is not true anymore. Linux is a great platform when you factor out the GUI stuff. But Windows also doesn't stand still and people tend to believe that Windows 7 is still the same as Windows XP... Or even 98. In contrast to Windows 7, a Linux machine, in particular NO linux machine can be used by an average end-user. At least not these days. And the question is why would anyone want to be able to use them? I certainly could, I even build my own little distribution with Linux From Scratch Editions, when I was back in my first college year... But I don't want to, quite frankly. I want an OS that just works, without me doing anything. All the time I just see Linux guys fixing their system LOL.

 

Ahem... You are incorrect in your assertions. In Linux, one executable file can, believe it or not, run on all systems with a Linux kernel. What confuses people are the existence of libraries like Qt, GTK+, etc, which lead people to believe there is no official Linux library for GUIs. There is; it's called Xlib, or it's upgraded version XCB. This is equivalent to Win32 on Windows.

Remember, there are other ways to code GUIs on Windows as well: wxWidgets, .Net, Java Awt, etc. And OpenGL, along with libraries like OpenAL, constitute a DirectX like environment on Linux.

Linux is no different of a platform than Windows or OS X. It's just a lack of support from boneheaded vendors like NVidia stopping further progress in high-tech games. Kudos to Valve (and Unity) for treading in unknown territory: we Linux users thank you.

 

http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/01/Why-you-should-use-OpenGL-and-not-DirectX

 

Great article; totally agree.

 

I hate that article due to the fact that it forgets one aspect: Crossplatform is a nice idea but it does not work that well as long as the driver quality on basically every platform is average or only barely above.
OpenGL can as api standard be as good as it wants, as long as there is no quality assurance on the driver side its merely that, a theoretically good standard with a practically abysmall execution.

Back in the old days it was ATI which failed absolutely on the desktop (now its good enough generally with a bad driver version every now and then and their constant driver crashes are still inacceptable) but now we have the same stupid problem ONCE AGAIN on mobiles (especially android where HW maker + handset maker lead to an absolute fail out of my view) with OpenGL ES.
So it seems that the ones not learning lessons are the OpenGL Consortium / Khronos. They still allow anyone interested to join their in claiming that they support OpenGL (ES) without proper quality requirements for drivers to ensure that they at least do their stupid job correctly, even if not performant.

Microsoft simply went the way that later on Apple went too and still goes: Control your environment to ensure consistency, and it was clear that OpenGL would definitely not lead that way with too many people with mutually exclusive interests having something to say. If you disagree look at Apples work towards OpenGL, their refusal to go with the standard or to even support the full standard

Also lets not forget the one really important aspect: The API is irrelevant. If you waste time on creating a engine that has no flexible engine core you will fail on both sides anyway, cause neither will you work properly with variable extensions nor will you have a DX 10+ vs DX9 split as required

 

And you think Valve haven't worked with hardware vendors when they just worked with Windows? They're working with hardware vendors to get Linux drivers up to a comparable level with that of Windows drivers. Most of the time Linux drivers aren't capable of running a AAA game, they're given no attention from hardware vendors. What do you think is more correct, dastardly Valve working with hardware vendors and optimising the hell out of L4D2 on Linux just so they can say it's better than Windows? Or porting L4D2 and Source to Linux and running into problems and requesting help from hardware vendors (Developers communicate with hardware vendors with windows as well) as their drivers are sub par and broken?

By the time DirectX became popular Windows had been popular for a long time. DirectX had nothing to do with Windows popularity.

Wow what? Linux isn't usable? What a load of crap. That may of been true in the mid 90s but last I checked this was 2012. I have shown Linux (Ubuntu in particular) to many of my friends and they find it much easier to use than Windows and that's because it is. Not just for a techy but for the average user and also computer novices. Everything from installing Ubuntu to everyday office work to installing new software is easier on Ubuntu than Windows. And it's not just Ubuntu most popular distros are easier to use than Windows. And no I'm not against Windows, I'm on it right now in fact I use it more than Linux.

 

Linux is simply underlooked. As it gets more attention it will get more improvements. You can't expect linux to be perfect when not that many people are contributing. Now that Valve has shown interest it might get good.

 

They had worked with vendors to optimize their game for direct3D too (and probably more). That's their main platform after all.

 

the difference between 315 FPS and 270 FPS is basically the difference between 59 FPS and 60 FPS, something as simple as having AIM in the background can cause that.

They'd probably get the same performance running L4D2 through WINE, the game is like 4 years old.

Not mentioning they worked directly with AMD/Nvidia to finely tune the drivers so it runs better, Linux graphics drivers are awful.

Yep.
Until you want to do something as simple as use dual monitors where you have to install the newest nvidia drivers by command line because the repo is too far behind to support them, then your xserver crashes because they're too unstable.

Or you want to use HDMI sound and the drivers have no support for it.
Or you want to simply print a piece of paper but have to spend hours configuring the drivers because linux has no driver support where it would have been as simple as plug and play in mac or windows.

Maybe year of the linux will be in 2025 when it has drivers, and I'll go back to it then.

 

Yes there is a reason, the one I've already said: The market size.
A game on linux will sell 100 times less even if it's better.

So you want to make a better game or you want to make a game that sells/ are played ?

Don't forget that the PS3 use a custom versoin of OpenGL. And we all know that game on PS3 are bad


I agree with dreamora the main problem is the hardware drivers.


PS: I like these Opengl VS directx VS Linux VS Mac VS Nvidia VS ATI war

 

59 fps and 60 fps? Off the top of my head it would be around 60 fps and 70 fps.

Do you actually have those problems or are you just being argumentative because you know Ubuntu is easier to use than Windows? The only real problem you came up with is compiling drivers because the repo is out of date, which isn't that hard at all for techies and not really a problem for the average Joe. The first time I had to do it was the first time I used Linux, it was easier than the end of last year when I had to manually install drivers on Windows 7 because it apparently it didn't feel like letting the installer install them.

And come to think of it Windows 7 has just as many stupid problems as Linux. I still can't get my home desktop to print over the network. Network connections decide it's their day off, the slowest boot time in the world, the kernel randomly starts using all the CPU, windows explorer goes for a coffee break, general sluggishness, files are in use when they're not, random BSOD.

 

The difference between 270 FPS and 315 FPS in terms of MS/frame is one half of a MS, or 0.5 MS, not quite 60 to 59(~0.3MS), but it's less than the difference between 60 to 58(~0.6MS).

yes

opinion

Not being able to use dual monitors is not a problem for the average joe? Not being able to use HDMI sound because the driver support simply isn't there isn't a problem?

Opinion, and my opinion guarantees it was easier on windows because all you have to do is click next a few times on an installer.

Worked plug and play for me after I spent hours trying to get it to work on linux.

My work's windows server has been up for weeks without a single disconnect, I think that speaks for itself.

Windows using all the CPU to index files for searching when the CPU is not in use, this can be disabled.
If you've encountered a BSOD it's likely a hardware issue, I haven't seen a BSOD since windows ME -- there was a thread on unity about a month back where a ton of people said a similar thing if you want to search for it.


Not sure why I even replied, you'll just dismiss all of this. I'll use Linux when it's worth using, and it isn't worth using yet. I have no bias towards any product besides the one that's worth using.

 

There's no money in linux so nobody wants to stick their neck out for an extended time supporting it. Those funny people screaming for opensource everything need to allow space for those who don't want open source free everything.

When they do stop stifling how people ought behave on linux we'll see some more interest, particularly now valve's making noise.

 

I don't exactly think the "open source preachers" are a problem to big boys. Seriously, no one cares what they're screaming. In the end they have no influence or power to enforce their views.
It's true that linux has a lot less money in it, but that's because no one develops for it, which in turn causes it to have smaller user base. Most games and software is not supported on linux, which makes it an inferior platform. That is also why drivers are worse and the OS is not that user friendly. I'm curious if anything will change when Valve steps in. They should release Episode 3 on linux only just for the sake of it.

 

I've never had any problem with Linux whatsoever. A buddy of mine uses Linux Mint and as far as I know he's never had any issues either. The people who encounter problems in Linux are those who expect everything to work like Windows. It doesn't. Linux doesn't work like that, neither does OS X. Get over it. No one's forcing you to use Linux, so there's no real reason to argue; if Valve wants to support it, kudos from me, but the rest of you don't have to care.

Very few distros in Linux adhere 100% to the free software paradigm. And there is money in Linux. I mean, people said there was no money in OS X and that supporting it would be a waste of time. What a joke.

Open source does have a benefit too to those who want to modify something or learn how something was done. And while the FSF has some good points, there are people who simply don't care, like yourself. There are those who adhere strongly to the Windows is best mantra; same with OS X. Linux has many fans as well, so don't denounce the platform because you disagree with those backing it.

 

Yep. Given the timing. Yep.

The Valve Linux Team has been around since Aug 2011. They have two blog posts: July 16 2012 and August 1 2012.

The comments about Windows 8 were made during Casual Connect, which ran Jul 24-26 in Seattle.

In the brief snippet about moving to a new platform, they gave us this tidbit:

So we know that the L4D2 Ubuntu 12.04 32-bit NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 version:

• was optimized to work with a 32-bit Linux kernel.
• was optimized to work with OpenGL.
• was optimized to work with the GTX 680.

They also tell us, that during their work they were able to optimize L4D2 for OpenGL on Windows. The L4D2 OpenGL NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 version, thus, runs faster on Windows than the standard L4D2 version.

So again...a very specific version runs faster - no S*** - and a partial optimization of a version runs faster - no S***.

In discussing the changes they made to the L4D2 Ubuntu 12.04 32-bit NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 version, they note the initial issues which were experienced (@6FPS) as:

They play it down.

In discussing the changes they did not make to the standard L4D2 Windows version, they make the following comment:

They play it up. It's something they have to mitigate. There's something inherently wrong, but they'll figure out a way to fix it for you.

All in all, they compared: the L4D2 Ubuntu 12.04 32-bit NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 version vs L4D2 Windows.

The L4D2 Windows version...hrmmm...

So it's basically a version supporting everything from Windows XP 32-bit on a Pentium 4 3GHz CPU and a DX 9.0b GPU on up...

So that version vs. the optimized for a specific kernel version, optimized for a specific OpenGL version, and optimized for a specific driver version... and the optimized version ran faster? NO S***.

To save Valve the daunting task of having to figure out a way to mitigate all the dreadful issues with Direct3D, how about they show what their Linux L4D2 version runs on Oneiric, Natty, Lucid...on Fedora, SUSE, Gentoo, etc, etc. How about they show what it runs on an ATI X800? How about a 64 bit version? How about different CPUs?

Oh wait, that wouldn't be as dramatic as having this second blog post in over a year less than a week after their comments about Windows 8...now would it?

So yeah, I'd have to go with:

 

Linux is a support nightmare, with Windows you can compile for literally 2 platforms ( 32bit and 64bit ) . You might have to work on some video card specific fixes , but still its nothing compared to the 800 distros of linux .

I love linux, and as long as i can use a computer i will be running Linux dual boot , but for games and game dev i'll always use windows .

 

Windows 8 is changing that though, in a sense - Desktop, Metro, and Metro ARM.

Your average booting up Windows 8, even on a desktop, is going to see that Metro interface first. Each time they try to go to the "start menu that no longer exists" they'll see all those Metro tiles over on the left and have to scroll right to see the lists of their desktop apps.

UT needs to make a Unity Metro Web Browser - a browser with the UWP built in, eh? Ahem...hai guyz!

 

Reminds me of GNOME 3: having to go to the Metro interface just to see the app. And IE being a Metro app will kill the productivity everyone is used to.

 

You can launch IE from the desktop as a non-Metro app. You can also install Chrome, Firefox, Opera etc on the desktop. I spent almost all of my time on the desktop - didn't touch Metro outside of the weather app. Also, I ran dual screen - so I didn't feel that switching stuff as much as I would have on a single screen. I was amazed at how much better Windows 8 handled memory, overall system speed, etc - but I had apps and hardware that just wouldn't work...meh.

I have this nagging thought that if not for Metro, Windows 8 could have made Windows 7 look like Vista did compared to Windows 7...meh. And, I guess I'm not happy about the route they're going with Windows RT/Windows 8 on ARM - as not something you can install, but rather something preinstalled.

I would have liked the option to have a tri-boot tablet with Android/Ubuntu/Win8. I wish more folks would look at what Ubuntu's trying to do with getting Ubuntu for Android devices...heh, I've mentioned that a few times over in the Ouya thread.

I still think that's where we're heading - combination of smartphones, tablets, and smart TV appliances for the average consumer. Android/Linux can take the pole position there and leave both Microsoft and Apple with WTF looks on their faces.

AND...of course, part of that will require nifty gaming.

 

It wouldn't surprise me for windows to back off on this , plus I think you can change this in the options menu to just boot to a desktop, the desktop is still their, I tired win8 before . Still Linux gaming isn't profitable for the vast majority of games . Like even with Linux support in Unity , i'm pretty sure it outputs a deb , so then all your fans who are running fedora , Arch , and god knows what will still have trouble getting your game to run

 

So? Just use the universal packaging tool (UPT) to package it as debs, RPGs, and tar.gzs for all major platforms. Done. Or of course you could use a zip.

 

There's not a simple flip - there's various pseudo-hacks that you can do, but honestly it's not that difficult just to click Desktop.

As for Linux, the market's just too small - it's growing somewhat, thanks to things like what Ubuntu provides - a more "Windows"-like Linux (/cough). Heh, I remember way back with an early Fedora picking the Redmond theme. The market share's actually been dropping (then again, so has Windows' share). Mac's had some growth, so has iOS and Android.

Mac's likely seen growth because of iOS. Microsoft's trying to tap some of that Apple "magic".

Linux though? Linux tablets? Linux phones? Even though I'm considering that switch over to Ubuntu as my primary, well - face it - none of us are average consumers. It's the average consumer that's needed for the platform.

 

Yes, and that is what companies like Novell and Canocial are trying to do.

 

If I can make a half way decent game( using ragespline and probably a starter kit of somesort) I'll submit it to the ubuntu app store, but thats it . And if it doesn't work, sh** it doesn't work . I'm not going to put a lot of effort into porting my game to linux . But i do like that Unity has a linux export option

 

Actually it's been seeing growth since about 2001-ish, though I'm sure iOS has helped in the last several years.

No...while Ubuntu is the platform that gets official support, Unity Linux games can and do run on most distributions without having to do anything special.

--Eric

 

But when something goes wrong , and a customer who paid for your product can't run it you have a problem . Of course this happens with windows too, but its far harder to trouble shoot with all the different distros .Kudos for adding linux support though .

 

I imagine you'd just do what Unity does: provide official support for Ubuntu only. It would be good to provide a demo, so people running other distros can see if it works without issues or not.

--Eric

 

Er...tada, eh?

 

I scaled by percentage, but I see the positives in using render time per millisecond. Does anyone know which way is more accurate?

The average Joe doesn't have dual monitors, even then this is the first time I've ever heard of a person having problems with it. And Linux works fine with HDMI has done for the last few years, even then the average Joe doesn't use HDMI sound.

Did you completely read over when I said I had to install it manually? Every time I used the installer it wouldn't install, and I'm going to assume it was Windows as that same installer now works. You try and find good information on installing drivers without an installer, let me tell you there's much better information on Linux.

Weeks?! That's quite bad, Linux servers stay up for years.

The computer was in use, I was programming and all of a sudden everything took dozens of seconds to work, and it was the kernel working all the systems resources. I doubt it's supposed to use all of an i7, especially when the computer is in use.

Yeah those evangelical open source supporters can get quite annoying. However there is money in Linux, Red Hat had 1.3 billion USD revenue last year.

I see where you're coming from but I'm not too sure. Some games run in WINE faster than on Windows. I think their port just worked out faster than it on Windows and they blogged about it. I doubt there was any foul play.

 

Valve's a business. They see themselves potentially losing market share with Windows 8. "Foul play" might be too strong a word for it - I see it as plain ol' business and marketing...well, which tends to involve a certain level of foul play...heh.

 

Valve is doing what they think is good for Valve, this doesn't sound surprising to me. Beside of this it's good if Linux is getting more attention on the GPU driver front as everyone will benefit from this, same as if they further optimise their work on Windows and OS X as well. It's one of these questions, how fast could a minimal modern system be if you would design it from scratch and with zero backward compatibility in mind.

Better drivers for everyone, less http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_36yNWw_07g needed.

 

Ha! I watched that earlier; man, it's priceless.

 

It also makes perfect business sense for valve. If I owned a digital distribution system that raked in BILLIONS a year in revenue... you bet your arse that I'll be putting a few million into getting Linux support regardless of Windows 8 or my own personal feelings on the matter.

 

The Linux marketshare is just so small and fragmented though. If not for the potential loss because of Windows 8, I simply do not see Linux as worth the risk. Windows, Mac, Android, iOS...Hell, BlackBerry's less of a risk than Linux. They're techies, so they may be looking at it from that angle - rather than a consumer angle.

There's a difference between Unity adding in deploy support for Linux and Valve taking a stab at it. Unity's risk is involved with the developer - the developer still faces the risk for the platform. Valve's not taking the risk with the developers, they're taking it on the platform. I see that as a world of difference. All the issues that a developer may have deploying to Linux, issues that UT will not face - are also issues that Valve will face.

As a developer, I'd take that risk - but not as a service provider in the sense that Valve is...it's just a big risk, both financially and even for their reputation.

 

So here's the question for you, that you likely cannot answer - do you use Ubuntu (one of the Ubuntu flavors) or another distro?

 

Er, not sure why I couldn't answer that. I don't currently use Ubuntu or another distro, but I used Debian for quite a while.

--Eric

 

A political thing - team spirit and all that, even as a volunteer.

 

Almost any computer can run LFD2, TF2, Portal 2, with not that much strain.

 

Not sure what that has to do with anything, but OK.

That's not the point. The point is that it's faster on Linux with OpenGL, and while the difference isn't huge, after years of constantly being told "Direct3D is faster than OpenGL", I think it's mildly interesting.

--Eric

 

I do agree there's risk - but I think you've vastly overestimated the costs of failure.

Worse comes to worse, they lose a few million in dev. They can lose that under the couch and no-one'd notice. Reputation wise the worse thing that could happen is they piss of a few Linux users that can't play their games anyway, much more likely though is they'll just boost up their rep as a consumer oriented and progressive company that's willing to try new things - just another soundbite to add to their speeches.

It's the game engines and game developers that I see having a harder time justifying Linux - as we don't have a multi-billion dollar revenue to spread our risk over, and we are the ones that actually have to make sure our games appeal and integrate well with Linux. Luckily for valve there are people who think it's worth a shot [don't ask me why] so they'll probably get some decent product to try and sell.

 

I suppose I just look at it as another platform. Deploying to Linux would be no different than if you had a Windows base and were deploying to Mac, iOS, Android, et al. If it works, great - maybe you do the same with your next game - maybe you even develop that Linux playerbase and following. If it doesn't work, well - you just keep doing what you've been doing otherwise.

Setting up a marketplace on the other hand...

 

Look, you can try to get a game to work on Linux... and I'll re-implement the marketplace.

 

It's curious going through and looking at various distros to see which feels the most game friendly...it's at odds with a distro I would run, lol.

I can see why they went with Ubuntu as the main, but man oh man...can't stand Ubuntu.

Interested in what distros folks are running and planning mainly to target with their deployments.

 

Mint and Ubuntu?