Guild Wars 2

Original thread: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/archive/suggestions/A-client-for-Linux/first

I would like to bring this topic back from the dead by creating a new one. I didn’t see a new suggestions forum anywhere, so I’m posting it here instead. With the release of OpenGL 4.5+ One of DirectX’s best features was made possible in the OpenGL API/etc. What does this mean? It means that companies may consider OpenGL as an actual contender again much like the days of DirectX 8 and earlier.

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/08/opengl-4-5-released-with-one-of-direct3ds-best-features/

Not to mention, Guild Wars 2 actually already has an OGL Port (IE: Mac Beta) and an impressive MMORPG known as Final Fantasy XIV is working on a Mac Native Port as well. It wouldn’t surprise me when companies start working on Linux ports as well, considering Android is Linux, and that SteamOS is Linux.

gw2 do not have a mac port.

I believe it still uses a cider wrapper which is basically a specialize version of wine.

You have to realize Anet cannot rely on the steam runtime. 30% of sales is kinda a harsh fee to maintain it on steam which means they will have to deal with package management

FWIW, GW2 runs beautifully under wine. It’s not the same as a native client, but it works very, very well.

As I said in the “OMG Y U NO DX12??!?!” threads, I really don’t think they need to put resources towards updating/porting the graphics API, I’d rather see them work on new content.

Yeah I’ve gotten it to play on Ubuntu under wine, via Playonlinux. However, I was having a wierd “fog of war” type of effect. But maybe with the update to OpenGL, it may work better. I’ll have to check it out.

yep you need the custom CSMT patch for wine but Gw2 works well

dlonie.6547:

FWIW, GW2 runs beautifully under wine. It’s not the same as a native client, but it works very, very well.

As I said in the “OMG Y U NO DX12??!?!” threads, I really don’t think they need to put resources towards updating/porting the graphics API, I’d rather see them work on new content.

http://anandtech.com/show/8962/the-directx-12-performance-preview-amd-nvidia-star-swarm

I believe this is the reason why direct x 12, mantle, metal are popular

dlonie.6547:

FWIW, GW2 runs beautifully under wine. It’s not the same as a native client, but it works very, very well.

As I said in the “OMG Y U NO DX12??!?!” threads, I really don’t think they need to put resources towards updating/porting the graphics API, I’d rather see them work on new content.

Having your graphics programers create content would be a horrible misuse of resources.

dlonie.6547:

FWIW, GW2 runs beautifully under wine. It’s not the same as a native client, but it works very, very well.

As I said in the “OMG Y U NO DX12??!?!” threads, I really don’t think they need to put resources towards updating/porting the graphics API, I’d rather see them work on new content.

It really doesn’t run THAT beautifully. I mean, my FPS is about 1/4th what it should be. My graphics card and CPU barely even recognize GW2 should be using resources even with the CSMT patch.

There seemed to have been some improved graphics in the HoT trailer, which means that it is possible they updated their engine. If so, this might mean wine has a bit more trouble than it is currently having and it could also spell disaster for their cider mac beta. Now, if they went OpenGL, it wouldn’t be a problem for mac or linux; however, I don’t really see that happening.

Improved graphics in the trailer? Could you be more specific?

Sirius.4510:

Improved graphics in the trailer? Could you be more specific?

I decided to hold off on answering this until the latest POI, where I could see everything again. It could be that I was wrong. I remember everyone talking of improved graphics and there are quite a few threads talking about a potential engine update, but those might have just been whisperings from the part of the community that wants it.

Man, maybe one day we’ll be free from exe tyranny of Microsoft.

This is not that day

yanipheonu.5798:

Man, maybe one day we’ll be free from exe tyranny of Microsoft.

This is not that day

Honestly, I was super hyped for a while… but I feel it’s not going to happen. We just have to deal with WINE for now.

If they do work on an updated client, I’d rather it be OpenGL Next than DX12. Functionally, they’re both the same, except supporting OpenGL supports all three PC platforms (Windows, OS X, Linux) and also supports mobile platforms (glNext is aiming to have one API for mobile devices and desktops which would be nice once mobile platforms have enough power to run a game like GW2). It’ll probably also have less restrictive OS support (going as far back as XP/Vista), unlike DX12 (free upgrade doesn’t count, upgrading the instant Windows 10 launches isn’t really advisable, I’d prefer at least 2-6 months of post-launch bugfixing).

Wine does a good job of running GW2, but it’s not perfect in all scenarios. WvW or large zergs are basically unplayable, and different versions of Wine have memory leak tendencies resulting in crashes. There’s one version that I had the best performance on, but it wasn’t stable for extended periods. I think every Linux user would much rather have a native client than rely on Wine.

They did hire an Engine programmer with cross-platform experience, so who knows what that entails. Either way, an upgrade to their game engine should be on the table or in the process of being done – an MMO that wants to continue long into the future can’t stick to using DX9.

Rashy.4165:

…
They did hire an Engine programmer with cross-platform experience, so who knows what that entails. Either way, an upgrade to their game engine should be on the table or in the process of being done – an MMO that wants to continue long into the future can’t stick to using DX9.

Hmm… did they now? I didn’t hear anything about the cross-platform developer. I agree with the DX9 stuff, but I think that mac and linux combined only amount to <10% of their playerbase. That might not be enough justification to switch to OpenGL.

If they update to even DX10, wine will have problems. Their Mac beta relies on wine just as much as linux. I cannot imagine Anet just stopping their mac beta… but most mac users are probably fed up with the beta by now anyway. Honestly, it has been in beta for years now. Surely they had some intention of writing a full client at some point, right?

Leios.8965:

Rashy.4165:

…
They did hire an Engine programmer with cross-platform experience, so who knows what that entails. Either way, an upgrade to their game engine should be on the table or in the process of being done – an MMO that wants to continue long into the future can’t stick to using DX9.

Hmm… did they now? I didn’t hear anything about the cross-platform developer. I agree with the DX9 stuff, but I think that mac and linux combined only amount to <10% of their playerbase. That might not be enough justification to switch to OpenGL.

If they update to even DX10, wine will have problems. Their Mac beta relies on wine just as much as linux. I cannot imagine Anet just stopping their mac beta… but most mac users are probably fed up with the beta by now anyway. Honestly, it has been in beta for years now. Surely they had some intention of writing a full client at some point, right?

Not sure if they actually hired one, but they did have a job opening for one mentioning cross-platform development experience.

Well, switching to OpenGL supports all of their player base, instead of 90% (and basically forcing the Linux/OS X playerbase to dual-boot). It’s possible that of the remaining 90%, a fair portion would switch to Linux/OS X instantly if a native version became available.

The benefit of cross-platform is that the source code stays the same across all of them, it’s just compiled differently on different platforms (as a .exe or binary file).

Maybe it’s just a question of not having enough resources to allocate, or maybe it’s something they’re working on as a long-term project. Either way, I would like to see cross-platform support.

Also, if switching to DX10-12 breaks the Mac client, if they do intend to support Mac properly, switching to OpenGL would be the better long-term decision. Wine still doesn’t have support for DX10, and it will be a while before it supports anything higher. OpenGL, on the other hand, doesn’t need Wine.

Anet should employ a cross-platform + game engine team to improve player-base support and to update game engine to current and new hardware standards and platforms.

I would also like to point out that even if Anet does manage an OpenGL client (which would be a feat in and of itself), linux support is still a long ways away. That said, there are very few Linux MMO’s, so they would certainly have a market. I don’t know how large the market would be in comparison to their player-base, but I know I would support the Quaggan out of Anet if they supported Linux.

That’s really all I can say. Nowadays, the desire for a linux client has died down and players have contented themselves with the mac beta (well, some of them have). Multi-platform support is probably not on any of their minds… which means it’s unfortunately not likely to happen.

One thing I love about this community, though, is that when we ask about linux, people respond. They don’t just reply, “LOL. INSTALL A REAL OS!” They genuinely try to help. There is a Linux community playing this game, and I really like that.

currently the OS trend is as follows , it is around about these percentages, this data correlates to machines connected to the internet.

2015 Win8 Win7 Vista WinXP Linux Mac
January 21.0% 52.8% 0.8% 4.7% 5.5% 9.8%

in reality, if they were to port it to another platform, mac would be first, only because of the near 10% they hold atm, linux would be after, though i too wouldnt mind seeing a linux port one day.

kinetik.8679:

currently the OS trend is as follows , it is around about these percentages, this data correlates to machines connected to the internet.

2015 Win8 Win7 Vista WinXP Linux Mac
January 21.0% 52.8% 0.8% 4.7% 5.5% 9.8%

in reality, if they were to port it to another platform, mac would be first, only because of the near 10% they hold atm, linux would be after, though i too wouldnt mind seeing a linux port one day.

Truth be told, 5.5% is much better than I was expecting. In the gaming community, most linux and mac guys dual-boot. This means that as far as Anet is concerned, the numbers for linux and mac are probably a bit lower than those found just browsing the internet. They also already “support” macs with their mac beta.

I am sure all the Wine users are counted as Windows users by Anet. I feel that a good number of mac users also dual-boot specifically for gaming and are thus counted as Windows users. I don’t mean to be overly pessimistic… I just don’t think Anet sees any real desire from their gaming community to make a port.

And even if we do get the word out, 5.5% is probably not enough of a sales increase to justify creating the port.

That said, I really, really want a linux port. Probably more than anyone else you will meet.

Leios.8965:

I am sure all the Wine users are counted as Windows users by Anet. I feel that a good number of mac users also dual-boot specifically for gaming and are thus counted as Windows users. I don’t mean to be overly pessimistic… I just don’t think Anet sees any real desire from their gaming community to make a port.

In addition to doing the automatic hardware survey they did before the BWE, I would like to see a poll alongside it, specifically for players who only game on Windows currently:

“If we (ArenaNet) were to support (native client, not Wine-based solutions) alternate platforms (OS X, Linux), would you switch to using that platform?”

This will give a sense of the percentage of players who would like to see cross-platform support, and if it’s high enough, would be a valid reason to switch to a cross-platform API like OpenGL.

The answer for me is a resounding yes. A lot of games still aren’t on Linux, but more and more future AAA titles are coming with Linux support from release, and that’s awesome. I can sacrifice the ability to play older games well, since I don’t play them often enough to justify it, but GW2 is the game I play the most regularly, and if it had a native linux client, I wouldn’t use Windows at all. I did try to run purely on Arch linux for a few months, but the performance issues with Wine made me re-install Windows on my desktop (still running Linux on laptop).

They probably already have more recent metrics on the hardware used by their playerbase. I’d personally like to see some of those numbers -shrug-

Never gonna happen.

Far too much work for NO potential return.

Those that fail to see this and STILL ask for it are living in some fantasy world where they actually “beleive” the customer is always right, or Linux is the solution to everyone’s computing issues…..

Open GL always has been and always will be the 3D modeling worlds standard and Driect X will remain gaming’s standard. I get that it’s kind of ironic, seeing how 95% of all games require 3D modeling….

Khisanth.2948:

Having your graphics programers create content would be a horrible misuse of resources.

TBH, I’m not sure they actually have dedicated graphics programmers post-launch. Once the rendering engine was in place, they wouldn’t really need that many devs to maintain it. More likely, they just have a team of general developers who work on many aspects of the game, some of which are knowledgeable about DX.

At least that’s how it works at my company — everyone works on a few different projects and has more than one skill set in their tool belt. Personally, I switch between working on our OpenGL backend, data model architecture, processing algorithms, UI/frontends, MPI abstractions, etc etc depending on what a given project needs at the moment. Building teams of single purpose developers seems wasteful to me, but you’re right — maybe that’s how they do it. We don’t know shrugs

If they have a team of developers who solely work on DX, then yeah — they should put them to work on some of these tasks. But then I’d have to wonder what they’ve been paying them to do for the last two years

Leios.8965:

dlonie.6547:

FWIW, GW2 runs beautifully under wine. It’s not the same as a native client, but it works very, very well.

It really doesn’t run THAT beautifully. I mean, my FPS is about 1/4th what it should be. My graphics card and CPU barely even recognize GW2 should be using resources even with the CSMT patch.

True, “beautifully” is subjective, and the performance under wine does take a hit. Being familiar with how hardware accelerated rendering works (combined with how horribly wine performed the last time I tried to run a gfx intensive app under it….) I was personally astounded at how well wine handles the DX —> OGL conversion

Rashy.4165:

Leios.8965:

I am sure all the Wine users are counted as Windows users by Anet. I feel that a good number of mac users also dual-boot specifically for gaming and are thus counted as Windows users. I don’t mean to be overly pessimistic… I just don’t think Anet sees any real desire from their gaming community to make a port.

In addition to doing the automatic hardware survey they did before the BWE, I would like to see a poll alongside it, specifically for players who only game on Windows currently:

“If we (ArenaNet) were to support (native client, not Wine-based solutions) alternate platforms (OS X, Linux), would you switch to using that platform?”

Sadly, I’d have answer no to that. I used to run GW2 under wine when I started playing, but so many other games had problems with it that I ended up just dual booting. Not having to deal with the headache of fixing a game every update is worth the trouble of dual booting.

The other personal benefit I got is that now I keep all my work stuff on linux, and all my fun stuff on Windows. No more work emails popping up while I’m relaxing \o/

But at the end of the day, avid gamers will find that simply dual booting is the path of least resistence, as most games will run much, much better and with fewer problems natively in Windows. BTW, I totally agree that if they update, I’d like to seem them move to GL over DX for the portability reasons. But I’d still stick with Windows since I’d need it for my other games.

I haven’t replied to this thread since I made the opening post I believe, I think it’s time for me to chime in on this whole debacle. I’m happy to see people from both sides debating this and throwing verbs of all kinds at each other, but that’s not exactly what I wanted here, well, I kind of did, but at the same time, I didn’t. Mainly because I already knew lots of the replies from the opposite side I would get here.

Just so people know, when you run an application in Wine on Linux, you actually are using OpenGL, mainly because Wine dictates DirectX methods to OpenGL in a way that OpenGL can understand. If you really want something that gets on the level of DirectX, you should try to follow the people developing ReactOS: http://www.reactos.org/ While I got banned on their forums for reasons I will not discuss here, they are a great group and aspiring to do something that the Open-Source community has always really wanted to do, make something for everyone to use, but for free and open source. In this case, ReactOS is developing a DirectX for themselves, considering their entire OS is basically just Windows but reverse-engineered clean-room. The difference with ReactOS and Wine though is staggering as well. Why is it? Well, basically, if you’ve ever used Linux before, you’ll know that some hardware just doesn’t work well on Linux, specifically printers, scanners, etc. You can find out more about the incompatibilities of printers/etc. over at Open Printing: http://www.openprinting.org/ ReactOS allows you to install those windows-only drivers however, because ReactOS does Windows on not just a software level, but on a Kernel level as well.

This does NOT mean that you should put all your chips on ReactOS though. Linux is an amazing alternative, and should be well sought after, especially when so few issues occur in Linux, and if there are, they tend to get fixed rather quickly. That said, people who scoff at a linux release mainly because it’s simply easier to do a dual-boot don’t realize how expensive it is to buy a full retail copy of windows. Maybe they do, maybe they don’t. Windows didn’t come with my computer, so I had to buy a copy for 199.99 USD (Plus tax, that’s over 200 USD at 5.5% in Wisconsin.) I’d rather my OS be free, and it would be nice if people went out and researched the whole war between Apple, Microsoft and Linus. It’s a real Eye-opener to see that Apple and Microsoft founders originally worked together, but split.

Portability reasons aside, OpenGL is a far better choice, even on Windows. Why? Because OpenGL versions are updated through drivers, not through Microsoft. Ideally, this is the best way to update a runtime of this magnitude, through your graphical drivers.

Also, I will have to start saving for a new computer in the near future, it will cost me from 1200 to 2200 USD or so to be relevant in PC Gaming for games I want to play, and some of that high price is thanks to me needing to buy a copy of Windows, since I’m currently using release previews / evaluations. (My old windows Discs were lost, and I don’t have the key anymore, so I cannot request a new copy. Plus, I reformat my harddrive every 6 months or so.)

Iyeru.5240:

This does NOT mean that you should put all your chips on ReactOS though. Linux is an amazing alternative, and should be well sought after, especially when so few issues occur in Linux, and if there are, they tend to get fixed rather quickly.

…

Also, I will have to start saving for a new computer in the near future, it will cost me from 1200 to 2200 USD or so to be relevant in PC Gaming for games I want to play, and some of that high price is thanks to me needing to buy a copy of Windows, since I’m currently using release previews / evaluations.

So. I am actually not a big fan of ReactOS because, at least from my perspective, everyone is already using UNIX or UNIX-like systems (Linux, included). Really, it’s only gamers and everyday consumers that do not. I use Linux because it’s the only OS I can actually do my work on. That said, I am never just running games on my machine. I’m always doing work on the side (which is why dual-booting makes so little sense).

Also: Are you building a computer from scratch? If so, $2200 will get you a super good machine. You should certainly be able to play whatever you need to and then some with that amount of money… if you are running Windows. Honestly, there are no games on linux that will even challenge a machine you build for $2000.

Back to the OpenGL port: In the previous thread, we had oodles of ideas and nothing from Anet. It was incredibly disheartening. I feel that no matter what we say, Anet’s already made up their mind on this and there is a reason they did not comment on the last thread. Now, because of the way Anet works, I don’t know if this is a good or bad sign, but I wouldn’t bet on a Linux port (but I’m not a betting man, in general).

That said, I still think it’d be useful to talk about the possibility of a linux port… But we need to be careful to keep ourselves from demanding things from Anet. Instead we should explain our reasons to the best of our abilities and hope for the best.

We also have to recognize that they will almost always take care of Windows first, Mac second, and Linux third.

Anet doesn’t even seem to support the Mac beta (for over 2 years) cider port client. The old Mac forum was almost never responded to. There have been multiple times when they said they would (promises of a Mac support team) but nothing ever really happened from support unless Mac customers could not buy gems. That got fixed when it happened but not much else. With the forum merger Mac support posts are like typing into the wind, they just blow away and get buried (well to be honest they were before the merger as well). So I would not get your hopes up or even wish it for you Linux users.

As much as I support Linux and open source initiatives, I gotta say, if it’s the cost of a windows install that’s causing someone so much grief, I don’t know how they’re intending on keeping a PC relevant in the first place.

http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/en_US/pdp/Windows-8.1/productID.288401200

If that’s too rich for your blood, PC gaming might not be the wisest investment is your clearly very limited resources.

And really, you don’t need more than this.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00H09BB16/ref=redir_mdp_mobile/187-0254249-0799312

I’m all for Linux, but I’m very sorry – if $90-$110 is a game breaking price point for you, this isn’t a good gaming platform to be trying to do much with irrespective.

This isn’t necessarily a ‘rich man’s hobby’ by necessity, but be realistic here. Linux can’t offer the support and consistency that Microsoft can, and if a distro apart that for and could, it wouldn’t be free anymore because there’s too much money to be made on it.

Developers don’t stick with DX and Microsoft Windows because through its the best thing ever, you know. Odds are, no matter what they’re developing, it’s what the car majority of their target markets using.

Linux remains an advanced user hobby in most every regard, despite the overwhelming popularity of Unix in industrial applications and the niche tenacity of Linux in the consumer markets peripherals.

Android is the first real breakout that’s making itself relevant in the mainstream. I’ll be surpassed if we don’t see more and more android platform saturation as time goes by. That right there is the Linux flavor to watch, since it has the dedicated might of almighty Google behind it.

But I’m not sure if Google very much intends to try challenging Microsoft’s dominance of desktops so much as they seem to intend on making desktops obsolete technology right out from under the plodding dinosaur Microsoft seems intent on repeatedly psychic itself to be.

Mobile is the future. There might be a legitimate need for powerful desktops for a while yet, but that need is evaporatively vanishing more and more every year.

In ten years, my desktop might well be something like a Google glass headset wirelessly interfaces with a physical keyboard, with me having a monthly subscription plan to cloud computing for the bulk of my computing needs. Having physical hardware for CPU, GPU and storage in my home might well be an increasingly niche province of the hardcore enthusiasts.

Who knows, eh? All I know is that if windows is too expensive for your blood, you need to find more cost effective hobbies, ‘cause windows isn’t exactly expensive for any requirement a gamer has.

I mean, come on, if dropping about a hundred bucks or so every few years strains your wallet, you’ve got way bigger problems than what is and isn’t supporting Linux.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Anet doesn’t even seem to support the Mac beta (for over 2 years) cider port client. The old Mac forum was almost never responded to. There have been multiple times when they said they would (promises of a Mac support team) but nothing ever really happened from support unless Mac customers could not buy gems. That got fixed when it happened but not much else. With the forum merger Mac support posts are like typing into the wind, they just blow away and get buried (well to be honest they were before the merger as well). So I would not get your hopes up or even wish it for you Linux users.

So, Anet tends to be quiet when they have things in the works. Maybe they refused to help mac guys because an engine update was expected in the future. I mean, I don’t think they will drop mac support. I don’t think it’s a good move to stick with DX9 and DX10 would kill mac support. OpenGL is their best option. If they go that route, Linux will be much closer to a possibility.

That’s honestly the only hope we (linux users) have.

Leios.8965:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Anet doesn’t even seem to support the Mac beta (for over 2 years) cider port client. The old Mac forum was almost never responded to. There have been multiple times when they said they would (promises of a Mac support team) but nothing ever really happened from support unless Mac customers could not buy gems. That got fixed when it happened but not much else. With the forum merger Mac support posts are like typing into the wind, they just blow away and get buried (well to be honest they were before the merger as well). So I would not get your hopes up or even wish it for you Linux users.

So, Anet tends to be quiet when they have things in the works. Maybe they refused to help mac guys because an engine update was expected in the future. I mean, I don’t think they will drop mac support. I don’t think it’s a good move to stick with DX9 and DX10 would kill mac support. OpenGL is their best option. If they go that route, Linux will be much closer to a possibility.

That’s honestly the only hope we (linux users) have.

HAHA drop Mac support? They never supported it unless it was a bug that didn’t allow Mac customers to buy gems. Those issues got fixed right away. Everything else was left to Mac players helping other Mac players even after they said there was a dedicated Mac support person for the 2nd and 3rd time since I have been here.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/support/Mac-Beta-Client-Support-Clean-up-thread/first#post4045876

Gaile Gray.6029:

We have a new tech person on board who is — be still my beating heart — a Mac specialist! So we will be reviewing all stickies and updating them in the near future. Let’s give her a bit of time to get up and running, but we’re on the case!

And nothing ever came from that. The forums got merged and Mac customers are still floundering for support. Like I said, be careful what you wish for. Yes OpenGL would be optimal but I won’t be wagering any gems or gold on it ever happening.

naiasonod.9265:

I mean, come on, if dropping about a hundred bucks or so every few years strains your wallet, you’ve got way bigger problems than what is and isn’t supporting Linux.

I would like to point out that the price tag isn’t necessarily the problem, at least for me. The price tag for a single game (the cost of Guild Wars 2 + Windows = 4X the cost of Guild Wars 2 alone) might be more of a problem, but still not the main problem. The main problem is that Windows is way too far removed from the desktop I and most other linux users need to get work done. You simply cannot easily do what linux does and it doesn’t make sense to lose all the programs we need just to play a game. In addition, the pair of Windows and Guild Wars 2 together requires a good amount of storage, a special partition (that needs wiggle room in the case of an expansion), and a special boot procedure just to get everything running. Then we have to deal with all the nuances of Windows, which are completely different than what we have become accustomed to. It’s ultimately a pain, but people do it because they need Linux to work and want Windows to play. If we could cut Windows out, that would be the best solution for us. That’s why you see all these threads. Linux users are a bit tired of all the hoops they have to jump through for unnecessary software (games).

I would also like to point out that Linux users become overly attached to their specific linux desktop for a number of reasons. This makes Windows more and more distasteful to them… but that’s beside the point.

JustTrogdor.7892:

HAHA drop Mac support? They never supported it unless it was a bug that didn’t allow Mac customers to buy gems. Those issues got fixed right away. Everything else was left to Mac players helping other Mac players even after they said there was a dedicated Mac support person for the 2nd or 3rd time since I have been here.

Honestly, they don’t need a mac specialist, they need a WINE specialist. That’s what they are essentially using. The problem is that there are still mac players that play the game and they do have a mac beta. To onlookers, it looks like they are supporting mac, even if in practice they are not. To go back on that would be a bit rough PR-wise.

I agree though. The mac-beta has not been one of their most successful endeavors.

Also: Just realized… TROGDOOOOOR!

Leios.8965:

Also: Just realized… TROGDOOOOOR!

http://youtu.be/TfrAf1a9Qhs

Mobile can’t be the future if the processors are ARM based, at least if you don’t plan to port to Linux or iOS. Because the Windows version of ARM can’t run actual Windows programs unless they’re made for the ARM Architecture. (This includes Guild Wars 2.) If people think they won’t do a Mac Port, they won’t do a mobile port either.

Iyeru.5240:

Mobile can’t be the future if the processors are ARM based, at least if you don’t plan to port to Linux or iOS. Because the Windows version of ARM can’t run actual Windows programs unless they’re made for the ARM Architecture. (This includes Guild Wars 2.) If people think they won’t do a Mac Port, they won’t do a mobile port either.

Intel is making some pretty decent strides in that sense. Their mobile processors are fairly powerful for their power consumption. It’ll still be a long time before mobile platforms are as powerful as desktops, and powerful enough to run games without much problems.

Rashy.4165:

Iyeru.5240:

Mobile can’t be the future if the processors are ARM based, at least if you don’t plan to port to Linux or iOS. Because the Windows version of ARM can’t run actual Windows programs unless they’re made for the ARM Architecture. (This includes Guild Wars 2.) If people think they won’t do a Mac Port, they won’t do a mobile port either.

Intel is making some pretty decent strides in that sense. Their mobile processors are fairly powerful for their power consumption. It’ll still be a long time before mobile platforms are as powerful as desktops, and powerful enough to run games without much problems.

performance and power aren’t an issue as long as the issue still is that the architecture =/= x86 or x64

I don’t think he necessarily meant that mobile was the future of gaming, just the future of computing, in general… which might be true. Who knows?

You know, I was thinking about it. If they make an OpenGL port, it would run better in WINE even without a linux version… though we would still have the multi-core issues so the CSMT patch would still be necessary.

Iyeru.5240:

Rashy.4165:

Iyeru.5240:

Mobile can’t be the future if the processors are ARM based, at least if you don’t plan to port to Linux or iOS. Because the Windows version of ARM can’t run actual Windows programs unless they’re made for the ARM Architecture. (This includes Guild Wars 2.) If people think they won’t do a Mac Port, they won’t do a mobile port either.

Intel is making some pretty decent strides in that sense. Their mobile processors are fairly powerful for their power consumption. It’ll still be a long time before mobile platforms are as powerful as desktops, and powerful enough to run games without much problems.

performance and power aren’t an issue as long as the issue still is that the architecture =/= x86 or x64

Most of Intel’s processor line-up IS x86/x64. My point was, Intel’s x86 processors targeted at mobile platforms (U and Y series SKUs) are becoming more powerful while reducing power consumption, making mobile platforms more and more attractive for the future.

Rashy.4165:

Iyeru.5240:

Rashy.4165:

Iyeru.5240:

Mobile can’t be the future if the processors are ARM based, at least if you don’t plan to port to Linux or iOS. Because the Windows version of ARM can’t run actual Windows programs unless they’re made for the ARM Architecture. (This includes Guild Wars 2.) If people think they won’t do a Mac Port, they won’t do a mobile port either.

Intel is making some pretty decent strides in that sense. Their mobile processors are fairly powerful for their power consumption. It’ll still be a long time before mobile platforms are as powerful as desktops, and powerful enough to run games without much problems.

performance and power aren’t an issue as long as the issue still is that the architecture =/= x86 or x64

Most of Intel’s processor line-up IS x86/x64. My point was, Intel’s x86 processors targeted at mobile platforms (U and Y series SKUs) are becoming more powerful while reducing power consumption, making mobile platforms more and more attractive for the future.

I am confused which mobile are you arguing for?

Laptops? tablets? cell phones?

Laptops already being target but the other two are completely different issue

loseridoit.2756:

Rashy.4165:

Iyeru.5240:

Rashy.4165:

Iyeru.5240:

Mobile can’t be the future if the processors are ARM based, at least if you don’t plan to port to Linux or iOS. Because the Windows version of ARM can’t run actual Windows programs unless they’re made for the ARM Architecture. (This includes Guild Wars 2.) If people think they won’t do a Mac Port, they won’t do a mobile port either.

Intel is making some pretty decent strides in that sense. Their mobile processors are fairly powerful for their power consumption. It’ll still be a long time before mobile platforms are as powerful as desktops, and powerful enough to run games without much problems.

performance and power aren’t an issue as long as the issue still is that the architecture =/= x86 or x64

Most of Intel’s processor line-up IS x86/x64. My point was, Intel’s x86 processors targeted at mobile platforms (U and Y series SKUs) are becoming more powerful while reducing power consumption, making mobile platforms more and more attractive for the future.

I am confused which mobile are you arguing for?

Laptops? tablets? cell phones?

Laptops already being target but the other two are completely different issue

Laptops, tablets and phones.

Right now, the low power consumption CPUs only target laptops, but it won’t be long before they’re capable of running tablets and phones (they consume too much power for tablets and phones currently, it’ll kill the battery too quickly; the other issue being cooling).

It’s only a matter of time.

Rashy.4165:

loseridoit.2756:

Rashy.4165:

Iyeru.5240:

Rashy.4165:

Iyeru.5240:

Mobile can’t be the future if the processors are ARM based, at least if you don’t plan to port to Linux or iOS. Because the Windows version of ARM can’t run actual Windows programs unless they’re made for the ARM Architecture. (This includes Guild Wars 2.) If people think they won’t do a Mac Port, they won’t do a mobile port either.

Intel is making some pretty decent strides in that sense. Their mobile processors are fairly powerful for their power consumption. It’ll still be a long time before mobile platforms are as powerful as desktops, and powerful enough to run games without much problems.

performance and power aren’t an issue as long as the issue still is that the architecture =/= x86 or x64

Most of Intel’s processor line-up IS x86/x64. My point was, Intel’s x86 processors targeted at mobile platforms (U and Y series SKUs) are becoming more powerful while reducing power consumption, making mobile platforms more and more attractive for the future.

I am confused which mobile are you arguing for?

Laptops? tablets? cell phones?

Laptops already being target but the other two are completely different issue

Laptops, tablets and phones.

Right now, the low power consumption CPUs only target laptops, but it won’t be long before they’re capable of running tablets and phones (they consume too much power for tablets and phones currently, it’ll kill the battery too quickly; the other issue being cooling).

It’s only a matter of time.

I find the problem with mobile is control scheme. No matter what, a tapping a tablet is more more different than typing a keyboard. I find targeting mobile confusing because merging two different schemes always have issues.

For example, K/M will always beat controllers in FPS.

I play this game on Ubuntu 14.04 LTS via Wine Staging 1.7.43 version and have decent FPS 40+ which is playble. But hope that next time Anet makes game I hope they write in opengl but not directX lol so we get faster fps, like Blizzard does. If they write code in just opengl, isnt it actually easier to release in any platform? mac and linux and windows or whatever.. i wonder why not?

My impression is that the tendency to favor Direct3D for PC games is mostly due to historical reasons (there is an enlightening summary here, although I can’t entirely warrant its accuracy: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/88055). Guild Wars 1 was developed and released at a time when OpenGL just wasn’t really happening in gaming, and GW2, if the stories are true, was built from that same codebase. So it used Direct3D.

Of course, these days – when cross-platform game engines like Unity and Unreal Engine run half of everything, and there are so many things being built for phones and consoles that… I think usually run OpenGL or some proprietary extension thereof – it’s much more likely for new built-from-scratch games to be more portable than that. So if ArenaNet decides to go build GW3 when 2020 rolls around, and they decide their current engine really can’t scale to what they plan to do (which is increasingly likely; it already has a few detrimental effects on GW2’s performance), they quite likely might build it using technologies that make it easier to port to Mac (properly) and Linux. And maybe iOS/Android if it makes sense at the time.

Until then, though, it’s likely just too expensive to build an OpenGL pipeline into the existing engine.

loseridoit.2756:

gw2 do not have a mac port.

I believe it still uses a cider wrapper which is basically a specialize version of wine.

Exactly. The exact equivalent would be to use playonlinux to play guild wars 2. Do not like that idea? Why?

Cider is the main reason why gamers scoff at macs. A good late-model mac will blow the doors off of many PCs that windows users use for games. Not hot-rodded custom machines, I am talking the person who is using a 5 year old business laptop over wifi.

Companies release PC games with a cider wrapper. Then say they have a mac version (often beta and/or unsupported) and call it a day.

Sirius.4510:

My impression is that the tendency to favor Direct3D for PC games is mostly due to historical reasons (there is an enlightening summary here, although I can’t entirely warrant its accuracy: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/88055). Guild Wars 1 was developed and released at a time when OpenGL just wasn’t really happening in gaming, and GW2, if the stories are true, was built from that same codebase. So it used Direct3D.

Of course, these days – when cross-platform game engines like Unity and Unreal Engine run half of everything, and there are so many things being built for phones and consoles that… I think usually run OpenGL or some proprietary extension thereof – it’s much more likely for new built-from-scratch games to be more portable than that. So if ArenaNet decides to go build GW3 when 2020 rolls around, and they decide their current engine really can’t scale to what they plan to do (which is increasingly likely; it already has a few detrimental effects on GW2’s performance), they quite likely might build it using technologies that make it easier to port to Mac (properly) and Linux. And maybe iOS/Android if it makes sense at the time.

Until then, though, it’s likely just too expensive to build an OpenGL pipeline into the existing engine.

So it was rather historical reason.
These days, so many various gaming platform now happens : ps4, xbox one, ps vita, nintendo 3ds, mac, ios, android and now even Steam machine.

They have plenty of time until gw3 happens, hope their engineer implements everything in opengl over directx and just release game in any platform lol..

I saw some game written in both d3d and opengl native (for linux it used sdl2+opengl) but framerate is rather almkst no difference, or just difference is within just 5fps, in most cases, if it is ported poorly in os other than windows, which can be covered by decent gpu devices in these days. I think dota2 engine is good example (i think it uses qt+sdl2+opengl)

Creating a 64 bit dx12 client only cements the games viability in the future, DX12 is more developer friendly so creating new content could take less time.

Also getting on steam, while they lose a take of their sales (its not a flat rate it varies based on negotiation ect) having access to the multi million gamer base on steam imo would outweigh the small loss on sales.

Remember, people can access the game for free, try it forever, then decide if its worth kitten payment for more content…that type of model flourishes on steam, on top of the fact that cash shop purchases are extremely easy to do on steam.

I think this type of game on steam, youll see an immediate flow that could double the current playerbase (with the following decline as people who are not interested stop playing of course)

Keep in mind that no one is making high budget mmorpgs anymore, those days are over (for anyone suggesting a gw3). The key to keeping successful with mmorpgs is to keep them modern and pile on content ontop of content. Bringing this games engine into the “next gen” would be a smart idea to help them move forward into the future with the same game. (also they should consider console version, mmorpgs are sort of a new thing over there and even the ones that kinda flopped are doing quite well)

Sirius.4510:

My impression is that the tendency to favor Direct3D for PC games is mostly due to historical reasons (there is an enlightening summary here, although I can’t entirely warrant its accuracy: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/88055). Guild Wars 1 was developed and released at a time when OpenGL just wasn’t really happening in gaming, and GW2, if the stories are true, was built from that same codebase. So it used Direct3D.

Of course, these days – when cross-platform game engines like Unity and Unreal Engine run half of everything, and there are so many things being built for phones and consoles that… I think usually run OpenGL or some proprietary extension thereof – it’s much more likely for new built-from-scratch games to be more portable than that. So if ArenaNet decides to go build GW3 when 2020 rolls around, and they decide their current engine really can’t scale to what they plan to do (which is increasingly likely; it already has a few detrimental effects on GW2’s performance), they quite likely might build it using technologies that make it easier to port to Mac (properly) and Linux. And maybe iOS/Android if it makes sense at the time.

Until then, though, it’s likely just too expensive to build an OpenGL pipeline into the existing engine.

OpenGL was popular once on the PCs, a long time ago when DirectX wasn’t as mature, as an example, id Software loved it. Eventually Microsoft evolved DirectX and with their market dominance, working closely with ATI and nVidia at the time, DirectX driver development quickly became dominant. Game developers followed because why swim up stream when it’s easier to leverage the industry experience developing for DirectX. Didn’t matter if it was superior or platform independent, OpenGL’s strength for many years,

Hell City of Heroes used OpenGL and I can tell you as someone who lived on their support forum helping on driver issues, it was probably a mistake in the long run. OpenGL compliance was an afterthought from ATI/AMD and nVidia. When some new hot FPS came out the beta drivers put out by both companies to provide the best frame rate for benchmarking, often broke previously working OpenGL drivers because they were never tested or an older buggier version was included than what’s found in the WHQL driver. So players were forced to choose between their MMO working or a better experience with the game they just bought.

When that game moved from OpenGL 2.x to 3.x there were more problems since driver development/deployment is normally dropped for older hardware and newer OpenGL support would never come and players had to upgrade hardware. Sure AMD and nVidia had descent support for OpenGL in their professional graphic card products but those drivers weren’t optimized for gaming, but rendering 3D CAD models and even though GPUs were shared between the two products, the driver software was locked based on the bios on the card.

No, PC gaming is going to be stuck on DirectX forever. If push came to shove I can see Microsoft opening up DirectX to multiple platforms before IHV support for other API standards would get equal resources.