Posted on 08/01/2014 11:35:34 AM PDT by ShadowAce
The true measure of any great gaming platform is not the number of games available. Nor is it the need to have the same games as other competing platforms (the Playstation 4 doesn't need Mario games to be considered successful). And it really isn't even about how many total games are sold, though that certainly helps.
The measure of a great gaming platform is if people want to use it to play games on... rather than another platform. At least on occasion.
For example: The SEGA Genesis. That beautiful console sold substantially less than the Super Nintendo. But it was still an excellent console that people enjoyed playing on. Thus, a success.
By that measure – and that is the only measure I can think of that makes any sense – Linux qualifies as a successful (even, great) gaming platform.
(Bear with me here. This isn't a cheerleader article. This is going somewhere. Pinky swear.)
I've seen quite a few articles that have made the point, in one fashion or another, that Linux is becoming a viable gaming platform. Now, I'm a big advocate of Linux, and I've spent years in the video games industry. So these sorts of statements should get me excited... right?
Yet they tend to have just the opposite effect on me. Whenever I see an article declaring something akin to “Gaming on Linux has arrived!” it immediately reminds me of the last decade (two decades, really... plus some) of that similar declaration we have all heard so many times. “Next year will be the year of Desktop Linux!”
There came a point where I had heard that refrain so many times that hearing it instantly made me pessimistic, or, at the very least, compelled me to say something snarky.
When I hear something like “2014 is the year for gaming on Linux” I have the same reaction. Pessimism. Snark. That simple statement, as positive as it may be, can turn even the most exciting of news into something... far less exciting.
That's when I realized we need a way to actually determine if Linux is a legitimate, successful gaming platform. Then we can simply determine if it is or isn't, and stop making those sorts of (oddly un-compelling) declarations. After much thinking on it, I decided on the criteria I laid out at the top of this article, which I am not going to repeat now, because I am lazy. Also scroll-bar.
Once I figured that out, it became clear. Linux is a solid gaming platform. It has been for a long, long time. And, in recent days, Linux has only gotten even stronger as a gaming platform.
But it's not the year of Linux gaming. That already happened a long time ago.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go play Battle for Wesnoth.
All it needs are .... GAMES
PlayOnLinux
huh? So the Dreamcast was a spectacular success?
This guy has a screw or two loose but he is not wrong about most of this.
Steam has a native Linux client.
Haven't tried Quake or Duke Nukem yet -and I really don't know if I still have that old copy of Nude Tomb Raider saved somewhere...
I run Civ 4 under WINE, and Civ 5 natively, using Steam.
Linux is a platform that you can play games on. It will never be a “gaming platform” where you put together a Linux system primarily to play games.
Thanks for the suggestion, though.
Steam is native on Linux—it doesn’t use wine.
Perhaps I can try adding a FAT32 partition using partimage or gnuparted and try again later on to see if I can get more apps running or even some games.
Something to tinker with later on, I suppose.
On a side topic, you have a moment to advise on an unrelated topic? I can FReepamail you if you wish.
There was an old freeware game called Cyberdogs or close. It was a maze with characters you could arm all kinds of ways. Fun game, ran off a floppy.
Almost impossible to find analog joysticks that still plug into the old 15-pin D-sub ports though, so it's a challenge.
There is a native client for Linux. I used to play that a lot back in the day.
The day Fallout 4 is released exclusively on Linux, I’ll believe it... :-)
GOOD TIMES. GOOD TIMES.
< |:)~
I don’t dispute final numbers but when people always say the SNES beat the Genesis it took them 2 years after Sega stopped making games for it to do so.
Sega was beyond stupid and incompetent making the 16 to 32 bit generational jump. They had the Genesis, Sega CD, Game Gear, 32x, Pico, Nomad and Saturn going at the same time.
Sonic Team stopped making 16 bit games while Nintendo kept focusing on the SNES gems like Yoshii’s Island and Donkey Kong Country (Yes, I know.... Rare.) so for 2 holiday seasons while Sega wanted 16 bit dead and to focus on Saturn (Which always sucked.) Nintendo finally took the lead on generational sales.
Year in and year out it was neck and neck while Sega was actively pumping out 16 bit titles. It took them quitting 18-24 months early on the generation for Nintendo to finally claim victory.
“GCE Vectrex” ... a masterpiece.
I have every game for this thing except Polar Rescue and one of the light pen games (well, I have those on a flash cart ... but that doesn’t count).
I have the 3D goggles and all 3 games for that with the color wheels (had to trade some vector arcade stuff I had for those) :-).
I frigging love that system :-). I was young when it came out ... my dad grabbed one + a bulk of the games I have when they were being cleared out for next to nothing around 1985 or so.
There have been a lot of great homebrew releases over the past 15+ years too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.