We'll have to disagree then. I do have a bit of experience running dev teams, dealing with capex/opex and finances in general. A decision on whether to use resources whether internal or not is almost always going to have a financial basis, not just the cost of the time spent but the expected return. Is it worth it to spend $500k (not to mention an ongoing cost in maintenance) to develop a native Linux client if only a small percentage of the customer base would use it? What would the return on that investment be? How can you determine that? You'd have to look at industry trends such as market penetration of Linux or Mac on the desktop, maybe flavor that with your own expectations of usage by the target demographic, and try to come up with a cost/benefit analysis.
You misunderstood me then. I didn't say FD will make Linux port for sure. I don't know numbers. it is their decision, and will be done on their own internal calculations.
What I did say FD it seems have solid engine team which are capable to do ports (in fact that's why it's there). What I meant that IF there will be a port, most likely cheapest way to do it will be still internally, not outsource it.
I don't think that's a very easy or clear thing to do for most companies which is why it's relatively rare to see games developed natively for Linux. Or, they do the analysis and don't like the results. Here's a question for you ... does Blizzard develop native Linux clients for their games? So if a company of that size doesn't think it's worth doing, why should we think FD will?
It is more complex than that. First is cost, sure, and people claim Linux is small, which is true comparing to Windows. However coming down to numbers those aren't that small. Problem is large companies have big profit margins because they are responsible to shareholders. FD is owned by David and other shareholders, and David can make such bet much more easily.
Another thing is that everything changes. 2K have released about 10 games on SteamOS this year alone - strategies (Civ5, Upcoming 'Beyond Earth', XCOM series), shooters, you name it. Valve is still serious about pushing platform and work with community to improve it's performance and usability. As many have said, FD will have actually something solid to make decision based on.
Even if they did do it internally, then those are resources that are tied up on that project and not working on other things that can take the game forward, so the question again becomes is the return worth it? That's actually why I would suggest they outsource it if they think the return would be worth doing. Either way, there is a cost.
No one said that doesn't cost, in fact in opposite - we have said many times that we are ready to campaign for new kickstarter to port ED to Linux if necessary. No need for FD to spend their money on that, we want give it to them.
Resources tied up - from what? Engine team improves COBRA and all it's modules, sure, but they most likely don't work on anything else.
I hate to feel like I'm throwing cold water on it all but I'm just trying to convey what the business thinking most likely is (having my own daily experience in this sort of thing).
You operate on assumption we expect Linux port. No. We hope it materialize, and we are ready to help FD if required so.
People always assume Linux users are freebies. This myth has been invalidated long time ago.
.
