Elite Dangerous and Linux from a Preorder Perspective

[Sylvester Ink]

So I know that native Linux support for ED is possible in the Cobra engine (according to developer statements), and that a Mac version is confirmed. However, there has been no official word on whether we'll get a Linux release just yet. I've been eager to support ED, but I only have Linux machine, so I've been holding off until I get confirmation that I'll actually be able to play the game. I don't mind skipping the alpha or beta, as I like to play my games when they are complete, but the lifetime expansion pass is certainly a compelling package, especially considering FD's plans for the game.

As a result, i'm in a bit of a bind. As amazing as a game looks, I'm not going to buy it if I can't play it. But at the same time, I'd really like to take advantage of some of the purchase options that won't be available after the end of this month, if I will be able to play the game after all.

(And no, I don't mind that I may have to wait a bit of time after the Windows/Mac builds are released for a fully-functional Linux release.)

Any advice on my options here?

 

[Asp Explorer]

You could always buy the game, and install windows on another drive and enjoy playing for 30 days at a time until a native Linux client is released?

 

[Mecha]

I've been assuming that when a Mac version of Elite is created it will be OpenGL based, and so a Linux client would not be too far behind - but have seen nothing official, and doubt they would want to commit to something like that until the game ships...

 

[Sylvester Ink]

You could always buy the game, and install windows on another drive and enjoy playing for 30 days at a time until a native Linux client is released?

That is, IF a Linux client is released.

But no, after years of migration, I've finally ditched Windows completely, with games being the only thing that held me back for so long. As I mentioned, I don't mind waiting a bit for the release. There are plenty of other games to be played in the meantime.

The issue about spending money on something that may never be playable for me. Had Linux support been anounced during the Kickstarter, I would have pledged instantly. (I was refreshing the page every day, waiting for that confirmation.)

 

[Patrick_68000]

Perhaps ask to Michael directly ?

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Linux advocate (and vivid Linux Steam user) here.

I backed ED despite it being Windows/Mac only because I knew if game doesn't get made, there's zero chance for Linux port.

At this point fingers crossed for successful Steam Machine launch next year. I already play lot of games via Steam - Civ V, XCOM, Metro, TF2, Don't Starve, Kerbal Space Sim - and will continue to support porting games to SteamOS (and from there to other Linux distros).

FD will do it what makes them sense financially wise. Elite was known of being ported on lot of systems. FD is known for having awesome engine team. They have all requirements to do that. So it will all go down to numbers.

So again, fingers crossed for Valve and it's Steam Machine.

Also I have idea of kickstarting an idea of kickstarter for Linux port - sort of "preorder en masse" after which FD say - ok, we will port it. I plan to start it early next year though.

 

[Patrick_68000]

Also I have idea of kickstarting an idea of kickstarter for Linux port - sort of "preorder en masse" after which FD say - ok, we will port it. I plan to start it early next year though.

I wonder if the number of players on Linux is really important in the world ... Perhaps, do not confuse the users of Linux and the players ?

 

[Agent 57]

I know there have been recent improvements with gaming on Linux - Steam for one - but let's face it if we want to play the latest and greatest we're going to have to use Windows. And that's fine. Windows is always going to be the primary platform for both games development and graphics card support.

but I only have Linux machine

What you have is a PC (the same can be said of Macs to some extent since the transition to intel). Simply free up a measely 32GB partition and install windows on there. Any linux user worth his salt will have a few partitions on the go anyway - hell if you're willing to shell out big-backer-bucks on a beta game, you could even think about paying for windows.

 

[Shadowdancer]

I wonder if the number of players on Linux is really important in the world

Looking at the Steam Survey, the answer is a resounding "no", with overtones of "lol no", since we're talking about a whopping 1.2% of their market, and that's the biggest games platform to date that dabbles in the OS.

For a single game, we could look at X-Plane, which back in January made it to 2%. They're keeping Linux support around because they've had some development support from their userbase for a bit of the "outside plumbing", but it doesn't really make economic sense for them either.

TBH, if you want to play games, for now just slap a Windows installation on a separate drive. Easy enough, doesn't cost the world, and you'll have a lot less trouble that way.

 

[Cody]

... hell if you're willing to shell out big-backer-bucks on a beta game, you could even think about paying for windows.

For many penguinistas, that would be anathema!

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Looking at the Steam Survey, the answer is a resounding "no", with overtones of "lol no", since we're talking about a whopping 1.2% of their market, and that's the biggest games platform to date that dabbles in the OS.

For a single game, we could look at X-Plane, which back in January made it to 2%. They're keeping Linux support around because they've had some development support from their userbase for a bit of the "outside plumbing", but it doesn't really make economic sense for them either.

TBH, if you want to play games, for now just slap a Windows installation on a separate drive. Easy enough, doesn't cost the world, and you'll have a lot less trouble that way.

Linux have significant share of well paying costumers though in Steam, much higher than any market share. Valve deems Steam launch on Linux as success and work with companies to port games to SteamOS. So either they are dumb, or they see something others don't.

 

[Alric]

To me it would not make sense to buy it if you're only prepared to use Linux, when it hasn't been confirmed for Linux. I'll happily encourage most people to back this game, but that would make no sense.

 

[kb_Nomad]

In as much as we all pay for games to be developed I feel the cost should reflect that.

If ED is ported to linux and 2% of the players run it on linux the cost should be 50 X the windows cost.
Same for apple/mac. Why are windows users paying for all the code to be redone in linux and/or apple/mac?

As the developers are rewriting code for the 'others' time and costs go up - OR the time and costs are taken from time that could be in the single windows version.

Over my years in computers I have seen the huge costs that have been passed on to windows users because apple/mac users want it all, so now we have linux also - someone needs to put their foot down OR pass the 'real' costs on the the 'off' operating systems.

Just my 2 cents

 

[Shadowdancer]

Valve deems Steam launch on Linux as success and work with companies to port games to SteamOS.

Initially, their "move to Linux" was a knee-jerk reaction to them feeling "locked out" of Windows 8 by some functionality or another, and they also saw a market in building a console with their Steam Box concept, which is (like the current "big two" consoles) just a PC in a shiny box. By now they've invested quite a lot of money into that, but it remains to be seen how well it ends up going.

It's been the year of Linux on the desktop for at least as long as it's been the death of PC gaming, so I'm definitely not holding my breath for Linux becoming a viable contender in the games market. OSX, maybe, but even they have a lot of quirks in the games corner, not the least being a completely broken OpenGL implementation.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

In as much as we all pay for games to be developed I feel the cost should reflect that.

If ED is ported to linux and 2% of the players run it on linux the cost should be 50 X the windows cost.
Same for apple/mac. Why are windows users paying for all the code to be redone in linux and/or apple/mac?

Err what? You know that for game to be ported you mostly port engine and that's it? It's not an easy task, but biggest amount of work in designing a game is all other content.

Also "Windows paying for the code"...what? You pledge money for FD, they deliver you a product - how and why and when they spend all money is irrelevant, especially when they have their own money invested in project. What they have to do is to deliver what they have promised. And don't worry, FD won't do anything till Windows/Mac version is shiny and perfect and have solid support. They will move on porting only when sure Windows version brings in shiny and is profitable.

As the developers are rewriting code for the 'others' time and costs go up - OR the time and costs are taken from time that could be in the single windows version.

While FD won't do anything else before Windows version, this claim is absurd. They have their own COBRA engine team. While game is designed and delivered, they can already start to work on Mac port (which as I understand they plan to do quite soon, as beta is planned around retail release of Windows version).

Over my years in computers I have seen the huge costs that have been passed on to windows users because apple/mac users want it all, so now we have linux also - someone needs to put their foot down OR pass the 'real' costs on the the 'off' operating systems.

Just my 2 cents

Seriously? Huge costs passed on? What do you smoke? Do you even understand what you just said?

 

[Sylvester Ink]

Thanks for all the responses!
For those suggesting I install Windows just for gaming, I've already had that for years, and I don't care for it. But that's not the point.

The thing is that a while back I decided that I would only buy games provided they ran natively on Linux, no exceptions. Sure it cut down my selection quite a bit, but in all honesty, we live in an age where there is a glut of games available, and no time to play all of them. (How many of you have Steam/GOG/Humble Bundle accounts with loads of unplayed games?) By restricting myself, I not only cut down on the games to concern myself over, but I actively support those games that support my OS of choice.

And surprisingly, I haven't been lacking in games. Dota 2, Europa Universalis 4, Cave Story, Warsow, the upcoming Planetary Annihilation, to name a few. I'm covered in just about every genre, and they're all great games.

Yes, the number of Linux users is small, but the reason for that is only due to market inertia. Games weren't made for Linux because there wasn't a financial incentive due to lack of users. Users didn't play on Linux because games weren't made for it. It was a big circular mess, and now we're suddenly breaking free of it because of events like the Humble Bundle and Steam supporting Linux. So you can bet I'm going to try to keep that inertia rolling in my own little way, despite the temptation to be lazy and just pop Windows 7 (which I still own a legit copy of) onto a spare hard drive (of which I have several) just to play a game.

So is Elite a game I'd like to support? You bet it is! But if I can't play it, then there is no point. If it does get Linux support in the future, then I'll be quick to buy it then, and I'll even shell out for the expansions individually, if they are as amazing as the core game seems to be. But until that happens, I'll have to cheer from the sidelines.

And no, I'm not going to jump to support a certain other space sim, just because Linux support was announced. I have standards. 0 (plzmodsdontkillme)

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Initially, their "move to Linux" was a knee-jerk reaction to them feeling "locked out" of Windows 8 by some functionality or another, and they also saw a market in building a console with their Steam Box concept, which is (like the current "big two" consoles) just a PC in a shiny box. By now they've invested quite a lot of money into that, but it remains to be seen how well it ends up going.

It's been the year of Linux on the desktop for at least as long as it's been the death of PC gaming, so I'm definitely not holding my breath for Linux becoming a viable contender in the games market. OSX, maybe, but even they have a lot of quirks in the games corner, not the least being a completely broken OpenGL implementation.

Valve reaction to Windows 8 was interesting thing, sure, however I think it boiled down to Microsoft stepping away from PC as powerhorse of gaming. Tablets, XBox One...you should have seen signs, haven't you. Are their worries justified or just knee jerking - it doesn't matter anymore.

Is Valve invested a lot in Steam OS and Machine? You bet. Are they risky? Sure. Are they completely clueless? No, I don't think so, and I am saying as sysadmin with 20 years of Windows, OS X, Linux, Solaris admin at multiple levels. Problem is Microsoft is getting into software delivery business, they have expressed big interest in doing so. Valve sees is as primary threat for them and for their delivery platform.

Now, regarding Steam Machines being shiny PC - that's exactly a point. Idea is that you can buy a gaming PC for a cheap, and having all games already running without hacking around. Linux is well suited for this idea.

It isn't that Linux don't have homeworks to deal with. A lot of things can and will go wrong. Valve certainly have diffcult road ahead with SteamOS/Machine, but as I say, some of their decisions make sense.

Regarding OS X you will be happy to know that Valve and others have forced Apple to implement OpenGL 4.1 finally (in latest OS X that is). So things are getting better.

 

[Alric]

The thing is that a while back I decided that I would only buy games provided they ran natively on Linux, no exceptions. Sure it cut down my selection quite a bit, but in all honesty, we live in an age where there is a glut of games available, and no time to play all of them. (How many of you have Steam/GOG/Humble Bundle accounts with loads of unplayed games?) By restricting myself, I not only cut down on the games to concern myself over, but I actively support those games that support my OS of choice.

Fair enough. To me it's like limiting where I go on holiday to where a particular airline flies.. but it's personal choice in the end

 

[kb_Nomad]

You say this: They will move on porting only when sure Windows version brings in shiny and is profitable.

Then say this: Seriously? Huge costs passed on? What do you smoke? Do you even understand what you just said?

What am I smoking??? read what you are writing - enough said.

 

[Sylvester Ink]

Fair enough. To me it's like limiting where I go on holiday to where a particular airline flies.. but it's personal choice in the end

Well, it's more like voting with your wallet. I don't know about you, but I don't quite have the money to buy every single game in existance. So spend the money on things you support. Ubisoft shoving their ridiculous, always-online DRM all up into their latest game? Don't buy it. Yet another Call of Duty game with just the barest of changes? Don't buy it. And so forth.