Scott Draeker Interview About Loki's Demise 327
An Anonymous Coward writes: "News forge is running an interview With lokigames president Scott Draeker. Looks like the leaked email wasn't a hoax after all. A very sad day for Linux. AOL? Redhat? IBM? someone please help these guys."
AOL, IBM, RH (Score:2, Troll)
And why should they? They're just interested in Linux as far as the server market.
Truth is that linux is a horrible gaming platform.
Most gamers just want to play games. They don't want to recompile the kernel to play. They want to put the disk in and click "play" and that it.
Thats why they buy consoles.
Re:AOL, IBM, RH (Score:3, Interesting)
If they do, I think the blame could go onto the distro providers. Hardware support starts there. If the drivers exist, they should be on that CD.
I'd like to see mandrake get into it. They make some stuff 'easy' already.
Thats why they buy consoles.
And windows, and macs...
There seems to be a huge PC game market, I don't think you got the memo. Not all PC games are click and play, many aren't. Linux or no linux.
We need a game distro, I elect mandrake.
Re:AOL, IBM, RH (Score:2, Informative)
Re:AOL, IBM, RH (Score:3, Interesting)
Just a thought...
-me
Total BS (Score:3, Informative)
Alpha Centauri and Kohan being my favorites out of the three.
And another thing, gaming companies drop like flies all the time. Dynamix, Looking Glass and other big names were no exception. Loki lasted pretty long all considering and did some very good work.
Re:AOL, IBM, RH (Score:2)
Consoles have their merits....in the early nineties I would have said you were right, but now? Back then PC games looked better had better interface than any common console...that has changed and consoles are on par with consumer level PC's that won't last 5 years.
Re:AOL, IBM, RH (Score:2)
Note : Halo does look delicious
Wrong market (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Wrong market (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, I don't think that. But that is how your comment reads.
But once again... why do we need opensource games? We just need games.
If the games are open-source then anyone can basically rip them off. Open source is good for the GUI, server apps, and the kernel. Games are always going to be closed. At least to make some money they need to be.
Seems to me that is what keeps big game developers out of linux. There is no need to recompile a game. Give me a million reasons... I won't buy a one. If a game doesn't work, 9/10 times a fix is promptly released.
Game developers are in it for the money. They don't make that money however on support like server markets etc.
Re:Wrong market (Score:3, Insightful)
We need games where the game engine is open-source, but the art isn't. Hell, even a Minix-style license would be fine (i.e. you pay for the game, but you get non-redistributable source with it, but you can distribute patches).
I don't find it too difficult to imagine a constantly evolving open-source game engine, where various companies periodically grab a version of the engine and sell art for it. This is where QuakeForge [quakeforge.net] might be in the future.
Open-source engine (Score:2)
Re:Wrong market (Score:3, Insightful)
Explain to me again how to build a company around that? Oh right, by providing support... ugh...
Modding is simply a difference of opinion.
Re:Wrong market (Score:3, Insightful)
Look deep into your heart, and tell us honestly: how much would you pay for nethack-in-a-box? How much is that box worth to you?
Re:Wrong market (Score:2)
>Look deep into your heart, and tell us honestly:
>how much would you pay for nethack-in-a-box?
>How much is that box worth to you?
If the box contained a nicely typeset and bound
copy of material equivalent to Dylan O'Donell's
site, and the ever-popular "all I got was this
t-shirt", (find the links yourself) and a
CD containing all current versions
of Nethack and Slash'em together with source,
and a searchable, edited archive of
rec.games.roguelike.nethack,I'd pay fifty bucks for it.
Right! Wrong market (Score:3, Insightful)
Although not the most technically advanced game, Tux Racer is a good example of the possible success of Linux games. If even a simple Linux-only game as this can achieve as many fans as it has in the Linux market, larger projects that were creative and Linux first had a good chance of success. But a port of SimCity 3000 months after you could already play it on your computer in Windows? Good game, bad business.
Re:Wrong market (Score:2, Interesting)
Ironically, I have all this beefed-up hardware and what do I do with it? I play NetHack, SNES games, MacOS System 6/7 games, and low-frills (but high-quality) games like PySol and Uplink. Hell, I've played LBreakout 2.0 more than I ever played some of the Loki ports I bought.
For me, Loki's two biggest faults were: 1) Too slow to get games ported (a year for Deus-Ex, wtf) and 2) Most of the games weren't to-die-for. Sure, I love Railroad Tycoon 2, HOMM3, and Kohan. But Loki couldn't bring me, for example, Half-Life and Diablo II. They can't bring me older games, and they can't bring me games that the developers simply refuse to allow to be ported. I and others have had to turn to TransGaming's WineX [transgaming.com] for this, albeit grudgingly because of the license issues.
The only way Linux could "dominate" the game world would probably be if somebody started creating to-die-for games that were only available for it (or available for everything but Windows... say, Linux, BSD, and MacOS X
Just my 2 cents. Back to slaying ASCII characters I go.
How sad :-( (Score:2)
It is sad, I still frequently am playing my copy of Tribes 2. Hopefully someone will take the Loki's place.
So long Loki, and thanks for Heroes III (Score:3, Interesting)
the one that was good enough for me to use a Windows computer to play
before Loki's port was Heroes of Might and Magic III. As it turns out,
the games in the Heroes series were the only games that I ever considered
good enough to use Windows to play. Loki's port of Heroes III meant that
I can now get all of my gaming needs met without having to dual boot;
significant when my computer only has a 3 gig hard disk.
This game wastes hours of my time on my Linux laptop, and hours of my
friend's time when we play hotseat together. The game still has hours of
my time to waste, since I have not yet finished the campaigns; and, even
after finishing the campaigns, there are the single senerio maps and, of
course, the third party maps over at astral wizards.
I only have a small number of dissapointments with the Linux version of
Heroes III. One is that Loki never finished the map editor; one still
needs to use Windows to make a decent Heroes III map. The other is that
the expansion packs were never (and never will be, now) ported to Linux;
while Loki wanted to do it, New World Computing would not give them the
source code to make it possible. And, finally, I am dissapointed that
Loki will not be around when Heroes 4 gets released; Heroes III without
the expansion packs is all the Linux community gets of the excellent
Heroes series.
I am not a hard core gamer; but I am an open source developer who
appreciates having some good games on Linux to blow off steam after
dealing with a frustrating programming problem. Loki has made enough
games to meet this need. I hope I do not offend anyone by saying that
people who feel that Linux does not have enough games need to find other
things to do with their time than play video games.
Now, to the people at Loki, I wish them the utmost of luck.
And, who knows, maybe one of the other Linux game publishers will port
Heroes IV to Linux.
- Sam
What about IP concerns? (Score:3, Insightful)
Since Loki only worked on ports of existing games and didn't (as far as I have heard) purchase full rights to the existing games' source code, what gives them the legal right to release the original authors' code into the public domain? Are they just doing it because there's nobody left to sue?
Any way you look at it, though, it will definitely be a victory to open source to have such a substantial amount of game source code out there now.
Mr. Uptime
Re:What about IP concerns? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What about IP concerns? (Score:4, Interesting)
Or make KDE one click installable, or upgradeable.
Thanks Loki for giving. I do know that I will be buying up what I can, as I do have 2 youngster linux newbies that would love mindrover simcity, etc..
You want games? (Score:3, Insightful)
Someone needs to figure out how to make the people happy AND make a profit. This communistic ideal is never going to work properly if you want these companies to last... Making a game is not a "group study," its a tough, 60 hour a week, full-time job. And people need to get paid.
Maybe we need "Open Source Money Pools" where you can vote what kind of game you want. I'm sure that'll happen.
Re:You want games? (Score:2, Insightful)
Games have no such luxury. They are the end product. There is very little to be made off support, certainly not enough to support the development of games like QuakeIII. Games have to make their revenue off initial sales.
Linux has proven dominant in the server market and it is a brilliant star there. Many have now set their eyes on the desktop, and all signs [newsforge.com] seem to indicate that this is a viable dream. I see linux gaming as the target after the desktop - once we have a serious control of the desktop market, Linux games will become a serious issue. Until then, however, the fight for Linux games will be difficult, as many others are pointing out. Loki did a great job, and many of us love their games, and it's sad to see them go. But the fight's not over yet.
Re:You want games? (Score:2)
Re:You want games? (Score:4, Insightful)
The primary ongoing games development for Linux is largely being done for communalistic (or, at least, unprofitable) motives. John Carmack has worked to ensure that linux binaries are available for ID games simply because he likes linux, not because there's any profit to be had in it - he's made this clear again and again.
The truth is that the market, as a market, is too small to support Linux as a target platform. Perhaps appealing to the communal "by geeks, for geeks" ethic would actually be more effective than by claiming, wrongly, that there's some untapped goldmine in the Linux gaming market.
Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why? You seem to be missing the main point of Loki's business model. Loki took games that the game developers considered unprofitable to port to Linux and paid royalties to these game developers to port these games to Linux.
Now, with Loki having gone out of business, it has proven the developers' original point: Linux gaming is just not economically profitable. Heck, even John Carmack [slashdot.org] says (and I quote): "[T]he linux market is not viable for game developers to pursue. Linux ports will be done out of good will, not profit motives."
The harsh reality is that no one is going to bail Loki out. At this point, Linux games remain unprofitable. As long as gamers have good 3D support and decently easy game setup in Windows, they will continue to use Windows. My advice is to move on and not pursue the issue until Linux gets more desktop market share.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Read the interview. The porting was to create a market, a need for Linux gaming. The eventual goal was to create Linux games, not ports. Draeker gives great examples in how even with the Mac, most games are just ported from Windows, which Mac isn't exactly a large market either for gamers.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
OMFG, that philosophy reeks of soul-less corporate product shovelling! "There's not really any current need or market for our products, so we'll try to create one!" Personally, I love Linux for programming, administration, deploy-and-forget Oracle installs, etc., but there's clearly just no desire amongst gamers to switch from Windows.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Interesting)
<SoapBox>
Think about what is going on. Desktop users aren't exactly ready to leave they're windows partition solely on the fact that their games are built for DirectX, thus not being supported on Linux, (or Mac (-- I don't know to much about this), or whatever without a level of porting)
What Loki tried to do, as well as what TuxGames and a few other companies, is trying to say "Hey! there is a market for Linux gaming". Maybe game developers will listen, maybe they won't. Maybe SDL will become easy to use, maybe it won't. Can't blame the guys at Loki for having a vision though, and trying to create a market.
I personally do not want to install a Windows partition to play games. So if Transgaming can bring it to me through WineX so be it. However nothing runs better than a pure port, and that is why I hope more companies like Loki pop up in the new future.
</SoapBox>
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Linux isn't like that. Linux is taking a huge step back into fighting hardware, distro issues, compatibility issues. It's a pain in the ass, and not worth the effort. I don't think we're ever going to see that. Not until we have standardized development (SDL, still needs to go a long way) and good vendor support (Hi nVidia!). Don't hold your breath, because unlike windows, Linux isn't commercially backed for the desktop. The only way linux gaming will succeed with it's current setup is good nature which we all know companies don't have -- because that tends to turn them into liquidation material.
Re:Why? (Score:2)
This company failed because of a stupid business model. There is no market for Linux games and probably never will be. Keep that Windows partition, folks, you're going to need it.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Interesting)
Look how many Xboxes Halo has sold. Look how many PS2's MGS2 has sold.
I think we're all missing the point here: we want linux games...let's make a game that people install Linux to play.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would you do this? I can see making the game for Linux first and then porting, but why on Gods green earth if you a had game so earth-shattering great would you NOT try to sell it to a market about 10000% bigger then Linux users?
Games take money to develop, and most people want to make that back.
Re:Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
The desktop market would add so much more credibility in the marketplace too. I am not saying to hell with gamers, just learn to crawl before you walk.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why is it I never have moderator points when something REALLY needs bumped up.
Jump back in time to Windows 3.1 if you will. Even Solitaire didn't play well on it, much less the bulk of the gaming market that was designed for DOS. Once it was readily apparent to even the most obtuse gaming company that Windows was going to be the future of the desktop, games started coming out for it. The best place to establish this is at the corporate level, much like Windows did way back when.
Folks seem to forget that the killer app for Windows 3.1 was not Doom, it was Excel. Only by focusing on the corporate desktop will *nix OS's have a serious chance at going after the broader consumer market.
Re:Why? (Score:2)
DOS4GW as I recall. This was my point, games meant very little to the acceptance of Windows as the default desktop. Once Microsoft won the hearts and minds of corporate America, the consumer arena was sure to fall in line as well. Games were something that came about some time after folks were wanting to do work at home.
No Mac gaming companies? (Score:5, Informative)
mark
Re:No Mac gaming companies? (Score:2, Informative)
Bankruptcy in August 2001 (Score:3, Insightful)
Anyway, this might be a good opportunity to buy some Loki releases cheap. However, according to the article, we shouldn't expect discounts right away. Scott Draeker said "I don't think there will be any huge discounts right away -- maybe in six months..."
I have a hard time being upset about this... (Score:5, Insightful)
Mostly, when I hear news like this, I want to tell people 'right tool for the right job'. Right now, the right tool for gaming is Windows. I wish it weren't so, but I also wish that the cheapest place to buy quality hand-tools wasn't Sears Roebuck.
Until the tools change... and this means an infrastructure change to Linux like any of the Wine-focused distros are harping... Windows will continue to be the best platform for games, just as MacOS continues to be the best platform for many multimedia tasks.
Rather than bemoaning YALCB (Yet Another Linux Company Bankruptcy...) contribute to projects like WINE and LindowsOS. Also, Linux GUI's and apps have all gone well past the point where they should be spending as much time on usability and compatibility as they do on technology development and application power:
Example: One of the complaints I hear most frequently from Windows users who switch over to a big name distro like Mandrake or RedHat complain about the speed of Gnome or KDE up against Windows GUI. The speed hit can be explained and fixed through several settings, program switches, and even kernel optimizations, but if I'm a Joe-Sixpack who doesn't wan't to support Microsoft, but sees this behavior and can't fix it easily, then I'm probably going to stay with Windows.
If you want Linux to be a gaming OS, it has to be just as easy to use and configure for everyone as the other gaming OS.
Re:I have a hard time being upset about this... (Score:2)
It is an interesting experiment, be it feasable or no.
Re: The focus should still be on mass adoption. (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate to mince words here, but dig this: Some might argue that *BeOS* is the best platform for many multimedia tasks. But it's gone the way of the dinosaur because almost *nobody* used it in that manner, regardless of how well designed it was.
Likewise, I would argue that *Linux* is the best platform for gaming...if you're ready to cope with a limited selection of games. I won't bore you with FPS benchmarks, but Linux (3rd party drivers and all) has evolved to a point where it can spank Windows 2000 and XP on a regular basis every time a part-time gamer wants to turn that badass mail server in the back room into a temporary gaming box. The file system is faster and more efficient. A user can easily give any game close-to-realtime priority if fragging a friend is foremost on her/his mind, picking up 5-10 extra frames per second in the process...
My point is that Windows is *not* a superior gaming platform compared to Linux, just that it is far better supported by game developers and hardware manufacturers alike. Until that changes, we will all find ourselves downloading the new DirectX version 37.
-------
I have no signature.
Re: The focus should still be on mass adoption. (Score:4, Offtopic)
>>might argue that *BeOS* is the best platform
>>for many multimedia tasks.
Hate to mince words, but those people are idiots.
First - don't talk about BeOS in the present sense. It's dead. Sad, but true.
Second - where would be all these multimedia apps on BeOS? Where's Illustrator? Photoshop? Quicktime? Painter? Freehand? Media Composer? DS? Symphony? ProTools? Quark? Maya? SOFTIMAGE? 3DSMax? Lightwave? Houdini? Pagemaker? Framemaker? InDesign? Combustion? Inferno? Media100? etc etc etc...
See a trend? Certainly BeOS *may have had the potential* to be a good MM os, but there was zero software. And that's what matters. Unless I'm willing to write all the tools myself. If i'm being paid to do graphic design i couldn't give a damn about the OOP'ness and threading model of the OS. I need apps - period. And I need *specific* apps. For example - If i need Photoshop I need Photoshop. I don't want GIMP. It's always kind of laughable when people declare GIMP to be a Photoshop killer. Maybe it will be in 10 years - but it's nowhere in the ballpark now. Not to slag on GIMP, but it's no Photoshop. And when I have a job to do, spending $600 on Photoshop to get the tools I need, vs. getting GIMP for 'free' and having endless headaches and missing 80% of the tools I need.... well there is no choice. Spending $600 on photoshop would pay for itself in a week.
Lets drop the 'coulda-woulda-shoulda' attitude. Next thing you'll bring up how killer the Amiga was.
>>Likewise, I would argue that *Linux* is the >>best platform for gaming...if you're ready to >>cope with a limited selection of games.
You could argue, but you'd be wrong. Limited selection of games, terrible drivers, and an OS that is stuck in 1979.
Example: I want to change the resolution/color space of my monitor. On Win32, ControlPanel->Display->Settings. Click click click I'm done.
On Linux - oh christ. Go try and dig out the chipset docs for your PC and gfx card if you've got them and start digging into the Xfree config files. Make sure you don't type in bad settings that'll cook your monitor or fry the card because you've put in a sync value that exceeds their specs. I got to fight with a default of Xfree4.x for a hour because my mouse type (though supported) isn't even documented (luckily i had an old v3.x config file still laying around). And no, Xconfigurator isn't even close.
>>The file system is faster and more efficient.
Lets see, it seems like they've FINALLY fixed the corruption problems in the 2.4 kernels...... we hope. Too bad about the VM subsystem. We're getting there......
>>My point is that Windows is *not* a superior
>>gaming platform compared to Linux,
Sure it is. It the OS facilities that are required, it is easy to use, and it has the games selection. You should start reading the linux kernel mailing list. The kernel has some *serious* problems. Even the powers that be can admit that.
Where is the linux equivalent of DirectInput? Nope.
Where is the linux equivalent of Direct3D? We've got OpenGL, which is proceeding at a glacial development pace, while D3D updates pop up every couple months --- significant updates. Being able to work with retained mode in D3D instead of being forced to deal with immediate model in OGL can make a big difference to a coder. The points go on and on. If you think D3D is junk, i suggest you read Carmacks points on his opinion of D3Dv8. It's quite nice, and MSFT is doing some good stuff with it.
It's funny --- there are so many things that Win2k/XP offer the user that the linux zealot will say "NOT IMPORTANT!" until linux finally adds it.... then it's the best thing since sliced bread.
C'mon. Lets be realistic. Linux isn't great for games. Generally it's a colossal pain in the ass - and ocassionally not being too much trouble.
I write code all day on Win32 and Linux so I'm not one of these armchair quarterbacks who's talking out of their ass. I like linux for what it's good at, but it isn't good at everything. And it just makes you sound like a naieve zealot to spout off that it is.
Re: The focus should still be on mass adoption. (Score:2, Interesting)
Also linux does have a directInput equivalent, SDL. And while SDL doesn't yet support force feed back (which is kinda pointless IMO) it does everything else DirectInput does, while being much nicer to use. (at least that is what my friend told me who rewrote his directX based game to a SDL based game)
Your right Linux can be a pain in the ass, if you don't have the right equipment, and if you don't know what you are doing. However, the same can be said about windows. I know plenty of people who have stability problems playing windows games.
Dude, have fun coding on Win32. Personally as a recreational programmer I find linux alot more fun. Everything is there for the examining and comes with free compilers for most languages. And the OS doesn't hide stuff from you and treat you like a dummy.
Re: The focus should still be on mass adoption. (Score:2)
Agreed, but if you're willing to run Wine, it's now getting pretty decent, even without Transgaming's DirectX extensions. What's nice about Wine is that it doesn't actually require any installation of Windows. So you install Linux, install Wine, and you can get away with never spending the cash on a Windows OS. Some of the great sites that are soooo helpful for this include:
Re:I have a hard time being upset about this... (Score:3, Interesting)
While I'm a strong proponent of the right tool right job mentality, I'm also well aware of the chicken and egg problem. If nobody tries to push linux into being a gaming platform, it will never become one.
And lets face it, while hackers might be good at developing fun games, they're usually not good at developing ones with a lot of artwork. Text based games aren't groundbreakers any more and graphic artists don't often want to work for free, from what I've seen. Yes, they could be like lots of us open source give it away programmers, but it is everyone's right to ask for compensation for their work.
So, the upshot of this, as I see it, is that if you want linux to become a gaming platform, you need commercial entities that are pushing it. Like any new technology and market, it will be small and unpopular for a while. Once it gains critical mass, things won't be so tight. Until then, we need companies like Loki that combine money with an overall good faith effort to develop the market and technology.
While I don't really give a damn about videogames, I know that the more games you can play on linux, the more people will use linux, and all users of linux benefit, at least indirectly, from an increased user base.
And as far as things like Wine go, yes, they're neat, and are a useful interim solution, but Wine will always be slower than running the software natively in Windows by the very nature of how it works and what it is. You don't tend to run servers and other intensive processes in emulation, why should you run games, which will often chew up all the resources they can to run as well as possible?
Re:I have a hard time being upset about this... (Score:2)
I believe it was mentioned awhile back that Amiga was working on a multimedia layer that could be grafted to Linux systems. Whether or not this happened, it's still a good idea. With this MM layer, you could write truly hardware independent games, and the only user requirement would be that they have this layer installed.
Re:I have a hard time being upset about this... (Score:2)
The real problem is that even when there is a linux port available, people buy the windows version anyway. Example: Quake 3. Does it really matter that much what operating system you're running your games under? You're machine's not going to be doing anything but playing the game when you're using it for that, so who cares if you have to reboot into windows?
Re:I have a hard time being upset about this... (Score:2)
Games development will eventually flourish on Linux; its development is logical and organinc rather than driven by the need to release sucessive versions of boxed software on time. This will probably mean that the stability, refinement and quality of the of the games will be unprecedented.
All of this can happen, but not without the basic need of a usable, inclusive, non threatening distribution, which probably could only be produced by someone like AOL. They have the money, the deep experience in usability and intimate familiarity with "joe sixpack" that is crucial to the development and mass acceptance of Linux.
Games are the icing on the cake; got to turn the oven on first, decide on the flavour and mix the batter before we try and eat it.
Re:I have a hard time being upset about this... (Score:5, Insightful)
*Looks over at the Dreamcast and Gamecube consoles next to the television, controllers already so worn from extensive use that the buttons are going bad*
You're kidding, right?
Re:I have a hard time being upset about this... (Score:2)
What will make linux a viable game creation platform are things like SDL, WorldForge and other open source projects that are also games. If people continue to develop open source gaming engines and the tools needed to create content for them, then maybe in a few years we will see more games popping up on linux first. If there are better tools on linux, then the games will come. Right now the best tools available for creating games all run on WINDOWS. Everything from 3dstudiomax to directX. Yes, directX is a good tool because it supports so many features.
SDL is a good tool, but there needs to be a larger pool of people using and developing it before it will spawn great games on a regular basis.
Re:I have a hard time being upset about this... (Score:2)
And there are several different viable versions of Linux for Dreamcast that are out there, plus a brand new Open Source OS called Kallisti!OS which is being built from the ground up to support the very well-documented Dreamcast.
With the PS/2 modchip industry an endangered species, with the Game Cube using a non-standard DVD media, and with the XBox using enough strong crypto and non-standard parts to turn an ordinary PC into a modder's/emulator writer's nightmare, the Dreamcast is the only console around which a developer underground can emerge. And it is happening. Do some searching on Google sometime. You'd be surprised by what pops up.
Re:I have a hard time being upset about this... (Score:2)
If you want to reccomend to someone the correct tools be sure that you are an expert before you go making reccomendations....
The FF series blows away any windows game ever created in sales, use, following, profit, everything.....
and it will stay that way.
Loki discounts. (Score:2, Informative)
I think he is mistaken on this one. I bought Loki Heretic II today for $5.00 at Microcenter.
Re:Loki discounts. (Score:2)
Re:Loki discounts. (Score:2)
Tin Box for Linux, in fact.
Re:Loki discounts. (Score:2)
Re:Loki discounts. (Score:2)
Possible new business for these guys... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Possible new business for these guys... (Score:3, Insightful)
The Games? (Score:2)
Re:The Games? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, that's exactly what's going to happen.
The same could have been said for Corel's products -- there is nothing else comparable to Corel Draw for Linux or Corel WordPerfect Office 2000 for Linux, but both have been discontinued due to nonexistent sales. I'm lucky enough to own both, but people who want to buy WordPerfect Office 2000 for Linux today are out of luck, because Corel won't sell it to you and neither will anyone else.
In fact, it was Corel's second try... Corel Draw 6 (IIRC) was released for Linux years ago, and pulled due to lack of sales.
I see a lot of people here complaining that it's about capitalism vs. communism, or about "they didn't release the games I want" but I think, when it really comes down to truth, things look something like this:
It's nothing to do with a utopian fantasy about free software... Linux users just want free beer. It's a sad thing for those of us who want to use Linux for anything else. We get told over and over "Use the right tool for the right job. What you want is Windows." Hmmm, Windows to run office software. Windows to browse the Web with a decent browser. Windows to play games. Well, as it turns out that's all I use a computer for these days.
So, in essence, what the "community" tells the rest of us, day in and day out, is "get lost and go back to Windows." Not because of any principle, but because they're deathly afraid they might become mainstream.
Sad for those of us who have never owned windows. I came up through the Unix world, starting in the mid '80s and I'm comfortable with *nix systems I still have a VT100 (yes, a real one) sitting in the corner that I use for some things. But if they're saying that Linux is for coding only, and thus modern Unix is for coding only... I guess I've outgrown Unix and will have to invest in Windows.
Ramble, ramble, ramble...
Back to on-topic... in short, yes, the games, and all of the hard work, will likely disappear into a black hole.
AOL? Redhat? IBM? (Score:5, Troll)
The only people that could have helped these guys were Linux Gamers. Where either a) there aren't enough of them, or b) they're not used to having to actually pay for software, c) they didn't like the games Loki did.
whichever it is... the market has decided.
Hmm, let's see how long it takes for this to get modded down...
Re:AOL? Redhat? IBM? (Score:2)
They really wanted to create a niche market for linux porting, that would open up ground to a real game company. Unfortunately, most linux people who play games I reckon are pretty similar to myself. Coders and admins, they work and do hobby work and when they need a break from that they switch to games. Hell, I play around with crafty and gnuchess more than I play the games I've actually purchased. I think you have to look at the people who are running Linux. A lot of us aren't huge gamers, and those that are already have access to our games and are stuck in our paths.
I thought about buying Kohan from Loki. Then realized it'd be another game that I don't play ever. It woulda been nice to support them, in hindsight. I'm happily stuck in my niche, and they don't provide much in the immediate benefit for myself. I know it's a selfish outlook, but that's the way it goes.
Re:AOL? Redhat? IBM? (Score:2)
However as I saw it there were two big problems:
1. I'm not a fan of first-person shooters so I didn't buy any of them. I would have loved to seen more games like Railroad Tycoon II and Alpha Centauri.
2. I bought several of the games at a local Electronics Buotique, where they were selling for $5-10 a pop. I like a bargain as much as anyone else but the low price told me that either Loki wasn't charging enough for the games (doubtful), or EB wasn't selling the games and was closing them out. No matter how good Loki was, I don't think they were ever going to make it without retailer support.
Mandrake (Score:2, Insightful)
How much did they sell? (Score:2, Interesting)
As an avid gamer (I boot Windows ONLY to play games) I was very happy to see Loki port Windows based games to Linux. And contrary to a bunch of the posts so far, I thought that it was a) simple to get the games running and b) pretty decent in performance. Yeah, sure, Windows generally played the same game better on the same computer (although generally not by much), but then you had to cope with all that Window's garbage, like reboots and mysterious hangs and
Anyhow, does anyone have the answers to my questions?
Best of luck to all who worked at Loki! You did a great job!
Re:How much did they sell? (Score:2)
However, I suspect things will change now that XP's out. XP is useless for everything BUT games. And perhaps since XP is pretty much 2K with lots of frou frou maybe some of the new games will play decently on 2K
And yes, I am an MCSE...dammit, don't flame me! Yeouch!!!
Who will host the CVS repository? (Score:3, Interesting)
NewsForge: What happens to your public CVS repository and the projects it hosts?
Draeker: We'd like to find someone to continue hosting it.
Any volunteers?
-
Green Bay Packers (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.packers.com/history/stockhistory.htm
Issue voting, non-divident-paying shares, with no chance of stock appreciation. I would be willing to pay $100 for a share. The motive for us is the same as it was for the Packers - to save a cherished institution; buy Loki enough time to make their business model work.
It would be important to prevent any single entity from gaining control, just as it was important for the Packers, by limiting how many shares any individual or organization can possess.
I know, ideally we should have bought the games in the first place, but Mandrake only recently was able to autodetect NVidia cards and install 3D support automatically. I think manually setting up NVidia cards was the big stopper for a lot of people.
Re:Green Bay Packers (Score:2)
Re:Green Bay Packers (Score:2)
At the risk of sounding repetitive... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not saying Loki was a bad company. I'm saying that the business they were in was not robust enough to sustain Loki. Even the best of the best can only sell ice cubes to eskimos for so long. The Linux gaming market just isn't there, folks. Make your peace and move on.
I wish the folks at Loki (and the former employees) all the luck in the world, and maybe some day Linux will have a viable game market that will bring them all back together again. For now, though, it's not there. Pooling money together to keep Loki alive for the few people who bothered to buy their games is just plain silly. Ditto for asking RH/IBM/AOL to bail them out.
Loki wasn't in the business of charity; nobody should be asked for charity to keep Loki in business.
Re:At the risk of sounding repetitive... (Score:2)
Hey, Loki provided something valuable to me and if I'm willing to pay to try to keep it coming, what the hell is wrong with that?
I'm not asking you to chip in your $100. But why should you seek to prevent me from chipping in my $100? Just because you're an asshole and want to prevent me from supporting what I want to support?
Cheer up, Loki (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course she has no concept of the strategy or even of the point of the game, but she likes creating armies full of sprites, water elementals and unicorns.
You could always do worse than pleasing a child.
Blood from a stone (Score:2, Insightful)
If Loki been able to get some big name games to the platform things may of been different. Sorry, but Postal is a crap game that was crap on PC and no amount of good will can make a 2-3 year old crap game a viable product.
Maybe they should of looked at the charts more and sold out. Who wants to be a millionaire? sold bucket loads. Yeah it is shallow, but it is mass market and a damn sight more likely to sell than The Return of Postal-Unplugged Special Edition.
Oh, and for all those people who say things like "I use Windows ONLY for games" why bother saying that? Does it make any difference if you use Windows for ONLY games or if you use Windows for everything? Do you feel proud that you pay the same amount to Microsoft for their operating system but don't use it for anything (apart from games)?
Re:Blood from a stone (Score:2)
Re:Blood from a stone (Score:2)
At the risk of sounding elitist, I suspect that Linux users would have been profoundly uninterested in stuff like that. People (and yes, there are a lot of them) who buy that kind of crap, don't have Linux. Postal made more sense than that.
Speaking of Postal: yes, it was crap. But it had "buzz." Maybe Loki did a better job of selling out than you think.
Damn (Score:2)
Bound to Happen... (Score:2, Interesting)
In hindsight and now knowing what the Linux gaming market is like, this was inevitable. The fact that most Linux users either dual-boot with Windows or have another x86 machine with Windows was the critical factor. As most of us Linuxheads are in the technically-savvy section of the computing market, and those users tend to be aware of new products & software faster and early adopters, why would they want to wait months for a game to come out for Liunx if they could play it today on their Windows partition? Even if our hearts were in the right place and we tried not to play a game until we bought the Linux version, obviously our desires exceeded our willpower otherwise Loki would still be with us.
This is unfortunately not good news for the rest of the Linux gaming industry (or what's left of it). The circumstances that made Loki die still exist, and I'm sure other Linux gaming companies are feeling them too. But our own use of x86 hardware - as much freedom and value as it has given us - is the very reason Linux gaming is faltering. Mac-porting companies are doing well, and even Amiga companies get good responses to their ports, all because they have captive audiences. It's the price we pay for inexpensive and abundant hardware.
this could be just the break (Score:2)
Linux Gamiing Market... (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem here is they port a game after it is popular, with a lead time of at least 6 months to get from Windows to Linux. The Linux users who also like to play games alot are typically on x86 architecture, and have some version of Windows (even 95) lying around. Is it worth it to wait 6 months to a year to play a game on Linux, especially since by then the Windows version is in the bargain bin at 1/5 the price of the Linux version.
*If* there is a potential viable Linux gaming market (and that is a big *if*, the Linux desktop userbase is already small compared to Windows, and of those users, I would venture to say that most don't really care that much about games.), then the only hope to see it come forth is if the playing field is level, meaning that releases would have to be simultaneous, equally available (on the shelves), and equally priced. Given the circumstances, only Transgaming can have a short enough lead time to really sell enough to have any good numbers.
Re:Linux Gamiing Market... (Score:3, Insightful)
Note that giving the users a choice of which OS to run (a "level playing field") isn't a necessity for vendors... If you you sell 100 units split fifty-fifty when selling to Win and Linux, you might be just as happy selling 90 to Windows and not selling to the Linux market by not porting.
Of course, if the cost of bringing the product to the platform is low, the support burden low you might as well get the remaining profit as well. It's just a question of economics.
open source/ free games? i doubt it. (Score:2, Insightful)
with the majority of popular games coming out now, mainly in the land of FPS and RTS, you can gain access to an SDK within days of the games release, as well as normally a section of source code with which to rewrite sections to make your own mod or just to tinker with the game, making the whole 'port games to linux because its open source etc etc' a moot point
and with every developer and his mother trying to release another version of quake, c&c etc, and all the 'its like <genre defining classic> but quicksave is now F10 instead of F6' games coming out, its hard enough to make money without charging the large amounts companies already do for games.
how could a company that is rewriting already existing games for an operating system that is really only a niche market *in the land of gaming* (note this point before you flame) expect to cope? even though they dont have all the issues with art, music etc, these things dont convert themselves. and the amount of people that downloaded a full OS for free, then a browser for free, then everything else for free arent gonna wanna pay just to play games. i think this whats happened to loki has proved this point.
<redundant>
windows is the premier gaming platform, and its gonna be a hard thing to change. sure, i whinge like the rest of us when IE crashes for the millionth time for no good reason, and i despise all the 'invasion of privacy bullshit that makes me use Eudora and Netscape/Opera instead of Outlook/IE, but games wise, you arent gonna get a better platform.
</redundant>
Gamers follow games, not platforms (Score:4, Insightful)
So the problem with Loki's business model is that it was porting games that were already available. The only people interested would be those people who don't run Windows, but want to play the games - that's a minority of gamers. The vast majority of gamers just want to play the game; since it was already released for Windows, they have no need to get it again for Linux.
Now if they were producing new games for Linux, that'd be another matter entirely. But they're producing games for Linux that the hardcore gamers all already have for another platform; there's little incentive for them to buy it again.
Alternative business models? (Score:2)
Would it be easier to write the game for Linux and then do the port to Windows? Which is more difficult, going from Windows to Linux or from Linux to Windows? I'd imagine Linux -> Windows is easier to do since you'll be using a set of libraries that are more likely to be cross-platform than if you started with Windows.
But that's just my guess.
21-gun salute... (Score:2)
While Free Software is the lifeblood of this community, I have to urge everyone who cares about Linux to vote with their money when they see a company trying to turn things right. It's the only language capitalism understands...
Convince crazy Larry... (Score:2)
Want to know why "Linux" companies are failing? (Score:2)
1.) Distributions - supposedly 'value-added' compilations of free software with various technical support options as the real selling point. (Well, tech support if you really want to use the quirky, obfuscated mess that is most commercial Linux distributions.) Now if these same companies had just helped to enhance the Debian project (with say.. a newbie-friendly installer / hardware detection / GUI control panel / etc.) and then supported that instead, maybe it would have worked. But instead, the commercial distro people waste enormous amounts of time and energy redo'ing work that other people have already done a good job on.
2.) Proprietary Software for Linux - these are the people who believe that Open Source doesn't work for all types of software, so instead of fully supporting the community, they've created proprietary products to "fill in the gaps" in the landscape of free software. Problem is, this isn't economically efficient for them OR the customers. And it certainly doesn't further the cause of Open Source software. People who use proprietary office suites or games are throwing money into a black hole. Sure, it may temporarily suit a need or desire, but that money doesn't go towards producing software that will live on, continually improving as an open code base.
So here's the part where innovation comes in. People are willing to pay for software that they need as long as it actually fits the bill. Because of this, there is no reason why these users cannot pay Open Source developers to write software they need, but which will also be free to the community. Why would you pay for something that will be free? Because if you don't, it will never exist.. or at least it won't exist by the time you need it. So would you, as a user of software, rather sink money into proprietary software whose code will never see the light of day? Or would you rather get better quality software for the same price and support Open Source at the same time? The key, of course, is how to *organize* this exchange between users and developers in some sort of contract form.
Unfortunately, I don't believe Eric Raymond ever really touched on this when he wrote The Magic Cauldron. Of the Open Source business models he listed, the closest match is perhaps found in section 9.3 "Give away recipes, Open a restaurant." But it does have a powerful point, one that needs to be re-thought and expanded. Software can be, in every sense of the word, a service. Programmers are paid for the labor of writing code that does what people need. That's it. Forget selling things. Forget delusions of 'value-added versions.' And forget distributions plastered with bright logos and 'commercial looking' shrinkwrap. It's a waste. The true value is the functionality of the code itself. Contract for it to be written to specification, then stick it up on an FTP server for the world to see. Or sell your services, promising that you will transform any current and future Open Source software into a turnkey solution. Because that's what customers want: a solution. It's that simple.
There are many ways to go about this and it's time to starting trying them. People, stop sitting on your asses complaining and go start making a difference.
Thank Odin the Allfather (Score:2)
Now, was it *really* wise to port that Rune, eh?
May you live forever in the halls of the One-Eyed.
Re:Mac Gaming Companies... (Score:2)
I don't think The Fool's Errand ever made it to the PC. Neither did System's Twilight
As far as extant Mac companies, I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned Freeverse. Most of what they've produced is card games, but they've been branching out into arcade and strategy games as well. Also, I don't know too many other game companies with a character that was used on a Blockbuster commercial.
Also remember that Myst was originally not only Mac only by Hypercard, and, what was it, Quake 3 arena came out on beta first for the Mac just a couple of years ago?
Re:Just a second.. (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Just a second.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Dont shed too many tears for Draeker (Score:2)
Yes its a shame that this business folded; for the acceptance of linux as a viable gaming market and such potential growth across desktops etc; for those talented programmers who worked for the company; and those - myself included - whom have enjoyed their games.
However Draeker (an ex Apple lawyer) apparently had some rather novel business practices, which (at least when things began to get awkward) allegedly seemed to involve manipulating a rather gullible employee into bankrolling the company. Before any more moderators get too slap happy on the parent post please consider this:
Loki Speaks up on Chapter 11 [slashdot.org]
Specifically this and related threads: More informative media on Loki [slashdot.org]
Which highlights this:
Founder, Creditors Differ as to Loki's Future Course [linuxtoday.com]
Re:(OT)Troll? Flamebait? (Score:2)
That WAS a serious question people...
I've bought a couple of Loki's games (and am quite pleased with them, I might add). Evidently, the moderators haven't been following this story long, though. If the company's been going broke for the last few years, as seems to be the case from the stories that have been coming out, either Draeker had a HUGE savings (possible, I suppose), or has drawn a comfortable paycheck for himself all this time. Either way, his quote implies that he is evidently walking away from this supposedly long-faltering company with enough personal wealth to not need to look for work any time soon. I'm sorry if this thought offends people, but what other interpretation is there?
Re:Very simple reason! (Score:3, Flamebait)
people who use warez and cracks, and serials are cheapskates who wont buy anything.
Linux and BSD users buy things. we just dont have to spend 1/2 our computer budget on the operating system and basic operation software. If they sold any of the Corel products I would buy them, I was waiting Eagerly to buy them. they never sold them or allowed purchase. If I could buy quicken for linux I would, (quickbooks? no way, BANAL is better.) I bought every Loki game. most of which right after they announced the chapter 11 but I had some before that.. Would I buy html editors or text editors? no, because I use the free stuff happily.
90% of the Linux users would happily buy closed source binaries of apps that they want for linux. the 10% that wont are the same 10% that want to warez everything. Just like the windows people. (SHOCKER!!! scumbags in the linux camp... get used to it they are everywhere.)
Loki's demise is sad but is is far from a forcaster or indicator. the Linux market is about to explode... and it will explode MASSIVELY.
If there was one app I would pay for without hesitation for linux? cool-edit pro. the best sound editor on the planet, hands down. (soundforge sucks compared to it... besides soundforge is a looping and cycle editing program for rappers and industrial not for music or sound editing.)
So you win the prize as the most wrong poster of slashdot tonight.... because Linux people do buy things, happily.
Re:Very simple reason! (Score:2)
How is this post going to induce a flame-fest? What is there even to discuss? Are we going to get a posting war between legitimate users and software-pirates? Give me a break.
And now for my equally "flamable" (but will cause no flame) comment:
In the Linux world we have the GPL, and we expect users and developers to respect it. We should also respect other software licenses as well. So please, if you are a Linux user, don't pirate software! It makes us look bad. If you don't like a software's license, then don't use it. You would complain if Microsoft were to steal GPL code, after all.
Re:Very simple reason! (Score:2)
You weren't watching very closely. They were on the market for a full year. I bought Corel WordPerfect Office 2000 for Linux and Corel Draw 9 for Linux off a retail shelf at retail prices at my local CompUSA and have used them every day since. Corel has finally withdrawn them due to a "lack of interest" in non-free software -- according to their sales guy, sales of Linux products weren't nearly enough to justify the minimal development effort.
Re:Loki Uninstall tool (Score:2, Informative)
I'm planning to continue supporting the Loki installer, so it probably won't stay a dead project.