Search Unity

  1. Megacity Metro Demo now available. Download now.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Unity support for visionOS is now available. Learn more in our blog post.
    Dismiss Notice

Linux Support :D

Discussion in 'Wish List' started by FelixAlias, Nov 14, 2005.

  1. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    That's the best answer I have. You seem to be mistaking me for someone who works for Unity Tech.

    --Eric
     
  2. tfitzner

    tfitzner

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Posts:
    1
    But the matter of the fact is,(also the way i see this situation) that unity could be makeing money... look alone at the indie bundle's. remember alone that these are DONATIONS and they have gotten THOUSANDS of dollars because of a pack or games that have either been recently made or been previously released. and also the average of the users who wanted this bundle or bundle's spent over 10$. to me the time it would take(from what admins have said to be 2-4 months could be easily spent getting profits as a way to (bring) an early release or a holding for the Linux-based users can also start makeing and playing these games.

    but i mean this is how i see it.
     
  3. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    Surely you can see how futile it is trying to advise a multi million dollar company how to make money when you don't even have a company, let alone a business. I have a company and a business and I wouldn't dream of telling them how to run theirs.
     
  4. ColossalDuck

    ColossalDuck

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Posts:
    3,246
    But thats just it, no experience in the subject at hand, therefor, no knowledge.
     
  5. Evilduck

    Evilduck

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Posts:
    32
    Windows Me is more important. :(
     
  6. neuromancer

    neuromancer

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1
    I don't understand people that in a Linux Support post, continue to make FUD statement about Linux users and Linux platform.
    Linux is great, more and more people use it in different ways, so UT join the Linux world and make your player available also for Linux users.
    I know many people who are using windows in dual boot ONLY to play games, so I think if UT release Unity also for Linux is a win-win.

    Any fudders have heard about DESURA?

    Life is too short to annoy Linux users. Go play your games on your preferred OS and let us do the same in our OS.
     
  7. SudoBash

    SudoBash

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Posts:
    1
    I just stumbled on this thread looking for Linux support in Unity...
    Linux is pretty much all I feel at home with and I am working on a project that's not a game, but would definitely benefit from running as / like a game with a game engine and all. I stumbled on Unity about a year ago but rediscovered it recently thanks to Slashdot and a project called Code Hero being developed in Unity. I would like to develop in Unity, but I mainly only develop in NIX and have never tried making a game. I think for me personally, I would prefer Linux support because it doesn't slow down nearly as much as Windows over time and I just prefer it as my Every OS.

    So I would love to use Unity and learn about it and the whole game development process, but without Linux Support I may be forced to look at something else, although what first caught my eye about Unity is the multi-platform support... :-|

    BTW I am actually a prospective customer...
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2011
  8. kpedersen

    kpedersen

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Posts:
    9
    I believe Linux support to be a much more valuable proposition to the Unity developers than they realize.

    By providing the free version to hobby Linux developers (and there are many more than Mac OS X), they will get used to the technology and will be happy to purchase a Unity Windows license to provide end users with win32 binaries if / when the time comes.

    By measuring the popularity of a platform based on sales is not a good indicator of popularity when it comes to the hobby / development market.

    I think a similar plan was initiated by Apple to appeal to students and then when they graduate they keep to Apple's software because it is what they know.

    So in short, I would really suggest not counting Linux support out completely!

    If Adobe flash did not release a Linux binary, do you believe the platform would have been as successful as it is today?

    (Also... removing the online activation from the Free versions would inspire a lot more confidence for aspiring unity developers and this small amount of freedom for them should not be an issue for piracy)
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2011
  9. ColossalDuck

    ColossalDuck

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Posts:
    3,246
    @kpedersen
    Read the thread, its coming.
     
  10. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    That won't happen; there is no separate free version, there is only one Unity.

    No, only Linux publishing is coming, the editor isn't.

    --Eric
     
  11. ColossalDuck

    ColossalDuck

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Posts:
    3,246
    Blast, I completely misread that.
     
  12. kpedersen

    kpedersen

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Posts:
    9
    It was probably my fault. I didn't make myself very clear looking back at my post.

    Linux as an output target is definately a good step forward if we are ever going to get the Editor ported so I guess I will just have to cross my fingers for a while longer :)

    As for the online activation issue with the free version. Perhaps only forcing activation to use the Pro features would be a solution? Anyway, apologies. I don't want to take this thread off-topic since getting it on Linux is the first step :). Then I can complain about the "short-sightedness" of online DRM at a later date.
     
  13. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    If Unity is going to have DRM at all, then it's going to exist regardless of whether you use Pro features or not. Spending 30 seconds to activate it is hardly onerous, considering it's free.

    --Eric
     
  14. flim

    flim

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Posts:
    326
    Tonight I installed Unbuntu 11.10 64-bit, I am impressed, there is build-in App Store, I really like it.

    Maybe we should request port Unity to Ubuntu.
     
  15. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,601
    you are 2.x years late and the targeting with the player for linux was mentioned to be in works :p
     
  16. tgraupmann

    tgraupmann

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    Posts:
    828
    Having the publishing target to Linux is perfect. Because you can already run the IDE in Linux.

    Here you can see it working in 3.4:


    Here you can see it working in 3.4.1:


    I'm using the codeweavers product to do this. The IDE is functional if it auto loads the demo project.

    There's a minor file dialog issue with loading projects or creating new projects. With very little effort this could work.

    Here is the support page where you can lend your votes to get codeweavers to fix the issues on their end:
    http://www.codeweavers.com/compatibility/browse/name/?app_id=7152

    There's a workaround. When you make a new project and it fails, it still makes the empty folder. And then you just open that empty folder as an existing project and the IDE loads just fine.

    After that the Unity IDE is functional in Ubuntu. You just have to move windows around sometimes to get them to refresh. The Asset Store loads completely black.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2011
  17. dl.zerocool

    dl.zerocool

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2011
    Posts:
    1
    Well wine/crossover are good tools, but they should never ever be a end solution to get a peace of software running in different environment.
    Because there's no hundred percent chance that this compatibility will brake, fully or partially. Some necessary functions may just stop functioning at any moment, plus you will not get any support for unity3d due to using a non supported environment. It's cool tough.

    I just want to say that today no developer has a real make software that is OS bounded (except for really really specific ones).

    The libs are now multi-os and multi architecture.
    If porting is impossible by design, then the design is broken, literally.

    Unity does a great job, but having the IDE bound to Windows is just a shame, when you have libraries like Qt. OpenGL, OpenAl and so on.
    I know lot of engines and tools work the same way, but it's not because the others don't do worse that we have to do the same :) There's always place for improvement.
    I hope that unity3d will still think about it and that they will turn their tools to be multi-platform because that's the way to go.

    Thanks for the tips tough, I'm trying with wine right now.

    [edit]
    I just tested with wine and it works (not well...) but it works.
    I've tried to build&run and it sadly fails always at moving some file close to the end. So no it's a viable solution for me. Thanks for the tip tough. (I've tried build&run standalone&web both generate the same problem)
     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2011
  18. npsf3000

    npsf3000

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    Posts:
    3,830
    It isn't.
     
  19. Helmut Duregger

    Helmut Duregger

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2010
    Posts:
    18
    Yes, there is indeed an OSX version of the editor, which makes it even more realistic to provide a Linux version.

    I also put my vote in for a Linux version of the Editor and Player. This would allow me to finally get rid of Windows which is just a pain to work with.

    Unity starts to become or is already the leading Indy engine. I believe Linux support would multiply the user community. Which means more potential IOS, Android, whatever licenses sold. Unity already did, but could write even better game dev history.
     
  20. tyoc213

    tyoc213

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    Posts:
    168
    I vote for editor on Linux, we have already NaCl on chrome I think, but it would be great to a Linux native client.
     
  21. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    I think enough has probably been said about this - and all developers actually want it. But would you want it if you knew you had to pay for it separately ie 1500 for linux pro, or 400 for linux basic export?

    Does a price on it, change your answers? Of that I am curious.
     
  22. elias_t

    elias_t

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Posts:
    1,367
    No. I would surely pay to have the Linux executable.

    Unity is also extensively used for visualizations and many customers want to have their app running on several linux boxes.
     
  23. tgraupmann

    tgraupmann

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    Posts:
    828
    It's totally worth it.

    I think back over the years about games on the linux platform.

    I remember when LinuxMagazine and Loki games died. And having Unity support Linux will resurrect a lot of great content stuck in the mud.
     
  24. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    I was just wondering, because you know what humans are like. They'll demand and demand the world and not even use it. Just senseless behaviour. But I was thinking, Linux support I'd probably pay for if I wanted to try and get in on those bundle things :)
     
  25. janpec

    janpec

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Posts:
    3,520
    No it does not. As long as it is avalible and even if i have to pay additional 1.5k so be it, it is just a plus not an obstracle in any kind.

    I vote +1 to this thread, with + 1.5k license or free.
     
  26. Nateao

    Nateao

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Posts:
    74
    I know that we all have talk about this for long time but we need to stop talking and star working in a Linux Unity Free or Pay

    We need unity in linux there is a big community out there that can help in making devian and unity 3D to work

    There is a Linux with the name Unity alrady all we need to do is make it work the base is Mandriva wich it was mate by Red Hat and they have a big suport.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2012
  27. fanjules

    fanjules

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2011
    Posts:
    167
    It's interesting the concept of payment came up, given Mac and Windows export are essentially free.

    But I would certainly pay (if I had to), as I believe it's an untapped market.

    I'm not a Linux user myself, but note from gaming forums and even just my facebook feed that the platform has a lot of fans - and Linux Mint appears to becoming the most successfull Linux distribution in a very short space of time giving new momentum to Linux as a whole. Unity would become THE game creator for Linux, period - and should Linux increase in userbase in the future (it may well do with more games!) Unity will be in the best seats for anybody that wants to develop for Linux.

    It would also give huge kudos to Unity and make anybody who is using a different game engine to maybe give Unity a second look. :)
     
  28. Loudmask

    Loudmask

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Posts:
    17
    I use Linux as a hobbyist platform, but it's true: Linux is often overlooked from being suitable for sales/downloads of games. We need Linux support, so that we can keep Tux going strong! :D
     
  29. TehWut

    TehWut

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Posts:
    1,577
    I never thought about it like that. Sounds quite profitable for UT - and Unity developers alike.
     
  30. npsf3000

    npsf3000

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    Posts:
    3,830
    While I agree in principle you've overlooked one small principle.

    Linux.

    The Linux market is full of developers... developers who think Mono of all things is too proprietary. Try to chuck in a closed sourced game engine into the mix...

    In short - just because you lead a horse to water doesn't mean the horse will drink from it.
     
  31. fanjules

    fanjules

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2011
    Posts:
    167
    Maybe, but I wasn't thinking about targeting Linux *developers* (partly for the reasons you give), but rather the platform.

    Linux developers wouldn't touch Unity unless the editor was on Linux too, which is a whole new task again.
     
  32. janpec

    janpec

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Posts:
    3,520
    Well, anyways +1 to this topic!
     
  33. dubbreak

    dubbreak

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Posts:
    22
    I spoke with a Unity Tech rep at G2E (tech evangelist iirc) about a Linux native client. Apparently there was one in testing stages.

    The reason I brought it up was gaming devices (such as slot machines) need an OS. Android and Linux are much more flexible on hardware than Windows (allows running on ARM which is cheaper, though Windows 8 will supposedly change that), licensing is free, easier installation (just copy an image from machine to machine) etc etc.

    For a totally custom platform Linux is easier (in my opinion). Plus for something that will basically just be launching into a full screen instance of Unity you don't want/need the overhead of the Android stack. I'd love to see Unity running on something like the raspberry pi mini board ($25!!), which already has a linux build. With a board like the RPi think how cheaply you could throw together a unity based arcade cabinet (something like the winnitron).

    I'm really excited about targeting linux from a 'Unity as a platform' perspective. I could care less what OS I develop Unity on (I currently run Unity in both Win7 and OS X), not being able to easily dev in Unity on linux isn't an issue to me. The end target isn't the desktop/laptop I'm developing on, it's the device (just like targetting IOS or Android).
     
  34. xedi

    xedi

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2012
    Posts:
    4
    Ubuntu is more popular and seems to have a much faster adoption rate, too, than Mint: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/02/stats-show-ubuntu-not-losing-ground-to-linux-mint/

    Of course, Mint is essentially Ubuntu, so the growing popularity of both distributions is a good thing and I would not mind either of them becoming the dominant OS but right now there are no indications that Mint will overtake Ubuntu.

    Back to topic: I think it is crucial that Unity is released as Linux version because that ensures that everybody can use it because Linux is free. I think it is a big mistake that software developers only develop for Windows and thus force everyone to pay for it instead of developing for Linux. Every Windows user can use Linux software because every Windows user can install Linux. It does not work the other way so the most logical thing to do is to either develop software for both Windows and Linux or only for Linux. Developing only for Windows hurts society because it forces everybody to spend unnecessary money.

    I am using Ubuntu exclusively for a couple years now except that I use Windows (free MSDNAA copy, I would not have payed for it) to play Battlestar Galactica Online which runs on Unity so I am very much looking forward to the Linux version. The Linux market is also not THAT small, the last humble bundle sale statistics show that 25% profit came from Linux users. Of course that does not mirror the whole population and Linux users payed more than the other platforms but it does show that Linux is not insignificant and most importantly the share is growing.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2012
  35. dubbreak

    dubbreak

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Posts:
    22
    As cool as Unity Technologies is it has to make business sense for them. Does making a native player make sense financially? Depends on the cost of doing it. The linux desktop market is smaller than the market of OS X users, however it is a market ripe for the taking and the humble bundle seems to show there is a desktop market.

    I think Linux as a platform makes a lot more business sense from it being used in embedded and stand alone solutions. For example if a company like IGT (who if I remember correctly has more than half the gaming machines in all US Casinos) adopted Unity as their main dev tool for their new machines (and assuming those machines are running linux) that would make linux deploys make sense. The gambling industry is a multi-billion dollar industry. Having a slice of that pie is a lot more tempting than the whole linux desktop pie. Hell, IGT's market cap is >$4Billion USD. If they wanted to pay for Linux support they could.

    I quickly checked IGT's site. 44 current Engineer/dev positions, some of which even list Unity as required skills (also various Java and Flash targeted positions). I think a company worth >$4billion USD has a lot more influence than the linux desktop market.

    As far as Unity dev tools on linux? Unless it's nearly trivial port of the osx or windows code or basically cross platform already, I doubt we'll see it any time soon. Maintaining various support branches is a PITA and the revenue has to justify that support. The people who are paying for Unity Pro most likely aren't worried about the cost of their OS (and it seems many are running Macs). If you can't afford a $350 for a laptop that comes with windows or $130 OEM MS license then you most likely aren't going to fork out for a Unity Pro license.

    If you want to make games for free there are options other than Unity (though none as nice to my knowledge). If a Windows license (usually wrapped in the cost of a computer) is the base cost for getting into Unity3d then so be it. I don't expect Unity Tech to spend money on a niche group that isn't going to support itself financially (and that's speaking as part of that niche group).
     
  36. xedi

    xedi

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2012
    Posts:
    4
    I see your point with the dev tools and your points about embedded systems is also interesting.

    However, I disagree with that it does not make business sense to release a player for the Linux market. As others already pointed out, one advantage would be to conquer a niche market.

    One reason why I think Linux is growing is that nowadays everything is getting more web based including games. Those who do not play AAA titles on their computers do not need Windows to play games because the browser games everybody is playing also work fine on Linux (except Unity based ones obviously). So the argument which comes up often in these discussions: "Those who want to play Unity games have Windows anyways" is not necessarily true today and is getting more and more false in the future, because those who play browser games do not need windows and so in this segment chances are that they either do not have windows or prefer to not use it.
     
  37. npsf3000

    npsf3000

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    Posts:
    3,830
    U3D now has TWO web-player solutions for Linux.

    If you want to make Linux games in Unity... go and make Linux games in Unity!
     
  38. fanjules

    fanjules

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2011
    Posts:
    167
    I thought only NaCL works on Linux. GPU-accelerated Flash Stage3d hasn't been implemented on Linux yet?
     
  39. Wolfos

    Wolfos

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Posts:
    949
    Will never be, Adobe are lazy dicks.
     
  40. npsf3000

    npsf3000

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    Posts:
    3,830
    In addition, players making use of Unity’s new Flash export feature will also run in any Stage 3D-enabled browser, regardless of operating system. Linux users will take a moderate performance hit here, however, as Adobe has delayed Linux support for GPU-accelerated rasterization in Stage 3D. Nevertheless, an out-of-the-box Flash build of the Angry Bots demo looked great and ran smoothly on my Ubuntu workstation, at the cost of somewhat higher CPU usage.

    http://blogs.unity3d.com/2012/01/25/unity-3-5-developer-preview-expanding-horizons/

    Once again - all I hear is complaints - never any doing.
     
  41. xedi

    xedi

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2012
    Posts:
    4
    Wait, I was always under the impression that there were plans for it but nothing was released yet? So is there a Web Player for Linux or not?

    And as far DIY goes: I cannot do everything in the world I want myself. This is the wish list forum where we can discuss wishes and my wish is linux support. What is wrong with asking for it? If that is not possible then so be it, all I want is that if there is way to show that there are people who would appreciate it and provide reasons why it would be a good idea. All my reasons might be crap and I appreciate if this is pointed out but I do not get how a do it yourself response is in any way helpful.
     
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2012
  42. dubbreak

    dubbreak

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Posts:
    22
    I didn't say it doesn't make sense to make a linux player. I was actually arguing it does but for because of the embedded market rather than desktop market. If the desktop Linux market pans out great, but financially there are other reasons to target Linux. Whatever Unity's reason though I hope a native linux client is out in the wild soon (as it appears it does exist in some state at the moment from what I've heard).

    What I did imply or state is that it doesn't make sense to put the dev tools on Linux. My comment on having windows already was for development. Those that want to develop most likely have a Windows license or a Mac. And wasn't even to that degree, it was that it's an ok restriction to have for development in my opinion, as it isn't a very big barrier. Also, if you are really adamant on running the dev tools on linux another poster pointed out they run on wine. It had nothing to do with people wanting to play games.

    As to your arguement: ""Those who want to play Unity games have Windows anyways" is not necessarily true today and is getting more and more false in the future, because those who play browser games do not need windows and so in this segment chances are that they either do not have windows or prefer to not use it."

    That may be true (though it smells of false consensus) but even if it is true, more of a small number is a small number. By web usage estimate the amount of people using Linux to browse the web (or some device based on Linux.. so possibly TVs etc) is ~1% which is at best 1/4 the market of OS X and more likely 1/10th. Android usage is larger and v1.0 only came out in 2008. Plus Android usage is growing rapidly. I've been using Linux on the desktop since 1998. Usage has definitely increase (especially with the likes of Ubuntu), but desktop adoption of linux is still minor. Where linux thrives is on servers and embedded applications.

    If Linux desktop users doubled next year they would still be far behind OS X and Android users. Call me when that happens. "The year of linux on the desktop" has been a running joke on slashdot as long as I've been a member. It's right up there with hot grits and natalie portman.
     
  43. npsf3000

    npsf3000

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    Posts:
    3,830
    As I just said, there are two. Hell I just linked to a Unity blog post that discusses both of them.

    If you can't be bothered to do a little research of your own...

    So let me get this right:

    • You ask for Linux support.
    • You get Linux support.
    • You ask for Linux support.

    Me telling you use the god-damn Linux support already available and prove that the resources unity has invested are worthwhile ISN'T constructive?
     
  44. dubbreak

    dubbreak

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Posts:
    22
    +1

    Rather than treating it like deploying to Windows or OS X it could be treated as IOS or Android and require a license for that. I already forked out for the Android license, I'd do it again for Linux no problem.
     
  45. xedi

    xedi

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2012
    Posts:
    4
    I agree, I do not think there will be something like "The year of linux on the desktop". However, I think it is safe to say that Linux is growing and will so in the near future. The question is up to which point.

    I didn't say that THAT wasn't constructive but I was talking about the do it yourself comment.

    As far as the clog post you linked is concerned: It said developer PREVIEW so I was under the impression that the Linux support is being worked on but not yet fully implemented.

    But that does not matter, because I realize that I have expressed myself incorrectly. I was aware that there is Linux work being done which is why I said
    but then in response to your DIY I was talking about asking which does not fit very well because as you point out, work is being done.

    The reason why I first started posting here was the Mint comment and I wanted to clear up the current misconception floating around since Ubuntu switched to the Unity Shell in the web that Mint is about to take over Ubuntu. Since in this thread there were also the usual comments that it is not worth to support Linux I wanted to present also some of my views. This got a bit out of hand and I realize that it sounds as if I am demanding Linux support because Unity 3D is doing nothing even though I was aware that work was being done (I was not aware how fat they were, though)

    So to clear things up, I am glad that Unity is not ignoring the Linux platform and I appreciate the efforts currently made to support the platform and want to thank them for that. I also hope that these efforts continue and expand in the future for the reasons I provided.
     
  46. artisanicview

    artisanicview

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    Posts:
    4
  47. George Foot

    George Foot

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2012
    Posts:
    399
    I'm not hugely interested in a native Linux client, but with Raspberry Pi released now, and it having the goal of inspiring kids to learn programming like we used to in the good old days - by hacking games together - I would have thought being able to use something like Unity to develop on the platform would be highly compelling.

    I doubt UT could make any money from it directly - schools wouldn't want to pay, and kids can't pay - but imagine how much exposure their engine could get. Imagine a whole generation of kids growing up learning to program via Unity. Even if only a tiny percentage of them go pro, that's still a lot of sales.

    Edit: Actually, Wine support is no good for Raspberry Pi because it's not x86. :( They would need to make a separate OS sku.
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2012
  48. dubbreak

    dubbreak

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Posts:
    22
    While I agree I honestly don't think the RaspPi has the guts to run the Unity3d dev platform. It's a 700mhz ARM with limited ram. I'm certain it would run the client fine (as it is as good or better than my Android phone in specs) but running the editor seems like a no go. I just upgraded from my old core 2 duo Mac (with intel graphics) to a quad core i7 with dedicated graphics for better performance in Unity. I wish I had a p3 to test on kicking around as that would give feel for how deadly slow it would run.

    I could see making a cool arcade machine based around the RPi with a common (open sourced) joystick/buttons platform that attaches via USB and some libraries/scripts for Unity to support the controls. Something like the winnitron, but cheaper (http://winnitron.ca/). It would be a great way to motivate kids to create stuff (put arcade machines in the school halls that are populated by games the kids create). But creation of the games would have to be done on a higher powered machine (in my opinion).
     
  49. thundermoon99

    thundermoon99

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Posts:
    1
    I think Unity should also be compatable with Linux because even with Wine and Wine tricks it still doesnt work. Wine crashes and it says "GetThreadContext Failed"
     
  50. U7Games

    U7Games

    Joined:
    May 21, 2011
    Posts:
    943
    i wonder, if mac is linux based os, then what could be the problem building a linux release?.. (just curious !)