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. Coburn64

    Coburn64

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Posts:
    30
    I second this. I'd love to use Unity on Linux.

    Even if Linux doesn't have any commerical games, we can start showing people that Linux is ready for gaming - just compile one binary for Windows, Mac and Linux platforms, and off you go. Imagine rich Unity games, on par with Crysis, running on Linux. Even if you can't run Unity games on Linux, you can do so by running the Windows version of the game via WINE on Linux - DirectX support has come a long way using WINE.

    If Unity started a Linux edition, I'd use it. It's a open platform, and not hard to program on. :)
     
  2. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,601
    as target only, unsure if it ever gets an editor for the handfull of users that have it as their native home, and its even there the plague citizen I guess going by the linux installer and the problems you get if you are an x64 user forgetting that 32bit library installs are not optional if you want to use 32bit software.

    Thats what makes targeting the platform for unity also this kind of troublesome as the webplayer invisible install is completely impossible, it can't install system libraries from repos along its install without admin support at all and unity does not the slightest bit support 64bit and linux distros still behave like a 1980 OS with no proper and safe 32bit emulation layer and no intend to ever add it from what I recall.

    And I think its reasonable to assume that the deployment targeting of linux (first web and then perhaps standalone) would come a year to two before there is even a realistic chance of seeing the editor appearing there (so UT can evaluate the real interest in praxis through the webplayer installs for example). Windows had to wait like 3 years to get an editor, before that it was deployment target only.

    Coburn: not hard to program on? Compared to what, c64 and amiga? Cause against windows and osx it loses straight away on the simple to program closed source longer term stable software ;)
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2011
  3. Sofox

    Sofox

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Posts:
    14
  4. Dreamora

    Dreamora

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Posts:
    26,601
    Yay ... less than 1% of unity users voted for it and its not even known how many of them are paying users ... If that doesn't make the number useless, then I don't know what else would.
    Thus the idea of preselling such a platform target addon license to evaluate the real interest, not the fictive one as long as they would have to pay $0 for it, cause I'm pretty confident that the interest then will be quite a bit lower (I know the big blabla on how much they desire an android license and then the android preorder took months to sell the initial 500 licenses for linux I would suspect it to potentially take even longer if all the technical aspect are layed out before like 32bit library install enforcement, webplayer only usable to users with admin install rights, ...)

    Another shortcoming of the vote is that it is not that specific, Linux as mentioned on several dozen occasions, means nothing as its just a kernel and the kernel itself will never be supported, the support would likely happen with focus 1+ specific somewhere longer term stable distros. At the time, by any reasonable measure, it wouldn't leave anything but Ubuntu and perhaps Mandriva in play anyway as the rest either lack a reasonable amount of enduser install base or longer term stability, which even ubuntu kind of lacks as targeting LTS would be a failure ;)
     
  5. Sofox

    Sofox

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Posts:
    14
    dreamora: This consumer feedback is directed towards Unity. You can ignore and dismiss it if you want, but it doesn't affect you either way. Ultimately it affects Unity Technologies more than anyone, so it's up to them to determine how seriously to take this feedback.

    Oh, and you mention "paying customers," the feedback is for "Platforms: Linux Player / Web player Support" not the editor.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2011
  6. agentsmith

    agentsmith

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    132
    Perhaps if a Linux Player / Web player was developed, it would be a helpful way for Unity Tech. to test the waters without committing the resources needed to develop the editor prematurely. Also if an Official "iAd" equivalent were produced (and if it has sorry I'm not aware of it) it would amongst other monetization opportunities allow paying customers (great Pro only feature!) to make money with the Linux community.
     
  7. ColossalDuck

    ColossalDuck

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Posts:
    3,246
    Oh ok, thanks.
     
  8. Beliar

    Beliar

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Posts:
    46
    If one really needs an easy 3d game engine that has Linux support right now, there are plenty of (opensource or not) engines around that may not be as easy and straightforward as Unity, but surely worth taking a look on them.

    No offense for Unity guys, but i've managed to find an engine that is just as good as Unity (and has webplayer for all the tree major pc operating systems) and is opensource, and actually was useful to learn a wide range of things that are applicable on other areas also.

    The problem is, Unity might have a bright future, but i seriously doubt that they are going to port it for Linux because the more complex it gets the harder it is, and real cross-platform programs are programmed using standard methods so that they just don't have to be "ported" but only adapted and compiled. And as far as i know the developers aren't taking any providences to begin to code differently.

    So i just don't bet on it anymore, mostly because i think that they should focus indie and small companies, and primarily on the Computer platform and interactive web content, because interactive 3d creation for web is surely a growing segment that many people are trying to enter but no one has anything substantially concrete and stable at the moment. And web content has to support more than win&mac.

    I'm just saying that if you're happy with Unity as-is, then you probably should just stick with it and doesn't count on a Linux port, however, if your main concern about it is Linux support, you can simply stop crying for devs that don't care about you and learn how to use one of those hundreds of slightly harder and more complex engines (some are actually easier because you can use python (for rapid prototyping only if you wish)) without all of that graphical interface but that supports a wider range of platforms and that are more standardized as high-end game engines.

    That's what i did, i've learned how to use another engine in 3 months and i feel confident with it and i can say that my productivity is very satisfactory.

    Also, if you really want to go professional, i highly recommend learning one of those popular C++ engines because even if it's proved that the in the future languages such as c# will be used for gaming, i don't think such future is near.

    There are plenty of alternatives, if you really want Linux support stop crying and spend some of your time getting confident with them. Don't spend your life waiting for a Linux port because while you wait you could have made a complete game in another engine that may be a little harder but adds a very useful and valuable knowledge.
     
  9. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    That "future" is the past; game engines (including major engines used in AAA games) have been using non-C++ languages for scripting for years. It just happens that the scripting in Unity is fast enough that you can also use it for many tasks typically handled by C++ engine code in other engines. The Unity engine itself is C++.

    --Eric
     
  10. d.toliaferro

    d.toliaferro

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Posts:
    95
    Incorrect, other than ShiVa, the Unigine Engine also officially supports Linux deployment.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2011
  11. Beliar

    Beliar

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Posts:
    46
    Scripting != Programming. Just look at the statistics... >90% of the people working with game programming uses C++, and generally, the programmers that does scripting ( far cry is an example ) aren't really programmers but the guys who create content for the game.

    I'm just telling that C++ is something that really worth knowing. And i really don't know any big company that will even cogitate the possibility of hiring a game programmer that doesn't know C++...

    Anyone who knows C# can just read one of those C++ tutorials to learn everything necessary to actually begin to use an engine in a week or two. After that, 6 months of varied programming experience (3-5 hours daily) will be enough to get very used to it and possibly you will be able to program an entire game without consulting google/forums/irc, at that point, it's just a matter of practice to get confident, and you can begin to make a portfolio and publish on internet, so you will have material to show.

    The demand for good and experienced C++ programmers is higher than the supply, and it's growing even more. A lot of companies (gaming industry is well supplied though) are hiring 3-4 just-graduated inexperienced programmers instead of one professional due to the high demand so it's cheaper to hire the 4 inexperienced ones.

    Just my 2 cents.
     
  12. Sofox

    Sofox

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Posts:
    14
    Which engine is this? Not ShiVa 3D, that's closed source.
     
  13. pwolfinger

    pwolfinger

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Posts:
    1
    New poster here. As someone who works with Linux very often I can say that Linux support would be accepted in open arms but at the same time, you need to ask yourselves whether Linux needs Unity. Yes, Linux game development is pretty scarce and the little it has is very low-class. However, remember that people who work with Linux all the time are the same people who generally want something free. Not just free of cost, but also open source so they can modify it and use it for their own projects as they please. I think that Unity could use Linux but Linux doesn't really want or need Unity. I guess an easier way of explaining this is that supporting Linux could benefit both sides but it would take a lot to really get endorsed because the engine that Linux really needs is a solid, completely open source game engine instead of a closed one that just adds support because they could use the cash/audience.
     
  14. Beliar

    Beliar

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Posts:
    46
    Panda3D. It's so easy that if you already know python you're ready to go.
    I was using python to prototype things but i gave up and am programming directly in C++. The documentation for C++ is very bad though. To figure out how to use it i'm consulting the python documentation as referece, most things are self-explicative though.
    There are no easy built-in functions and pretty much everything has to be done the brute force way (for example check a distance between objects). The only advanced physics engine available atm is ODE, bullet integration is in progress though (seems physx is available too). Also, it needs some optimization on the rendering and some more features.
    You should check the website for more info, some big commercial games were launched and on the forums (showcase session) you can find an infinity of others.
    I'm pretty happy using it and don't miss Unity's graphical facilities at all.
    I feel much more confident and comfortable programming in my main operating system with the tools that I'm used to.
     
  15. d.toliaferro

    d.toliaferro

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Posts:
    95
    Hey there,

    That's not true. open source idealists are the ones who generally want software to be free. Not all Linux users are open source idealists. For instance, some people choose primarily to use Windows but still tend to gravite toward using open source products if they can, and very recently we're seeing more adoption of closed source products on Linux (Ubuntu's Software Center for instance).

    How many great game projects have we seen come from open source minded developers using open source engines? Not many. The vast majority of open source minded developers and designers aren't doing games because it's not a priority for them. Getting Linux and userland applications to a better state of quality is the bigger priority currently. I'd rather see people who make entertainment software for a living make awesome games for Linux with Unity, than have people just sitting around tinkering with the code of an engine, or that of an open sourced game.

    The Linux community is such a diverse group of people. Yes, there's a huge group of open source idealists behind Linux that have a mild to severe disdain for anything closed and anything commercial, but that one sub-group doesn't speak for us all.

    Besides, sites like ubuntugamer.com are already running articles about games made with Unity and getting them working under Wine, although they'd still much rather run them natively. If that's not a need for Unity then I don't know what is.

    Again, the community is so huge that you can't make blanket statements such as those. Who would have thought Linux users would be the first computer-based community to embrace Microsoft's Kinect, before Windows-centric people and even Microsoft themselves. I believe even some interesting Unity projects are using that open source Kinect driver.

    One of the problems with the open source community is that everybody has their own idea and starts their own project around it. There's no one or two great engines, instead there's 6 or 7 engines that are unfinished, outdated, outclassed, unfriendly, or otherwise not widely adopted because low quality issues.

    Plus, while we're waiting for that great gold open source engine the world moves on again and perpetually leaves us in the dust.

    Linux gamers are known to routinely run their favorite Windows-only or Linux incompatible games through compatibility layers, emulation, and virtualization. This shows us that Linux gamers are willing to pay for (or at least pirate) closed source games, even with the great possibility of the game not working (or in some cases at all) with their system.

    In the end, compare the best open source game offering to the best closed source game offering. Right, there's no comparison.
     
  16. MyraLoveless

    MyraLoveless

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Posts:
    13
    I'm going to have to concur with dtoliaferro and also put in another voice for at least getting the IDE running on Linux.

    I honestly don't really care whether or not a Linux based web plugin or support for a standalone player is added. I mainly just want to see the IDE run in Linux. This is because I've recently reinstalled Ubuntu and am finding it an absolute joy to use. I've tried running the IDE on Wine and it simply will NOT work. The screen never refreshes and it crashes a lot. It'll run with marginally better success on VirtualBox but the screen still does not update properly.

    I've managed to square away compatibility either through Wine or VirtualBox for *every single Windows program I own* except for Unity. I'm also running minecraft servers on Linux and a variety of other stuff that I can't do properly on Windows. I don't like having to take down my servers so I can get some work done. I've got MORE than enough system resources to do it all at once anyway.

    So I'd personally like to see EITHER improved compatibility with Wine, improved compatibility with the Windows version of Unity running on VirtualBox on Linux or an actual linux version of the IDE.

    I'm also saying this as someone who has not only bought the pro version of Unity but also did so back in the 2.5 days before Unity went free, as an Asset Server Client license holder, and as someone who has upgraded both Unity Pro and their Unity Asset Server Client License to Unity 3. So it's not like I'm all about open source and free. I happen to like the OS because it's a very good OS. A lot more fun to use and the interface is a heck of a lot more responsive for me.

    Just to put it out there, I'm using Ubuntu 10.10 with Compiz Fusion and fully official nVidia drivers, not the open source drivers.

    I'd also like to remark that Unity already has two commercial competitors on Linux that I know of. Flash and Shiva. It's time to pony up and at least get it running in Linux.

    (Edit)
    I've managed to get Unity 3.1 and 3.2 to run under Wine and display all of it's windows just fine. However, the compiler pumps out errors. So I suppose it would take only a bit of work on the compiler to make it run properly under Wine...

    Mind you I had to do some pretty cheap tricks to get it to run. Namely installing DirectX 9.0c on Wine using winetricks. If anyone from UT wants the error I'm getting from the compiler please let me know. I don't want to waste anybody's time if it isn't going to matter.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2011
  17. tommyw

    tommyw

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Posts:
    3
    I read post in this thread that was posted awhile back.
    It said that you guys had poor sales for game on linux in the past.
    Well my question is what kind of game was it ?
    Because you dont have to many illiterate computer people on linux,
    usually true geeks on linux. And who are the Battle Star Galactica fans - ohh yeah - True Geeks.

    I use linux exclusively ( well do have XP on VMWare for just a cpl programs - bnut windows still sux )
    I use to play allot of games, I really dont anymore because I have found I like that runs on linux.

    also isnt Mac OSX like 90% linux these days anyway.

    Tommy



    If you think "MS Windows" is the answer.
    Then you dont understand the question!
     
  18. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    No, it's 0% Linux. It's based on NeXTStep, which in turn is based on BSD with a Mach kernel. So much for "true geeks".... ;)

    --Eric
     
  19. tommyw

    tommyw

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Posts:
    3
    a true linux geek - not mac person at all ( Went from my VIC20 to my Commodore 64 to my 8088 - lol ) - i just know when I read on forums on compiling kernels and other stuff - there are people asking the same types of questions for OSX as for Linux.




    If you think "MS Windows" is the answer.
    Then you dont understand the question!
     
  20. raymix

    raymix

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Posts:
    192
    i'll troll here a bit:
    both Linux and MAC are based on Unix, if you can figure out how to work on one of them, ie konsole, you can master the other fairly quickly
    bye
     
  21. xathos

    xathos

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2009
    Posts:
    23
  22. tommyw

    tommyw

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Posts:
    3
    Well I started out on HPUX - while working for HP for 12yrs, then went to FreeBSD, then RedHat and now on Mandrake / Mandriva for the Last 6yrs. I haven't really looked at the newer mac stuff - maybe Ill check it out. I know its more java, perl and python loaded like most linux distro are these days.
     
  23. MyraLoveless

    MyraLoveless

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Posts:
    13
    Well, I managed to squeeze Unity's compiler into working properly under Wine. The performance is a little sluggish and UniScite doesn't load the script documentation when hitting the F1 key. The inspector window doesn't update until i click it after switching objects. Minor issues all around. It's usable but due to the issues I'd give it maybe a 7 out of 10 as far as running it on Wine goes, and I'm a hard person to please.

    I have no idea if this is going to be stable enough to want to do a pro license migration over to Wine/Linux from Windows.

    The way I cleared up the error I was having was by doing a recursive chmod setting all the folders in the Unity folder to read/write. I figured that there's no legitimate reason that I can run Unity games in Wine but not run the compiler unless there was some kind of permission issue preventing writing. Sure enough that seemed to be what fixed it.

    Anyway this makes me a happy camper and I'm satisfied with running the IDE on Linux, tentatively speaking.
     
  24. nhumphrey1969

    nhumphrey1969

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Posts:
    1
    What about business applications that sell $5-50K a machine, that have no 3D sims3 type graphics (and desparately need some).
    Across every industry and major company? Are you interested now?
     
  25. MyraLoveless

    MyraLoveless

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Posts:
    13
    Huh? Sorry, what is this in response to exactly? Completely out of the blue and random to the topic.
     
  26. Sofox

    Sofox

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Posts:
    14
  27. d.toliaferro

    d.toliaferro

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Posts:
    95
    Wow!

    Thanks for this wonderful news Sofox, this is indeed monumental.

    Thank you Unity Technologies!
     
  28. krides

    krides

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Posts:
    38
    Well, you could at least try make it run on Wine. I am using Ubuntu on my netbook, and I would really love to be able to tweak some scripts and scenes on it, while I'm not anywhere around my PC. I have managed to install Unity, but there is just no way I can create a project, as it spawns tons of errors when I try to.

    I don't really care for any _real_ unity client or being able to publish to Linux (don't really see how anyone would seriously want to release a game for that platform), but at least let me access my projects from Wine, if you aren't willing to invest in any actual porting of the engine. Seriously.
     
  29. d.toliaferro

    d.toliaferro

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Posts:
    95
    Wow, I can't tell if you're trolling or not.

    First of all, both independent and big name developers (Id Software and Epic Games to name a couple) have, and continue to release games that run natively on Linux. And while open source game development isn't exactly booming, there are tons of those games for Linux as well. It's a huge gaming platform with tons of games already, and with Unigine, ShiVa, and now Unity support I'm sure it'll only get bigger now.

    How can you not "see how anyone would seriously want to release a game for that platform" when so many people have, and continue to do so?

    Second of all, don't forget that Android is also Linux.
     
  30. ColossalDuck

    ColossalDuck

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Posts:
    3,246
    Nope, it isn't. It is extremely loosely based off of Linux.
     
  31. d.toliaferro

    d.toliaferro

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Posts:
    95
    Uhm, yes it is.



    And before you reply after doing a little research; yes, a modified Linux kernel is still a Linux kernel.
     
  32. tsturzl

    tsturzl

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Posts:
    8
    Scripting is programming, it just means the code is Interpreted or JITed(Just in time compiled). Scripting uses the same concepts as a lower level language however often includes things like Dynamic Typed variables.

    Most people how know C++ well know a scripting language as well. In fact many game developers use a mixture of low-level languages with highlevel scripting language. I use C++, Python, and Lua for game development, whether they are working together or on there own.

    In fact Scripting==Programming, if you look up Python, a well known scripting language, on wikipedia its classified as a programming language. Same goes for lua, javascript, boo, ruby, and many others. Maybe with Unity3D its a bit different, seeing as the need to script anything is minimal.

    The point is you still need knowledge of how to programing to write a game in a script language.
     
  33. garethmcc

    garethmcc

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Posts:
    1
    Can I just mention that "Linux users do not pay for games" is a fallacy. Look at the humble indie bundles (http://www.humblebundle.com/). The current one has more Linux purchases than Mac purchases and the average Linux user spends more than double what the average Windows user pays.

    Please stop spreading FUD about Linux gamers. We do exist, we do pay for games, and we love to play them! I was interested in the Battlestar Galactica MMO for example but now I am stymied by the inability for the game to run because Unity doesn't support Linux. Money lost!
     
  34. ColossalDuck

    ColossalDuck

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Posts:
    3,246
    Already been mentioned, and its coming. No need to post on this subject any more.
     
  35. d.toliaferro

    d.toliaferro

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Posts:
    95
    Sure there is. Now it's time for the celebratory posts!
     
  36. ColossalDuck

    ColossalDuck

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Posts:
    3,246
    You are quite right... HURRAAH :D.
     
  37. winterstein

    winterstein

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Posts:
    1
    I'd like to add my voice to the "please give us an export for Linux" movement.
    I develop on Linux for preference. I also play games on Linux. And I have been known to pay for software.
     
  38. canuckkat

    canuckkat

    Joined:
    May 6, 2011
    Posts:
    1
    I want to voice my confusion about how different distros have different filesystems. No, my confusion isn't about why.

    It's about why that would be a problem? Most distros I know have system paths/variables defined so that even if the usr/var/opt/lib directory is in a different place, things (when compiled properly) get installed in the proper places.

    Thusly, UT can provide a source package (much like Adobe does with Flash), and let each distro's programmers pre-compile it into binaries for their distro if they need to (e.g. debs, rpms, etc.). And then other distros that compile things from source (Gentoo, Slackware and Archlinux are the ones that come to my mind) can go "I want X as my Y directory" (provided that you can compile with switches, which you SHOULD be able to).

    No, I'm not a linux power user. I just know this stuff from reading how to do things. I have used Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Archlinux, Debian, Fedora and Puppylinux and despite some system config files being in different places, the structure of the files are the same, and how things get install (in the end) are the same.

    Anyways, that was just info. I know this thread is a bit pointless now ;)

    ETA: Yes, I registered an account just to post this. I love Unity and what it can do, but there are a lot of ignorant people on this thread who think they know linux, but don't.

    Oh. And Android isn't linux. Android is the Java emulated layer aka a virtual machine in which you do your Android stuff. The emulation is due to how Java works (every Java program runs in a virtual machine). Think of Android like you're booting up in UNIX and then running a Java OS.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2011
  39. d.toliaferro

    d.toliaferro

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Posts:
    95
    Please recheck my post above and/or read this.
     
  40. kaintn

    kaintn

    Joined:
    May 18, 2011
    Posts:
    1
    Hi,

    I'd really like to see Unity working on Linux, as a user and as a developer.

    Most of linux users don't use linux because it's free but because it's great (there's no troll here: everyone is free to feel confortable on any OS). So I think there's a real market for Unity on this operating system.

    Plus, Linux is a POSIX system like OSX so I think it won't be this long to develop a Linux version for Unity.

    Linux has evolved a lot since the first post in this thread, and so Linux users.
    Maybe it is time to give them a chance ;)
     
  41. Dahlgren

    Dahlgren

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Posts:
    3
    Developing on Linux would be a dream come true. I use it for all my development work, except things that require Unity work :)
     
  42. Unityplayer187

    Unityplayer187

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2011
    Posts:
    11
    Hey there im going to voice my support on this topic
    But im not sure how the linux player is coming along, anyone want to redirect me to where i can find that data?
    Thanks

    I mainly use it as a player for my 3d games, but since it dosen't work for linux im sad...T.T
     
  43. cobe571

    cobe571

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2011
    Posts:
    1
    I joined this forum to express the desire to see Unity 3D for Linux. I'm a CG artist and Developer. I work from several years with Blender 3D software and I use Linux from 9 years. Now I have a real desire to create a video game. Looking at the programming languages ​​used into Unity, I do not think there is a real difficulty to create a Linux package. My experience tells me that, it would be simple to create a .bin file that perform all functions for all Linux variations. This would avoid wasting energy to create a .deb package, or a .rpm package, etc. Times have changed, and in the meantime, Linux has not seen only increased its notoriety, and his host of fans fierce, but it's grown! Maybe it's time that you think about us. Do not leave us alone. Help us to realize our dreams. Please...
     
  44. Legendman3

    Legendman3

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2011
    Posts:
    16
    I just want to say that I hope this is getting worked on for linux. Is there any webpage/site that can tell us news about this? I have windows and linux but I mostly develop my music/videos/games/misc on linux (I get bored and I learn easily).
     
  45. maclypse

    maclypse

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2010
    Posts:
    1
    I ran linux distros (mostly debian) for years, and loved it. For a while I double-booted for the sake of games but after I left college, but in the end I couldn't be arsed with the constant reboots. I switched over completely to windows for one simple reason: games. I also learned to truly hate windows in the meantime. And just 2 years ago, I went for a mac: not that many games, but hey, at least it's not freaking windows!

    "It's not worth it. No one buys the games." -Bollocks. I see the same situation on mac as I did on linux.

    This is and always has been simple: There's no supply of games for games for non-win platforms. The end result of course is that no gamer will run anything but windows, out of necessity; that means demand for games remains fairly low. Low demand is met by companies as a sign that it's not viable, or simply not worth bothering with. It's not surprising that the supply is low, and there we go - GOTO 10, as my c64 would say. No supply creates a market with no demand. No demand means no supply. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    To make matters worse, the few things that do end up ported to mac and linux are usually complete botch jobs (like SPORE, running that godforsaken cider-thing and crashing every hour, and unity which is still plagued with input problems the second you flip to fullscreen). The one good thing to be said for cider is that while it's crap, it at least makes mac viable for a casual gamer. As numbers increase, demand rises, and maybe one or two companies will wake up and smell the apples.

    The real appeal of unity for me is the platform independence; I get games running native on my mac, despite the windows obsession. I think it's tragic that linux is still out in the cold. Unity could be precisely the kind of thing that would increase the appeal of linux. A linux port may not feel economically viable, but it'll mean pretty serious bragging rights to be able to tell a developer that they can build their game and get native mac and linux ports thrown in for free. Hopefully, someday soon, we'll wake up and smell the penguins.

    My personal opinion is that anything that runs in a modern browser should by definition run regardless of operating system. Anything less just makes a mockery of the way the web is supposed to work.
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2011
  46. FireMuse

    FireMuse

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Posts:
    3
    The multi-billion dollar video slot machine business is standardizing on Linux. If you had a Linux version, we'd buy it today.

     
  47. saymoo

    saymoo

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Posts:
    850
    Unity could break through the ever going barrier of cirlular reasoning (chicken egg), and become the biggest player in that field (popularity and income wise).

    I mean, if nobody would have broken the circular reasoning towards apple, Iphone would not been popular for games etc.. and Unity would be lost. Fortunately some developers saw the chance to break through that, (not unity btw), and made Iphone popular for gaming, and once that was realized, suddenly all developers wanted to jump aboard this new goldmine, incl. Unity with their Iphone support.
    Yes, Unity was first for OSX, but kept very low in popularity, once the windows version came, it's popularity/sales raised by thousands each month.

    At first Unity didn't want a Windows version, for whatever weird reason....
    But now, looking back, i'm sure they are very pleased with the result, and mindset change towards windows.. so why not GNU/Linux aswel?

    There is a market waiting to be discovered, with a lot of potential business wise...

    Who's the first to go there? Unity? or someone else....
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2011
  48. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    You guys realize you're responding to a post that's almost 6 years old?

    --Eric
     
  49. saymoo

    saymoo

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Posts:
    850
    just a few weeks old.. :)
    And it still matters (topic)
     
  50. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    No, 5.5 years old. November 14, 2005, to be precise.

    That doesn't make any sense; the iPhone was always extremely popular. People were clamoring to make apps for it from the beginning, but Apple originally only allowed web apps.

    Because it started as a Mac app and they only had 3 employees. They ported it when it had matured enough and they had the resources.

    --Eric