These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Linux

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

DX11

Author
Katrina Bekers
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#1 - 2014-05-10 23:01:44 UTC
Back from FF2014.

A slide from the saturday keynote sent shivers down my spine: http://i.imgur.com/0eU10zf.jpg

The new EVE United vision is cool and all, but DX11/UE4 means we will be Soon(tm) left out?

Gentlenerds, start your tinfoil engines!

<< THE RABBLE BRIGADE >>

Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
#2 - 2014-05-11 04:19:48 UTC
AFAIK, UE4 is planned to have native linux support.
Katrina Bekers
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2014-05-11 20:38:10 UTC
Yes, Now rather than Soon: https://twitter.com/UnrealEngine/status/464832839616569345

Still, even with UE4 (which is only for Dust, atm), what if DX11 becomes mandatory? I still remember with a bit of pain when the SM3.0 became a requirement to play.

<< THE RABBLE BRIGADE >>

Neuntausendeins
#4 - 2014-05-12 11:30:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausendeins
To be frank, SM3 didn't cause me any headaches, because I had a real graphics card to begin with. Most of the drama was caused by mostly office PCs and older Laptops with ****** onboard Intel GPUs, and many of them didn't support SM3 on Windows either. However, DirectX 11 might cause some trouble when it becomes a definite requirement, since even the DirectX 10 rendering pipeline is still on wines to do list after what now? Seven years?

I wouldn't panic yet however. As far as I know, nothing was announced along the lines of making DX11 mandatory any time soon. Maybe we will miss out on tesselation, godrays and lensflares, but we will still be able to play for the time beeing. And wine will eventually get to a point where we can have those as well.
SCV'Argos
TheMurk
#5 - 2014-05-13 06:15:54 UTC
I think they should unofficially start to slowboat towards opengl. Popularity of *nix is not declining, it's growing, so they will just have to make multiOS Eve. The longer they're resisting, the more will be pain for them later, in 3-5 years.
Kasutra
No Vacancies
Wardec Mechanics
#6 - 2014-05-13 11:36:46 UTC
Ehh, I'd be surprised if they left the Mac population out in the cold by enforcing DX11.
Katrina Bekers
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#7 - 2014-05-13 12:40:03 UTC
Acutally, the SM3.0 problem was that the (usually) embedded Intel HDA chips had SM3.0 support in software, inside the Windows driver, and not on chip. So we were screwed because our drivers didn't emulate SM3, and without the code on silicon, it didn't pass the check.

OpenGL would be fantastic, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Steam, Codemasters, Epic are keeping our hopes high on proper linux gaming, but a relatively small shop like CCP might take the safe and profitable road - which is DX, unfortunately.

My concern is that the number of DX9-only platforms, with XP well into EOL, is winding down at an alarming rate, and they might be tempted to flip the DX11 required switch for all three games sooner than later.

<< THE RABBLE BRIGADE >>

Marsan
#8 - 2014-05-15 21:56:47 UTC
It's a real interesting question as the Mac client is basically just a wine wrapper around the Windows code. Hoestly I don't see them being able to go DX11 only until their windows XP user base upgrades. That's a far larger population than their Mac or Linux userbase.

As far as Unreal Engine goes I don't think it's used in Eve. Valkyrie on the other hand uses UE4, and Dust UE3. I expect both Valkyrie and Legion to use UE4.1 or newer at release. As of UE 4.1 they should be able to compile for SteamOS/Linux. A lot really depends on the up take of the steambox, and linux games in general on steam.

Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a grumpy small portion of the community.

Wilhelm Ormand
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2014-05-20 11:46:21 UTC
Suppose, very hypothetically, that eve would be rebuilt on the Unreal Engine 4.x (seeing that CCP is definately getting experience with this engine in other projects this might not be even that far fetched), how likely then would OpenGL support be?
Neuntausend
Rens Nursing Home
#10 - 2014-05-20 17:15:22 UTC
Definitely possible, but it's still more than unlikely that Eve will be ported to UE 4 or anything else.
Jaxon Grylls
Institute of Archaeology
#11 - 2014-05-21 08:16:33 UTC
I think Kasutra has hit the nail on the head here. Macs are officially supported by CCP, unlike Linux.

Yes, I know it's all done with smoke and mirrors using afaik, Transgaming's Cider, to put a wrapper around the code.

Nevertheless as an official port it seems unlikely that CCP will shut out the Mac users as by so doing they would be failing to support an O/S that they have officially recognised.
Katrina Bekers
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#12 - 2014-05-21 17:20:30 UTC
They officially supported Linux, too, for two years (starting with Trinity in 2007 and ending with Dominion release in 2008). And they dropped it once it was clear the effort wasn't worth it. But they dropped it nonetheless.

My concern is that DX9 userbase is falling like a rock in Windows land, and this might encourage them to flip the switch.

And with all the money they poured onto Carbon, I doubt they will switch to UE4 for the EVE client. Much less for the spaceship graphics engine.

<< THE RABBLE BRIGADE >>

Kasutra
No Vacancies
Wardec Mechanics
#13 - 2014-05-22 12:38:26 UTC
Katrina Bekers wrote:
They officially supported Linux, too, for two years (starting with Trinity in 2007 and ending with Dominion release in 2008). And they dropped it once it was clear the effort wasn't worth it. But they dropped it nonetheless.


Yeah, but bitter as it is to say, the desktop mac population is quite a bit bigger than the desktop Linux population. And more vocal.

Enforcing DX11 would mean we're talking about effectively killing off Wine support. Surely, the fact that Wine worked and was used in practice was a factor in the decision to drop the "native" client. It was a letdown, but they knew we could work it out. Were they to enforce DX11, they'd do so knowing we can't work it out.

I'm worried too, but I doubt mandatory DX11 is going to happen in the most immediate future, at least...
Elmore Jones
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2014-05-22 17:33:33 UTC
The thing is, dx11 isn't new. and nor was shader 3 support when it was introduced to EVE. I'm a linux fan myself, and would be distinctly unhappy if I could no longer play EVE with wine. The "but" looming is pretty obvious though - how long will CCP and the majority of the player base be happy to be throttled by standards set in 2004 for dx9? There has to be a push to the better features at some point. Perhaps CCP will do a similar change over period to the dx9 one unless the current user choice can be maintained once actual features like tessellation can be added.

As for UE4 - I doubt we'd ever see it in eve unless the CQ gets ported from the Carbon engine and UE4 being linux native doesn't really help a windows exe running under wine :(

+++ Reality Error 404 - Reboot Cosmos +++

Marsan
#15 - 2014-05-23 00:46:08 UTC
The things to remember about Eve and DX 11 is that:

1) Unless Transgaming has made incredible strides they since their last release they don't support DX11. Which means no mac client. (Honestly TG is pretty marginal as a company these days.)

2) Windows XP doesn't have DX 11 support. These folks out number Linux and Mac gamers combined. In China XP is near 75% of all systems.


PS- In terms of Unreal Engine 4.x. Linux support is available now, and there is real commitment on Unreal's part. It's a race to see who releases the 1st AAA game for Linux. That said it won't help Eve, but it might mean Valkyrie, and Legion will have Linux/SteamOS ports. If not as a Linux gamer there will certainly be space fighter, and FPS games that I'll be playing rather than attempting to play Valkyrie, and Legion under wine.
https://www.unrealengine.com/blog/unreal-engine-4-and-linux

Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a grumpy small portion of the community.

Neuntausendeins
#16 - 2014-05-23 02:58:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausendeins
I wouldn't call it a "race". Unless racing includes hesitating and taking your ******* time. At the current rate the first AAA title to be released for linux will be Duke Nukem: Star Citizen.
Katrina Bekers
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#17 - 2014-05-24 14:58:37 UTC
Boys, support for XP ended in April. Some countries stroke a deal with Microsoft to give specific, time limited support to their XP public administration machines, while they migrate to something new.

My concern is that DX9 userbase, China included, is dropping sharply due to its main platform being forcefully put out of business, not as a normal technical life cycle ending on its own.

<< THE RABBLE BRIGADE >>

Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
#18 - 2014-05-26 07:07:08 UTC
As if MS dropping support for XP would bother anyone but corporate users.

As if XP users have anywhre to run.

MS declared end of sales for windows 7 OEM on oct 30 2014. Retail is already dead. Which leaves us with faildows 8. As if anyone would willingly use that.
Marsan
#19 - 2014-05-27 01:09:21 UTC
Katrina Bekers wrote:
Boys, support for XP ended in April. Some countries stroke a deal with Microsoft to give specific, time limited support to their XP public administration machines, while they migrate to something new.

My concern is that DX9 userbase, China included, is dropping sharply due to its main platform being forcefully put out of business, not as a normal technical life cycle ending on its own.



You do realize that 25% of people in the US who are on the internet in the US are running XP. In China it's over 60%. It will take a long time for those numbers to change.

Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a grumpy small portion of the community.

Learned Vagrant
Black Horse Logistics Industries
#20 - 2014-05-29 09:10:25 UTC
Torgeir Hekard wrote:
As if MS dropping support for XP would bother anyone but corporate users.

As if XP users have anywhre to run.

MS declared end of sales for windows 7 OEM on oct 30 2014. Retail is already dead. Which leaves us with faildows 8. As if anyone would willingly use that.


Looks like it's time for me to blow off some steam. I built my first PC while I was stationed on Okinawa in 1987. Since it was 'home made' I got to select my OS. MS-DOS was not even in the running. The first time I ever saw Windoze was in 1993 when I went to work as a control systems engineer, and ended up getting stuck with the additional duty of IS/IT manager for the branch office I worked at.

As a consultant you have to be familiar with the software the client uses, and Mickeysoft was really hitting it's stride in those years. So Windoze it was. I started with WFW and was up to W2K when I was finally too disabled to work any more.

I did make the move from W2K to WXP, finally. Kicking and screaming all the way, but I had a breakdown and wasn't able to program at all for about 5 years. I just couldn't make my self do it because I knew that what I was writing was crap, and that just isn't me.

Things finally got better after I completely got out of the VA medical system and found a real doctor, who spoke English and everything. So I started getting back into computers. I really hadn't heard much about Win7 and 8 at that time. I think I was the only one within 20 miles who had a computer.

I finally decided to build a new computer for Windoze 8. However, after using it for three days, I formatted the drives and ran the install disk through my shredder. Surprisingly enough, it ate the whole thing.

So i decided to try Windoze 7. I figured it, or anything else, couldn't be as bad as Win 8. I think I used Win 7 for a couple of weeks, but it just didn't allow me to have the amount of control I was used to. If I wanted Bill Gates to decide what the future of my interactions with computers would be, I would offer to adopt him . . . not.

One good thing I have to say about ***xers is that they seem to agree with me, that the future of computers shouldn't be 'all about the money.' Computers are capable of a lot more than we get from them now, but we won't see it because it is not cost effective to build useful computers. So we get stuck with the dreck while the big computer manufacturers and OS design houses ignore what we want because they make more money that way. There's no standardization anymore. No one can force them to do that. We pay the price.

Especially since I just started learning how to program in Ada, the current situation reminds me that even governments, who we don't expect a lot from, have been more mature about computers than the American public.

Two examples:

1. Ada, and if you don't know anything about that, just ask.

2. The ESA computer system, and if you don't know anything about that, just ask.

I remember the one college course I took in computers. The language was WATFIV, which was a derivative of Fortran. It was back in the Hollerith card days when a gust of wind might blow your whole program off of the hand cart you hauled it around on. I had to spend 6 hours one day getting all the cards back in the right order. I decided then that I hated computers and would never have anything to do with them again.

Little did I know how impossible that would turn out to be.

Hmm. I was just reminded that CCP is never going to fix the posting problem on the forums. I hit the post button, and all I got was the quote at the beginning. However, being experienced with CCP produced software, I had a copy on the clipboard. Shocked
12Next page