X3:TC 2.0 Now Available on MacOS

[mrbadger]

You've never tried to set up a wireless connection in Linux, I guess--took me hours to get that working on my laptop when I put Ubuntu 9.04 on it a few weeks ago!

You managed it on ubuntu? I gave up. Now I only use the wired network for my linux laptop. Kind of defeats the point really.

It's nice to have X3:TC on other platforms, simply because there are people who have such systems, and don't want to be restricted to loading windows to flash up a game. Gaming has been, and will remain I suspect, predominantly the property of Windows and the consoles.

Games companies can't risk targetting Linux in the first instance. This is especially true of smaller companies like Egosoft. Their customer base is already small, so aiming for that portion who use, or would use, Linux, would be tantamount to commercial suicide.

I write cross platform software, targetting Windows, Linux and MacOs, but I always develop primarily on Windows, because I know that is where the majority of my users like to work. It's a simple matter of aiming for the majority market.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

I would tend to agree that the MacOS X is probably a marginal operating system, but the assumption about needing to be "technically competent enough" to operate Linux has been rather unjustified for about the past 5 years (approx.)...

You've never tried to set up a wireless connection in Linux, I guess--took me hours to get that working on my laptop when I put Ubuntu 9.04 on it a few weeks ago!

Try OpenSUSE .... works out the box in 11.1 on my NetBook.

I have never tried Ubuntu, but I do not rate the Red Hat/Debian derivatives for usability/configurability. I have tried several distros over the years and SuSE has always come out on top for me.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

You've never tried to set up a wireless connection in Linux, I guess--took me hours to get that working on my laptop when I put Ubuntu 9.04 on it a few weeks ago!

You managed it on ubuntu? I gave up. Now I only use the wired network for my linux laptop. Kind of defeats the point really.

It's nice to have X3:TC on other platforms, simply because there are people who have such systems, and don't want to be restricted to loading windows to flash up a game. Gaming has been, and will remain I suspect, predominantly the property of Windows and the consoles.

Games companies can't risk targetting Linux in the first instance. This is especially true of smaller companies like Egosoft. Their customer base is already small, so aiming for that portion who use, or would use, Linux, would be tantamount to commercial suicide.

I write cross platform software, targetting Windows, Linux and MacOs, but I always develop primarily on Windows, because I know that is where the majority of my users like to work. It's a simple matter of aiming for the majority market.

You need not necessarily target Linux... NeverWinterNights successfully targetted both platforms with the same base code (OpenGL/OpenAL based IIRC)... The point being the main points that make software dependent on a given platform are the third party libraries/APIs (for most games that means DirectX although as already pointed out there are compatability layers around that at least partially work).

There are a number of industry standards that if you follow them mean that the software will work on almost any platform with little or no rework. (EDIT: Bu you should already know that )

[KidDeath]

You've never tried to set up a wireless connection in Linux, I guess--took me hours to get that working on my laptop when I put Ubuntu 9.04 on it a few weeks ago!

You managed it on ubuntu? I gave up. Now I only use the wired network for my linux laptop. Kind of defeats the point really.

It's nice to have X3:TC on other platforms, simply because there are people who have such systems, and don't want to be restricted to loading windows to flash up a game. Gaming has been, and will remain I suspect, predominantly the property of Windows and the consoles.

Games companies can't risk targetting Linux in the first instance. This is especially true of smaller companies like Egosoft. Their customer base is already small, so aiming for that portion who use, or would use, Linux, would be tantamount to commercial suicide.

I write cross platform software, targetting Windows, Linux and MacOs, but I always develop primarily on Windows, because I know that is where the majority of my users like to work. It's a simple matter of aiming for the majority market.

You need not necessarily target Linux... NeverWinterNights successfully targetted both platforms with the same base code (OpenGL/OpenAL based IIRC)... The point being the main points that make software dependent on a given platform are the third party libraries/APIs (for most games that means DirectX although as already pointed out there are compatability layers around that at least partially work).

There are a number of industry standards that if you follow them mean that the software will work on almost any platform with little or no rework. (EDIT: But you should already know that )

Developers could take the risk and put effort into making such games compatible with OSX by universally targeting Cedega or similar as the foundation and sticking with it. I'm not saying Egosoft should, but I am simply suggesting developers as a whole.

[eladan]

Developers could take the risk and put effort into making such games compatible with OSX by universally targeting Cedega or similar as the foundation and sticking with it.

Cedega is only providing emulation for what is still a Windows only technology though. Far better for companies to give proprietary technologies the flick and go with open standards.

[mrbadger]

You need not necessarily target Linux... NeverWinterNights successfully targetted both platforms with the same base code (OpenGL/OpenAL based IIRC)... The point being the main points that make software dependent on a given platform are the third party libraries/APIs (for most games that means DirectX although as already pointed out there are compatability layers around that at least partially work).

There is another reason why Windows is easier. What a lot of people don't realise is that openGL doesn't really do very much of what directX does. DirectX abstracts away hardware, and provides everything you need to write, among other things, games of any type. DirectX really is very cool technology.

Linux, and for that matter MacOS, have no equivilent of DirectX. Not in a single package, you have to assemble to bits from several sources, all of which have different interfaces, and seperate documentation. It's simply more work, which means it's more expensive.

[The-Gizmo]

Everything in DirectX except Direct3D and the newer GPU related items is deprecated. Look it up on Wikipedia some time .

So all DirectX provides now is basically what OpenGL provides, with just a few extras that only work with Vista and Windows 7. But a bonus with OpenGL is that Direct3D 10 similar features can be used on XP and other operating systems.

[KidDeath]

If I remember correctly, iD Software builds all their games on OpenGL technology rather than DirectX.

[mrbadger]

Everything in DirectX except Direct3D and the newer GPU related items is deprecated. Look it up on Wikipedia some time .

That article has factual errors.

DirectX is _not_ just about graphics. It's about sound, controls, keybord interaction, everything you need. Of course it changes as the underlying hardware changes. It would be a bit odd if it didn't.

[The-Gizmo]

DirectSound and DirectInput are both deprecated by Microsoft themselfs. Do a google search. DirectX is mainly just about graphics now. Microsoft offers alternatives to those, but they are not part of DirectX. In much the same way OpenAL is not part of OpenGL.

If I remember correctly, iD Software builds all their games on OpenGL technology rather than DirectX.

You are correct, however the last bit of information I read about id's next engine rage, it was going to support both OpenGL and Direct3D.

[incubator01]

Everything in DirectX except Direct3D and the newer GPU related items is deprecated. Look it up on Wikipedia some time .

That article has factual errors.

DirectX is _not_ just about graphics. It's about sound, controls, keybord interaction, everything you need. Of course it changes as the underlying hardware changes. It would be a bit odd if it didn't.

As I've used both in a very limited range, DX is an over complex API that's not cross platform and uses deprecated win32 structs and datatypes.
To render a shape you have to write a lot more code compared to opengl and as usual, Microsoft's documentation at MSDN is seriously lacking.

Most companies use DX because they mainly target windows users and don't want to invest in OpenGL research. The associated problem with that is that ports to other OS's (native ports, not emulations) are out of the question unless there is a big market for it.


OpenGL however is a framework that can run on any OS provided it has an implementation for it.
The only thing OpenGL oes not have is input, network, sound and the link to the window management. But that's where SDL comes in.
In terms of graphics, OpenGL can do far more than DX however most common hardware cannot handle such heavy graphics, so there is a certain limit as to how much such a graphics engine is allowed to do.

DX however already puts this limit in there for us up to a certain degree, so it is easier to adopt in the marketing scheme.

Cost effectively it is "today" better to use libraries that are supported on multiple platforms, write once, compile anywhere (cfr. Trolltech SA)

Linux on the other hand is still an unwise choice for game development (and I'm a linux user for many years so don't get me wrong) since libraries update very often as well as sound architecture.
Hardware support is still limited for recent sound cards and the most common issues people have is that the game still uses OSS instead of ALSA and that thir version of glibc does not match because the game was compiled with a different one. A lot of libraries also have statically linked dependencies which is a further problem.


In short: OpenGL + SDL + OpenAL gets my vote

just my € 0,02

[eladan]

This is all getting a bit off topic for this thread. If anyone wants to continue the discussion, please do so in off topic.

[KidDeath]

Everything in DirectX except Direct3D and the newer GPU related items is deprecated. Look it up on Wikipedia some time .

That article has factual errors.

DirectX is _not_ just about graphics. It's about sound, controls, keybord interaction, everything you need. Of course it changes as the underlying hardware changes. It would be a bit odd if it didn't.

As I've used both in a very limited range, DX is an over complex API that's not cross platform and uses deprecated win32 structs and datatypes.
To render a shape you have to write a lot more code compared to opengl and as usual, Microsoft's documentation at MSDN is seriously lacking.

Most companies use DX because they mainly target windows users and don't want to invest in OpenGL research. The associated problem with that is that ports to other OS's (native ports, not emulations) are out of the question unless there is a big market for it.


OpenGL however is a framework that can run on any OS provided it has an implementation for it.
The only thing OpenGL oes not have is input, network, sound and the link to the window management. But that's where SDL comes in.
In terms of graphics, OpenGL can do far more than DX however most common hardware cannot handle such heavy graphics, so there is a certain limit as to how much such a graphics engine is allowed to do.

DX however already puts this limit in there for us up to a certain degree, so it is easier to adopt in the marketing scheme.

Cost effectively it is "today" better to use libraries that are supported on multiple platforms, write once, compile anywhere (cfr. Trolltech SA)

Linux on the other hand is still an unwise choice for game development (and I'm a linux user for many years so don't get me wrong) since libraries update very often as well as sound architecture.
Hardware support is still limited for recent sound cards and the most common issues people have is that the game still uses OSS instead of ALSA and that their version of glibc does not match because the game was compiled with a different one. A lot of libraries also have statically linked dependencies which is a further problem.


In short: OpenGL + SDL + OpenAL gets my vote

just my € 0,02

You win.

Anyhow, I just bought TC for OSX just to see the difference (if any). I will write a micro-review soon.

Also, I agree, we should probably take this over to off topic if we wish to keep up with the discussion.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

You need not necessarily target Linux... NeverWinterNights successfully targetted both platforms with the same base code (OpenGL/OpenAL based IIRC)... The point being the main points that make software dependent on a given platform are the third party libraries/APIs (for most games that means DirectX although as already pointed out there are compatability layers around that at least partially work).

There is another reason why Windows is easier. What a lot of people don't realise is that openGL doesn't really do very much of what directX does. DirectX abstracts away hardware, and provides everything you need to write, among other things, games of any type. DirectX really is very cool technology.

Well I must say I think DirectX is pretty nice, but about the only plus point I will grant it is that it is Object Orientated out of the box (but that does not make it any better). If you want to use special features unique to specific graphics cards both OpenGL and DirectX provide ways to exploit them and both also provide a level of abstraction from the underlying hardware. Admittedly, OpenGL does require a little more effort but the benefit is that you can target a much wider audience rather than tying yourself to the Micro$oft monolithic altar.

Linux, and for that matter MacOS, have no equivilent of DirectX. Not in a single package, you have to assemble to bits from several sources, all of which have different interfaces, and seperate documentation. It's simply more work, which means it's more expensive.

Just do a search on Wikipedia for "OpenSceneGraph for example. There are also quite a few examples of where OpenGL has been used to great success in games (NeverWinterNights and Unreal Tornement being just two).

[CBJ]

This is all getting a bit off topic for this thread. If anyone wants to continue the discussion, please do so in off topic.

I'm not sure which part of this was unclear. It would be a shame to have to lock this sticky thread.

[BigdaddyB]

Don't lock this thread yet please. What I'm wondering about is if there will be a Mac portion on this forum where OSX related issues can be discussed?

[esd]

Given that none of us here are Mac coders, your best source of support would be the developers of the Mac port.

[Azalyn]

You've never tried to set up a wireless connection in Linux, I guess--took me hours to get that working on my laptop when I put Ubuntu 9.04 on it a few weeks ago!

I had the same experience; though solved it by inputting the data keys into what should have been the incorrect encryption method. Was frustrating as hell but worth the time.

As to why there aren't as many Mac ports, I can at least say second hand (friend of mine that works for Microsoft but doing coding for their Mac apps) is that writing code for a Mac is much much harder than windows or unix.

Previously pointed out that the majority of -nix users already know what they are doing, that may be starting to change. Dell has recently started shipping their machines with Ubuntu on it. When people are configuring their computers online and see that to switch to Ubuntu from Windows Vista/7 is -$150, and removing office is -$200 that will look very appealing. In a depressed economy saving $300 or more on an already expensive purchase is going to raise a lot of eyebrows to those who wouldn't have normally considered an alternative.

Since all the GNU related pool of OS's/apps are free, the only way they get any kind of recognition is via word of mouth as there's no one to do the marketing. Gaming is the only real stranglehold Windows has over -nix distros, with the equivalent of getting free Office Pro (Open Office), Email (Evolution, Thunderbird or Slypheed), and two otherwise very expensive apps Photoshop and CAD being included in the OS for free is a hard offer to turn away. The problems of devices not being compatible or difficult to configure would eventually solve themselves as the user base increases. The Direct X issue is still a difficult one to resolve, though given a high demand I imagine a solution would present itself.

True that -nix gamers/users are accustomed to having virtually everything free, when there is something of real worth that comes along (namely games) there is more respect and willingness to purchase rather than pirate.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

[OT]

As to why there aren't as many Mac ports, I can at least say second hand (friend of mine that works for Microsoft but doing coding for their Mac apps) is that writing code for a Mac is much much harder than windows or unix.

If he is talking about old MacOS 9.x (and prior) then I can understand it. But if he is talking about MacOS X then I would say he is towing the company line since MacOS X is a derivative of BSD UNIX referred to as GNU Darwin. The only real complication for coding for the Mac could be the complication of which version of the the Mac you are targeting (which should not be a major issue anyway): Intel based or PPC/G<n> based.
[/OT]

This does raise the topical question wrt the Mac port of X3:TC... is it for Intel only, PPC/G<n> only or both types of Mac? (my guess is Intel only)

EDIT: DOH! I Should have read the original post... it is Intel only

[jacare]

I wonder if anybody is considering a linux port?

And I would also in Linux