> On Tue, 4 Jun 1996, root wrote:
> > least make it a module option. The fact remains, if linux is to be
> > supported by game developers it needs to have the basic video support
> > required.
>
> Ok, here's the fundamental point I was trying to make: Do we want, as
> a design goal, for Linux to be an OS for game developers? Is "supported
> by game developers" really a goal for Linux/UNIX?
Why shouldn't it be? It can't *hurt* things, and the gaming
market is big and getting bigger.
> It seems to me that this is not the direction Linux should take, or IS
> taking.
I disagree. Linux should go in ALL directions |->. "World
domination, fast", remember? That's not gonna happen if people need to
boot into DOS/Windows95 to play the latest games, all of which will be on
Win95 very soon. The reason that is happening is because of DirectDraw
and Direct3D (and the whole DirectX library suite in general). These let
games tunnel down through the monolithic Windows graphics API and do
direct framebuffer stuff, while still offering device-independence. The
new DGA stuff in X is something similar.
However, DirectX *sucks* compared to what is possible (as usual
with M$ products). We in the Linux world can do much better. If we could
say to game developers 'we have this niftyradcool graphics API that can
work better than DirectDraw/Direct3D, not have to deal with a Windowing
system for fullscreen games if needed, AND you get to use all the other
advanced features of Linux in your game, AND Linux is MUCH faster than
Win95 in general, AND you can distribute is FOR FREE on the CD-ROM with
your game!', it would be another big coup for us.
> Is Linux supposed to be an alternative to Windows 95 and the
> Mac or is it supposed to be an alternative to Windows NT, SCO Unix,
> Solaris, etc...?
It is supposed to be an alternative to damn near everything!
Linux has the potential to truly bring UNIX into the mainstream computing
world for the first time, and games are a part of that world.
> Now, if we can make Linux a great game platform WITHOUT compromising
> these goals, then fine. However, at least Linus and some others don't
> seem to think that's possible.
This is wrong, if for no other reason than Quake. Even as things
stand now, the X+DGA stuff allows for games that are on a par with
anything that can be done in Win95+DirectX. Requiring X is a turnoff,
though. Having those capabilities available outside of X would help a
lot.
Jon Taylor = <taylorj@gaia.ecs.csus.edu> | <http://gaia.ecs.csus.edu/~taylorj>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Everything in excess! To enjoy the flavor of life, take big bites.
Moderation is for monks." - Lazarus Long