Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Tomohare #546525 21/08/14 02:09 PM
Joined: Aug 2014
T
stranger
Offline
stranger
T
Joined: Aug 2014
I'm waiting for Divinity to drop on Linux as well. I don't actually mind waiting, since given the low market share of Linux and financial factors etc I'm grateful we're getting a Linux version at all. An estimate would be great. If an official representative would just pop in and say 'Q2 2015 is what we're looking at', that'd be much better than just silence.

Tomohare #547780 24/08/14 05:29 PM
Joined: Jun 2013
M
stranger
Offline
stranger
M
Joined: Jun 2013
The good news is, their silence on the forums is a clear indication of their dedication to invest every waking second into porting the game to Linux ;-)




Tomohare #547787 24/08/14 07:44 PM
Joined: Jun 2014
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jun 2014
So far, the FAQ says it's coming. But there was no update form developers about any progress.

And really, can't they give some ETA if they plan their own work properly? Didn't they give an ETA for the Windows release?

Last edited by shmerl; 24/08/14 07:48 PM.
Tomohare #547807 24/08/14 10:51 PM
Joined: Jun 2013
M
stranger
Offline
stranger
M
Joined: Jun 2013
I can understand their hesitation to give ETAs. There are always some people who forget that the "E" stands for "Expected" and not "Guaranteed". And software ETAs are notoriously inaccurate.

There were a few ETAs for the windows release, if I remember correctly, and the single correct one, the last one, was only accurate because of a day-one patch.

But, it really would be nice to get some sort of progress report from time to time, just here in the forum.

Meganoth #547813 24/08/14 11:43 PM
Joined: Apr 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2013
Originally Posted by Meganoth
There are always some people who forget that the "E" stands for "Expected" and not "Guaranteed".


Not to digress, but actually, the 'E' stands for estimated. As in 'Estimated Time of Arrival'.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/e.t.a.?s=t

shmerl #548432 27/08/14 01:28 PM
Joined: Jun 2014
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by shmerl
And really, can't they give some ETA if they plan their own work properly? Didn't they give an ETA for the Windows release?

The ETA for DoS was:
Originally Posted by kickstarter
Estimated delivery: Nov 2013

For a game like DoS that was a bogus ETA, or better: a developer ETA. You should always multiply developer estimates by 2. So in that respect, Jun 2014 was early... Even now I think they were pretty fast.
But the cool part of larian was the 63 updates about how they are moving on.
I'd rather have them continue like that:
Originally Posted by developer
Today I typed in make, and then my whole system froze...


recluce #548707 28/08/14 08:36 PM
Joined: Aug 2013
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2013
Originally Posted by recluce
Originally Posted by Daz23
Well I certainly hope the Linux version is announced soon, as my collectors edition box is sitting in a corner unopened with lots of dust on it.

For us Linux users with no windows machines, this wait is excruciating.


+1

While I still have a Windows installation in a triple boot config (Linux Mint, PC-BSD and Windows), I would much prefer to play D:OS on Linux.


I used to keep three OSes going, too--Workbench, OS/2, and Windows (even the horrid Mac OS for a brief period)--and it turned out to be a lot of work for very little payoff. Of course I was much younger and had ample energy to burn and it was a great ego kick...;) But it didn't take me long to find out that where games were concerned Windows was the place to be--even then--much as I would have preferred it be the Amiga. Today, it's not even close. The Linux version certainly won't be "better" by any stretch, so it's hard to figure sometimes what you guys are waiting on and why. If computer gaming is something you really like then Linux is the exactly the wrong place to be . I mean, you don't have to like Microsoft to understand why Windows is the game-developer's choice, hands down. I'll shut up, now...;)

Last edited by Waltc; 28/08/14 08:37 PM.

I'm never wrong about anything, and so if you see an error in any of my posts you will know immediately that I did not write it...;)
Tomohare #548722 28/08/14 11:31 PM
Joined: May 2014
Location: Germany
pts Offline
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: May 2014
Location: Germany
Oh man, OS/2! Was so proud when i was finally able to afford 8MB RAM to get Warp 3 run smoothly... smile

Anyway, unless you need to play games on release day, Linux with wine is sufficient for most modern RPGs. D:OS certainly works fine with wine 1.7.24.


pts #548783 29/08/14 08:43 AM
Joined: Jun 2014
E
stranger
Offline
stranger
E
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by pts
Oh man, OS/2! Was so proud when i was finally able to afford 8MB RAM to get Warp 3 run smoothly... smile

Anyway, unless you need to play games on release day, Linux with wine is sufficient for most modern RPGs. D:OS certainly works fine with wine 1.7.24.


wine is not an viable option. it's a bad workaround at best. updates will constantly break games. performance and quality is often much worse. many effects are not supported yet and probably never will be. it might not be true for dos NOW but it's true for many titles out there that worked and then suddenly stopped working.

Last edited by eNTi; 29/08/14 08:43 AM.
eNTi #548820 29/08/14 10:29 AM
Joined: May 2014
Location: Germany
pts Offline
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: May 2014
Location: Germany
Originally Posted by eNTi

wine is not an viable option. it's a bad workaround at best. updates will constantly break games. performance and quality is often much worse. many effects are not supported yet and probably never will be. it might not be true for dos NOW but it's true for many titles out there that worked and then suddenly stopped working.

well i was pretty lucky so far, probably because i usually wait for the finished version (with all DLCs/Expansions). But a native version is certainly better & i look forward to see more games running natively on linux. Fortunately, linux support seems to get more common, at least in kickstarted / unity games, maybe even in future AAA-Titles due to steamOS.


Last edited by pts; 29/08/14 10:30 AM.
pts #548866 29/08/14 05:26 PM
Joined: Aug 2013
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2013
Originally Posted by pts
Oh man, OS/2! Was so proud when i was finally able to afford 8MB RAM to get Warp 3 run smoothly... smile

Anyway, unless you need to play games on release day, Linux with wine is sufficient for most modern RPGs. D:OS certainly works fine with wine 1.7.24.



Yes, the emulators have come a long way...! But still...it's an emulator...;)

OS/2...after warp I stripped OS/2 from my life and never looked back. It was my third version of OS/2. IBM did such a poor job with it--I had an on-the-shelf CD-ROM drive that ran great under Windows (which I was hoping to escape) but OS/2 did not support it! I asked IBM for a driver and their response was: just use the built-in Windows emulation! Grrrrr....;) That was it for me!

At the time IBM had the money and OS/2 could have been a contender. But IBM just didn't want to match or exceed Microsoft's OS R&D budgets, and so OS/2 predictably failed. Can you imagine what a boon it would have been had IBM spent $500M (it was an $80B-a-year company then, richer than Microsoft or Intel) to get 500 of the leading Windows applications & games ported to OS/2? That and some serious hardware driver improvement would have put OS/2 out front. But as soon became clear, IBM simply didn't have any taste for competing with Microsoft on the OS front. Such a pity!



I'm never wrong about anything, and so if you see an error in any of my posts you will know immediately that I did not write it...;)
Waltc #548884 29/08/14 08:25 PM
Joined: Jun 2014
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Waltc
Yes, the emulators have come a long way...! But still...it's an emulator...;)

Sometimes I wonder if it is better to just settle for a wine version. If it works, wine will always work, even in ten years. But I have a load of Lokigames that really need a lot of .so hacking just to get them to run.
Originally Posted by Waltc

OS/2...after warp I stripped OS/2 from my life and never looked back. It was my third version of OS/2. IBM did such a poor job with it--I had an on-the-shelf CD-ROM drive that ran great under Windows (which I was hoping to escape) but OS/2 did not support it! I asked IBM for a driver and their response was: just use the built-in Windows emulation! Grrrrr....;) That was it for me!

Well, Actually they are right: the supplier of the CD-ROM drive should have supplied an OS/2 driver. It's like that in the current graphics world too. Intel supplies linux drivers by making sure the opensource drivers work. Nvidia delivers binary drivers, and AMD delivers binary, and makes sure that the opensource drivers work.

Quote
At the time IBM had the money and OS/2 could have been a contender. But IBM just didn't want to match or exceed Microsoft's OS R&D budgets, and so OS/2 predictably failed. Can you imagine what a boon it would have been had IBM spent $500M (it was an $80B-a-year company then, richer than Microsoft or Intel) to get 500 of the leading Windows applications & games ported to OS/2? That and some serious hardware driver improvement would have put OS/2 out front. But as soon became clear, IBM simply didn't have any taste for competing with Microsoft on the OS front. Such a pity!

At that time IBM and Microsoft had a deal to develop OS/2 together. Microsoft had a habbit of stabbing partners in the back, so they went and developed NT, and made sure that IBM was not able to run Windows software by sueing them over the para virtualisation replacement IBM made to be able to run Windows in OS/2 protected mode. In the mean time Microsoft could just use everything IBM thought of for OS/2.
In the end I am glad OS/2 did not make it. Although it probably still is better than windows 8, if IBM would have had success with OS/2, they would not have invested time in linux.
Now there is just one common "enemy" with still a lot of anti-competition lawsuits, and one common linux in which about every company is investing.

SirDirty #548993 30/08/14 11:26 AM
Joined: May 2014
Location: Germany
pts Offline
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: May 2014
Location: Germany
Originally Posted by SirDirty

In the end I am glad OS/2 did not make it. Although it probably still is better than windows 8, if IBM would have had success with OS/2, they would not have invested time in linux.
Now there is just one common "enemy" with still a lot of anti-competition lawsuits, and one common linux in which about every company is investing.

At the time i was quite annoyed that a better system would fail due to bad software support and marketing. But you make a very good point, looking back it was actually a good development for Linux and the Open Source World.

pts #549023 30/08/14 04:33 PM
Joined: Apr 2013
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2013
Originally Posted by pts
Oh man, OS/2! Was so proud when i was finally able to afford 8MB RAM to get Warp 3 run smoothly... smile


Ah, memory lane (pun most definitely intended). My second computer, and first IBM-compatible, was a 486 DX/2 66MHz with a whopping 640KB of RAM. Yep, it had a single stick of 72-pin SIMM RAM with 640KB on it. Not sure who designed that frankenstein of a RAM stick, but it worked. I still have it on my keychain, to this day. smile

Tomohare #549128 31/08/14 01:37 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
R
stranger
Offline
stranger
R
Joined: Aug 2014
Hey, just throwing in my 2 cents for the eventual Linux release. I bought into the late beta back when I was still on Windows, and I've been waiting anxiously to play the full version since I converted over. I got to taste the appetizer, and now I want the full entree!

I say take your time and get it right. Though admittedly, the wait...yeah, it's killer.

Renzatic #551471 09/09/14 02:58 PM
Joined: Jun 2014
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Jun 2014
Originally Posted by Renzatic
Though admittedly, the wait...yeah, it's killer.

It's not the wait, it's the silence. Especially the silence after almost every week a video until the windows version was released. Which is great and I think might have been too much.
We don't need a weekly video. We just need a monthly bone to chase...

SirDirty #551590 09/09/14 07:45 PM
Joined: Aug 2013
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2013
Originally Posted by SirDirty

Well, Actually they are right: the supplier of the CD-ROM drive should have supplied an OS/2 driver. It's like that in the current graphics world too. Intel supplies linux drivers by making sure the opensource drivers work. Nvidia delivers binary drivers, and AMD delivers binary, and makes sure that the opensource drivers work.


Well, IBM told me to use Windows--and I had no trouble with the off-the-shelf IDE CD-ROM (not SCSI, not custom) drive under Windows at the time. That wasn't the only limit to the hardware OS/2 didn't support, either, just the one that I remember most because it was so ridiculous. Nobody comes close to supporting hardware like Microsoft--as I mentioned, IBM should have *paid* for the requisite driver support, paid to port applications & games to OS/2 *if* IBM really wanted to challenge Windows for OS primacy. But, they didn't really mean it...at least, they simply were not going to go head to head with Microsoft on OS R&D. So, OS/2 shriveled up and blew away...


Quote
At that time IBM and Microsoft had a deal to develop OS/2 together. Microsoft had a habbit of stabbing partners in the back, so they went and developed NT, and made sure that IBM was not able to run Windows software by sueing them over the para virtualisation replacement IBM made to be able to run Windows in OS/2 protected mode. In the mean time Microsoft could just use everything IBM thought of for OS/2.


Eh? The Windows virtualization in OS/2 was its *downfall*...that's what made it suck so hard, imo. After MS & IBM split their differences and went their separate ways, IBM began relying far too heavily on Win3.1 emulation *instead* of doing what I thought they should have done...make a clean break and pay to port what they needed to port to OS/2. Emulating Windows was a *bad* idea because it worked the reverse of what IBM thought...instead of convincing people they didn't need Windows, it convinced them they didn't need OS/2...;) Emulators frequently work exactly that way--no emulation is better than that which it seeks to emulate.

Quote
In the end I am glad OS/2 did not make it. Although it probably still is better than windows 8, if IBM would have had success with OS/2, they would not have invested time in linux.
Now there is just one common "enemy" with still a lot of anti-competition lawsuits, and one common linux in which about every company is investing.


IBM invested time & money into Linux because much of it was a freebie, remember. OS/2 cost a lot more money and time to develop--just like Windows. If you want to build a global desktop OS to beat Windows you'll have to really invest the money--Linux just won't do, open-source development is far too insecure and slow for a global commercial *desktop* OS. For specialty servers and custom networks, Linux is very nice indeed. Still, even there, Windows is tough competition even though it frequently is more expensive. As a competitor to Windows on the global desktop, however, it's a poor substitute by any measure. Heck, even now OpenGL races to keep stride with D3d, and its a race OpenGL has yet to win...

Just my two cents...;) This is something that I doubt either of us wants to debate to infinity...!...:D



I'm never wrong about anything, and so if you see an error in any of my posts you will know immediately that I did not write it...;)
Tomohare #551660 10/09/14 12:58 AM
Joined: Jun 2013
M
stranger
Offline
stranger
M
Joined: Jun 2013
"open-source development is far too insecure and slow for a global commercial *desktop* OS"

There are problems with OS for a consumer desktop because development doesn't necessarily take the direction the customer wants.
But really, insecure software didn't stop windows from conquering the market in the last century. Only after their reputation couldn't get any worse somewhere near 2002 did they invest into security at all.

The development speed of linux is also comparable to windows, there are only two differences: Linux might not go into a direction a commercial entity using linux might want (but there are remedies, see google, see ubuntu). And driver development for windows is completely outsourced to the hardware manufacturers. But the same happens for any OS that gets enough market share, so some hardware companies do that for OS-X and even Linux.

Take a look at android which is, obviously, a global commerical "desktop" OS, just not the "desktop" you were thinking of. Is its development too insecure and slow? Doesn't seem that way.

IBM did invest some time and money into linux, but they never tried to make it into a consumer/business desktop, they looked at the server market. They had burnt their fingers with OS/2 and they always were a big iron and server company at heart and didn't and still don't have the mindset to push a desktop into everyones home and business.

They had their small chance with OS/2. Their chances after 2000 would have been negligible, whether with Linux or OS/3 or any other OS. The only way Microsofts domination could be endangered was by conquering a new market and coming in from the side. That's what Apple and google did. But notice that Microsoft still has 85% or more of the desktop market even though Apple has a closed source OS and the money.

Ah, what was this discussion about? Oh yes, Divinity ;-) Got a bit sidetracked


Last edited by Meganoth; 10/09/14 01:06 AM.
Tomohare #554402 14/09/14 10:12 PM
Joined: May 2013
member
Offline
member
Joined: May 2013
On subject, Will there be a beta for the Linux version? If so I would really like to be a part of that. I'm running Arch 64b following the "short-term" kernel on a system with the following specs: i7-4930k, 8GB RAM (upgrading soon-ish), nVidia 570 (upgrading sometime in the next 6 months when the 870 comes out).


CPU: i7-4930k, Gfx: EVGA 950, RAM: 16GB DDR3-2133 (quad channel), OS: Arch Linux
Waltc #554485 15/09/14 07:38 AM
Joined: Jul 2014
P
stranger
Offline
stranger
P
Joined: Jul 2014
Originally Posted by Waltc
[quote=SirDirty]IBM invested time & money into Linux because much of it was a freebie, remember.


Linux is their main OS next to AIX and they keep investing in it, because it has proven to be very advanced system. Oracle, Novell does the same.

EDIT:

To show how stupid this claim is:

IBM's jfs file system was ported to Linux, so it's not an effort that company takes, because something is just a freebie. Furthermore, IBM is one of the main companies that works on the Linux kernel:

http://www.linuxfoundation.org/news-media/infographics/who-writes-linux-2013

You can notice how many people are working on the same kernel and how fast development is. Next time you'll write some bull do some research.

Quote
If you want to build a global desktop OS to beat Windows you'll have to really invest the money--Linux just won't do, open-source development is far too insecure and slow for a global commercial *desktop* OS.


This is just silly. Open Source model has proven to be far more secure and successful. There are companies who check the quality of code (like Coverity) and Open Source projects have same quality as closed ones. However, what they don't take into account is the time needed to fix critical vulnerability exposure. Just compare Linux to Windows. It takes months to close CVEs in Windows (and some of them won't be EVER fixed, because it's still based on broken DOS principles), but only hours in Linux. This is the power of Open Source and this also shows how closed development model is weak and insecure. Linux is growing much faster than any other closed source project, so your arguments are nothing, but false and wishful thinking. The only thing that Linux currently lacks are some specialized programs. It beats Windows in everything else.

Last edited by Pawel.pc44; 15/09/14 08:31 AM.
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5