LOLCAT Mar 27, 2013 @ 2:45pm
Should Wine developers reverse-engineer the D3D-OpenGL layer in the source engine?
They could use it to improve wine performance. It we take a look at how well CSS or HL2DM runs, Valve must have some really useful tricks. Even better: Valve should share the knowledge willingly.
Showing 1-7 of 7 comments
< >
ten miles [Linux] Mar 27, 2013 @ 5:15pm 
I assume this would not prove useful. I think (I'm not sure about that, so don't take my word on this) the source engine has a fixed render path which then could be optimized. While directx and opengl "in free nature" do not have a fixed render pipeline. However the directx 9 emulation in wine is reasonable good. If we were talking about directx 11 it would indeed prove more useful
Last edited by ten miles [Linux]; Mar 27, 2013 @ 5:15pm
Kano Mar 28, 2013 @ 2:39am 
I think thats the major problem for users with slower cpus right now. With fast intel cpus there is basically no frame drop but amd cpus are slower and that leads to problems with the on-the-fly conversation. Maybe it would be better to convert the shaders statically - it could be automated as well just at build time.
yabba Mar 28, 2013 @ 6:17am 
Originally posted by LOLCAT:
They could use it to improve wine performance. It we take a look at how well CSS or HL2DM runs, Valve must have some really useful tricks. Even better: Valve should share the knowledge willingly.

OTOH if we take a look at how badly TF2 runs you'd question whether Valve have tried it themselves, let alone learnt any useful tricks :-)

WINE is a waste of time. Fun to develop, but if you want good windows application support and performance, boot into windows 7.
LOLCAT Mar 28, 2013 @ 6:52am 
Originally posted by aardvark:
Originally posted by LOLCAT:
They could use it to improve wine performance. It we take a look at how well CSS or HL2DM runs, Valve must have some really useful tricks. Even better: Valve should share the knowledge willingly.

OTOH if we take a look at how badly TF2 runs you'd question whether Valve have tried it themselves, let alone learnt any useful tricks :-)

WINE is a waste of time. Fun to develop, but if you want good windows application support and performance, boot into windows 7.
TF2 is a mess and has all sorts of CPU/memory usage issues. Just look at how it takes 3 days to load the simplest map. Probably it has nothing to do with OpenGL, or all source games would behave like that.

WINE is not a waste of time. It gives people choice. No one is required to use it. Also it's a good and ambitious project. If you look at it from a technologycal point of view, it clearly is great. Do you know how it works? Have you seen the source code yourself?

Also you only say this because it's not feature complete yet. It will be in the future probably. I wonder if you want to play a DOS game, do you say DosBox is a waste of time and boot into DOS 6.22?
yabba Mar 28, 2013 @ 2:18pm 
Originally posted by LOLCAT:
If you look at it from a technologycal point of view, it clearly is great.

As I said, I'm sure it's great fun to develop.

Let me give another example. Developing open source 3d drivers is a lot of fun too. I worked on them a long time ago. But, it's a complete waste of time from the point of view of actually running 3d applications on linux- as you can read about here.

That said, the slight caveat is, often the proprietary drivers are a waste of time too - but I suppose, from time to time that's true of windows 7 too. It's not a perfect world.

Also you only say this because it's not feature complete yet. It will be in the future probably. I wonder if you want to play a DOS game, do you say DosBox is a waste of time and boot into DOS 6.22?

I don't want to play a DOS game. I'm sure you'll find many of the ones you think you might want to have been ported - and often improved in myriad ways since their release.

If anything, Carmack's willingness to release old engines and games as open source is a better wish than either a dosbox or a wine. But new games are usually so much better in every way, technically, artistically and so on it doesn't really matter.

AIUI Gabe Newell, whilst at Microsoft, visited ID software once and ported their game to Windows - from which you can see, years later, why windows gaming exists.

The question isn't whether I would boot into DOS. The better question to ask yourself is why Carmack et al decided that I didn't have to because they would port to Windows - or just develop for windows full stop.

Today, of course, Carmack develops game engines for a company that doesn't really develop games, but his attitude is "use wine" whereas Gabe Newell is still saying "We'll port this game to Linux"

I know who my money is on. Although I have to say, I wouldn't bet very much at this stage on either.
Last edited by yabba; Mar 28, 2013 @ 2:22pm
LOLCAT Mar 28, 2013 @ 2:25pm 
Probably you're young and don't play DOS games. That's OK. What will you do when Windows will stop being what it is and you can't use it anymore? Just like DOS or Windows 95. You can't install them on a modern PC. Probably the time will come when you won't be able to install Windows 7 or 8, and the actual version won't run desktop applications anymore. Will you abandon the games you love now? Don't you think you'll want to play them in 10 years? Emulation will come in handy. WINE or something else, it doesn't matter. It is a good thing and something that has to be better and better as we'll probably need it in the future when Windows will be nothing more but a tuchscreen-smudging appstore.
Last edited by LOLCAT; Mar 28, 2013 @ 2:26pm
Oskar Kinomoto Mar 30, 2013 @ 4:20am 
Originally posted by Kano:
I think thats the major problem for users with slower cpus right now. With fast intel cpus there is basically no frame drop but amd cpus are slower and that leads to problems with the on-the-fly conversation. Maybe it would be better to convert the shaders statically - it could be automated as well just at build time.

On AMD under wine I don't have any glitches or other problems with slow cpu so...
Showing 1-7 of 7 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50