Will there be a Linux Build?

[Tatrasiel]

I only run linux and I was hoping that the developers would make a Linux Build.

@Devs will you make this happen?


@Everyone please comment below if you'd like a Linux build.

[Ultimoore]

+1 Linux

[Minz0r]

Windows 8 is more change than joining the free LInux Platform where KDE will be more familiar to the Users as Windows 8. And do not forget what MS is trying to archive with DRM all tied in the next Windows Plattforms that will prevent Users from using their Computer as they wish.

[Pandora]

Minz0r님이 먼저 게시:

Windows 8 is more change than joining the free LInux Platform where KDE will be more familiar to the Users as Windows 8. And do not forget what MS is trying to archive with DRM all tied in the next Windows Plattforms that will prevent Users from using their Computer as they wish.

I dont see how thats gonna work. The computer enthusiast community will take a split second to break their ♥♥♥♥ >.>

[Hrafn]

+1 for Linux. There's no Windows in my home.

[Kefo]

Athrins님이 먼저 게시:

+1 for Linux. There's no Windows in my home.

must be a dark home :P

[Aranud]

+1 for Linux

[Agent Orange]

Virosa님이 먼저 게시:

Minz0r님이 먼저 게시:

@Virosa: As you mentioned "Koreans donßt do Linux". Samsung is one of the Worlds biggest Companys and hosted in Korea. Nearly there whole Product Line is build on Linux from Smartwatches (Linux based Tizen OS) over Android Smartphones which are also Linux based, over to Smart TV which are also Linux based. Linux is the worlds most used Operating System and will dominate Microsoft in the next Years.

I was generalizing, and you're cherry picking. Asians games seldom get devlopped cross-platforms.

You're also generalizing Linux > Microsoft.

I use Linux OSes, i code on both and i'm certain that for desktop, Windows will continue to dominate the market for a long time, at least. Consumers are clueless and afraid of change...

For other things tho, like androids phone, that are already running linux, then yeah, ♥♥♥♥ microsoft. But i asked most people what OS they were running on their androids and they said Google, some said... huh, Jellybeans, or such.

Can't fix the codes ID 10-T

The argument is moot. Change will only happen if demand is shown. ArcheAge is unlikely to see a GNU/Linux release, however showing potential demand in various places for various software will help growth at its best and not harm anyone other than a few minutes of wasted effort at its worst.

+1 for Linux

[Airica Fyresong]

First off, just want to say I am NOT biased with operating systems. Each OS (Mac, Windows, Linux distros) all have their advantages and disadvantages. Personally, I have a Linux box (RHEL6) and a Windows 7 box. The Win7 is my gaming rig, the RedHat is for work (network administration) and server virtualization.

If you're a serious gamer, you go with Windows simply because most games are on Windows. It doesn't make sense to be a Linux when it comes to playing the games you like. It's like crying that a game is on PS4 when you have an Xbox (which is peasant problems but you get the gist of what I'm saying). Don't get me wrong, I love Linux, but it has it's limitations, and this is one of them. (I'd say virtualize a Windows box on your favorite Linux distro, but I don't like pushing high-end video cards through a VM.)

[Agent Orange]

Nuinethir님이 먼저 게시:

I love Linux, but it has it's limitations, and this is one of them.

What is the limitation? That many games aren't available for it? Great. That's the point of this thread and many like it. If nobody ever requested builds, then it would always stay the same. I mean, if this wasn't a 'limitation of Linux' then this thread and the others wouldn't exist right? Right.

[Airica Fyresong]

Agent Orange님이 먼저 게시:

What is the limitation? That many games aren't available for it? Great. That's the point of this thread and many like it. If nobody ever requested builds, then it would always stay the same. I mean, if this wasn't a 'limitation of Linux' then this thread and the others wouldn't exist right? Right.

The limitation is that a lot of proprietary software isn't available on both sides of the table. Linux has open source, but that's just it, it's open source: free unless the license says otherwise (RHEL vs CentOS). Windows you have to pay for, yet it is a large share of the market. When you cut to the core of the matter, it is about making money, not appeasing a small percentage of the population. It's a hard fact of life and, as much as it pains me to say it, you'd better get used to it.

[Hrafn]

Linux isn't limited to open source and free software. Steam is proprietary and is on Linux, I play proprietary, non-free games on Steam. Ubuntu's repositories contain proprietary and non-free applications. The only reason Windows has the bigger market share is because it had advertising and it was an early bird, and it was also produced with user-friendliness in mind, while Linux was by developers for developers, and only rather recently have some distributions succeeded in creating a user-friendly environment such as Mint and Ubuntu with their Cinnamon and Unity DE's.

All this is to say that there's no telling where Linux will end up, but there is no good argument against showing demand for games to be developed for the Linux platform now that the ball has started rolling what with SteamOS and whatnot. I do just fine with my personal library of around 70 Linux games which just keeps growing every week. The few games I am missing I try to ask the devs to port them and most of them are already in the works. Hell, CryEngine is already Linux-compatible, and so is Unreal Engine 4, Unity, and others. It's not at all a stretch to ask for a port of a CryEngine game such as ArcheAge.

Edit: Take a look at the top seller list on the store page. 3/10 games are on Linux, at least another 4 are in the works or are planned for Linux, coming up to a total of 7/10 of the top selling games being available for Linux sooner or later. Don't try to tell us you can't be a Linux gamer.

[Ultimoore]

Athrins님이 먼저 게시:

Linux isn't limited to open source and free software. Steam is proprietary and is on Linux, I play proprietary, non-free games on Steam. Ubuntu's repositories contain proprietary and non-free applications. The only reason Windows has the bigger market share is because it had advertising and it was an early bird, and it was also produced with user-friendliness in mind, while Linux was by developers for developers, and only rather recently have some distributions succeeded in creating a user-friendly environment such as Mint and Ubuntu with their Cinnamon and Unity DE's.

All this is to say that there's no telling where Linux will end up, but there is no good argument against showing demand for games to be developed for the Linux platform now that the ball has started rolling what with SteamOS and whatnot. I do just fine with my personal library of around 70 Linux games which just keeps growing every week. The few games I am missing I try to ask the devs to port them and most of them are already in the works. Hell, CryEngine is already Linux-compatible, and so is Unreal Engine 4, Unity, and others. It's not at all a stretch to ask for a port of a CryEngine game such as ArcheAge.

Edit: Take a look at the top seller list on the store page. 3/10 games are on Linux, at least another 4 are in the works or are planned for Linux, coming up to a total of 7/10 of the top selling games being available for Linux sooner or later. Don't try to tell us you can't be a Linux gamer.

+1 that, all day.

[Agent Orange]

Nuinethir님이 먼저 게시:

Agent Orange님이 먼저 게시:

What is the limitation? That many games aren't available for it? Great. That's the point of this thread and many like it. If nobody ever requested builds, then it would always stay the same. I mean, if this wasn't a 'limitation of Linux' then this thread and the others wouldn't exist right? Right.

The limitation is that a lot of proprietary software isn't available on both sides of the table. Linux has open source, but that's just it, it's open source: free unless the license says otherwise (RHEL vs CentOS). Windows you have to pay for, yet it is a large share of the market. When you cut to the core of the matter, it is about making money, not appeasing a small percentage of the population. It's a hard fact of life and, as much as it pains me to say it, you'd better get used to it.

The GPL doesn't limit to non-proprietary software on the Linux kernal and the distributions it is used on. Companies do make a lot of money off of "free software", such as RedHat (even with something like CentOS competing with RHEL). RHEL for example, is completely free. You can request the source code or go to RedHat's FTP and download then compile the entire source yourself, though you'll need to pay for RHN access (unless that's changed recently).

Regardless, a game developer can certainly sell their game without giving up the source code if developing for GNU/Linux (or any Linux for that matter, such as Android/Linux). I do understand the confusion though. It is easy to think that the GPL restrictions flow from kernel to OS to software on the OS but it doesn't. You do not have to make software made to run on the OS open source.

[Airica Fyresong]

The point I am trying to make is that ArcheAge is currently Windows proprietary software. It would be nice to have them on other operating systems, but unless the developers have enough resources to make it happen, gamers use Windows because it's a safe bet. Like I said before, if a lot of the proprietary software that I use on Windows was available on Linux, I would abandon the Microsoft train in a heartbeat. Hence, two boxes.

[Pandora]

I dont see the problem with having linux AND windows.

Your hopes lies with linux making more and more windows .exe run, not the other way around.

You guys all forgot the main reason why its not going to happen anytime soon in current state.

(It cost more significantly more money to make, but doesnt bring in significantly more money in)