GW Linux client, WHEN ?

Windows XP bothers me more and more every day, last week i had to do some magic tricks to be able to remove a nice trojan that channeled all my google search results to porn sites, (fun isnt it),

the only thing keeping me in windows is GW, everything else i do with my computer can be replicated with linux,

NCsoft promised Clients for MAC Os and linux, where are they ?,

i dont want to dual boot every time i want to play GW and i dont want to run GW trough an emulator like Cedega, paying for a game and then having to play it in window mode, being forced to pay more money for the emulator (55 bucks a year for cedega), and plus almost doubling hardware requierments is a joke, plus, i have to trow away my X850XT and but a nvidia card if i want to play guildwars in linux,

do we have to mount a ingame protest or something, gather tons of people in international district ?

We did not promise clients for Mac or Linux. The only thing that has ever been said with regards Mac/Linux versions is that we would evaluate the possibility of releasing on other platforms. At the current time, I am not aware of any plans to release for another platform.

ha, sorry, i guess it was a missunderstanding on my part,

anyways, i hear that WOW accounts were banned becuase of running WOW under wine/cedega in linux becuase a modified client was detected, do players running the GW client under the same conditions run in to the same risk ?

We won't ban you for running on linux using an emulator. Do be aware, however, that we do not support non-Windows environments so if you encounter any issues our support team probably won't be able to assist you.

On the different OS question Alex, anything new for vista? are there any issues running it so far?

Linux just looks like too much of a hassle and I usually like a challenge

EDIT ~ Bad England speak

the real question about that would be "is a DX10 patch/upgrade for guildwars in the works?", it campaign 4 going to be DX10 ?

Just use proper virus protection and get over it. If you get a virus, it's not because of Windows XP, it's because of you.

If there is, hopefully Dx8 will still be available. Scalability is one of Guild Wars' strongest points at the moment - you can run it with lots of shinyness on a brand new gaming pc, or at low settings on a laptop that's a couple of years old.

I'd like to see an x86 Linux client, because it runs so poorly under Cedega on this box, but it would make more sense for them to release an OS X client first. I know quite a few people who moved to playing Wow from D2, because they could run Wow on their macs. Some of them have expressed interest in GW, but because of the lack of a native client, can't run it.

The best you will get is running in a Windows XP Pro in a VM ware or Virtual PC setup.

For now, windows xp is fine. Vista sucks because it is a resource hog.


Windows isnt all that bad security-wise if you install a firewall, antivirus, practice sound computing (aka no opening of suspicious attachments before scanning on multiple antiviruses) and do regular backups.

Linux is good (and free/opensource ), but what it is missing is developer support. The world is run by money sadly.

Bleh. Hardcore OS users use Linux because windows is a pain to mod up and Linux is more customizable, stable, cheaper, and faster. Not because "Linux doesn't get viruses". Linux gets viruses, it's just that since it is open source the patches get rushed out asap.

Well that is partly true, yes. Unix and Linux systems also have a different default user configuration which helps to protect the core system architecture unlike windows systems in which Many if not 90% of users are automatically Administrative users. While that doesn't protect all of your data it does ensure that critical components cannot be affected by an out break.

You are however absolutely right viruses and exploits do exists in the Linux world and by part in large because the code is open, however as you have mentioned very often this problems are rectified long before they become mass hysteria.

As for a lack of developer support, that by large depends on the project you choose and its objective. There are as many that are very well supported as there are those that are not. I have worked on several projects targeted toward the Home user base that were almost at times overly supported and we never charged a dime.

You are also absolutely right about this, however the sad truth is there are a minority of users who interested in anything but simply having a system that works. Such is the problem across all Platforms currently. Many users are blind to security and safe access practices, and not only blind but choose to continue ti be blind under the assumption that because they don't use an online bank, or make an online purchase, that there is nothing worth a hackers time on their machine. The truth is however if you have a computer and you have an internet connection your computer is worth it regardless of if it is devoid of personal information. Bots, Backdoors, Keyloggers, trojans, spam bots, phishing bots, these don't need anything more then a machine, an internet connection and a root kit.

User could do them self a huge favor by visiting sites like US-Cert and practicing just an ounce of safe access practices.

My main hard drive (the one with Windows) crashed (the motor stopped spinning). Now all that remain on my computer is Linux. Since yesterday, I try to run Guild Wars with Wine. It worked once at 5fps or so then... nothing. It's really sad because I love Guild Wars. :-(

With the release of Windows Vista, more and more people are thinking of switching to Linux mainly due to Microsoft's habit of screwing users (forcing them to upgrade) every once in a while. The latest thing that prevent them from doing so are the games that run on Windows only.

Please Alex and other folks at NC Soft/ArenaNet, pay attention to this: http://www.petitiononline.com/gwlinux/

Personally, when I buy new software, seeing it's cross-platform is a real plus because I know that it will still run if I change my OS. And today's situation is that buying Microsoft products isn't interesting on the long term. Make your game lasts, make it cross-platform. It's a real added value.

Maybe it's a bit late for Guild Wars but think about it for Guild Wars 2. And please, make use of OpenGL instead of Direct 3D, it will be easier to port to Linux and MacOS X and your customers won't be screwed the day Microsoft decide. And I'm sure some people will buy it just because it runs on Linux (unlike WoW ;-) ).

Please think about it. I'm really sad that there are no current plans for a GW Linux client. I was thinking of purchasing GW2 when it's out but now, I wonder...

I don't have anything against a Linux client, but you have to consider the business side of this. It takes a lot of development and QA resources to build and test a new client for a game like GW. They don't charge a monthly fee, so they only get money from their user base once...it's not exponential profitability like monthly fee-products such as WoW. It's cost-effective for Blizzard to make ports for their client because they continue to make money based on subscriptions.

The installed-base of Linux and MacOS compared to Windows is very small. Teeny-tiny even. Realistically it probably doesn't make a lot of financial sense for ArenaNet to worry about making a port for Linux. I really doubt that there's much of a profit margin there considering that the port would be really expensive to produce.

You're right of course but unlike Windows, Linux's market share can only grow in the future. So I guess we'll have to wait a couple of years after the release of Guild Wars 2 to see Guild Wars client going open source (with community servers).

Community is the strong point of Linux software development meaning that it doesn't cost you anything since the community takes care of both development and user support. Some Linux development groups works together with companies while being tied to a NDA. So for the company who dare, it can be a great benefit.

Another problem i can see is then streaming of updates to a linux client. And god Ncsoft, if you move away from direct3d im going to be really sad. DX10 Looks so awesome..... Hopefuly Guildwars two will take full advantage of it.

I think a Linux client will never come because, well I'm not a full expert on this but Guild Wars heavily uses DirectX and that's a no-go in Linux. Also I don't know the relationship between ArenaNet and ATi, but GuildWars.com has the ATi logo so I assume Guild Wars is specially designed to run on ATi cards and getting ATi cars to run properly with full support (for 3D games) = LOL in Linux.

I don't see why... Many Linux software are using this technique without problem...

Won't DirectX 10 be Vista only? Another example of pure MS screw-up. I read that many game dev said they will stick to DirectX 9 for compatibility sake. Many gamers will still use DX9 video cards for quite some time... OpenGL isn't that different to DX, converting a game to the other API isn't that difficult. Some games offer you the possibility to use one or the other as you will. After all, DirectX is MS's version of OpenGL (see history).

That's simply due to a lack of workable drivers for ATI hardware. That could be fixed. Also, since OpenGL is an open standard there's no reason that the features that DirectX 10 brings to the table couldn't be implemented in OpenGL. To me the real question is, "is it worth their time to do these things?" Right now I believe the answer to that question is "no." Will Linux ever see a significantly larger installed-base? That completely depends on whether or not someone decides to create and market a truly full featured, plug and play, easy to use, vendor-supported Linux implementation that can truly compete with Windows. If that ever happens things may begin to change.

I never managed to get Guild Wars running on Linux (after all I only tried for 2 days ). Others succeeded using Cedega or Wine.

For ATI, Doom 3 is running as fast as the Windows version on my Radeon X1600 XT but of course, it's an OpenGL game. ATI drivers are getting better but it's a slooooooow process...

Not sure if there is or not, but consider the possibility that there are technical reasons that DX10 will be Vista-only. I think you're jumping to a conclusion by calling it "pure MS screw-up". I'm not a fan of MS (nor am I a "hater"), but I must admit it gets a bit tiresome that it's so fashionable to bash them. MS does make mistakes and some bad decisions, but nobody else has even attempted to hold the place in the market that they are. I guarantee you that if Apple and (if there were a centralized point of responsibility for) a commercial Linux implementation were in the same position as MS (being "all things for all people" and "a melting pot of 3rd-party products") both of their OSes would have most of the same problems that Windows does. If you want to point out mistakes that MS has made and back up your statements that's fine, they've made plenty, but please have some perspective. MS isn't as bad as people make them out to be. Sure, they don't always make the best decisions or produce the best products, but come on. The type of business they run is completely different from that run by Apple. It's like comparing Apples to......well......Windows....

I didn't say/mean Microsoft products are bad or have more problems than other. I just see how quickly their products get old and they're fully responsible of that. It's the main characteristics of their business model. They never adapt their legacy product for new technologies. They release something completely incompatible to make you switch to their new solution (MS-DOS > Windows 95 > Windows 98SE > Windows XP > Windows Vista). And if you don't do it quickly enough they kinda force you to do it (eg software that runs only on XP and not on 2000 while it doesn't require specific XP features, soon Vista only games that could run on XP). It's the way they chosen and I won't blame them for that. The goal of a company is to make money. But as an end-user, I feel like being their hostage (not to that point but...). Using Microsoft OS (and following them), is like paying a yearly subscribtion of $25. So I'm fed up to be the cash cow. Of course you don't have to always buy the latest Windows but you take the risk that the latest version of your favourite software won't work on your old OS or that your brand new peripheral won't connect to your PC because it's not beign recognized by your OS. The good point with Linux is that you can follow the evolution smoothly and freely (in both sense of the term) and that's priceless, because you can use the saved money to buy "useful" software and not just paying to stay up-to-date. This is not an universal truth, it's just how I see it.

But before they close the thread, we should get back to Guild Wars Linux client discussion.

I just want to make a couple of statements on this and then I'll let it go.

The main technologies that "expire" as Windows versions progress are gaming technologies. 99.9% of all software that will run on Windows XP will also run on Windows '95. The move from MS-DOS to Windows '95 isn't a valid point...there's no way that any company would have tried to make MS-DOS and Windows compatible platforms. The main reason gaming technologies "expire" is because vendors stop making device drivers for newer hardware. How is that Microsoft's fault? Windows '95 goes all the way to DirectX 8 and Windows '98 can use DirectX 9...from where I'm standing Microsoft held up their end of the bargain. If the hardware and software vendors choose not to make their products compatible with older versions of Windows that isn't Microsoft's problem. Beyond that there are a few base infrastructure issues that cause incompatibilities with older versions, but all OSes have that. Yes, even MacOS has that. When that happens to something as complex as an OS sometimes patches and updates aren't enough. Sometimes the core of the system must be changed (trust me, I'm a software engineer...this happens when a system gets old enough and technologies change even if the system is designed well), and sometimes this can get really expensive. Not many companies are going to keep things like this up-to-date for free, and when your OS has hundreds, perhaps thousands of times the (desktop) installed-base as any other and you're responsible for keeping up with integrating a staggering number of 3rd-party technologies it becomes difficult to design the core of your system to handle everything. Apple is only able to do it a bit better because the number of 3rd-parties involved is extremely limited, and this is even more true for Linux. I actually find it pretty impressive that I know several people that are still quite happily running Windows '98 and don't feel limited by it.

It sounds to me like you're saying you want a free OS. That's fine, but expecting every software company to spend money making a port for a free OS so you don't have to pay for one is like asking to "have your cake and eat it too," and that is seldom realistic. (Now back to the Linux subject) I'm willing to bet that if someone eventually creates an implementation of Linux that is full featured and vendor supported enough to compete with a commercial OS it's going to be created by an organized entity. An organized entity that is going to want money for all of the hours and hours of skilled labor that went into building it. I'm saying that it's no longer going to be free. There are a lot of dedicated engineers that contribute to making Linux the product that it is, but it's going to take a lot more work to make a truly commercial quality OS out of it. Something tells me that, as dedicated as the current community is, they neither have enough time nor are they organized enough to handle all of the work that's required to fill it out feature-wise as well as form standards and relationships that allow their product to integrate technologies from legions of 3rd-party vendors. It takes an entity as organized as a company to accomplish things like that, and companies tend to want to get paid because their employees need things like salaries, health care, etc. $25 per year for what is most likely the most complex piece of software on your system? I wouldn't call that a cash cow. People pay an average of $25-$50 per month for cable television.

Well, I like this conversation, I find it interesting. Both sides have valid points so if it doesn't bother moderators...

Yes sorry. I just remember the hard time the transition was. When many of our DOS games crashed the brand new Windows 95 or just runned dead slow. Real pain!

You're right about hardware support but software wise, we have seen XP software not compatible with Windows 2000 without any real reason (SoundForge, game upgrades for Tron 2, Unreal Tournaments). Strange...


Yes, staying with Windows 98 is possible. My old PC is running Windows 98SE and is happy with it. Unfortunately, it can't install MS Internet Explorer 7 (which at last support PNG alpha-channel transparency) while Mozilla is talking about not supporting Win98 anymore, latest Photoshop and MS Office doesn't install on it... So it's fine but for how much time?

No, no, I just want something I pay only once for. That's why I chosen Guild Wars and not World of Warcraft.

No, I would pay for the software of course. Imagine, I don't buy Windows Vista, then I save $125 (that's the price of the 32-bit Home Basic OEM DVD in Belgium). With that money, I can buy the next 2 Guild Wars campaigns. Guess where I rather like to invest my money.

You're right, Linux community lacks organization and sometimes efforts are ruined by disputes on insignifiant details. But many companies live of Linux. Linux, unlike Windows is open. That means everybody can make its very own version of it that suits his needs.
And that's what happens. Many Linux companies sell custom servers assembled and especially configured to suit customer's need. So everybody is happy. Others are service only companies that provide extensive support. I worked at a video surveillance company and we were in business with a local Linux company, the service was really great. All our needs were fulfilled in no time. Now there's a subscribtion fee of course. But that's for companies, as non professionnal end-user I don't need that support (since I don't mind spending some times on community forums) and logically, I don't have to pay for that service.

Linux is doing great in the business world since it can be build for very specific task.
In Windows, lots of stuff you don't need are included for the sake of easiness. Personally, I'm not interested in losing gigas of disk space wasted by thousands of drivers I will never use. But as Microsoft is in dominant position, people get used to it. An d that's the problem: Nowadays, people are so used to the Microsoft way, that they feel lost in Linux.

Now Linux distributions like Ubuntu try to attract those people by "imitating" Windows behaviour. And that works for a moment unless you try to install some fancy software. Then the illusion doesn't long last.
But most of the problems you encounter are due to bad drivers, incompatible sotware, all things that could be avoided with better support from 3rd party companies. This can be achieved if all the big Linux vendors gather together to establish a standard way of working along with the community (RedHat, Novell, Sun, IBM, HP).
Linux is a great commercial OS for companies but not quite ready for today Microsoft PC users. But I think that's going to change. The biggest brake is people's closed mind (only the MS way exists).

Nothing prevent 3rd party developpers to make valuable Linux drivers for their products. It's not difficult since everything is well documented. And if everybody makes his own driver there's no problem. But you're right that it lacks a unique standard. Currently, everybody does what he want the way he wants. That's freedom but the drawback of freedom is anarchy. Fortunately, a few standards are dominant in the Linux world. And if some big vendors use these standards, others will follow.

In fact you can't compare Linux to Windows. The distribution model is different, the business model is different but you can build a successful business off Linux based solutions. It's just another way of doing business. But it's profitable.

Of course the current Linux user market share amongst consumers is not appealing to game companies (to say the least), but it's a new market. Now it's their time to lead the way and prospect this new business. I see that situation as exciting. If a game is planned as a cross-platform product from day one, its development wouldn't be higher. But it would reach more people. The money the user pays for Windows isn't going to software publishers pocket.

No and neither will GW2 (or at least it won't be required)

That's true, but that isn't Microsoft's fault. If a company designs their software for Windows XP and doesn't bother to test and QA it with older versions of Windows that's the software vendor's fault, not Microsoft's. Now, if Microsoft released Windows XP and it caused Windows 2000 software to stop working (and it wasn't the result of poor device drivers, etc., for the new platform that are outside of MS's control), then that would be Microsoft's fault for not allowing for backward compatibility. This happens, but not terrbly often.

As I said, it's not unheard of for new features to be exposed in an OS that prevent a piece of software from being compatible with an older one. That is difficult to get around for any software company.

That's fine, but software development and testing is very expensive. Better hope the company that makes the OS you paid for doesn't go out of business because they provide unlimited updates for free without releasing anything new to generate revenue (even ArenaNet does this). I just don't think that's realistic.

Right, and that's why Linux is a niche product and probably will be until someone produces a "be all, end all" implementation of it.

Microsoft is giving the average end-user what they want in a way that Linux cannot unless someone creates a more "bloated" implementation of it. Again, Windows and Linux are working completely separate markets.

And once that happens you'll have to pay for that implementation. It'll end up being just like Windows. There's no "free lunch" here.

Nothing is really helping the developers for 3rd-party vendors justify the expense of creating these Linux drivers, either. Again I have to say the establishment of these standards, the development of these drivers, and the development, testing, and publication of these Linux implementations are going to cost a lot of money. There's no way that such a wonderful product is going to be offered up for free...not for long, anyway.

Exactly what I'm trying to say. They're different animals. If you try to make a Windows out of Linux it will stop being a free product. The process of making a good end-user Linux implementation will cost a lot of money and isn't likely to be possible coming from an open-source community. It's going to require a company to organize such an effort, and that company is going to charge you money for their product.

My question is, "who is going to lead the way for Linux, and will they do it for free?" I think the answer is "no". Linux really isn't a new market. It's been around for quite some time, and it's never been able to evolve beyond a niche product because (I believe) that nobody is going to build the "Windows killer" implementation of it. If they do it's going to be very expensive to develop, and by the time it makes it to the shelves of your local software store with all of the features and end-user usability that Windows has it's going to have a $100 price tag on it.

That's just how I see it. I work in the software industry, and while I do use some open source products that are quite nice (.netTiers, NUnit, Subversion, etc.), they're all small-scale applications. The big stuff (like a full-featured, end-user OS) requires a lot more than a handful of programmers with some spare time to create and maintain. It requires a company, and most companies don't work for free.

i could care less if they support linux or not, opengl 2.0 support would be great but i am wishing a lot.

If you are having trouble installing guild wars on linux here is a thread
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=283122
Guildwars runs very well in linux on the wine layer.

Dex with Dell in the near future offering Ubuntu who knows what is going to happen but you are right who is going to (for free) develop the windows killer
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6610901.stm

Thanks Lucifer!

I tried to run it through Wine during 2 days before posting here. Unfortunately, it ran only once and at 5fps. Then it crashed each time. I tried with installations done using the web client, from my original CDs and by copying the Guild Wars directory from my girlfriend's Windows XP installation. In all cases, it installs successfully but whan I run it, it looks like entering a loop where it's continuously loading data and that's all.

At this moment, I play Guild Wars on my girlfriend's laptop (she kindly lend it to me) but it's only a temporary solution.

Ugh...Thread necromancy. I hate it!

Be advised, depending on where this thread continues to go, it may be moved as it's not really a technical issue that we're talking about here.

"This game doesn't work." is a technical issue IMHO...

The thread is going borderline Win vs Linux.

Let's keep it on topic.

Useful switches for gw using Wine

-nosound to avoid FMOD problem. This disable sound engine where -mute only lowerise sound.

-dx7/8/9 (9 is default) to do DirectX regression test.

-diag to generate log about what's going wrong.

-repair to repair broken file. If you think you do have.

-noshaders to disable pixel and Vertic Shader's

-sndasio to enable audio using ASIO Audio Format

-image will download every files and decompress them. Huge use of CPU cycle - Warning.

-dsound


Registry tweaks:


[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Wine\Direct3D]
"DirectDrawRenderer"=""

gdi - Use GDI to draw on the screen (slow but reliable) (default)

opengl - Use OpenGL (fast but not all programs work correctly)]


"OffscreenRenderingMode"=""

backbuffer: the rendering is done in the backbuffer (default)
pbuffer: uses PixelBuffers
fbo: uses Framebuffer object


"PixelShaderMode"=""


"RenderTargetLockMode"=""

auto: same as readdraw at the moment, will do benchmarks and use best method later(default)
disabled: effectively disables render target locking
readdraw: uses glReadPixels for reading, glDrawPixels for drawing
readtex: reading with glReadPixels, drawing by drawing a textured quad
texdraw: readback using a texture, drawing with glDrawPixels
textex: readback using a texture, drawing with a textured quad]


"UseGLSL"=""

[When set to "enabled", this enables the use of GL Shading Language for vertex
and pixel shaders, as long as the hardware supports it. This is experimental
at the moment, and not fully implemented.]


"VertexShaderMode"=""


"VideoMemorySize"=""

[Sets the amount of emulated video memory. Default is 64 (that results in 64MB),
in the future some automatic ways to obtain the real value should be added.]

http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?...estingId=11123

http://wiki.winehq.org/UsefulRegistryKeys

Sorry, it was not my goal. I just tried to give my opinion about why it would be a good idea to make a Linux version. I didn't say anything like that one OS is bad and the other one is good.

Thanks Lucifer PVP, I'll try with these settings!

I don't know if you had any issues with video drivers but ill post up this application for others that would like to try out linux and gw. it is for ubuntu 6-7.04 and it may work on some other deb based systems it install the graphic drivers so you don''t have to.

http://www.albertomilone.com/nvidia_scripts1.html

graphic drivers in linux can be a real pain in the ass to configure correctly so if you haven't install the drivers yet use this persons script. Learned that when i installed beryl.. which a little off subject the best eye candy i have ever seen in an OS and will run on most old machines just fine .. quite amazing .

That wasn't my intention either. In my opinion there is no point in arguing Linux vs. Windows. They fill two completely different niches and have their individual strengths and weaknesses. I was just trying to express why I don't believe it's realistic to expect Linux ports of games...mainly because it isn't financially viable or a wise use of resources for most game software companies. In that sense I think our exchange was on-topic.