
Blizzard Entertainment Planning A Linux Game For 2013 - mtgx
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTI2ODE
======
jpxxx
The technical considerations are uninteresting here: all of Blizzard's titles
are optionally built to use OpenGL, letting them avoid the golden handcuffs of
DirectX & Friends. So if porting is cost-effective, why would they do it when
virtually all of their revenue comes from Windows systems?

I say: gatekeeper-free subscription gaming appliances.

There's no evidence the total Windows PC experience is getting any better or
cheaper for the uninitiated, there's no evidence that Playstation or Microsoft
will bend over and allow third party platforms on their consoles, and all of
the new-era Desktop App Store UXes force significant technical and billing
restrictions that would eat at Activision Blizzard's subscription and in-app
business model and reduce their control over the game experience.

And I don't think this is a bet that desktop Linux/x86 is going to be relevant
for gaming. It has no inherent advantages over classical Windows.

So I think this is a gamble that new-era quasi-consoles based on
Android+Linux/ARM+x86 are going to succeed to some degree (be it the Ouya or
Steam Big Picture or some Samsung Generico-Colossus that can spit out WiDi or
whatever).

A keyboard, mouse, and controller capable Linux platform with no overarching
gatekeeper and adequate gaming horsepower is going to be extraordinarily cheap
in the near future. If Blizzard Activision gets their ducks in a row now,
they'll be ready to jump into the first one that offers ten million users, a
reasonable hardware target, and a bullshit-free content delivery mechanism.

~~~
sliverstorm
Right, they obviously don't want to wed themselves to any particular "quasi-
console", but they want to be ready if the "quasi-console" thing really picks
up steam. That's how I see it.

~~~
stonekeeper09
I see what you did there...

~~~
jpxxx
I don't, but let me talk louder and slower in case I'm being unclear.

The goal is to sell subscriptions and in-app upgrades to game softwares of
exceeding depth and breadth that are operated primarily with a keyboard and
mouse.

The Windows PC has arrived at an unsubsidized price floor of about $300-$400
and is unlikely to go lower with Microsoft charging perhaps $40-$80/unit
depending on who's licensing. This market sells ~350M units a year with a
total installed base of 1.25 BILLION, yet unit sales are declining, desktop
Linux is doing nothing to change this, and Blizzard's flagship title is in
decline.

The Linux PC cannot go lower than $300-$400 despite essentially $0 licensing
costs because virtually nobody is selling or buying raw Linux PC hardware. So
the platform is drafting on boutique sales, whitebox sales, and repurposed
Windows PCs while still offering no benefits above and beyond standard Windows
PCs. At best, it's (currently) worse.

The classical consoles are off limits. Nintendo has no coherent Internet
strategy evolving and a severe lack of onboard storage. Sony has allowed a
single third-party platform which has no billing support, subscription or
otherwise. Microsoft has no third-party platform support. All of these
consoles come with significant licensing expenses and do not support software
subscriptions. All of these consoles require major rework when porting
existing PC titles due to custom CPUs, GPUs, and input frameworks.

Mobile as we understand it is either completely off limits (iOS) or
unaccustomed to keyboard and mouse input (Android).

So if you are in the business of selling subscriptions and in-app upgrades to
game software that requires keyboards, mice, and untrammeled billing pathways,
what are your options for addressing new markets?

There is one: quasi-consoles. Stationary (TELEVISION OR MONITOR OVER HDMI)
Android (LINUX) Consoles (MOUSE, KEYBOARD, CONTROLLER SUPPORT) with
untrammeled billing pathways (BATTLE.NET) at dramatically lower price points
than the existing options ($100) that will enable less-engaged gamers (ME)
easy one-click access to pre-existing titles (WORLD OF WARCRAFT).

And in order to do that you first need your titles running on a Linux stack,
addressing OpenGL hardware.

Which is what Blizzard Activision is (allegedly) doing.

Ta!

~~~
jmillikin
I believe he was making a joke about one of the dominant gaming distribution
systems being named "Steam".

~~~
orionblastar
I'd imagine that Valve would use their own Linux Distro for their Linux Steam
client. When they make the GabeCube or whatever, it will run Linux with the
Steam Client for Linux and play in TV mode for TV sets. I'd imagine it would
also have Netflix, Hulu apps and other stuff added as well to compete with
other video game consoles.

Since a lot of classic video games are DOS based, they'd just have to use the
Linux version of DOSBox to run them, which shouldn't be too hard. In Windows
games like Doom, Dark Forces, etc run in the Windows version of DOSBox when
bought from Steam. I'm imagining Steam would also port their Sega Genesis
emulator to Linux and other things as well.

I'd really like to see the Linux based GabeCube or whatever they call it
(SteamTV?) that doesn't require a Windows license and can play most video
games from Steam.

~~~
sliverstorm
It has been nicknamed "SteamBox" by the rumormill.

Also, I hope they don't roll their own distro. Customizing an existing distro
seems like a much better idea. Considering Steam Linux is currently targeted
at Ubuntu, I'm guessing that's the distro of choice.

------
spdy
Afaik Blizzard always had an internal Linux client [1] but never wanted to
make it public.

 _One of the big problems with Linux, and this is from other game developers
too, is the problem of targeting a specific version of the platform. Since
everyone is free to create their own distros, they can become somewhat
unstandardized. That makes "targeting linux" difficult.

Add on that there are far fewer linux users than windows/mac users, and that
you can play wow on linux using Wine... and there isn't a lot of reason to
target even a specific distro_

[1]
[http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTA0N...](http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTA0NQ)

~~~
donniezazen
It is a problem and also a lame excuse. Steam has successfully made itself
available on variety of distributions.

~~~
veeti
They're not there yet. Steam for Linux only supports Ubuntu officially.
Otherwise, you have to resort to installing dependencies for some of the games
manually and other tinkering. Serious Sam 3 even asks for root access that it
can install the libraries it needs.

~~~
viraptor
I don't get this. It's a multi-GB game that already needs to be downloaded
over internet. Why don't they just bundle the dependencies, or at least make
it installable via steam as a separate component? There should be no reason
for a game to ever ask you to become root.

~~~
donniezazen
Steam is working out a system which would automatically install dependencies
from system repository. About root, that is just a bug.

------
orionblastar
Blizzard has to, Valve already has a Steam for Linux beta client and at least
41 games ported to Linux.

Team Fortress 2 for example plays better and faster with a higher frame rate
on Ubuntu 12.10 Linux than it did on my Windows 7 Home Premium on my Acer
laptop.

Oh yeah check out PlayonLinux <http://www.playonlinux.com/> to run some
Windows Video Games under WINE for Linux. The Windows Steam Client works great
on WINE and most games can run on WINE just fine as well. For some reason
Civilization V plays better under WINE than it did in Windows 7. I would like
to see a Linux native version of Civilization V come out, it would rock. The
PlayOnLinux Python client configures different WINE versions and profiles for
you and it can even install Internet Explorer from version 1 to 8, and some
versions of MS-Office (not all) if you really need them.

I see in the next five years a move to Linux as the next big gaming platform
by major video game makers. The reason being Linux runs video games better
than Windows, and does not cost as much as an Apple Mac OS X gaming machine.
Microsoft is really killing themselves with Windows 8 and Windows RT, and
software companies are considering moving to Linux as a result.

~~~
mtgx
I believe that Linux will become very popular with games within 5 years, too,
but even if you don't believe that, what is even more likely to happen is that
most games will be made on OpenGL thanks to Android, iOS, (supposedly) PS4,
and even Steam boxes. That in turn should make it a lot easier to support
games on Linux in general, and in turn it might help the market share of Linux
on the desktop, too.

~~~
b0rsuk
I don't think many of existing games will be ported, but B-class (with medium
budgets) games are coming to Linux in a big way. Wasteland 2, Eternity, Godus,
Castle Story, Planetary Annihilation, War for the Overworld, Double Fine,
Maia... "Indie" usually means a budget of around $100000, and smallest of
these are multiples of that. Plus, almost all humble indie bundles fully
support Linux.

I think the outcome is clear: some of these games will make a lot of money.
Big publishers and devs will want a cut of the pie.

------
vamur
Given that all their games work fine with Wine, this is likely a hint to MS
not to make the app store mandatory in the future.

------
venomsnake
Talking is cheap. It is the shipping to the platform that eludes the linux
gaming so far. And the install base.

Of course everyone evaluates the platform with the planned obsolesce of
desktop machines and the walled gardens.

Lets hope to see some A class titles on linux in 2013.

------
webwielder
It's always pained me that the only AAA publisher/developer to maintain strong
Mac support through thick and thin has been the one whose games I have no
interest in (no slight intended, just not into MMOs, strategy, and hack 'n'
slash).

~~~
rednukleus
Not even Apple take Mac gaming seriously.

------
FreeKill
Nice to see, the more choices the better. I think it will be really
interesting this year to see if the Steam console actually manifests itself
and when/if it does, will it get any real traction? I hope it does because the
more competition for Microsoft and Sony, the better off the gaming market will
be.

Steam just needs to allow for trading/selling of used games, and it would be
even better, but I'm sure the publishers have a lot to say about that.
Hopefully the EU forces that feature on them.

------
kreiselb
I hope all the attention gaming on Linux has been getting lately will fuel the
development of better graphics drivers and support.

~~~
zokier
It already has.

> Nvidia has announced a huge increase in Linux gaming performance for their
> GeForce R310 drivers after almost a year of development alongside Valve and
> other game developer partners.

[http://linux.slashdot.org/story/12/11/06/204238/nvidia-
doubl...](http://linux.slashdot.org/story/12/11/06/204238/nvidia-doubles-
linux-driver-performance-slips-steam-release-date)

------
lampe
I think the money cow WoW will be ported... Starcraft2 I like a lot more but
you cant charge monthly money from people...

~~~
mikle
I'm sure that Starcraft 2 is still a commercial success. It might not have
made as much as WoW yet, but as expansions come out it will definitely is
going to make a lot of money. I'm sure they'll also experiment with different
monetization models like they are with Diablo 3.

~~~
tsotha
Starcraft 2 is certainly a commercial success, but it will never, ever make as
much money as WoW. WoW grosses more than SC2's total sales every five or six
months.

------
b0rsuk
Does he mean one of the existing games will be ported to Linux, or the new
game they're working on will have a Linux version as well ? If the first, I'm
not interested. Blizzard used to release games that would set trends, that
other developers would imitate or draw inspiration from. These days are over.

------
Rovanion
> From a reliable source at the company, I have been told at least one of
> their very popular titles will see a release for Ubuntu Linux this calendar
> year. I was told this in person and was a statement backed up by additional
> proof.

Nothing to see here.

~~~
tcoppi
Considering the same source (Phoronix) basically reported the same thing about
Valve/Steam and was proved correct, I think we can give it the benefit of the
doubt.

~~~
Rovanion
Michael had been reporting that Steam was soon comming to Linux ever since
2006. Just because Valve with the changes from Microsoft decided that they
needed a backup plan six years later doesn't mean that Michael is a good
source for news.

He's comparable to a gambler who by the Roulette table repeats the mantra "It
will hit 12". Eventually he'll be right, but that doesn't make him a credible
source when it comes to predicting what number the ball will hit.

~~~
tcoppi
Given the way Valve works, it would not surprise me at all to learn that they
have been working on Steam for linux in some capacity since 2006.

~~~
Rovanion
And Blizzard have had a Linux client for WoW ever since alpha which testers
were allowed to use up until the release of the game. But as we can see that
client has yet to see the light again for the eight years that have passed
after the games release.

Big companies like Valve and Blizzard have a ton of different projects that
never see the light of day. In the case of Linux clients it's most likely
because the man hours needed even to support them doesn't pay back in new
customers.

------
kelvie
My guess is that it's going to be their DOTA clone, "Blizzard All Stars" or
something.

~~~
gibybo
Their DOTA clone isn't a standalone game, or at least hasn't been so far. It
is/was built on the StarCraft II engine, so if it were to support Linux,
StarCraft II would pretty much have to as well. However, I think WoW is much
more likely since it brings in a lot more revenue than StarCraft II.

~~~
Aissen
Well then StarCraft II is a good target since the version coming in 2013 is
basically an upgrade to the game that went out mid-2011. So it's an already
proven and well-understood technology, easier to port; just like the Source
engine games for Valve.

------
phragg
THQ has interest in Linux games? Aren't they bankrupt

~~~
roc
Out of convenience. They're temporarily out of cash, but it's a cyclical
business and they're going to have a very different balance sheet shortly.

The bankruptcy angle is being played up as the decision-makers are trying to
ram a sweetheart sale through to ensure their own lucrative exit from an
increasingly-difficult business. (Instead of actually considering competitive
bids or seriously seeking funding to cover them until the money starts rolling
in again.)

A group of shareholders has just filed suit over the issue.

In any event: there's no chance they stop making games and thus having an
interest in the current platform upheaval.

------
martinced
TFA says: "Windows 8 isn't great for Blizzard".

Can someone explain why? Can't a game be run in full-screen mode anymore?
Would there be technical issues during the installation of the game?
Privileges issues? No more Direct X?

~~~
jat850
I'm going to speculate (and nothing more) just based on a few discussions a
friend and I have had. It seems as though with Windows 8 and the trend towards
unification with the mobile experience, Microsoft is headed in the path of a
walled-garden style environment.

It may become more difficult (or just less convenient) for the consumer to
select software that falls outside of the "Windows App Store" (whatever it may
be termed).

This type of distribution model (Steam being another example) would be counter
to Blizzard's apparent philosophy on the matter.

So I don't know that "Windows 8", the operating system, is bad for Blizzard.
But maybe "Windows 8", the direction, is.

Again, 100% speculation. No necessary basis in fact, just ideas bounced
around.

~~~
minibus
This is why I went back to Snow Leopard from Mountain Lion. Download file,
install dmg (or exe), use software... "app store" irrelevant.

~~~
eropple
With respect, I think you're misled. The App Store is completely optional in
Mountain Lion. Gatekeeper can be turned completely off if you so choose.

~~~
georgemcbay
Don't you think this might be a case of "boiling the frog slowly"?

That's the impression I get from both Apple and Microsoft's recent OS/App
Store directions.

A few years from now the apologists for each will be saying "Well hardly
anyone but super techies ever used those options to disable verification
anyway, so I understand why they turned them off".

~~~
eropple
_> Don't you think this might be a case of "boiling the frog slowly"?_

No, because that would be fantastically stupid of them and none of them are
stupid. Not even Microsoft--I mean, I think the Metro slop is a joke, but no,
they're not stupid enough to do that. What you are peddling doesn't even make
_sense_ because precisely what the fearmongerers (see, this goes both ways,
think about that next time you call me an "apologist") because it is fairly
unlikely that anyone is ever going to be writing native applications from an
iPad so it really does follow that they need a mostly-unencumbered environment
from which to make the software that makes the whirly buy-the-iPad-buy-the-
apps wheel go around.

Which, as it happens, is what Apple has said for quite a while that they're
doing: iOS is the daily-driver car and OS X is the do-work truck. Which,
though I don't use iOS myself anymore, is a completely reasonable division of
labor for the majority of computing tasks.

------
minibus
Awesome.

