Linux Gaming: Are We There Yet?
by Christopher Rice on December 28, 2009 2:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Linux
Wine Projects: Which Vintage?
Now that we have a basic understanding of Wine, we can dig into Cedega and Crossover Games a bit. The two major goals behind Cedega and Crossover Games are to offer additional game support and a friendlier user interface than what is currently implemented in Wine. That being said these projects have taken two different approaches to the solution.
Since version 2.1, Cedega has been patching and developing their code without using the public Wine source tree. This is mainly due to the license change that occurred with Wine back in 2002 from MIT to LGPL. Under LGPL Cedega would have been forced to publish all their source code for free. The result is that parts of Cedega are open source, but the GUI, Copyright Protection, texture compression, and other parts are closed source. The GUI and Copyright Protection (SecureRom and SafeDisk) is what most people really want, but there are other benefits to paying. First, you get a nice package that won't require compiling on your part - these are available for most Linux distros. If they don't have a package available, you can still get a precompiled binary. Purchasing Cedega also gives you the ability to vote on what games to support in future releases, potentially getting your personal favorite to work sooner rather than later.
Cedega will cost $25 for a 6 month subscription or $45 for one year. If you just want the free version, you lose out on the GUI and you're also going to need to try and get the project to compile on your own. That will entail finding and setting the correct flags for your distro, and in many cases you'll also need to find a patch to make it work.
Crossover Games uses the current Wine source tree and employs Wine developers to handle part of their proprietary code. Crossover Games also contributes code to the Wine project as per the LGPL license. This means more of the Crossover source code is available, but paying still provides a better experience - otherwise you're going to have to deal with the same compiling/patching issues as Cedega.
Crossover is available for Mac OS or Linux, with the Linux version costing $40 per year. (A $70 Professional version gets you enhanced features that are mostly useful for corporations and multi-user environments - nothing you need for gaming under Linux.) The free version of Crossover will provide users with some of the GUI, but the final result is still less desirable than the pay-for version. Honestly, if you're going out and buying $50 (or even $10) games and you really want to play them under Linux, you'll save yourself some headaches by just ponying up for the full version of the software. Of course, at that point you're almost half-way to the purchase of a licensed copy of Windows (though you'd still have to deal with the hassle of dual booting).
One of the key features Wine is missing is relative to Cedega/Crossover is an easy to use GUI. Wine does install shortcuts on your Linux desktop, but when it comes to managing your different Wine environments there isn't really anything available. As far as the free versions of Cedega/Crossover, you get a somewhat functional watered down version of Crossover/Cedega, but I have never had great results with the CVS versions. You might as well pay the couple of bucks to get the full version along with all the bells and whistles.
Users new to Linux will likely prefer Cedega/Crossover Games over Wine due to the interface and easy implementation of the application. Both of these projects also support different games than your standard Wine install. As far as game compatibility, the three projects use similar rating schemes. Wine and Crossover both use medals: Gold means it should install and run pretty much as you would expect; Silver means it will install and run well enough to be "usable", but you'll likely encounter some bugs or performance issues; and Bronze is for games that can install and at least partially run, but frequent bugs/crashes are likely. Wine also adds a Platinum rating, which is for games that install and run flawlessly - Gold Wine games may require a special configuration. For Cedega, the ratings are broken down into Cedega Certified (Platinum/Gold), Checkmark (Silver), and Exclamation Point (Bronze). There are of course plenty of other games that are unrated, as well as games that are known not to work.
Despite the ratings, it's possible to have a very different experience than what you would expect. A bronze game may work fine for you, or a gold game may have problems. Hardware and drivers play a role, sure, but other times you're just left with some head scratching. Of course, if you're already running Linux and intend to give any of the Wine projects a shot, you likely are familiar with the process of searching wikis and forums, a skill which can save a lot of time.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
126 Comments
View All Comments
JimmiG - Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - link
True, the OS is only a small part of the computer. What matters is the applications you run on top of it. It's easier to find Windows versions of open source apps than it is to try to make closed source Windows apps work in Linux. I think the way to make more people switch to open source is not to force them to change OS and ditch a ton of applications they're familiar with - Instead, release more and better free, open source alternatives for Windows, until suddenly one day people realize that they are almost only using such apps. Then the switch to Linux will come naturally I think.I use my computer for browsing the web, typing documents, making music and playing games. Linux works fine for the first two but not at all for the latter two, and that's how it has been for the past 10 years. Getting the audio latency down under Linux requires a lot of tweaking, and then there are no DAWs that can match Cubase or Ableton live, not to mention you have to run plug-in instruments and effects using some Wine-like workaround.
Penti - Saturday, January 2, 2010 - link
Well the thing is, their aren't can't be any replacements for Windows. Both the movement and users need to understand that.Linux is only commercial/supported in the server and workstation space any way.
There's no complete commercial video decoders for Linux for hardware accelerated decoding thats up to Windows or Mac standard or format support etc, DVD etc. Sure there's PowerDVD for Linux, Fluendos DVD-player etc but getting them to work in the latest distro wouldn't really be possible, neither can they be included in a free distro. There's no legal or decent video editing suit. There's as you said no commercial DAWs. Sure again there's commercial high-end video editing software that runs on RHEL and high-end workstations used for movies. But it's none existing in the consumer and prosumer space.
The problem is there's no consumer linux, no computer supplier or OEM that supports it. There's linux in a lot of consumer things, Android, Maemo, most consumer routers and file servers, so the possibility is there. But only when theres support from the makers otherwise their will never be complete hardware support, even for the little OEM/model-specific buttons and so forth. It will lack working video decoders OOB (out of the box) and a lot of finish users expect and need OOB. It isn't enough that companies such as Intel supports F/OSS and Linux distros. So much are computer model specific and to iron out all of those things without support and testing wouldn't be possible. The maker must supply driver kits for the hardware and installation kits for the OS. If they do it work just fine, that's what they do in the workstation space.
Alternatives aren't replacements. OS X users know that and so do any realistic Solaris or Linux user. That's why there's virtual machines and app streaming.
Users shouldn't switch and replace. They should just use what they need. Linux might have a bigger role in the client space in the future. However there are limits in a patent riddled world. Particularly when it comes to multimedia. Getting that into the free world isn't possible, and bridging the cap between free and proprietary making it free of cost wouldn't really be practical for someone independent as it would cost millions to have it freely distributable. No company has any interest in paying for such a products/software any way. So homebrew solutions have to make do for now, which is a mayor drawback as it robs OOB experience and hinders companies from using it to make money and or build solutions on it for the users and to include it in free distros because of fear from the courts which can forbid distribution and issue billions in fines. It's not a matter to take easy. The server world looks differently that's why it works there. There isn't the same monopoly on technology there.
It works on Maemo, WebOS, Android etc because they are none free commercial distros that includes commercial codecs that the device-makers pay for. Free consumer software isn't possible with just free code in an unfree world. Free of cost is only possible when someone pays for it to be so. Then not just for the development like say Mozilla but also pay for it to be legally distributable and that's a mayor issue or problem.
haplo602 - Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - link
Nice article. And the comments are also as expected, nothing new to see there.Anyway I was expecting a failure report on the ATI side of things even before I opened the article. I was trying to get Eve Online running on an old x1650 card about a year ago and the major issue was the driver. Native linux games/opengl apps were perfect. I see nothing much changed there.
The one advice you lack is this: If you want serious 3D under linux, forget about ATI. Whatever their progress through the last year in drivers and support, they still have major issues with Wine (partly because Nvidia is faster to implement new OpenGL features in their NV extensions, so Wine folks code for NV mostly. Also the ATI implementation does lack some).
That out of the way, Linux is fine for one group of people (myself in the group): Home desktop with mostly internet browsing, a bit of video/music, light gaming mostly games from the bargain bin. Not the latest hardware. These folks are completely satisfied with Linux.
(btw the above group is aprox. 80% of home users. AT is mostly read by geeks, so disregard most of the comments negative about Linux).
Holly - Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - link
Honestly, if the usability of linux towards normal people was so good many try to claim, there wouldn't be this discussion, this review and neither boasting talk of linux-liking folks. Simply because it wouldn't be needed.The louder something gets defended the higher is the liking it doesn't do what it is supposed to.
haplo602 - Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - link
you mean like all the folks here saying Windows is better ?/sarcasm
Holly - Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - link
both linux and windows... since there is nothing like universaly better system imo.jackylman - Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - link
ATI has been putting a lot of development time/effort/money into their open-source stack. They've recently got OpenGL 2.0 working on RadeonHD cards. Now it's going to be a few months before OpenGL 2.x apps are running like they should (and unfortunately, even longer before this code finds its way into mainstream distros).Nevertheless, ATI/Intel/VMWare are rapidly bringing the open-source Linux graphics driver stack into something resembling modern usefulness. It would be nice if other companies (*cough nVidia, VIA) contributed to the Linux development effort.
shangshang - Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - link
and it barely is making Windows scare. I still remember all the linux fanboys declaring the death of Windows over a decade ago. Yet 2 decades later, Linux is still a joke on the commercial desktop platform.You'll still have your geeky college "elistist" boys with the snobbish mentality that if you don't know linux you suck. You'll still the academia world using linux (and Windows). But other than this, the desktop world is a Windows world. And most important of all, the BUSINESS PC world is still a Windows world. At least with Microsoft, you'll get support even if you have to pay for it. But with Linux, good luck. Try asking a question on a Linux forum, and you'll get an answer like "have you reat the 100 page cryptic manual before posting?"
And now with Windows 7, I don't see why would any typical home user or coporate user using Linux.
And spare with the the "free" softwares on Linux. OpenOffice is a joke compared to the Office 2007 with its integration.
tomaccogoats - Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - link
Unix is much better in terms of shared computing. If working on a large project Unix OS's make it simpler to share files. Many corporations utilize Unix servers in their intranet for this reason.kmmatney - Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - link
Openoffice is not really an argument for Linux, since you can get it free on Windows as well.