Also, after looking at the Portal 2 gameplay footage from IGN: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5THiN8szSKM (there's 3 parts) am I the only one that thinks that the lighting system has had to have a large overhaul to support how the levels change dynamically? (particularly obvious in the part 1)
On 17 June 2010 14:58, Alexander Hirsch <1ze...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Mesa3D? > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:20 AM, Katrina Payne <fullmetalhar...@nimhlabs.com >> wrote: > >> This also adds a rather odd burden here, that allows Linux to get a better >> standing for gaming. >> >> It is not that unknown that without mixing, Linux generally does not >> require >> anywhere near as much over head to run as windows. >> >> The minimum requirements to run a GUI on Linux is about 256MiB of RAM. This >> even includes GUIs like KDE and Gnome. Though XFCE and LXCE would be better >> if >> you really did only have 256MiB of RAM (well if you were using a DE... and >> not >> a slimmed down WM with only a few programs loaded into it) >> >> You can do just fine win 1GiB of RAM. >> >> Linux also, as an OS can run on some old Intel boards--that running an OS >> on >> would other wise be insane today. a Pentium 1 can still get (some) use with >> Linux. >> >> Not enough to really be noteworthy as a desktop PC... but, this is a lot >> less >> than the least you will get Windows 7 onto. >> >> So we have a nice toss up here: >> >> 1: Linux requires Software Rendering in place. IE: how rendering was done, >> before we got silly things like TNT and Voodoo on the market. >> >> 2: Linux requires significantly less overhead to run, as far as OS goes. >> >> If we can get it so that we can show Steam running on Linux, using mostly >> Software Rendering, and getting it to run as fast as the same game on >> Windows, >> on comparable hardware... >> >> This will definitely sell Linux as an OS... >> >> Which in turn will get various Graphics Card makers on board to add their >> support. >> >> You know--I kind of want to see somebody work on that goal then. I am >> almost >> ready to dig up some old books that go over the theory of 3d programming, >> just >> to pull make a software rendering engine for this idea. >> >> On Monday, June 14, 2010 07:59:45 pm Darren VanBuren wrote: >> > Yes, 3D drivers are definitely quite lacking on the GNU/Linux front, >> > but if Valve shows support for the development of these drivers, this >> > may prompt certain GPU manufacturers to step up their GNU/Linux driver >> > development. >> > >> > Darren L. VanBuren >> > ===================== >> > http://theoks.net/ >> > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 18:35, Bob Somers <magicbob...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > Something to consider, though, is that the 3D driver support is years >> > > behind from *ahem* a particular GPU manufacturer. I won't embarrass >> > > them by saying their name, so I'll just say their initials: ATI. >> > > >> > > Their driver support for Linux is, frankly, pathetic at best. The >> > > Fedora team is trying to solve this with their new free drivers in >> > > Fedora 13 (which, I'll admit, are quite good), but it's still not up >> > > to par with what you need to run a game. For example, the new free >> > > drivers have very little (read: practically none) support for basic >> > > vertex and fragment shaders. It will be at least another year before >> > > the free drivers are up to what ATI's crappy proprietary drivers are >> > > now. Even worse, right now you can get the proprietary drivers running >> > > on Fedora 11 alright, sort-of on Fedora 12 with some ugly hackery, and >> > > not at all on Fedora 13. Literally, ATI's Linux drivers are at least >> > > 12 months behind, and the free ones are 12 months behind that. >> > > >> > > Unless somebody gives ATI a swift kick in the nuts the situation does >> > > not look good. >> > > >> > > --Bob >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Darren VanBuren <onekop...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> Spoiler Alert. It's like the ratman drawing that says "She's watching >> > >> you." Canonical is she in that case. >> > >> >> > >> I'm personally a fan of Fedora, but if Steam on GNU/Linux is >> > >> distributed as a tarball, that'd be best in the interests of Valve. >> > >> Even if some people (mainly Ubuntu users) would be a bit stuck on the >> > >> concept of a tarball, it'd be minimal work for Valve, and maximum >> > >> cross-distribution compatibility. >> > >> >> > >> Darren L. VanBuren >> > >> ===================== >> > >> http://theoks.net/ >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 16:49, Harry Jeffery >> > >> <harry101jeff...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > >>> It's all down to personal opinion, as long as it does what you need >> > >>> quickly and effectively then it's fine. I've yet to see the dark side >> > >>> in cannonical so I honestly can't say much about their ethics. >> > >>> >> > >>> Either way, I <3 Linux and so should Valve. >> > >>> >> > >>> On 15 June 2010 00:19, Katrina Payne <fullmetalhar...@nimhlabs.com> >> wrote: >> > >>>> Well a few points: >> > >>>> >> > >>>> The commands in the Linux Commandline... and well those on any UNIX >> or >> UNIX >> > >>>> Workalike have not really changed since the 1970s. You could pick up >> a >> book on >> > >>>> BASH or TCSH from the 1970s, and still have most of what you should >> do. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> This kind of has allowed for tools to be put around these base >> functions, such >> > >>>> as autocomplete, history and well--quite a few other really handy >> tools, to be >> > >>>> added into the Linux CLI, to make its functionality go above and >> beyond >> > >>>> anything cmd.exe is capable of. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> I still have yet to look into Microsoft's PowerShell though. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> This is why most Linux users use the CLI. It has developed into an >> experience >> > >>>> that is completely unlike the root canal that is cmd.exe. You can >> actually go >> > >>>> in, and get some functionality from it. A lot of functionality too. >> It >> also >> > >>>> gives the feeling that the user has more direct control--without >> that >> Pesky >> > >>>> GUI in the way (though, technically, this just has a bunch of other >> items >> > >>>> typically in the way, such as init.d, bash, various bash >> extensions-- >> maybe >> > >>>> screen... you are just trading one thing in the way, that is, a GUI, >> for >> > >>>> another thing, that is a CLI). >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Now, that said--there are plenty of Desktop Environments ('DE') that >> Linux can >> > >>>> make use of, that pretty much make requirement of CLI use >> unnecessary. >> That >> > >>>> is, between KDE4, LXDE, XFCE, E17 and GNOME2/GTK, the average Linux >> user >> > >>>> nearly never has to do anything on the CLI. Unless something has >> gone >> horribly >> > >>>> wrong. In which case, he should be able to get the local Linux Admin >> to >> fix it. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> As that technically is what he'd do if something went horribly wrong >> on >> > >>>> Windows. He'd get his local Windows Expert to fix it. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> The "required" use of the CLI rather than GUI to properly use Linux, >> is >> much >> > >>>> like how using Vi is "required" rather than EMACS for the proper use >> of >> Linux. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Also, I use Fedora, and typically find it a LOT easier to work with >> than >> > >>>> Ubuntu. This maybe, because Fedora tries not to be a bunch of >> asshats >> to the >> > >>>> people upstream. The same cannot be said about Canonical, the owners >> of >> > >>>> Ubuntu. Where, from what I have seen on their policies by past >> actions... >> > >>>> their MAIN desire is to be asshats to the upstream. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> I have a long winded rant on why I do not like Ubuntu... I mostly >> just >> state >> > >>>> that nobody uses Ubuntu Linux. Typically most people go over to >> another >> Linux >> > >>>> Distro afterwards, generally agreeing that no matter what Linux >> Distro >> they go >> > >>>> to, be it Fedora, Puppy (well, prior to being based on Ubuntu), >> Arch, >> Slack, >> > >>>> Gentoo, Knoppix, CentOS, LFS, etc., is better than Ubuntu... either >> that, or >> > >>>> they return to Windows--only using Ubuntu as a rescue disk setup. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Right, now then. Back to your regular discussion >> > >>>> >> > >>>> ~Katrina >> > >>>> >> > >>>> On Sunday, June 13, 2010 07:20:08 am Harry Jeffery wrote: >> > >>>>> People like the command line because it's very fast to do what you >> > >>>>> want if you know what you are doing. So far ubuntu seems to be the >> > >>>>> most user friendly linux distro and what a majority of linux gamers >> > >>>>> might use. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> Personally I'd just use arch-linux and optimize my system...a lot. >> As >> > >>>>> long as nVidia release decent linux drivers it's all good. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> On 13 June 2010 14:01, Adam Buckland <adamjbuckl...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >>>>> > A couple of things: >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > Elan Ruskin gave a good talk on porting to consoles at GDC08. The >> > >>>>> > slides are on Valve's website. There's something in there that >> may >> > >>>>> > help you here: >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > #ifdef __GNUC__ >> > >>>>> > #define MAXSI_THREADED_VARIABLE __thread >> > >>>>> > #else >> > >>>>> > #define MAXSI_THREADED_VARIABLE __declspec( thread ) >> > >>>>> > #endif >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > You may wish to use another define for windows rather than an >> else >> > >>>>> > statement in case you wish to port it somewhere else in the >> future. >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > Also I agree, the Mac and Linux ports are incredibly similar. In >> fact, >> > >>>>> > on the Mac port a shell script is executed first to determine >> whether >> > >>>>> > it's running on OS X or Linux. >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > Finally Linux could be a great consumer platform. Before it can >> become >> > >>>>> > this, it needs to learn that not everyone is a power user, and >> make >> > >>>>> > things simple. Learn from the Mac app bundles, and remove >> reliance >> on >> > >>>>> > the command line (for example the output is shown on the update >> > >>>>> > software). It scares normal users. That, and a lot of power users >> > >>>>> > (like myself), don't want to have to rely on the command line for >> > >>>>> > everything. >> > >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > On 13 June 2010 13:28, Jonas 'Sortie' Termansen < >> hlcod...@maxsi.dk> >> wrote: >> > >>>>> >> I'd like to share a few experiences about porting code and >> writing >> > >>>>> >> portable code. Scroll down, if you just want my thoughts on how >> portable >> > >>>>> >> the Source Engine is. >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> Recently I've been porting my in-development digital >> distribution >> > >>>>> >> platform to GNU/Linux for the fun of it. Naturally, most of my >> code >> > >>>>> >> didn't work right out of the box. But it is worth that several >> > >>>>> >> subsystems actually worked at the first attempt, or with an edit >> or >> two. >> > >>>>> >> For instance, my string system and parser classes/functions >> compiled >> > >>>>> >> right away. >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> However, stuff like accessing the filesystem, multithreading, >> user >> > >>>>> >> interfaces, networking, and so on didn't work because it relied >> on >> the >> > >>>>> >> Windows API. The interesting part here is that POSIX does things >> > >>>>> >> differently; but almost in the same manner as Windows. That >> means >> for >> > >>>>> >> each Windows API call you use, there is often one or more POSIX >> calls >> > >>>>> >> that does the same thing (if you add a little abstraction, that >> is). >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> Now, some of you heavily suggested the use of #ifdefs all around >> the >> > >>>>> >> code. You should not use #ifdefs each time you rely on platform >> specific >> > >>>>> >> behavior, but only in shared function calls or in headers. For >> instance, >> > >>>>> >> if you have to open a file. On Windows you can call the >> CreateFile >> > >>>>> >> function, while POSIX supports the open function. That means for >> each >> > >>>>> >> file opening, you need to write something like. >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> #ifdef linux >> > >>>>> >> int FileHandle = open(Path, Flags); >> > >>>>> >> #elif defined(WIN32) >> > >>>>> >> HANDLE FileName = CreateFile(...) >> > >>>>> >> #endif >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> Naturally, this isn't very pretty. And if this was used all over >> the >> > >>>>> >> Source Engine you would spend a lot of time writing #ifdefs and >> checking >> > >>>>> >> platform specific documentation. However, I am not saying >> #ifdefs >> are a >> > >>>>> >> bad idea. But instead of using them all over your code, you >> should >> move >> > >>>>> >> them to a shared class or function that simply implements all >> this >> once. >> > >>>>> >> In my code, I declared an abstract baseclass called >> MaxsiFileSystem >> that >> > >>>>> >> implements all the common functions to access the local >> filesystem. >> So >> > >>>>> >> now when I wish to open a file for reading, I would call: >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> MaxsiHandle FileHandle = FileSystem()->OpenFile(Path, >> MAXSI_FILE_READ | >> > >>>>> >> MAXSI_FILE_SEQUENTIAL); >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> This additional layer of abstraction makes it very easy to add >> support >> > >>>>> >> for new platforms as you just have to define a new child of the >> abstract >> > >>>>> >> baseclass. I have also added such a layer for my Window System. >> This >> > >>>>> >> means I call my own APIs in my actual code, and then it >> redirects >> it to >> > >>>>> >> the Windows API or GTK+ depending on your platform. >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> You might also have noticed I implemented a FileSystem() >> function, >> in >> > >>>>> >> the same manner I have implemented a WindowSystem() function >> that >> > >>>>> >> returns the window system in use by the current function/class. >> This >> > >>>>> >> makes it easy to simply swap the window system on the fly. For >> instance, >> > >>>>> >> my source mod links against my distribution platform (LGPL) and >> my >> mod >> > >>>>> >> then implements some of these interfaces. It could implement the >> > >>>>> >> MaxsiWindowSystem class using VGUI and then my programs could be >> > >>>>> >> natively drawn ingame with mininal work. >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> Other porting issues includes how the VS compiler breaks a lot >> of >> the >> > >>>>> >> C99 standard. To counter this, I have simply declared a lot of >> macros in >> > >>>>> >> my header files that replaces platform specific behavior. >> #defines are >> > >>>>> >> very powerful for this. For example, to declare a >> thread-specific >> > >>>>> >> variable, I would use this header define: >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> #ifdef __GNUC__ >> > >>>>> >> #define MAXSI_THREADED_VARIABLE __thread >> > >>>>> >> #else >> > >>>>> >> #define MAXSI_THREADED_VARIABLE __declspec( thread ) >> > >>>>> >> #endif >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> And then use the MAXSI_THREADED_VARIABLE macro to declare each >> threaded >> > >>>>> >> variable. My experience is also that the GNU Compilers throw >> much >> more >> > >>>>> >> errors and warnings than the Visual Studio compiler - and it is >> often >> > >>>>> >> right to do so. Visual Studio teaches you to write bad >> > >>>>> >> standards-breaking code, even if you just compile using MinGW >> you >> will >> > >>>>> >> get to fix a lot of issues that makes your code rather >> non-portable. >> > >>>>> >> (Like avoiding Microsoft-specific extensions to the C Library, >> in >> some >> > >>>>> >> cases.) But Microsoft did break the standard enough that you >> might >> need >> > >>>>> >> to use some of the above methods for porting, just to get your >> code >> > >>>>> >> compiling using MinGW. >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> Now to return to the Source Engine. In my experience a lot of >> stuff >> in >> > >>>>> >> the SDK code is already defined using interfaces, classes, and >> such. >> > >>>>> >> That means the actual porting issues have been outsourced to the >> Engine. >> > >>>>> >> This, in turn, means that the SDK code will be rather easy to >> port >> > >>>>> >> compared to the Engine. Fortunately, as the Source Engine >> already >> is >> > >>>>> >> highly modular using interfaces, it is easy to just swap a DX >> renderer >> > >>>>> >> with OpenGL. As such, they already have the framework to make >> their >> code >> > >>>>> >> work on new platforms - all they have to do is implement their >> > >>>>> >> interfaces using the local system calls. If you start to do this >> on >> the >> > >>>>> >> low-level interfaces and move upward, then soon your program >> starts >> > >>>>> >> working in all its glory. >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> As for a Steam Client for GNU/Linux. It exists. I lost the link, >> but it >> > >>>>> >> seems that Valve uploads nightly builds of their Steam Client, >> and >> each >> > >>>>> >> day it works just a bit better. Last I heard, the Steam Client >> actually >> > >>>>> >> logged on and the actual UI was partially drawn. I am not sure >> why >> Valve >> > >>>>> >> is so silent about this - perhaps it's just experimental, or >> they >> they >> > >>>>> >> to make a big deal about it, like they did with the Mac. >> Seriously, >> when >> > >>>>> >> are they gonna shut up about it? Last I saw was that they made a >> funny >> > >>>>> >> TF2 comic about it. >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> >> > >>>>> >> Porting programs to Linux hasn't been very hard for me, though >> it >> is a >> > >>>>> >> lot of work, if you want to do it properly. It seems that the >> Source >> > >>>>> >> Engine is already highly portable and GNU/Linux build doesn't >> seem >> too >> > >>>>> >> difficult, as it seems from the nightly builds. There is no >> doubt >> about >> > >>>>> >> whether we need a client for GNU/Linux, it is just a matter of >> time >> > >>>>> >> before they announce and release it. >> > >>>> >> > >>>>> > Bucky >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, >> please visit: >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders >> >> > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders > > -- Bucky _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
