Mtn_Man

[quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="110" id="3438691"] When I originally made that comment I didn't know what the Steambox was as I've been searching I noticed that steam has an operating system can I download that into my computer instead.[/quote] You're referring to SteamOS which is still in beta as far as I know. SteamOS is essentially a customized version of Debian Linux with Steam as its primary interface and supposedly some performance improvements und

I would love to see a Linux port, but I doubt it will happen.

Steambox = Linux[quote who="Frogboy" reply="93" id="3435321"] Mac and Steambox support are likely but NOT promised. Depends on the challenge of supporting OpenGL.[/quote] [quote who="admiralWillyWilber" reply="95" id="3435521"] What about Linux. Your the main reason I'm still on Windows.[/quote] Steambox = Linux

[quote who="Cumberberg" reply="84" id="3430431"] Uh thanks? I'm a bureaucrat, not a programmer. Part of the reason I ditched my PC is that even with a typical computer out of the box, i don't think I ever once purchased a piece of software that didn't require some sort of tech support or custom instal to get to run properly. I'm sure I'll get some scorn from the community for not being more tech literate, but with kids and a more than full time job, my ti

[quote who="satoru1" reply="66" id="3410381"] Quoting Clocknova, reply 65 The trick is to convince them to make that initial investment. I'm convinced that there are enough eager Mac/Linux gamers out there to more than subsidize the initial development costs. And from there, future development costs will be much lower. thre's a lot of conflicting data on how much Mac/Linux gamers are out there. http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey<

[quote who="satoru1" reply="61" id="3408715"]The only 'semi-flaw' in that ointment is that the dev mentions they only spent $1000 on teh Linux build. Obviously if you have that low of an overhead to get onto Linux that's fine and all. However I would imagine that making a Mac/Linux version for GalCiv3 is going to cost significantly more than $1000. Which throws some of the math off in terms of the pay off in investement.[/quote] Not if you design your software f

[quote who="Viperswhip" reply="56" id="3408304"]I always see things like big success and so on, but numbers would be tremendous. Still, the devs will do what they will, I am just really curious as to whether it's worth the the dev time, and if I am just hearing a squeaky wheel. What % of mac and linux users show up on forums to ask for things? Because if it's just the 10-20 of you guys, its not really worth it [/quote] I've read reports from a few different developer

[quote who="Clocknova" reply="43" id="3407376"] Also, when you consider the relatively limited appeal of 4X games like GalCiv (as compared to franchises like Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto), you'd think that an indie company like Stardock would want to spread their game over as many platforms as possible to maximize their sales. Obviously I cannot claim to know what drives their business decisions, but this seems logical to me.[/quote] The Crusader Kings II and Euro

[quote who="satoru1" reply="37" id="3405946"] Quoting Mtn_Man, reply 34 Regarding your second point, everything I've read suggests that supporting multiple platforms adds very little time to development provided the software is designed from the ground up for cross-platform support. Basically, stay away from proprietary middleware like DirectX, and you're golden. Again, indie developers with tiny budgets are able to release Windows, Mac, and Linux versions

[quote who="Drewblood" reply="33" id="3405634"] Quoting Mtn_Man, reply 26 Quoting Drewblood, reply 21 DirectX is superior to OpenGL. No it's not. Feature for feature, they're pretty much equivalent, although in certain cases, OpenGL is actually faster than DirectX. "Left 4 Dead 2 is running at 315 FPS on Linux. That the Linux version runs faster than the Windows version (270.6) seems a little counter-intuitive, given

[quote who="RonLugge" reply="31" id="3405602"]And you're making the assumption that the dev is already familiar with with OpenGL, I'm making the -- I thought clearly stated -- assumption that he was not.[/quote] Is that a valid assumption for someone working in the gaming industry? I guess Brad would be the one to answer that question.

[quote who="Clocknova" reply="28" id="3405543"] You know what else I don't understand? Why some Windows gamers get all bent out of shape whenever a non-Windows gamer suggests the possibility of a Mac or Linux version of their favorite game. Do you guys really believe that porting to other platforms will somehow take something away from the game, make it not as good as it could have been? We all want to play the game, and we're simply pointing out that a relativ

[quote who="Drewblood" reply="21" id="3405472"] DirectX is superior to OpenGL.[/quote] No it's not. Feature for feature, they're pretty much equivalent, although in certain cases, OpenGL is actually faster than DirectX. "Left 4 Dead 2 is running at 315 FPS on Linux. That the Linux version runs faster than the Windows version (270.6) seems a little counter-intuitive, given the greater amount of time we have spent on the Windows version. However, it

[quote who="RonLugge" reply="20" id="3405470"] Quoting Mtn_Man, reply 19 Making the move to OpenGL would be a one-time, upfront investment that would pay off in the long run, and that's assuming learning OpenGL is as difficult as you imply it is. I seriously doubt it would add over a year to the development process. If you read my post carefully, I said that learning OpenGL would require a few months investment in time. And I'm not implying: I&

Making the move to OpenGL would be a one-time, upfront investment that would pay off in the long run, and that's assuming learning OpenGL is as difficult as you imply it is -- and besides, what graphics programmer worth his pay isn't already familiar with API's besides DirectX. I seriously doubt a switch to OpenGL would add over a year to the development process.

[quote who="My Views and Muse" reply="15" id="3405340"] I do wonder how many Linux users there really are? I tried it and found it to be a pain in the ass.[/quote] We're not a majority, but we are significant. I read an interview recently where a developer said they increased their sales by 10% simply by making their game available on Steam for Linux, and the Humble Bundles gets huge support from Linux gamers who regularly account for 10 to 25% of sales, often pu

[quote who="SteveWinwood" reply="3" id="3404676"]How hard would a linux version be to accomplish when it looks like so much of what has been said about the game so far is a heavy reliance on dx 10 or 11? [/quote] Any non-Windows version, whether for Mac or Linux or Android or iOS or PlayStation 4 or Wii U, would have to make a break from DirectX. Those are all OpenGL platforms, and since Windows is also capable of running OpenGL, seems now would be a great opportunity for S

Please "evaluate" a Linux version. I'll put it this way: I've had fewer compelling reasons to reboot into Windows to play Fallen Enchantress ever since Paradox Interactive released Crusader Kings II and Europa Universalis IV for Linux. That is to say that my chances of buying Galactic Civilizations III would be significantly improved if Stardock released a Linux version. As Captain Picard would say, "Make it so."

Now that Linux is the next big thing in gaming, thanks to Valve and SteamOS, what are the chances we'll see GalCiv III for Linux?