Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

No Man's Sky: Update 1.03

no-mans-sky.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 88 posts

Re: No Man's Sky: Update 1.03

#41

Post by kordless »

shmerl wrote: post #37
NEDM64 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but you're being naive. Rarely there are standards bodies that aren't controlled by companies and their interests. If they allowed OpenGL to flourish, it would ultimately be controlled by either Nvidia, ATI, PowerVR or someone else in the interest group to suit their hardware. Somebody has to pay the engineers. Look at W3C, if is practically controlled by Google, and they only do what suits their needs, the wa…

So, you think it's better not to have open standards and let lock-in and monopolies run rampant? Hard, doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

I agree with you, but I also think asking leading question sucks. Just say what you mean!

Open Standards are the MOST CRITICAL thing we can be considering right now. If we can agree on standards that can adapt to other standards, using AI most likely, then we can get on with being able to trust each other again.

In order to trust each other, we have to be honest about our intent. Personally, I think the use case of games on insecure hardware is probably fine. To a point.

Re: No Man's Sky: Update 1.03

#42

Post by wtbob »

pduan wrote: post #4
shmerl wrote: post #2

I tired to reach developers with question whether they plan Linux release or not, but got no response. So not really looking forward to it. Everspace on the other hand looks quite promising: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HvpLe-2ijk

I never understood why people on Linux always fight to have games on the platform. From the dev perspective, Linux is probably a sub 5% market share so it's never worth the effort compared to releasing new features/content. Why fight this losing trend when you could easily dual boot or even have a dedicated gaming rig?

> Why fight this losing trend when you could easily dual boot or even have a dedicated gaming rig?

Because I don't want to pay Microsoft. Because I don't want Microsoft to collect my data. Because I care about my freedom. What better reason is there?

Re: No Man's Sky: Update 1.03

#43

Post by shmerl »

kordless wrote: post #41
shmerl wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you think it's better not to have open standards and let lock-in and monopolies run rampant? Hard, doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

I agree with you, but I also think asking leading question sucks. Just say what you mean! Open Standards are the MOST CRITICAL thing we can be considering right now. If we can agree on standards that can adapt to other standards, using AI most likely, then we can get on with being able to trust each other again. In order to trust each other, we have to be honest about our intent. Personally, I think the use case of g…

It was a rhetorical question :) I don't think anyone in their mind would say that we should pursue lock-in rather than open standards. Except crooked monopolists.

Re: No Man's Sky: Update 1.03

#44

Post by khedoros »

mvkel wrote: post #9
ekimekim wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a) A few years ago it was a sub 1% market share and no games bothered. Now it's a sub 5% (disclaimer: I'm making these numbers up) and i'd say approx 50% of indie games and 10% of AAA bother. We fight because we're slowly winning. b) A dual boot setup is awfully annoying. I keep a ton of things open in a "i'm in the middle of this" state, and shutting everything down/losing that state in order to reboot is a massive…

It's still sub-1% market share. Would you design a site that only works on IE6?

That's not an apt comparison.

- IE6 is strictly, inherently an obsolete platform, running on obsolete OSes and superseded by later versions of the same browser

- No one's talking about making the games work only on Linux.

Re: No Man's Sky: Update 1.03

#45

Post by chucksmash »

pduan wrote: post #4
shmerl wrote: post #2

I tired to reach developers with question whether they plan Linux release or not, but got no response. So not really looking forward to it. Everspace on the other hand looks quite promising: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HvpLe-2ijk

I never understood why people on Linux always fight to have games on the platform. From the dev perspective, Linux is probably a sub 5% market share so it's never worth the effort compared to releasing new features/content. Why fight this losing trend when you could easily dual boot or even have a dedicated gaming rig?

Because they a) have Linux and b) want to play games? What's not to understand?

Enjoyment of a game is not contingent on the slice of the OS market share pie chart I'm in.

Re: No Man's Sky: Update 1.03

#46

Post by yladiz »

shmerl wrote: post #26
yladiz wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not exactly true. With some newer tools, it's possible to export to an OpenGL Linux executable, but in other tools, especially older ones, it's still so specialized for DirectX that's it's not always possible especially with AAA games, and companies don't have much incentive to make Linux versions because the market share is significantly lower than Windows. The only reason that it's more easily possible with…

You mean to say they put resources into lock-in to tax cross platform development. Those who care about the progress of the industry put resources into shared technologies like Vulkan, which makes cross platform development more affordable.

Yes, some do development in OpenGL, but why would a big company put resources in the development of something unless it has tangible benefits for the company? E.g. why would a big AAA company like EA put effort into changing their tooling to support OpenGL when they make millions from consoles and PC? It would only make sense to develop for non-DirectX or change tooling if the cost of changing is outweighed by the benefit. It's the same reason why a team like Github took 2 years to change from Rails 2.3 to 3 even though 4 had already been released for a while by that point.

I'm not saying it's right, and I wouldn't mind seeing better gaming support on Linux and Mac, but I'm saying it's reality.

Re: No Man's Sky: Update 1.03

#47

Post by wmf »

cdr wrote: post #28
wmf wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does sound kind of weird that the three paths (whatever that means) were added after the game went gold.

http://ramiismail.com/2016/08/patch-the-process/ Not weird at all, "big day 1 patch" is very common for anything being distributed on consoles.

Is it common for the day 1 patch to rewrite the story?

Re: No Man's Sky: Update 1.03

#48

Post by fsloth »

CyberShadow wrote: post #40
NEDM64 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but you're being naive. Rarely there are standards bodies that aren't controlled by companies and their interests. If they allowed OpenGL to flourish, it would ultimately be controlled by either Nvidia, ATI, PowerVR or someone else in the interest group to suit their hardware. Somebody has to pay the engineers. Look at W3C, if is practically controlled by Google, and they only do what suits their needs, the wa…

You are talking about something else. > If they allowed OpenGL to flourish, it would ultimately be controlled by either Nvidia, ATI, PowerVR or someone else in the interest group to suit their hardware. As opposed to DirectX, which is not implementable on other systems without large reverse-engineering efforts, because the technology depends on proprietary and encumbered middle-ware. Does a former specification for D…

"An open platform allows free choice of technologies to use it with."

Which are also made by companies just like Microsoft.

It's really hard to combine gaming enthusiasm (with the exception of retro gaming) with love of the 'free choice' and not be delusional.

The main reason: the GPU. There is very little value in having an open specification, if the implementation sucks. And the complexity of the graphics stack is such that nobody but huge monoliths that can focus lots of paid personnel to implement the GPU, implement the drivers, fix the drivers, fix the drivers, fix the drivers...

It's grueling, backbraking work to make a complete hardware based graphics stack.

Yes, there is MESA - so if software rendering suffices one can use more open options.

We can argue what do we mean by "gaming" of course. Solitaire, chess, tuxracer - yeah, I agree, free is very doable.

GTA v, Witcher 3 ( triple aaa titles) - you need a BigOrg to mind your graphics stack, of which there are only handfull on earth, of which Microsoft is one, and not worse as the others (if we limit discussion to games).

Re: No Man's Sky: Update 1.03

#49

Post by shmerl »

yladiz wrote: post #46
shmerl wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean to say they put resources into lock-in to tax cross platform development. Those who care about the progress of the industry put resources into shared technologies like Vulkan, which makes cross platform development more affordable.

Yes, some do development in OpenGL, but why would a big company put resources in the development of something unless it has tangible benefits for the company? E.g. why would a big AAA company like EA put effort into changing their tooling to support OpenGL when they make millions from consoles and PC? It would only make sense to develop for non-DirectX or change tooling if the cost of changing is outweighed by the be…

Asking common sense questions about practices of legacy publishers is a futile endeavor. I stopped asking such questions for a while already. Those who want to innovate, do it, and find it useful for them. Size of the budget has nothing to do with interest to release for Linux and have wider cross platform reach. If anything, big publishers have more resources to do it. At the same time, innovators happen to be smaller studios, who actually are expanding Linux gaming market, while legacy publishers don't pay attention.

Re: No Man's Sky: Update 1.03

#50

Post by frik »

NEDM64 wrote: post #36
CyberShadow wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I never understood why people on Linux always fight to have games on the platform. Because it is important to challenge monopolies least they abuse their position of power. With DirectX, XNA etc., Microsoft pretty much holds the monopoly as the PC gaming OS. Microsoft has made bold moves against individual freedom and privacy in Windows 10, and I'm sure more will follow. And what better platform to compete against…

Sorry, but you're being naive. Rarely there are standards bodies that aren't controlled by companies and their interests. If they allowed OpenGL to flourish, it would ultimately be controlled by either Nvidia, ATI, PowerVR or someone else in the interest group to suit their hardware. Somebody has to pay the engineers. Look at W3C, if is practically controlled by Google, and they only do what suits their needs, the wa…

MS actively has been trying to negated PC gaming to get consumer to XBox (closed all MS Game Studios, stopped all franchises like Age ofvEmpire and FlightSimulator series (everyone is angry about the Farmville style cheap F2P knockoffs), closed MS Windows Live, stopped DirectXdotNet and XNA, changed completely the direction of DirectX with DX10 and yet again with DX12, and the infamous privacy issues aka telemetry that half of the gamers will never upgrade to Win10 including myself). macOS, SteamOS/Linux, PS4 and WiiU/NX will get a lot more gamers - and that will continue until MS fires its third CEO sooner than later. Win10 UniversalRuntime/Store games are implemented in such a bad way it's just laughable and XBoxOne has little marketshare compared to PS4. And Win32 game market share is still huge, also thank to Steam (Valve is very much against Win10!), compared to the WinStore which has little to offer and compared to Android and iOS the WinStore on WinPhone smells and feels like it is already and legacy platform.
Post reply on HN