Starcraft 2 on linux, why not?

It's painfully obvious that ppl don't even seem to realize why games aren't made for linux

On January 08 2010 05:41 BishopONe wrote:


The game will have openGL support as it will run in MAC, therefore it could run in linux if the released an installer with the linux binaries.
I would agree with you if the game only had DirectX support. nVidia and ATI release their drivers for linux machines aswell so the job is easier than you think.

On January 08 2010 05:39 Puosu wrote:
Blizzard could take a huge leap forward if they were the first big company to do this, although I am not informed on how difficult it is to make a game compatible with both platforms it seems like a hugely profitable investment.

I'm all for spreading StarCraft to even more players.

On January 08 2010 05:36 Catch]22 wrote:
It's painfully obvious that ppl don't even seem to realize why games aren't made for linux.

On January 08 2010 05:49 ZBiR wrote:
Largely profitable? You mean spending tens of thousands of dollars on solving compatibility issues is worth increasing sales by 0,1%? Cause that's no less than portion of their target using Linux.

Although yes, I'd appreciate it.

On January 08 2010 05:50 Aim Here wrote:
If the only thing keeping you on windows is Starcraft, then you might be interested to know that Starcraft runs rather well Linux when using Wine (except that the battle.net screens are a bit garbled). In fact, I don't run Windows at all.

On January 08 2010 05:31 BishopONe wrote:
The game will be released for MAC and MAC is based on a linux architecture.

On January 08 2010 06:01 Aim Here wrote:
TheYango,
Starcraft used to be slow under a default wine install for a long while, though it was fixable with a tweak to an obscure wine registry entry ( 'RenderTargetLockMode = readtex' ). Now, with newer dev versions of wine (note that a lot of distros will default install 1.0.1, a very old version), the registry entry is set correctly by default, so the performance is much improved.

On January 08 2010 05:48 mmp wrote:
OpenGL hasn't seen any major updates in a while, no?

On January 08 2010 06:07 theconartist wrote:
Linux user share might be small but not much less of a pea than a mac when compared to windows, and this will only grow with time especially as linux netbooks/android phones sell more and the economy implodes.

On January 08 2010 06:12 Aim Here wrote:
Maybe you're doing it wrong, maybe it doesn't work on certain computers, maybe my eyes are too slow. Anyways, since wine doesn't cost any money, people can always try it out for themselves.

On January 08 2010 06:12 Aim Here wrote:
Maybe you're doing it wrong, maybe it doesn't work on certain computers, maybe my eyes are too slow. Anyways, since wine doesn't cost any money, people can always try it out for themselves.

On January 08 2010 06:06 TheYango wrote:

I'm aware of this. I've tried the registry fix, along with a truckload of other fixes in old WINE versions, and I've tried the newer versions of WINE. The problems are generally reduced, but on a fair number of setups, the problems don't actually go away entirely. Again, it's acceptable for a casual game, but if you plan on iCCup-ing to a serious extent, the issues compound themselves enough to be a relevant hindrance to your play.

Bear in mind that I'm not talking about a slowdown to the GAME, but a mouse-lag issue--when you're making quick selections (particularly noticeable with drag-selections), the mouse response in Linux is slightly slower than in Windows, which means that if you're playing a fast-paced game, your selections might be slightly off, or miss several units.

On January 08 2010 05:48 Catch]22 wrote:


Thanks for proving my point.

On January 08 2010 07:50 fabiano wrote:
imo, if it is possible, there should be a distro that aims gaming.

The same people thinking OpenGL is going to become a standard think there's gonna be a year of the Linux desktop, sorry guys. You won't be seeing any changes at all if not only for the corporate environment of gaming these days -- it's a mutli-billion dollar industry.

Microsoft is not gonna let DirectX be anything but the standard, and to be honest it's completely reasonable. DirectX provides a solid, powerful featureset. OpenGL does not provide any more but larger support for legacy hardware, and like was said, gamers are the ones that tend to upgrade their hardware frequently. Is it unfair you have to upgrade to Windows Vista or Windows 7 to get DirectX 10? The answer is: No. Look at consoles, you can't upgrade those at all, you just have to go out and buy a completely new one -- give me a break; it's the best gaming situation available given you make the intial investment on good hardware.

Those still arguing the advantages of Windows XP are either (a) in a corporate environment, (b) are running old hardware, (c) run Linux in a dual boot with Windows XP, and/or (d) overly skeptical of Windows Vista and Windows 7 and don't realize Windows XP was made by the same company 10 years ago. I don't assume the people that are grouped in option d are old enough to remember the change from 2000/ME to XP.

Realistically this is just dumb for this argument to continue now that we've gotten over all the non-issues involved with Vista. I can't wait for these people to fade off the face of technology with their Pentium 4s complaining about how everything is too slow or the other people that don't want to upgrade in fear they may lose that one or two FPS they have to have for their gameplay to be perfect. It's just slothful. There's valid reasons why one would still need to use XP in very specific situations or situations where it is clearly not worth the effort to upgrade (corporate situations in which they're just using it for a cash register front-end and upgrading provides no extra functionality nor does it need the security), for example, but for every day use there's no logical reason to talk down on Windows Vista or Windows 7 generally.

On January 08 2010 09:18 FrozenArbiter wrote:
I seem to recall a Blizzard rep stating that they actually used Linux on several of their office computers - I can't remember if he said they played SC2 on it or if he just meant they use it.

I think this was said in the same breath as saying SC2 wouldn't have official Linux support - though my brain might just be confusing Blizzard with some other company I guess.

On January 08 2010 07:57 Aim Here wrote:
Those of you complaining about mouse delay with SC on Linux - just looking around on the wine applications database, there appears to be an issue caused by some old X Windows config option called 'Emulate3Buttons', which really ought to be off by default, because nobody uses two-button mice anymore.

Anyways, the issue was addressed in these very forums in 2007 ( http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=61452 and search for 'Emulate3Buttons' ) but newer versions of Ubuntu (8.10 and up, and presumably other distros), require a fix in the hal configuration
( http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=6103132#post6103132 )
Hope this helps.

On January 08 2010 08:15 Glaucus wrote:
Then it should be able to run many many games. That means running games for windows without emulation.

On January 08 2010 09:22 Virtue wrote:
The Mac version for SC2 will likly run in DX9 which is on Mac OSX

On January 08 2010 08:15 Glaucus wrote:
Then it should be able to run many many games. That means running games for windows without emulation.

On January 08 2010 10:07 TheYango wrote:
Exactly.

On January 08 2010 10:43 MamiyaOtaru wrote:
Luckily WINE Is Not an Emulator. It's far from perfect though D: If you meant "emulation" to mean compatibility layer like WINE, well I'm not sure how a Linux distro would be supposed to run games for Windows without one.

On January 08 2010 14:45 JeeJee wrote:
i would love it because blizzard's awesome rating would go up +1 in my book (like s2 providing a linux HoN)
but really, be reasonable. how many people use linux? Little. How many of those would want to play sc2? Significantly less. And how many of those wouldn't want to get a windows partition to play sc2? A really really tiny fraction...of an already tiny number. We're approaching 0 here.

but hey, sometimes you do things not for the money but just because you're an awesome company, like patching starcraft a decade after it's been out. who knows

On January 08 2010 17:49 haduken wrote:
Unfortunately, the vast majority of Linux users have no interest in games. It wouldn't make any sense to develop a commercial version for this platform,

On January 09 2010 00:11 Chuiu wrote:
That's not what I've seen. I know many people that dual boot their systems or have two computers, one for Linux and one for Windows and gaming. Sure there will always be those who only use Linux or don't game or both but most of the people I know aren't like that.

On January 08 2010 16:16 Manit0u wrote:

Actually, S2 has released a native client for Linux/OSX/Windows for each of their games. Surprisingly enough, HoN works 2x better/faster/smoother on Linux than on Windows.

On January 09 2010 00:11 Chuiu wrote:
That's not what I've seen. I know many people that dual boot their systems or have two computers, one for Linux and one for Windows and gaming. Sure there will always be those who only use Linux or don't game or both but most of the people I know aren't like that.

On January 09 2010 05:51 EximoSua wrote:
StarCraft 2 on Linux: Why?

On January 09 2010 09:19 JohannesH wrote:
And theres some market of Linux users who dont care that much about games but might buy this when they just want some game without worrying to technical side. But it must be pretty small.

On January 09 2010 09:36 scintilliaSD wrote:
You know how much potential money they could make if the huge number of Linux gamers out there (face it, most people who use Linux are gamers or were gamers at some point in their life) actually bought their game instead of pirating it?

And I'd be very interested in how you think using Linux has anything to do with software piracy.

On January 09 2010 10:25 Aim Here wrote:


Well, compared to Windows users, far fewer Linux users are running pirate copies of their operating systems.

On January 08 2010 05:39 Puosu wrote:
Blizzard could take a huge leap forward if they were the first big company to do this, although I am not informed on how difficult it is to make a game compatible with both platforms it seems like a hugely profitable investment.

On January 09 2010 13:08 arcticStorm wrote:


LOL, is it even possible to pirate linux?

On January 09 2010 16:18 ven wrote:

Of course. Why shouldn't it?

Hrmm... I think he's talking about it being generally open source.

But I beleive there are pay versions of linux out there that aren't free.

On January 09 2010 05:31 Proleter wrote:
A lot of games that are ported to Mac OS also don't have OpenGL support. They use 3rd party libraries which emulate the DirectX API with OpenGL and other libraries.

On January 09 2010 09:36 scintilliaSD wrote:

You know how much potential money they could make if the huge number of Linux gamers out there (face it, most people who use Linux are gamers or were gamers at some point in their life) actually bought their game instead of pirating it?

On January 08 2010 06:59 muse5187 wrote:



I had the same problem, then i stole cedega off torrent and never looked back at the mouse slowdown issue.

On January 10 2010 12:34 obesechicken13 wrote:
I'm using linux right now
Can't you run something on linux that makes the computer think it's using windows?

And if you're enough of an expert to be using linux, wouldn't you have two computers; one for windows?

On January 10 2010 14:39 -fj. wrote:
He means having a windows partition, I think?

Honestly, from a market point of view, whether you consider money or user statistics (money) then making it so that it can easily be ported to linux is just stupid.

BUT

In my opinion, money and statistics are a really shitty thing to have driving your life. Sure, maybe that only makes sense on a personal scale, but companies are made up of people, aren't they? I would much rather see something like blizzard releasing it's iron fist grip on their matchmaking service. No lan? Are you kidding me?

No one in this world is trying to make something good for those who want / need it, we are all to caught up in making something that someone will buy whether they need it or not, and in the digital realm, making something that must be bought to be used.

IMO, something as great as BW can only be replaced by a product produced to meet standards of excellence, not to sell well.

So I'm saying blizzard shouldn't make so much money. So what? It's their duty to do as they please, but It's not like making bank gets them or the people working for them anywhere. You can't buy happiness. The only thing it's good for is that it holds them together and gives them a common goal to work together towards: making a profitable game.

But it's not necessary, and I'd much rather see them working together to make an awesome game, as a "company" held together by the love of the art.

TL;DR fuck capitalism, lets make games because we want to

On January 10 2010 14:39 -fj. wrote:
In my opinion, money and statistics are a really shitty thing to have driving your life. Sure, maybe that only makes sense on a personal scale, but companies are made up of people, aren't they? I would much rather see something like blizzard releasing it's iron fist grip on their matchmaking service. No lan? Are you kidding me?

No one in this world is trying to make something good for those who want / need it, we are all to caught up in making something that someone will buy whether they need it or not, and in the digital realm, making something that must be bought to be used.

IMO, something as great as BW can only be replaced by a product produced to meet standards of excellence, not to sell well.

So I'm saying blizzard shouldn't make so much money. So what? It's their duty to do as they please, but It's not like making bank gets them or the people working for them anywhere. You can't buy happiness. The only thing it's good for is that it holds them together and gives them a common goal to work together towards: making a profitable game.

But it's not necessary, and I'd much rather see them working together to make an awesome game, as a "company" held together by the love of the art.

TL;DR fuck capitalism, lets make games because we want to

On January 11 2010 02:07 Manit0u wrote:
If you're speaking about Capitalism/Corporations/Money etc. then perhaps the release of the Linux installer for SC2 could be treated as a way of advertising your company? Just a way of saying stuff like 'Hey! Look at us at Blizzard, we're so good that we can release our products on more platforms than others, isn't that just great and customer-friendly?'.

On January 10 2010 14:39 -fj. wrote:

So I'm saying blizzard shouldn't make so much money.

On January 11 2010 05:45 TheYango wrote:

It would probably take less dev-time, and get them more good PR if they put LAN support back in. Really, if they want to come off as customer-friendly, they'd be better off doing something that affects a wider range of people.

On January 20 2010 10:23 RogerRus wrote:
Also, most dont know, but there was made a linux-installer for starcraft and wc3 which worked really well, I think it was called battlecraft or something like that. Anyways, Blizzard for some reason sued, or threatened to sue, the ones making the installer, and that was the end of it. (It made no sense to me, since you would anyways need the cd-key to install.)

On January 20 2010 10:50 JohannesH wrote:

I was under the impression that LAN support is not in not because of lack of dev time, but to fight pirates?

On January 11 2010 00:39 HeartOfTofu wrote:


The problem here is that companies exist not for the purpose of creating art, but making money. Corporations have an ethical obligation to their stock holders to try to make as much money as possible. I'm with you that more businesses should start thinking about the bigger picture, but unfortunately that's not how Capitalism works. What we need to realize is that the only way we can get them to change is through the only thing that drives them, money. This is why a SUCCESSFUL boycott is often the only way for companies to start listening. The unfortunate part is that it's very difficult to actually get people to stick to a boycott of a product, especially something like a game... What Blizzard understands is that regardless of how they make this game, people will buy it, whether it be because of marketing or franchise interest. Unless there's some imminent threat of money not coming into their wallets, they're not likely to care tremendously about the opinions of the players. The only saving grace here is that for the most part, Blizzard developers seem themselves to be interested in making the sequel close to the original in feel so at least SOME of their interests and ours converge to a degree...

But yeah.. Capitalism sometimes sucks.. =/

On January 11 2010 06:28 BluzMan wrote:
MAC is NOT based on Linux architecture. They are both based on UNIX, but are quite different.

On January 20 2010 13:30 Aerox wrote:
Since you're already so willingly to "be cool" by installing Linux by yourself, I'm sure doing a dual boot shouldn't be a problem for you. ಠ_ಠ