|
The reason is purely economical, and entirely reasonable and expected.
The big deal is that Blizzard is essentially telling me that I have to PAY for and use and inferior operating system in order to play their games.
Blizzard is not telling you that you have to pay to use a 'worse' OS. Blizzard is making a game for those who have paid and those who are content with paying for Windows. For those who don't have Windows and unwilling to buy Windows, Blizzard simply does not want you money. Why? Because the revenue earned from those who do not use Windows and Apple do not cover the R&D cost of porting.
I do, atm, dual boot to a windows partition to play Blizzard games, and only Blizzard games. It is bad enough that you are forced to buy a copy of Windows when you buy a computer, but this sort of game distribution only helps to further Microsoft's monopoly on the OS market, which its product does not deserve.
Blizzard is not helping to further MS's monopoly, it's a symbiotic relationship at worst; in fact, I could say Blizzard is leeching off of MS's established monopoly. If Blizzard did not make games for Windows, guess what, most people would not play Blizzard games.
|
On February 09 2010 13:29 sfdrew wrote:
Red hat made 28 million on Linux alone last year, and the reason I said Google, in case you haven't been keeping up with the news, is that they are planning on releasing an OS using the Linux kernel called Chrome.
All the big players except for Microsoft, and I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't either and just kept it under wraps, use it. It powers the internet. It powers most of the worlds stock exchanges and makes the one laptop per child program possible.
The reason why most Linux users don't buy a lot of software is because of two reasons.
1. most software you could want or need, and I do emphisis most is available for free (speech and beer)
2. there isn't a lot of software to buy. You can't buy what isn't for sale, but then again that was the whole point of this thread. Despite the fact that I have bought several copies of SC in the past I just recently bought a download copy the other week because I lost my discs and cd-keys. SC is easy to pirate these days, but I paid anyways, and I would be happy to pay for a Linux version of SC2.
Trying to paint Linux users as pirates is just plain wrong and insulting. Why don't you go spout some of your BS to all the windows users who hang out on the pirates bay and fill their Windows machines with viruses.
I'm not saying they use pirate software, just said they have all they need coming with their distro.
end-user customer market for linux is almost non existent. money making from linux is all about hosting services, networking services, etc., all services provided to companies, not end users
which makes linux not viable.
of course there are some people like you that would pay for a SC2 for linux, but how many linux users are also a gamer? maybe 0.000000001% of the entire market? is it viable to make SC2 for linux just to satisfy those people?
|
On February 09 2010 13:31 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2010 12:31 ilbh wrote:
if you are a linux user, please, tell me how many softwares have you bought for your linux?
not even your distro is bought.
What does that have to do with anything? Lack of purchases made on Linux has primarily to do with the fact that there are few things to purchase for Linux, not because of some mentality against buying things. The only proprietary software I've bought for Linux was a license for Mathematica, but I still buy my games and other software for Windows. In relation to Starcraft 2, you seem to be of the thinking that it won't affect Blizzard's revenue because most Linux users who care wouldn't buy it anyway. IMO, it has more to do with the fact that most Linux users who care WOULD buy it anyway.
yes but linux users who wants to play SC2 can be counted in your fingers.
thats what im talking about...
|
There's a lot more than you would think ilbh. Which still doesn't change anything. Like I mentioned previously, what should be done is some 3rd party porting the games to Linux.
|
if i had my way i would make a linux version before a mac version and i'm sure many people would do the same...but it would be utterly moronic for a business to appeal specifically to linux users. Sorry.
|
On February 09 2010 15:52 ilbh wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2010 13:29 sfdrew wrote:
Red hat made 28 million on Linux alone last year, and the reason I said Google, in case you haven't been keeping up with the news, is that they are planning on releasing an OS using the Linux kernel called Chrome.
All the big players except for Microsoft, and I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't either and just kept it under wraps, use it. It powers the internet. It powers most of the worlds stock exchanges and makes the one laptop per child program possible.
The reason why most Linux users don't buy a lot of software is because of two reasons.
1. most software you could want or need, and I do emphisis most is available for free (speech and beer)
2. there isn't a lot of software to buy. You can't buy what isn't for sale, but then again that was the whole point of this thread. Despite the fact that I have bought several copies of SC in the past I just recently bought a download copy the other week because I lost my discs and cd-keys. SC is easy to pirate these days, but I paid anyways, and I would be happy to pay for a Linux version of SC2.
Trying to paint Linux users as pirates is just plain wrong and insulting. Why don't you go spout some of your BS to all the windows users who hang out on the pirates bay and fill their Windows machines with viruses. I'm not saying they use pirate software, just said they have all they need coming with their distro. end-user customer market for linux is almost non existent. money making from linux is all about hosting services, networking services, etc., all services provided to companies, not end users which makes linux not viable. of course there are some people like you that would pay for a SC2 for linux, but how many linux users are also a gamer? maybe 0.000000001% of the entire market? is it viable to make SC2 for linux just to satisfy those people?
What you said, is in general, the open source model for making money, but games are usually not open source. I not only wouldn't expect Blizzard to open source their games, but I wouldn't want them to either.
There aren't a lot of companies who make money off closed source software for Linux, but there are some. People keep complaining about the market share, but more users won't come over until more programs are available.
I think that porting over is a smart idea, because unlike the Mac market, the Linux market has nowhere to go but up. The Mac market is limited by their high prices and trendy image that will only ever appeal to so many people. The market share for Linux is growing faster than either MS or Mac and there are probably a lot of people who use it sometimes, but still keep Win/Mac around for those programs they can't get.
The dogma that it isn't worth the cost is nonsense. How much do you think a port costs? Even if the market share is a little over 1%, which it is probably higher, that is a little over 3 million people. 3/4 of the population is either old or children and most of them aren't using Linux. I would be willing to bet the majority of Linux users are gamers, but they just play on other platforms because they don't' have a choice.
Lets be generous though and say the number of Blizzard gamers who will pay (and they are probably going to work harder this time to keep the pirates out on Bnet and since lan play is being removed, no more 'extra' servers like iccup) is only 15% of all Linux users, that is still 500k. Now lets be even more generous and pretend they only $5 off every customer, that is still 2.5 million dollars. You think you can't port a game you already have code for over to Linux for 2.5 million dollars!?
Trust me, you can. That kind of money will pay for a lot of developers salaries, and most of the hard work is already being done by their other departments.
|
As a linux-only user for the last decade, I have to say...give it up. Seriously. In the not-too-distant future, linux gaming will be more or less handheld or tablet-only. In fact, I would not be surprised if that is already the case.
I'd argue some more but a lot has been said in this thread and many, MANY other threads like it in many forums for nearly every major game release, ever. It's not going to happen.
|
On February 09 2010 07:04 mmp wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2010 06:17 Velr wrote:
... Does anyone actually know someone that only has Linux and no Windows or Mac?
Hell.. I don't even know a single guy that has only Mac-stuff... Yes to each lone OS, yes to every combination of the big 3, and yes to OSes you probably haven't heard of. There IS a world outside of Windows, and the view is a lot nicer on this side.
And the majority of users/gamers DOES NOT CARE about it and every corporation that wastes money on some OS that a small minority uses is fucking retarded.
About 10 years ago a friend of mine was like:
"A few years and Linux will be so easy that everyone will want to use it."
The exact opposite happened, no one even remotely cares about it, outside of the programming nerds from back then and the ones that have grown after them, anymore.
The only thing i still see, since years, from Linux users are their tears cause of lacking game support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
