Why Game Developers Should Support OS X and Linux 283
kevind23 writes "Although Mac OS X and Linux have a small (but growing) market share, Jeff from Wolfire Games argues that supporting non-Windows platforms can lead to a huge increase in game sales. Using their popular game Lugaru as an example, he shows how less-popular platforms, or more specifically, their userbase can be a powerful advertising force. This can lead to a dramatic increase in popularity and exposure, which usually means a large boost in overall sales. The short article is an interesting read, especially for those working in game development and sales."
Fill in the numbers: (Score:4, Interesting)
Targeting a 5 .. 10% larger audience lead to ~122% more sales.
Now, I would still have guessed (including the leverage) it but that does not go for everybody.
Blizzard (Score:5, Interesting)
Why game developers should support standards (Score:4, Interesting)
The alternative of simply programming over a common standard environment is still there.
Part of all that power currently spent on better and better graphics could be spent on passing through a common interface.
As an extra bonus, it would allow the creation of computer-like machines that would only run that standard gaming environment, without all the other functions of a computer.
Unless someone translated the rest of the usual computer functions to that common gaming environent.
Maybe there's more to it (Score:5, Interesting)
One thing that is true is that there is a lot of respect and word of mouth thrown the way of a good game with native linux client. That would of course diminish if there weren't so few quality games supporting it, of course.
I also find myself wondering whether this game Lugaru is an opengl game, keeping migration costs down.
Re:Mac users spend more money (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem here is, it also translates into a culture of shareware. Things which are freeware on Windows, and open source everywhere else, are shareware on a Mac.
Maybe it's just me, but that's what I've seen. You could argue that it's because the Mac version is so different, unique, and so much better than the free alternatives that it deserves to be paid for. I think it's because of exactly what you've said -- someone who just paid $1k for a dev machine is unlikely to gripe about $50 for TextMate.
(I'm lazy, so those numbers are almost certainly wrong, but they're close to right.)
As a user, that is one thing I really hate about the Mac. It's not that I don't believe in paying for software, just that I don't think every little file management tool or MP3 player needs to ask $20. Put up a donation page and be grateful someone hasn't replaced you already.
But hey, if you're going for that angle, target Mac users because they spend more money and are grateful for any decent games, and target Linux users because they might buy one just to up the Linux stats.
Re:Mac users spend more money (Score:3, Interesting)
If you look a little further, you'll find a freeware or open source alternative for OSX, although it may not be the same program as on Windows or Linux. Textmate may not be free, so try jEdit or Textwrangler.
I don't know what programs you miss. Most of what I use is freeware or open source: OpenOffice, AdiumX, Keepass, Cyberduck, etc...
Re:Mac users spend more money (Score:3, Interesting)
I've noticed that too. I find it helps to search for Mac Free Software rather than merely "freeware" -- there's a lot more of the former than the latter, and if you look for the latter you end up finding shareware (crippleware or nagware) instead.
The way I see it, you should target Mac users because they'll pay for software, and target Linux users because you might as well since you already made your software cross-platform to get the Mac users! Games do not need to have different code between the Mac and Linux versions; they can standard stuff like OpenGL, SDL, and POSIX. (Don't try it with applications though, since Mac users won't tolerate non-native UIs!)
Re:OGL vs DirectX (Score:2, Interesting)
I was looking for a coding rant I read in the summer about SDL and audio insufficiencies so that I could point you to it, but you'll have to settle for what I found instead. Take a look at this [viridiangames.com] ... and I found what I was looking for [braid-game.com]. Make sure to read the comments on Braid for the real info. A Loki programmer even says SDL isinadequate for audio.
Re:Blizzard (and CCP) (Score:3, Interesting)
One of the main reasons things like WoW work in WINE is because Blizzard actually makes a decent effort to have their games run properly in OpenGL. You can run a WoW client in Windows in OpenGL as well, which in some cases actually solves some DirectX problems on some cards/computers.
Another example is CCP, the producers of Eve Online. They have a MAC and Linux client, respectively on Cedega on the MAC (IIRC) and a specific Wine on Linux, and that seems to work quite well from what I've heard.
If software companies would work closer with the people that write these sort of 'emulators' (they're not really emulators in most cases, except for some specific routines), I think that would start to make a serious difference.
The other option is to go the Quake route, and just write your engine in such a way that it can run natively on other platforms, but that requires development effort from the start, something that up until recently wasn't exactly worth it for most companies.
We'll see what happens in the near future, but I'm afraid that the Winblows/DirectSux combination will be prevalent for a while longer yet.
OT: How to lay out a CD for Linux, Mac vs Win? (Score:5, Interesting)
strange question, shouldnt I know the answer myself since I've been using all three OSen for ages myself? (Typing this on an Ubuntu desktop)
But it's been quite some years now that I last mastered a win/mac CD (it still had OS9) and I never did one for Linux before.
On the other hand my own computer usage has so much shifted to a net focus that I hardly ever install and run a CD myself anymore. And if I do this at all, it's always on win.
So, win is easy, there will be an autorun.inf with a link to an icon and a link to some autorun.exe or whatever.
On Mac, I'd expect the CD to appear with a large friendly icon, a window opening on double click with more large friendly icons that make it very clear what to do (i.e. drag the application onto the application folder alias). No autorun here.
On Linux? I have no idea. From my own usage pattern I don't expect the stuff to be on a CDrom in the first place, it's either in the repositories of my distribution or in a .deb/.rpm dnl'ed from some url or I got a tarball and have to do the ./configure / make / make install - dance. I don't think I ever opened a "commercial" CD intended to be used from Linux (with the exception of install discs). Autorun? - Gott bewahre! Rather a README, may be an install.pl ...
Now there should be sites discussing that question, design guides, style guides, best practices. No way that I'm the first one pondering about how to make a CD look just right on all three OSen - but google drowns me in a bazillion of unrelated pages. Which is why I turn up here with my question, hoping that some of you keep a link or two in their bookmarks to help me find my way.
You lazy bastard (Score:3, Interesting)
OK, so you don't want to pay for TextMate...
How about just using XCode, Textwrangler, jEdit, Eclipse or Smultron?
Or how about using ANY FUCKING UNIX/LINUX EDITOR EVER WRITTEN IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND, either straight in an X11 window, or via the special OS X build that is available for most?
This year is indeed the year of the Linux desktop. (Score:1, Interesting)
This is THE year of the Linux desktop... because I finally switched over to it.
more reasons (Score:3, Interesting)
There are many more reasons, in fact. The most important one is that cross-platform development usually results in higher-quality products.
The most obvious reason is that bugs tend to show up faster if you test on more than one platform. Developers hate that, it appears to make development more difficult, but the truth is that it simply exposes the lousy work that most developers deliver.
The other reason is that you can take advantage of - or start thinking about - the platform features. For example, the old Loki port of Civ3 had additional features that the windos version didn't have, simply because the platform required them. One example: On the windos platform, there was automatically one profile for all users, because the game saved everything in the game directory. On Linux, due to stricter permissions, that was simply not possible, so the game saved everything it had to save into the user directory and every user had his own profile. You can do that in windos, too, but a lot of windos developers never think about it.
Re:Mac users spend more money (Score:3, Interesting)
It's mainly because Mac users don't tolerate crap. When I'm trying to find a free/cheap piece of W32 software I have to wade through 90 clones all which have GUI bugs and or just look like crap in general. (Some gung-ho developer tried to reinvent Windows widgets).
Most all of the freeware and software I've found for Mac (and use daily) is very consistent. Not only that it all integrates rather well. Almost every client/server connects to each other over Bonjour. Almost everything has the auto-updater library so it checks for updates. Everything uses Growl for notification.
I don't know how far you're looking back, but TextMate (IMHO) beats BBEdit hands down and has been available for at least 4 years. Cyberduck is an awesome SFTP/FTP/S3/WebDAV client. And as long as something still works, I don't see a need to update or fix it. I remember when I first got involved screen hadn't had an update in over a year, but it worked and was near bullet-proof.
And Notepad++ is an awesome free W32 text editor.
Re:Mac users spend more money (Score:4, Interesting)
[...] I have to wade through 90 clones all which have GUI bugs and or just look like crap in general. (Some gung-ho developer tried to reinvent Windows widgets). [Emphasis mine]
I get what you're saying, but a big pet peeve of mine on OSX is that I see the exact opposite. Sure, almost all of Mac software looks great, but many don't follow consistent usability guidelines and many program options are hidden away. The fact that most dialog boxes cannot be controlled by the keyboard on OSX (by default anyway) is another big issue for me.
For example, it took me months to find the "Play Song Preview" in iTMS/iTunes because it's not in any app menu or even the right-click context menu; you just have to know to doubleclick the song. In every other Windows app that's not a problem, the bold menu entry is what will happen when you doubleclick; I don't know why this "standard" doesn't apply to OSX.
Another example, I needed a tool to just crop an image on OSX (splitting a desktop wallpaper in two for spaning multiple monitors). I found ImageWell, which worked fine but has a weird workflow and a non-resizeable interface that forces you to work in a very small preview version of your image!
Now don't get me wrong, I totally accept that I'm not used to OSX so any difference from W32 annoys me, but I think the point stands anyway.
Anyway, getting back on topic, developers target the platforms they use. Less marketshare means less developers means less variety. I only use OSX occasionally, so I don't bother developing much for it (I only use the Mac for iPhone development now).
Lots of problems, to start with... (Score:2, Interesting)
Windows has a development environment for games. It bears some resemblance to the platform used to develop for the XBox and XBox360. That means you can develop for one of these, and have some level of commonality with other platforms.
There is nothing at all like this on the Mac or Unix side of things. There are _some_ common points with other Unix platforms, but these are limited to lower-level plumbing. There is no real "games platform" that
exists that is nearly all-inclusive as DirectX:
OpenGL is certainly good, widely used, and essentially a standard.
OpenAL might be OK, but is not widely used with many other claimants to the throne.
There is nothing like Bink that allows for cross-platform in-game videos. This can be handled by one of a number of video libraries, but these are heavyweight solutions to a lightweight problem, and the ones that are cross-platform generally suck IMHO.
There is no standard GUI - using X on the Mac will result in instant failure.
There is no real equivalent to DirectInput, you have to roll everything by hand.
There is no standardized multiplayer networking system (some might consider this a benefit, but...)
There is no standardized lobby system for meeting other players online.
There is no standardized voice chat system. This is vital for modern online games.
So, when someone has a package that combines all of these parts into a single box, then "alternate platform" development might become more common. In the meantime we'll see "casual games" (which are often much more fun anyway) and hand-ports of blockbuster titles. Such is life; if you want to play modern games, you have to buy a console(or more than one) no matter how odious this might be to you.
Maury
Re:Mac users spend more money (Score:3, Interesting)
We got Mirror's Edge, Spore, and Dead Space, all from EA.
Thanks to Transgaming creating Cider Windows emulator which EA use to make the games run on macs. It's not real ports, and it's more or less a no brainer for them. Why not release it if someone will buy it even though the resulting product is inferior*?
* From but running on an emulated layer and because OS X graphics performance probably isn't up to Windows speeds to begin with (and third because macs always tend to come with somewhat mediocre graphics even though you pay premium prices.)
Network effects, especially. (Score:4, Interesting)
When my spouse and I wanted to take up an MMO, we had an obvious requirement: It had to run on a Mac, because my spouse is a Mac user. So, we got WoW. (There weren't many competitors at the time who did Mac; even now, the most obvious is Eve which is of anti-value to me because I don't, ever, under any circumstances, want PvP.)
So far, that's two copies sold. But wait. My brother-in-law now plays with us. My sister-in-law now plays with us, because her husband plays with us. A friend of mine from some message boards who'd given up got back into the game because I was playing it. So I can name five people (and more than five monthly subscriptions) that came from that sale. Only one of whom plays primarily on Mac.
For games that are played with other people, the effect isn't just the actual sales to Mac users; it's the sales to people who want to play with Mac users, and the moment anyone provides an option for the Mac market, a lot of other users will end up being drawn to that product by preference.
Re:Mac users spend more money (Score:2, Interesting)
And? Just because a part of the game has been done before doesn't mean it's not new. Brain training has been limited to boring work-like programs before, sports games consisted of hitting buttons (or adjusting dials if we go really far back) rather than the actual motions and exercise vids are again work-like and not interactive. You can always find a weak relationship to something existing for any new idea (someone jokingly said GTA is like Pac Man except the dots are people). I don't think there's any indie game that couldn't be claimed to be just a clone if you just looked at it with enough abstraction.