Linux Gaming: Are We There Yet?
by Christopher Rice on December 28, 2009 2:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Linux
Closing Thoughts (for now)
What's the answer to the initial question, "Is Linux ready for gaming?" As you probably expected, the answer is both yes and no. If you're looking for an out-of-box solution for running older games, Linux is a decent alternative to Windows. The longer a game has been around, and the more popular the game, the better the odds that someone has already taken the time to get it working properly under one of the Wine projects. Naturally, that means the reverse is true: newer titles are less likely to work without some extra effort (and sometimes not even then). Even if you do manage to get a new release running, you should expect to see anything from graphical glitches to completely unplayable gameplay.
By now you're probably asking which of the three projects we recommend. Personally, I would use Crossover Games and Wine. We selected Wine because it's not only free, but if you're savvy enough you have a better chance of getting a new release game working right away. Since the Wine project is open source and extremely active in development, you can find patches around the net created on the fly for supporting specific games long before Crossover/Cedega come out with anything. We can then supplement Wine with Crossover Games when all else fails with installing or playing specific games.
Crossover Games provides a decent GUI and the ability to run additional games that Wine cannot. We have also found in many cases that Crossover Games will provide higher frame rates and a better gaming experience. Between both Wine and Crossover Games you should be able to get the majority of your games working with a reasonable amount of effort. If you're looking for the most functionality out of your Linux desktop and don't mind spending the extra money, then I would suggest getting all three. Having all three will give you the best possible chance to ensure all of your games are covered.
In an ideal world, Linux would be supported natively by games. Unfortunately, few developers are willing to take on that task. Eve Online used to have a native Linux client, but development was shut down this past year (in part because performance under Wine was more than acceptable). There was talk of a native UT3 client but it has yet to materialize. Some smaller projects (i.e. Penny Arcade Adventures and other indie titles) have been released with Linux clients, but for the most part major publishers are ignoring the platform.
One of the real problems we encountered is something we're going to address in a separate article. Our test system, if you notice, uses an NVIDIA GPU. We tried to be hardware agnostic, but the problems experienced with our test ATI HD 5770 and Wine eventually got the best of us. We could get the card to work with native Linux games, but Wine support at present was an absolute disaster. Part of the problem undoubtedly stems from the newness of the hardware, but we didn't have any alternative ATI GPUs available right now. The future of ATI GPUs on Linux isn't nearly so bleak, however, with some exciting developments coming from the open source driver. As stated, we'll be looking into that in a future article.
We have some other Linux articles in the pipeline as well. In retrospect, we should have started with something a little less daunting, as gaming and Linux was plagued by more problems than other aspects of the OS. In the meantime, we welcome your comments and thoughts on other Linux areas you'd like to see us investigate.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
126 Comments
View All Comments
tomaccogoats - Monday, December 28, 2009 - link
The only real reason i use windows over linux is because of it's game support. I'd totally switch to linux 24/7 if they could make a game play the same in Windows, and in Linuxmindcloud - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
I completely agree. Games is the only thing I use windows for.rs1 - Monday, December 28, 2009 - link
I wouldn't. Linux has too many usability shortcomings that have never been adequately addressed. Everything from connecting to a wireless network (and woe unto you if you need to switch between networks frequently, or between DHCP and static IP connections) to getting the networked printer to work still requires more effort, and more user knowledge, than it should.tracyanne - Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - link
What a load of rubbish. I use Linux (Currently Ubuntu), and Windows on the same laptop.I can move from network to network, Wireless and Cable, and be connected to multiple networks, Multiple wireless plus cable. Every time I switch networks on Windows I have to restart the network daemon, or run repair. Linux just switches transparently.
Typically I suspend the machine, then travel to whereever I'm going then wake the machine up. Every time I do Windows has trouble connecting to the new network, and I have to run repair or restart the daemon.
Linux just display a message saying I'm disconnected, then after a few seconds the network icon changes and a message saying that I'm connected appears.
As far as printers are concerned, I have no problems their either. I typically work on a Windows network, which has several printers on it. All of the printers appear and can be aquired, and for all but one the drivers were installed automatically, all I had to do was click OK the initiate the the install after the system offered to download and install them. The one machine that didn't I had to go to the manufacturers site for the drivers, which had to be installed manually.
JarredWalton - Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - link
Sounds more like a wireless driver problem than a Windows problem, as I routinely travel between various locations and never have issues with my laptop connecting/reconnecting. What WiFi card and drivers are you running, Ralink? I've had reasonable success with Atheros, Intel has never given me problems, but the few times I've tested a Ralink chipset I've been disappointed at best.Amiga500 - Monday, December 28, 2009 - link
Try a modern version of ubuntu.You'll be very surprised.
I had MUCH less issues getting my wireless network on ubuntu 9.10 than I did on Win7.
MamiyaOtaru - Wednesday, December 30, 2009 - link
Ubuntu gets worse with each release.rs1 - Monday, December 28, 2009 - link
I did that, not too long ago. I found I had more issues with Ubuntu than I did with earlier versions of SUSE and Red Hat. Maybe my laptop is just not the most ideal platform for Linux, but I've never once gotten the "it just works" feeling from Linux that I get from Windows.quiksilvr - Monday, December 28, 2009 - link
If this was Windows Vista I would totally agree. However with Window 7 out (and for only $30 for students), there is little incentive to switch to Linux just yet. Office 2007 is vastly superior to OpenOffice, the Flash video support on Windows runs MUCH better, and with Windows 7 out, the interface is much cleaner and much more stable. Furthermore, there is far FAR more compatibility.Ubuntu 9 has come a really far way in its OS. You spend much less time in Terminal and there is a lot more software. However, for only $30, I still would prefer Windows 7.
Penti - Thursday, December 31, 2009 - link
Well for business (there's no commercial consumer linux distros any how) it doesn't matter as you just stream (from a Citrix/remote desktop/terminal server/virtual XP) your Office 2007 applications to your Linux and OS X desktops. Same with all the rest of the win apps. You can stream Linux/OS X apps to windows too.For consumers there's really no reason to run Linux, your computer already has a legit copy of Windows or OS X. Community distros lack (free) legal support for patent video codecs and a lot of finish. Sure you can run homebrew codecs such as FFMpeg/libavcodec (as ffdshow, vlc etc uses) just as you do on Windows for your warez, but nobody can ship that as an official part of a distro no less can a computer OEM ship computers with it.
There's no drop in replacements for apps such as MS Office, Office 2008 for mac doesn't cut it in a corporate environment even. If MS can't do it you shouldn't expect any one else to be able to do it either. But that said, that doesn't mean you can't create an alternative word processor, spreadsheets, document management (others than SharePoint) or email client environment. Certainly companies like IBM do try where possible. But it's no replacement, if you need Office then run office, the same exact office as the ones you work against. If you need a word processor/office productivity app just for your internal corporate environment you might get away with a lot of other solutions. If you just need the ability to open and write basic doc/docx files even Google Docs or OS X internal TextEdit does that.
Of course multimedia means == Windows, even over OS X in a lot of aspects especially the one you mentioned Adobe Flash. For professional use or like creating multimedia/video OS X might be or fit better. Depending on preferences of course. But for consuming it's MS Windows hands down. But for gaming, well all the Windows computers (new too) aren't up to gaming at all, laptops or small form factor PCs with weak integrated graphics etc can't do it. So I don't see how not why not to just run a separate gaming machine with Windows regardless if you run a Linux, Windows or OS X laptop, Linux or OS X low end PC, mid-end work computer as your main machine. There's no reason to do everything on the same machine. Everyone aren't even Windows gamers now days. That's not why you have computers today it was like in the 80's and early 90's, but today is another world. Use what you need, that might be something other then Windows, it might not. There's really no reason to run a unified environment today mixed does fine for a lot of things.