So when is Blizzard going to support Linux?

Games, Gaming and Hardware
Prev 1 2 3 11 Next
Look at Steam's March 2013 user status. Even with their Linux push:

OS
percent of total users
change over previous month

Ubuntu 12.10 64 bit
0.47%
-0.24%

Ubuntu 12.04.2 LTS 64 bit
0.28%
-0.03%

Ubuntu 12.10
0.19%
-0.19%

Ubuntu 12.04.2 LTS
0.16%
-0.04%

Linux Mint 14 Nadia 64 bit
0.13%
-0.04%

Linux 64 bit
0.11%
-0.03%

This is why there isn't widespread support for Linux from game developers and publishers.

The much maligned Windows 8 has nearly 10 times the combined Ubuntu users in the Steam survey. Even Windows Vista has more than 5 times the number of Ubuntu users.

That's what it pretty much come down to.

For a wild a** guess, I'd guess the tipping point for widespread porting and support of those triple-A titles would be when one flavor like Ubuntu got between 5% and 10% of users like with Macs.


Linux users was at 2.02% in february and is now 1.89 part of is do to the free Tux pet Vavle was giving away in february and the lack of AAA games when Dota and CS:GO come to Linux i bet we will see more users

Steam now has over 100 games and it's only been out like 7 weeks
http://www.linuxgamerzone.com/index.php/software/24-steam-for-linux-now-has-100-games-and-counting

Activision and Raven Software game studios have open-sourced two of their games STARWARS!! and will soon be on Linux :)
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTM0MzA
Rome wasn't built in a day, guys. For the longest time, there has been a vicious cycle whirring around: Developers don't want to support Linux because they don't see viable gaming market. However, in order for the platform to become viable, we need to see more support from developers. In order to break this pattern, it's no secret that risks need to be taken.

With this in mind (as well the bellyflop of an "upgrade" Windows 8 was), Valve has made efforts to break the vicious cycle by releasing their Steam client on Linux. Hell, they even went back to the classic Gold Source games (Half-Life, TFC, CS1.6, etc) to provide not only Mac versions, but Linux versions as well. The 1-2% market share that Linux boasts is minuscule, but considering the total amount of people using Steam daily, is an impressive start. This is only the beginning, however. The overall viability of Valve's Linux push will majorly depend on the success of their upcoming Linux-based console.

Every bit of developer support for the platform matters. Small, yet powerful statistics from the Humble Bundles definitely show that there is worth for supporting Linux. For example, Linux may have sold the fewest bundles, but if you take a closer look, you'll see that surprisingly, purchases marked as "for Linux" throw more money at the pay-what-you-want scheme than Windows and Mac. Furthermore, look at the major Kickstarter projects such as Wasteland 2, Torment, Forced, and countless others. The most highly requested features of those projects are for Linux support. Not a free version, not a lower-cost version, just native Linux support for the game they are backing. My point is that Linux users are willing to support the efforts of a developer.

As for World of Warcraft, Blizzard does have a working Linux version of vanilla WoW in-house for testing. However, putting a fully-patched and playable version of the game online will not be as simple as patching it from vanilla to Mists and throwing it out there. Blizzard will have to train (or hire more) their support team to be Linux-ready and they will need to be committed continue supporting the game as 100% cross-platform (all three PC platforms) with every patch and update.

Lastly, I hate to come off as condescending, but saying "I hope Blizzard never supports Linux" is just flat-out immature. It's like the spoiled brat at the playground that doesn't want anyone else to have the toy that he has.
Get the linux community to commit to an official version of linux and you'll start seeing more main stream programs being migrated to it. Sure there's a current FOTM version but as soon as that changes whatever blizzard has developed for it breaks.
Isn't the kernel to Linux the same no matter the UI?
Rome wasn't built in a day, guys. For the longest time, there has been a vicious cycle whirring around: Developers don't want to support Linux because they don't see viable gaming market. However, in order for the platform to become viable, we need to see more support from developers. In order to break this pattern, it's no secret that risks need to be taken.

With this in mind (as well the bellyflop of an "upgrade" Windows 8 was), Valve has made efforts to break the vicious cycle by releasing their Steam client on Linux. Hell, they even went back to the classic Gold Source games (Half-Life, TFC, CS1.6, etc) to provide not only Mac versions, but Linux versions as well. The 1-2% market share that Linux boasts is minuscule, but considering the total amount of people using Steam daily, is an impressive start. This is only the beginning, however. The overall viability of Valve's Linux push will majorly depend on the success of their upcoming Linux-based console.

Every bit of developer support for the platform matters. Small, yet powerful statistics from the Humble Bundles definitely show that there is worth for supporting Linux. For example, Linux may have sold the fewest bundles, but if you take a closer look, you'll see that surprisingly, purchases marked as "for Linux" throw more money at the pay-what-you-want scheme than Windows and Mac. Furthermore, look at the major Kickstarter projects such as Wasteland 2, Torment, Forced, and countless others. The most highly requested features of those projects are for Linux support. Not a free version, not a lower-cost version, just native Linux support for the game they are backing. My point is that Linux users are willing to support the efforts of a developer.

As for World of Warcraft, Blizzard does have a working Linux version of vanilla WoW in-house for testing. However, putting a fully-patched and playable version of the game online will not be as simple as patching it from vanilla to Mists and throwing it out there. Blizzard will have to train (or hire more) their support team to be Linux-ready and they will need to be committed continue supporting the game as 100% cross-platform (all three PC platforms) with every patch and update.

Lastly, I hate to come off as condescending, but saying "I hope Blizzard never supports Linux" is just flat-out immature. It's like the spoiled brat at the playground that doesn't want anyone else to have the toy that he has.


a lot of Blizzards team members are Linux Friendy any ways and supporting cross platform is not as hard as it looks or sounds Valve has did a good job to point that out

If Blizzard was to do native Linux support it would create a mass of Linux Gamers/Users Valve has shown good signs that Linux is viable as a gaming platform and the Steam Box coming out soon as well its a good time to support Linux i dont see blizzard doing it.

it's been said many times it's more all about politics

given Dell also wants to move away form windows as well
I'm not sure of the validity of this article, but hopefully it sheds some light on the Linux-Blizzard situation:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTI2ODE

Here's hoping they reveal something at this years Blizzcon as I plan on being there.
Umm, going back a bit, doesn't OS X run off of Berkley Unix?
Umm, going back a bit, doesn't OS X run off of Berkley Unix?


That by no means implies it would be easily compatible with all versions of linux.

Unix is not linux.
04/23/2013 03:47 AMPosted by Ziryus
Umm, going back a bit, doesn't OS X run off of Berkley Unix?


That by no means implies it would be easily compatible with all versions of linux.

Unix is not linux.


Linux is Unix Based if you take a look at MAC OSX you can see a lot of it and Linux are Shared http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-1083/
Whenever the linux community gets its act together and picks one distro/UI as the standard.

As for apple I'm guessing never because they also want to maintain control over the hardware. Although I guess that would depend on what kind of support they would offer if you just bought the software.


Valve already did that, Ubuntu is fine for gaming purposes.

WoW works on Linux. You just have to use CrossOver.


Massive performance decrease, they could optimize it for WINE like EVE though (I have more fps in WINE for EVE then under Windows because its so well done and OpenGL >>>>> Direct3d).

Isn't the kernel to Linux the same no matter the UI?

Its the different display server's, library's and dependencies that are the main issue.
some one just made a Petition to Port Blizzard Games to Linux Operating Systems

http://www.change.org/petitions/blizzard-entertainment-port-blizzard-games-to-linux-operating-systems
Have some facts:

There's only one official version of Linux. It can be found at kernel.org.
There is no need to support multiple versions of Linux. If the game doesn't work on a distro because it doesn't abide by official Linux, the distro will either FIX IT or find a WORKAROUND. Its not the job of the application writer to fix the libraries they are using.

Differing libraries and dependencies are a non-issue, if not a feature. You choose your own and you abide by that. You may support multiple display servers but it's obviously not required. Most Linux users would be happy to deal with any display server if it meant they were able to get off Windows.

Wine isn't sufficient. There is no official support (except maybe CrossOver) and there are border-line legal issues. There's an obvious performance hit and some games simply will not work on it. It will never be ideal and I'd like to shoot for ideal.

Also, as for lack of popularity , it will grow. Whenever you have such ignorant comments, such as above, being spewed out, why would you want to be on Linux? Fortunately, people are still switching to Linux and while there's a decline in Steam users as of this month (by about 2%), there's also a lack of mainstream games which have yet to be released (DotA 2 in particular).

I can understand a concern of popularity and I would certainly not ask a game or application to change their entire codebase 100% just to support Linux. There is already an OpenGL renderer, there is already support for Mac OSX which uses a similar structure to Linux in most regards.

Stop spouting "whenever the Linux community gets its !@#$ together and decides on one distro". This is fallacious logic and a non-issue in all regards. It is so obvious, you should seriously be ashamed.

Stop spouting non-sense in general.
the distro will either FIX IT or find a WORKAROUND


There's already workarounds to play WoW on a linux system.
I've already stated why WINE isn't suitable. You should read the entire post. If you have further statements, PLEASE read my entire post.

EDIT: Its okay for a temporary solution but certainly not ideal.
I've already stated why WINE isn't suitable. You should read the entire post. If you have further statements, PLEASE read my entire post.

EDIT: Its okay for a temporary solution but certainly not ideal.


No it's not but it works. Unfortunately the closed source community just doesn't play well with the open source community.

If there was one standard blizzard could develop to like windows or mac you might very well see a linux client. So yes tell the linux community to stop splitting the distro everytime they have a development disagreement.
You make no sense. There is no split. Everything goes through one man, Linus Torvalds. There are libraries that use the kernel but that doesn't effect anything. Its a non-issue. Stop being ignorant and research for yourself.

Also, you're correct in some cases on open-source doesn't like closed-source. However, Linux works rather well in most cases. The biggest issue right now would be video drivers which even then isn't much of an actual issue. There are proprietary and closed-source modules developed for Linux all of the time, I'm even using one as we speak.

What standard are you talking about?
You make no sense. There is no split. Everything goes through one man, Linus Torvalds. There are libraries that use the kernel but that doesn't effect anything. Its a non-issue. Stop being ignorant and research for yourself.

Also, you're correct in some cases on open-source doesn't like closed-source. However, Linux works rather well in most cases. The biggest issue right now would be video drivers which even then isn't much of an actual issue. There are proprietary and closed-source modules developed for Linux all of the time, I'm even using one as we speak.

What standard are you talking about?


Eh... there's a huge split, for example debian and ubuntu, while being very similar have completely separate packages and libraries that are incompatible. And as you go through the various linux versions it becomes even worse....

As an IT person dealing with different linux versions is a huge nightmare compared to windows or mac, and developing for it would be a bigger nightmare.
I seriously doubt you anything related to IT given how small you understand.

1. You can distribute libraries with an application. This is what most indie games and valve games do.

2. Packages don't dictate what libraries are possible to use, only what's convenient for use.

Take UT2004 for example. Their game still works off the disk (if you have the original, there's installers for Midway and Anthology) after 7 years from their final patch. For input, audio, and window management, they used SDL 1.2 and OpenAL. Notice that it doesn't go through a packaging system either.

Also, distribution ends up being just as complicated as it is in Windows (Mac does a pretty good job although I can't really judge since I've not owned a Mac yet). It just seems more of a nightmare becomes it becomes complicated in order to integrate with the packaging system which isn't needed either way (or should be left to the distro packaging).
I seriously doubt you anything related to IT given how small you understand.

1. You can distribute libraries with an application. This is what most indie games and valve games do.

2. Packages don't dictate what libraries are possible to use, only what's convenient for use.

Take UT2004 for example. Their game still works off the disk (if you have the original, there's installers for Midway and Anthology) after 7 years from their final patch. For input, audio, and window management, they used SDL 1.2 and OpenAL. Notice that it doesn't go through a packaging system either.

Also, distribution ends up being just as complicated as it is in Windows (Mac does a pretty good job although I can't really judge since I've not owned a Mac yet). It just seems more of a nightmare becomes it becomes complicated in order to integrate with the packaging system which isn't needed either way (or should be left to the distro packaging).


You're welcome to think whatever you want about me. But you're comparing a program designed to run on windows running on multiple versions of windows which i just explained had maintained standards over the years, to programs that have completely different versions based on the linux distro.....

And you seem to have completely missed the point that each linux distro is a completely separate OS.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum