Author Topic: Games (Read 646 times)

<anouymous> · « **on:** 1 December 2001, 03:10 »

One reason I don't like about Linux asshole. Is that they don;t support much games. Like
Machwarrior and baldur's gate.

CommonSense · « **Reply #1 on:** 1 December 2001, 04:05 »

Buy a console, for fuck's sake.

k3it4r0u · « **Reply #2 on:** 1 December 2001, 04:08 »

quote:
Originally posted by <anouymous>:
One reason I don't like about Linux asshole. Is that they don;t support much games. Like
Machwarrior and baldur's gate.

Buy one of those fucking Warriner's English Grammar and Composition textbooks.

asdf · « **Reply #3 on:** 1 December 2001, 04:14 »

quote:
Originally posted by <anouymous>:
One reason I don't like about Linux asshole. Is that they don;t support much games. Like
Machwarrior and baldur's gate.

have you ever seen lokigames.com or linuxquake.com?

saquarrier · « **Reply #4 on:** 1 December 2001, 06:41 »

There are some games for Linux and I try to use the ones that there are, but basicly games are the only reason that I haven't nuked my windows partition.

CommonSense · « **Reply #5 on:** 1 December 2001, 06:59 »

Two words:

Dual boot.

eric · « **Reply #6 on:** 1 December 2001, 20:16 »

If i want to try a linux os,who is the best? redhat, mandrake ect ect.........

k3it4r0u · « **Reply #7 on:** 2 December 2001, 03:37 »

Depends on your skill level. RedHat and Mandrake are easy to install. If you try Debian on your first shot, there's a good chance you'll fuck up.

eric · « **Reply #8 on:** 2 December 2001, 12:07 »

ok then i wil have a go on redhad or mandrake.there's a first time for every thing.hope its user friendly so other people start using it too.

asdf · « **Reply #9 on:** 2 December 2001, 17:56 »

red hat and mandrake were designed in a way that the average user can use it. the isntallation process is quite easy. debian isn't any less user-friendly than red hat or mandrake (red hat and mandrake don't have apt-get! how about that) but the easier distributions of linux tend to do more things automatically for you (they will even partition your hard drive for you.. red hat 7.2 at least)

asdf · « **Reply #10 on:** 2 December 2001, 17:58 »

has anybody out there tried mandrake's new "gamers edition"?

badkarma · « **Reply #11 on:** 3 December 2001, 18:14 »

quote:
Originally posted by eric:
If i want to try a linux os,who is the best? redhat, mandrake ect ect.........

if it's your first try at linux I'd recommend SuSE, very easy to install and a huge selection of software comes with it. (7 cd's or 1 dvd for the professional edition)

<aline> · « **Reply #12 on:** 4 December 2001, 00:28 »

What speed is your internet connection. Redhat and mandrake are the easiest to install, but the hardest to get. If you can download from the internet get Mandrake. Otherwise I'd recommend getting Debian, and a GOOD BIG book on the subject.

Sinistar · « **Reply #13 on:** 4 December 2001, 13:51 »

Hmm...games...try using WinE, if you can't find the game you're looking for as a *Nix version.

It's supposed to work ok, but it reminds you of most other emulator-soft; it's unstable as hell.

Hmm, I wonder if we could sway (mail, rt-discussion, forum, or...?) all those darn game developers to use a *Nix platform as the standard, 'cause that would allow more people to play their games, instead of trying to force Monopoly-Soft down everyone's throats...

I mean, if people are still misguided enough to use The-OS-that-shall-not-be-mentioned, then have them use CygWin or something, or even better, why can't the damn game developers incorporate a CygWin mini-shell into the games, to be used when necessary, while basing the games themselves on a certain stable platform...

...checkout CygWin on http://sources.redhat.com/cygwin/

gump420 · « **Reply #14 on:** 4 December 2001, 14:22 »

Well, Apple has been pushing hard in the last year or two to get game developers swayed over to their platform, so hopefully that will have a trickle-down effect to the rest of the *NIX world with OS X in the works. Not that this is what Apple wants (if they had it there way, everybody would be writing their programs strictly in Objective-C and would only be using Mach-O binaries) . . . however, one would certainly hope that porting a game from a Unix-based OS that uses OpenGL (read: Mac OS X) to other *NIX variants would be easier than say, porting Win32+DirectX crap to *NIX and OpenGL.

Somebody should come out with a console aimed directly at competing with the X-Box. Load it up with a *NIX kernel with OpenGL support, for starters . . .

« previous next » Print Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Author Topic: Games (Read 646 times) <anouymous> Guest Games « on: 1 December 2001, 03:10 » One reason I don't like about Linux asshole. Is that they don;t support much games. Like Machwarrior and baldur's gate. Logged CommonSense VIP Posts: 21 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #1 on: 1 December 2001, 04:05 » Buy a console, for fuck's sake. Logged k3it4r0u Member Posts: 29 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #2 on: 1 December 2001, 04:08 » quote: Originally posted by <anouymous>: One reason I don't like about Linux asshole. Is that they don;t support much games. Like Machwarrior and baldur's gate. Buy one of those fucking Warriner's English Grammar and Composition textbooks. Logged (c) 2000 The Microsoft C++ Class It's grammar, not grammer. asdf Member Posts: 51 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #3 on: 1 December 2001, 04:14 » quote: Originally posted by <anouymous>: One reason I don't like about Linux asshole. Is that they don;t support much games. Like Machwarrior and baldur's gate. have you ever seen lokigames.com or linuxquake.com? Logged saquarrier Newbie Posts: 18 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #4 on: 1 December 2001, 06:41 » There are some games for Linux and I try to use the ones that there are, but basicly games are the only reason that I haven't nuked my windows partition. Logged CommonSense VIP Posts: 21 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #5 on: 1 December 2001, 06:59 » Two words: Dual boot. Logged eric Newbie Posts: 5 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #6 on: 1 December 2001, 20:16 » If i want to try a linux os,who is the best? redhat, mandrake ect ect......... Logged k3it4r0u Member Posts: 29 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #7 on: 2 December 2001, 03:37 » Depends on your skill level. RedHat and Mandrake are easy to install. If you try Debian on your first shot, there's a good chance you'll fuck up. Logged (c) 2000 The Microsoft C++ Class It's grammar, not grammer. eric Newbie Posts: 5 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #8 on: 2 December 2001, 12:07 » ok then i wil have a go on redhad or mandrake.there's a first time for every thing.hope its user friendly so other people start using it too. Logged asdf Member Posts: 51 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #9 on: 2 December 2001, 17:56 » red hat and mandrake were designed in a way that the average user can use it. the isntallation process is quite easy. debian isn't any less user-friendly than red hat or mandrake (red hat and mandrake don't have apt-get! how about that) but the easier distributions of linux tend to do more things automatically for you (they will even partition your hard drive for you.. red hat 7.2 at least) Logged asdf Member Posts: 51 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #10 on: 2 December 2001, 17:58 » has anybody out there tried mandrake's new "gamers edition"? Logged badkarma VIP Posts: 497 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #11 on: 3 December 2001, 18:14 » quote: Originally posted by eric: If i want to try a linux os,who is the best? redhat, mandrake ect ect......... if it's your first try at linux I'd recommend SuSE, very easy to install and a huge selection of software comes with it. (7 cd's or 1 dvd for the professional edition) Logged If you can't learn to do something well, learn to enjoy doing it poorly. <aline> Guest Games « Reply #12 on: 4 December 2001, 00:28 » What speed is your internet connection. Redhat and mandrake are the easiest to install, but the hardest to get. If you can download from the internet get Mandrake. Otherwise I'd recommend getting Debian, and a GOOD BIG book on the subject. Logged Sinistar Newbie Posts: 3 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #13 on: 4 December 2001, 13:51 » Hmm...games...try using WinE, if you can't find the game you're looking for as a Nix version. It's supposed to work ok, but it reminds you of most other emulator-soft; it's unstable as hell. Hmm, I wonder if we could sway (mail, rt-discussion, forum, or...?) all those darn game developers to use a Nix platform as the standard, 'cause that would allow more people to play their games, instead of trying to force Monopoly-Soft down everyone's throats... I mean, if people are still misguided enough to use The-OS-that-shall-not-be-mentioned, then have them use CygWin or something, or even better, why can't the damn game developers incorporate a CygWin mini-shell into the games, to be used when necessary, while basing the games themselves on a certain stable platform... ...checkout CygWin on http://sources.redhat.com/cygwin/ Logged gump420 Member Posts: 168 Kudos: 0 Games « Reply #14 on: 4 December 2001, 14:22 » Well, Apple has been pushing hard in the last year or two to get game developers swayed over to their platform, so hopefully that will have a trickle-down effect to the rest of the NIX world with OS X in the works. Not that this is what Apple wants (if they had it there way, everybody would be writing their programs strictly in Objective-C and would only be using Mach-O binaries) . . . however, one would certainly hope that porting a game from a Unix-based OS that uses OpenGL (read: Mac OS X) to other NIX variants would be easier than say, porting Win32+DirectX crap to NIX and OpenGL. Somebody should come out with a console aimed directly at competing with the X-Box. Load it up with a NIX kernel with OpenGL support, for starters . . . Logged I can't get over you until you get out from under him. Print Pages: [1] 2 Go Up « previous next » Stop Microsoft » Forum » Operating Systems » Linux and UNIX » Games
Share or donate

Author Topic: Games (Read 646 times)

<anouymous>

<aline>

Share or donate