Will GalCiv III be supporting any platforms other than Windows? Specifically, you really need to release a Mac & Linux version. You'll find there are a lot of eager Mac/Linux gamers out there who are ready to throw their money at you for native versions. How about some love for us non-Windows users?
No mine is just opinion I hate what windows did to Dos. I hate their modifications have to the latest desktop. I dislike the user interface, but Stardock is my main reason I don't switch over. The reasons given have not prevented microsoft from obsoleting software in the past. Even these desktop applications will be replaced down the road for better software. The only bummer comes in the fact that the smaller programmers will have proprietary software that will probably have to be reprogrammed. This logic has not stopped microsoft in the past. Besides obsoleting a version and dropping support they may carry the desktop for awhile scaling it down with every version only keeping compatibility with other desktop applications. Making it like Dos where you have a very flexible way to control your computer that has been regulated to only being used to make applications compatible. So I would say they will keep scaling down the desktop till it is useless. The desktop will not be better than windows 7 it will just become old.
Though you have painted a good reason for companies to migrate to Linux in the next few years.
Even though I doubt windows 9 has a good protection against infections as Linux. I would accept that I could be wrong on this. That argument is still the user interface vs Linux.
And yes I'm just posting an opinion hear. Though I think Jack can feel my argument over the years. Even though this would be up to him not me. The argument was for Dos, Windows 98 real Dos mode, Windows Xp, and now Windows 7. Again to my opinion Windows has bean flopping every other operating system. Operating systems that have been arguably bad has been Dos 4.2, Windows 99 it got bootlegged and sold for 88 cents that is why Microsoft has never carried support for it and no one remember this, windows 2000 when Bill gates tried to throw everyone vendor who wasn't microsoft off the cpmputer, Windows me was supposed to fix this but no one seems to like this, Windows vista, and now Windows 8. These you will find have a lot of enemies over the years.
The point I brought us about Linux is still pretty valid.
Depends how you define credible at this point. It's too early for official announcements. I do have rumors from connected people with a track record of getting these things right, and they fit with the noise coming out of Microsoft. Business software on Windows is also my day job, so paying attention to this stuff matters to me. See this for one source - http://m.winsupersite.com/windows-8/threshold-be-called-windows-9-ship-april-2015
Theyre re not going to re-emphasize the desktop, but they are going to make it and Metro play more nicely together so there are fewer barriers to getting adoption past Windows 7.
Tridus, I read the articles you pointed at. What I saw in that article and the three others it pointed to I found easy to read several different ways, hence I came to no conclusions. It mentioned "bringing back the start button", which could mean the full functionality of the desktop would be brought back, or something else would be behind it, or something in between.
Also I was not encouraged by the fact that the person in charge of "threshold" had been in charge of "Windows Mobile". It sounds like the same old thing, where a new person in charge wants to make his new charge look like his previous charge. Sorry about that, but I am a long ago converted skeptic and I refuse to speculate about what this all means. I guess this is another of those cases of "only time will tell."
They already brought back the button in 8.1, along with boot to desktop. It's just that the 8.1 button brings up the metro start screen instead of the start menu. That is the part likely changing back, along with metro apps being able to coexist in desktop mode (without needing Modernmix from Stsrdock).
There is also a goal to unify Windows into fewer versions, though I'm not sure when that will actually happen. Mobile is key to Microsofts strategy as they need to grow there, but there is zero chance of desktop mode going away this decade. It would be suicidal in the enterprise, when the whole idea was to get people used to the new interface at work and home so they want a similar one n their phone/tablet.
Here's some more on that, including stuff happening in 8.1 update 1. They're clearly not abandoning the desktop mode, given the effort going into making Metro suck less while on the desktop.
Is the start screen that annoying screen that keeps popping up at the right of the screen everytime I do anything. Just to begin with there is no where near the flexibility of the start screen I talking about everything that is included. This sounds like dos all over again they did the same thing with Dos. I don't mind them unifying most of the versions of windows as long as they left alone the computer. The reason I don't have a smart prone or a tablet is because I can do more on a computer. Dido for the ultrabook.
I think that the only real deal is the power button on the user interface. Bringing back the start menu.
To be honest microsoft has been telling us what we want, and usually it is only for minority of computer users. It's cool that only 25 million of the needed 1 billion computer users. If I ever go to those technologies other than the computer I will probably use a smart phone or a tablet over the widows tablet or phone. This is why because these technologies are more specialized with those operating systems.
Oh yeah the trick is not to suck less, but to give us more versatility with the computer. Let us do more complicated things.
Well this is certainly the most promising bit of news we've heard yet. Not just "thinking about it," now it's "likely." Thanks, Frogboy. I'll keep watching.
Not scorn but bafflement. Did somebody seriously convince you to buy another program so that you could play a particular game? If so then I can safely say that you were taken for a ride, and PC gamers haven't had to do custom installs since the days of DOS, so I'm really not sure what you're talking about.
Steambox = Linux
When I originally made that comment I didn't know what the Steambox was as I've been searching I noticed that steam has an operating system can I download that into my computer instead.
You're referring to SteamOS which is still in beta as far as I know. SteamOS is essentially a customized version of Debian Linux with Steam as its primary interface and supposedly some performance improvements under the hood, although I've not read any benchmarks to determine if the improvements are real or just marketing. Steam Machines (what you call Steambox) is the brand name for small living room PCs that will have SteamOS preinstalled.
Alternatively, you can simply install Steam on the Linux PC of your choice. I've been running Steam in Kubuntu Linux for over a year, and it works great.
+1 for Linux as well
Just a port some time after a release would be okay. I've just recently switched over to Linux (few months ago) and.. dont really plan going back.
+1 Mac. Toss me in for wanting a Mac build. I bought Founder so put some of my money to good use.
For whatever my opinion is worth, if there is a Linux version I will buy it immediately. I am currently playing MOO2 in linux hahaha, oldie but a goodie!
No word yet for support on other platform than windows?
You're likely not going to see anything until post release
I guess, you missed this post from earlier in the thread?
Great business sense even if MAC does suck.
I hate Kickstarter.
But, the Linux/Mac port is exactly the kind of thing that Kickstarter is great for, because it gets people to put their money where their mouth is.
If at all possible, I think StarDock should run a self-sponsored site to get people to put down money for the Linux and/or Mac port.
And, frankly, I'd hire someone to come in and consult on the OpenGL work - it's non-trivial to learn, and there's just as many dark corners as DX, and having a short-term consultant who really knows it is going to make the 1-time effort to create an OpenGL port much, much simpler.
One thing that people truly need to remember is that the fact that "steambox" is just a fork of Ubuntu. If anything it worries me that they are so intent on saying "steambox" vs. a more generalized Debian or Ubuntu because it indicates a preference for proprietary software and OS's which many mainstream Linux users are vehemently against.
I want to know that this will be LINUX compatible and not just compatible with one small fork of one distro.
Remember guys. Be twice as leery of how a corporation tells you something as what they actually say.
What is a Linux?
For me though, Windows is a operating system I no longer use at home. I have to provide support for it in a corporate environment, and it's broken before it boots! I want hardware & software that works, seamlessly integrates, and doesn't require me spending weeks just getting it work perform as it should.
I too would like to see an OS X version of this game. Many developers are providing OS X clients now, some cider & wine ports, but also a lot of native clients. Sadly Stardock hasn't indicated any commitment is this direction. I've supported Stardock Products for may years now, and I remember when Stardock basically ONLY provided OS/2 software, so it's not as if they've "...only ever supported windows".
Unfortunately I don't think Wine 64bit support is there yet, and neither does Crossover currently support 64bit windows. So clearly neither of these are options for me. It might be feasible for me to play the game in a Virtual Windows environment, the specifications as stated COULD allow for such a possibility. However unfortunately over the last few years, I've moved as much of my computing away from Windows OS as I can to the point that I don't run a PHYSICAL windows box anymore, I have one, including SLI GPU's, but really can't bring myself to use it for anything anymore.
I have managed to play SoSE & Skyrim on my iMac with Crossover, and that's thats as much effort as I put into windows OS based games now. I have 1/3 of my STEAM games with OS X clients, and that's my choice now. If a game doesn't provide me an OS X client, I don't buy it anymore. I've supported the previous two versions of this game, and loved every minute of playing it, both I & II.
Unfortunately I'm tired of a games industry that's not interested in either providing quality or variety. This is not a gibe at Stardock, I've been more than happy with the quality of all of the products that I've purchased from them, and that's almost ALL. I've bought every Stardock game to date (except this one). I supported them on OS/2, and have purchased quite a bit of their non game related windows software in the past.
Unfortunately as much as I want to play this game I won't because I don't want to run a windows box at home.
I use Kubuntu 14.04 64 bit mostly now. I have a dual boot system with Windows Vista Home Premium but it is 32 bit and I hardly use it any more. I subscribe to the wine updates mailing list so I know that wine has been improving its DirectX 10 and 11 support. Its still hit and miss as to whether a next gen game will run. I tried tropico 5 via wine 64 bit and it wouldn't run. When Tropico 5 for Linux (Steam) came out last month it worked on my NVIDIA Geforce 280 GTX! Thats a DirectX 10 card. Since NVIDIA makes OpenGL compatibility before it makes DirexctX compatibility then the GTX 280 is Compatible with DirectX 10 and OpenGL 3.2. Tropico 5 Linux version requiers OpenGL 3.2. If Kalypso can do it then why not Stardock? There is no legitimate reason why Galactic Civilizations III sould not be ported to Ubuntu Linux 14.04 64 bit via Steam for Linux and Steam for Mac. Stardock; while you are at it please port Sins of a Solar Empire to Steam for Linux and Steam for Mac.
Normally i ignore discussions like this, but this irked me.
1) Galactic Civilizations III is 64bit. How many Linux/Mac home users are already on 64bit.
2) Galactic Civilizations III uses - as far as i can see - the Granny, Miles, and Bink libraries van RADTOOLS and possible other libraries. For the Mac and (a limited number of distributions of) Linux 64 bit was only recently introduced (Miles) 07/04/2014, Granny (12/01/2012), Bink (Pre release: 11/15/2013, first stable: 01/31/2014). And quite a few of the recent bugs squashed are for these versions. So there are hardly any game developer who can have experience with these 64 bit versions. And blindly thinking it works on the windows version, so it should work on any of the other variants is not the reality of the this world.
3) Various libraries have demands for the supported compiler (IDE) and other things. On windows for example the Bink library now works under VS2012, on Linux it compiles with GCC 4.8, this means that you will need to make your sources and resources compiler/platform agnostic. This will take lots of time. VS solutions are not Linux makefiles. So double your software-project overhead because it needs to be kept in sync.
4) Debugging various platforms will required different skill sets: experience with different debuggers, memory dump inspection/interrogation, log file analysis. This will probably mean additional programmers, support staff.
5) Execution security on Linux is not standardized between the various linux distributions, which means SELinux will be probably need to be disabled. Are you happy about this? A lot of people have it by default on and don't even know how to switch it off.
6) Not all Linuxes are equal. For example Kubuntu is the 36th most used variant. Maybe you are lucky and will it work for you because it is derived from Ubuntu - the number 2. Because i do not believe SD is going to distribute the game in compilable source form.
7) Doubling/Tripling your license fees while still in the development phase is not the wised business strategy.
So i see several reasons why there are legitimate reasons for currently not supporting multiple platforms.
Even other A-class games that do support multiple platforms, there is always one primary platform and once that is up and running, the other supported platforms follow thereafter. And this is not just the initial release, but also any patches and other things like DLC, expansions and so on.
If a Linux version would arrive in the future and i wouldn't have to buy a second license (on top of the windows version) just to run it, then i would happily play on one of my Linux systems.
http://steamcommunity.com/games/CivilizationV/announcements/detail/1787114954235229948
http://steamcommunity.com/app/49520/discussions/0/616189106749909144/
The following games have been ported to Linux and I have them. They run on my computer:Including the two above.
Europiu Universals IV, Crusader Kings II, Tropico 5, Democracy 3, XCOM Enemy Unknown and Euro Truck Simulator 2. That is just a small part of my Steam for Linux library. There are around 1 thousand games that have been ported to Steam for Linux and Steam OS. Steam OS is just Valve's custom version of Linux. Valve/Steam for Linux is doing a good job with its Client installing everything you need to get games running. They currently support Ubuntu 14.04 but other distros seem to work mostly. They plan to support more distros in the future. If you already have the Windows versions of these games then you can use any OS that Steam supports. Just down load the client and you will find the games in your library. No additional license is needed. The License you bought for the Windows version is for all supported OSes.
With all these Linux ports, SD has no excuse for not porting or hiring Aspyr or some company to do the Steam for Linux port. If they port to Linux or Mac then the other OS will be easy. Both Linux and Mac use very similar graphics like OpenGL and the Xserver.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
