Unreal Tournament 3 and Gears of War Linux Status

November 22nd, 2007 by Crusader

Augustus of recently obtained new information regarding the Linux port of Unreal Tournament 3, the first-person shooter sequel developed by Epic Games:

While hanging out on IRC, I asked the big question of the day, “Has anyone heard from Icculus (ed: Ryan Gordon) on the UT3 server or client?” Here’s the dialog with Icculus that resulted from that question. And, while I had his attention, I had to ask: “Are you doing a Gears of War port?” Included in this post is the answer to that question as well.

icculus replied that UT3’s port has been delayed by middleware legal issues that necessitate code replacement, and that there is no client ETA at present. As for Gears of War, icculus noted that Microsoft (the publisher) didn’t seem interested in a port.

7 Responses to “Unreal Tournament 3 and Gears of War Linux Status”

  1. salsadoom Says:

    Ha! Thats a shocker, MS isn’t interested in a port. I didn’t know Microsoft was the publisher, but knowing that pretty much eliminates the idea of a port right out. Big surprise. Anyway, Gears of War is an ok game, but its really small potatoes compared to UT3 anyway.

  2. Anonymous Says:

    How much Middleware needs to be replaced in UT3?
    Man, I hope that it is a small job. But then again if it was a lot of code, then perhaps it would benefit us Linux users perhaps in performance?

    Gears of War would be a good edition. I would buy it if a Linux port is available. But if Microsoft is involved. Well. I don’t know, but they always find a way to stuff things up. So yea, whatever.

  3. Anonymous Says:

    I’ll try to keep this + but the ut200*? demo felt so console canned. The only reason I would have shelled out the $60 was in appreciation for Marks’ outstanding commitment to the Linux platform (and I still will if available). IMHO the atmosphere that was generated by the original SP unreal game has long since passed. What does it matter having the “next generation tech” if game play is the same old spasmodic DM + a few cute vehicles? #rant off

  4. Anonymous Says:

    I don’t know. I found UT’99 pretty great and still do. All that came after just didn’t have the same feeling, though.

  5. Anonymous Says:

    I’m guessing the middle ware needed for UT3 has to do with physics, but couldn’t really tell.

    As for GoW, let us not forget it was the most important title for the 360 until Bioshock (another UE3.0 game) and Halo 3 were to be released. It was the first game to really expose the “capabilities” of the console, hence a flagship product and an “asset” to Microsoft. Done by Epic, published by Microsoft, what did we expect? For Microsoft to say that it was OK to earn money from Linux gamers, or to even release one piece of code with their name on it for the platform? I didn’t think so. GoW was fun… for a little bit. SP was too short (IMO) and multiplayer was fun for a while, the new game play was fresh, but forced you to take cover in every battle (these are games, not war simulators, last I checked). All in all an OK game as was said.

  6. Anonymous Says:

    The middleware I can identify offhand are: PhysX, Bink, and, I assume, some GameSpy code.

    I doubt that PhysX could be replaced at this point without a major rewrite, though. Since Icculus mentioned removing the offending code from the server, I would guess this wasn’t the problem.

    Perhaps the GameSpy code?

    If Epic licensed some code from GameSpy to allow them to use the GameSpy servers/network stuff, It’s possible GameSpy is making them re-license/remove it for the Linux version.

    Then there’s Bink/Radtools. Remember Neverwinter Nights?

    The Linux version of NWN couldn’t play the movies because they couldn’t/didn’t license the Bink software required to play them.

    UT3 inexplicably uses Bink for the logo movies and, even more pointlessly, for the loading screens. Yes, the loading screens, which consist of nothing more that a still background image and a small “throbber” are actually Bink movies. I could see where this would be easy to remove from the server, and more troublesome for the client.

    At any rate, this just shows the perils of making your product dependent on a bunch of proprietary 3rd party stuff. You’ve got to hand it to a company like id, who develops all their own solutions and can therefore do whatever the hell they want with their software, including releasing the whole thing under the GPL.

  7. Anonymous Says:

    We Have paid for the game.

    Perhaps some parts of the code could be binary only. All that would be needed is a glue layer (GPL?), to interface to the binary layer (Non-GPL?).

    The Idea seems to work O.K with Google, Nvidia and ATI.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.