Jump to content

Running client on Linux


Crandules

Recommended Posts

I can see there have been some posts about people wanting to but i was wondering if there has been any one who has successfully set up the client to run on linux? the launcher seems to install successfully using proton however when it launches it just crashes repeatedly. 

 

and yes i am aware there is a lot of anti linux sentiment in the community going by a lot of the previous threads but they seem to be from a couple of years ago and some of the devs are known to be running on linux so it has to be possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bazzybtec said:

I can see there have been some posts about people wanting to but i was wondering if there has been any one who has successfully set up the client to run on linux? the launcher seems to install successfully using proton however when it launches it just crashes repeatedly. 

 

and yes i am aware there is a lot of anti linux sentiment in the community going by a lot of the previous threads but they seem to be from a couple of years ago and some of the devs are known to be running on linux so it has to be possible.

The anticheat program is incompatible with Linux. 

 

Your best options are:

A virtual machine with graphics pass-through. 

Some game streaming service. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think community is as you call it "anti-linux" in any particular way.  Most of us spare very little time thinking about Linux ,if at all, at least not in a context of a viable desktop OS, much less a gaming one. Its market share has remained literally static for the past 20 years and very few except for a few diehard wine/cedega enthusiasts really care. 

 

From a developers perspective, adding support for Linux  makes as little business sense as developing commercial software for QNX. It's a hard case to push even with macOS X, that has 5x the market share (consumer OS). 

 

But as to your original question, DU doesn't run on linux, the anticheat is installed as a system service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GraXXoR said:

also no direct X on Linux so you’d have to run it in “pants mode (beta)”

not entirely accurate as microsoft themselves have put a lot of development into linux code for direct X compatibility as part of their WSL integration and there are a number of modules that allow direct translation for directx compatibility  with vulkan. 

 

5 hours ago, Bazzy_505 said:

at least not in a context of a viable desktop OS, much less a gaming one. Its market share has remained literally static for the past 20 years and very few except for a few diehard wine/cedega enthusiasts really care. 

and yet Red Hat Enterprise Linux desktop has been commercially viable for over a decade and I am able to play most of my games in my steam library on it with no issue at all, additionally Valve obviously don't agree with this sentiment given the investment they have put into the development they have put into linux compatibility. 

 

21 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:

The anticheat program is incompatible with Linux. 

 

Your best options are:

A virtual machine with graphics pass-through. 

Some game streaming service. 

 

I intended to upgrade my GPU when they become a thing again so I will possibly look at the virtual machine pass through option until a proper client is available. the subscription model seems fairly pricey and will quickly add up to an upgrade to my system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seen the vanilla price of the 3080ti? $1200 before scalping for a 6-10% faster card than the $700 3080. 
 

I bet you NVIDIA will phase out the 3080. 

 

The free market has spoken. 
f’ckn hate crypto miners. 
 

 

not entirely accurate as microsoft themselves have put a lot of development into linux code for direct X compatibility as part of their WSL integration and there are a number of modules that allow direct translation for directx compatibility  with vulkan. 

 

I was under the impression that WSL was there to allow Windows to run Linux code.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GraXXoR said:

Seen the vanilla price of the 3080ti? $1200 before scalping for a 6-10% faster card than the $700 3080. 
 

I bet you NVIDIA will phase out the 3080. 

 

The free market has spoken. 
f’ckn hate crypto miners. 

 

the cheapest i have seen where i live is starting at $2000, its crazy expensive. even budget cards are way more than they used to be. I was thinking about the RTX 2060

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:

The anticheat program is incompatible with Linux. 

 

Your best options are:

A virtual machine with graphics pass-through. 

Some game streaming service. 

 

VM is your best bet for sure. And NVidia re-enabled virtual GPU support for normal consumer cards not that long ago, so it is easier then ever without hacky solutions.. https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5173/~/geforce-gpu-passthrough-for-windows-virtual-machine-(beta)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Bazzy_505 said:

From a developers perspective, adding support for Linux  makes as little business sense as developing commercial software for QNX.

Yep, you are anti-linux

 

Most current game engines will support Linux. 

Its the game developers that will do hard-coded stuff instead of using the engine methods and break linux compatibility. 

 

And there are allot of reasons to support Linux. 

Steam link. Several current and future game streaming technologies... 

 

And when ppl refuse to change 0.01% of the code to support Linux, it means that they dont want to. 

Not that it makes no sense. 

 

If you open steam on Linux, you wil notice that half of the games are supported. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bazzybtec said:

and yet Red Hat Enterprise Linux desktop has been commercially viable for over a decade and I am able to play most of my games in my steam library on it with no issue at all, additionally Valve obviously don't agree with this sentiment given the investment they have put into the development they have put into linux compatibility. 

 

While true, facts are that all this work really has not yielded much, if any result. For a game like DU, if NQ were to support Linux they would need to accommodate a number of distributions which are not interchangeable.  I mean, Linus himself is very clear about the reasons why there is no broad support for desktop on Linux in general and for gaming specifically.

 

I get why people may choose to go with Linux, I also feel many of the arguments are no longer valid or relevant today and bottom line is simply that there is not enough market share for Linux to be a viable platform to support for game developers in general as there no reasonable expectation of recovering the time and resources spent supporting these platforms.

 

 

Quote

I intended to upgrade my GPU when they become a thing again so I will possibly look at the virtual machine pass through option until a proper client is available. the subscription model seems fairly pricey and will quickly add up to an upgrade to my system.

 

If NQ would change their mind and see how Shadow is a platform which would solve many potential problems and offer opportunity for them to grow their player base, it would actually be a perfect middle ground. at $37/month you get a full blown gaming PC running windows which is accessible on your Linux desktop, your phone, your tablet or whatever.

 

Considering that your average GFX card suitable to run DU would come in around €600 by itself at least. even that above monthly cost is not unreasonable an offers some unique advantages.

Honestly, saying that a €7/mo subscription is "fairly pricey and will quickly add up to an upgrade to my system" is, frankly speaking, nonsense.

 

 

  

1 hour ago, joaocordeiro said:

And when ppl refuse to change 0.01% of the code to support Linux, it means that they dont want to. 

That is the most absurd argument I have heard in a good while and I do hope you actually know full well this is utter nonsense.

 

Some of the major engines may "support Linux" to some extent but the mountain of problems and issue to overcome is massive and varies depending on what Linux distro you try to target. Again, for the relative handful of users this will accommodate, it's not something worth the time and resources for most game developers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:

Yep, you are anti-linux

 

Most current game engines will support Linux. 

Its the game developers that will do hard-coded stuff instead of using the engine methods and break linux compatibility. 

 

And there are allot of reasons to support Linux. 

Steam link. Several current and future game streaming technologies... 

 

And when ppl refuse to change 0.01% of the code to support Linux, it means that they dont want to. 

Not that it makes no sense. 

 

If you open steam on Linux, you wil notice that half of the games are supported. 

What utter nonsense - there are many issues with multi-platform development. One of the biggest is testing - you now have multiple platforms to test everything on. It is a significant investment and for a small team not usually practical. You also need knowledge and skills in all the platforms.

 

The other hard part of multi-platform is that you end up with lowest common denominator development, coding to the weakest platform. Just not an easy option.

 

As to Steam - like it or not it is predominantly a Windows platform - the 2020 survey had over 95% Windows, a few percent Mac and I didn't even see Linux mentioned. Bad example.

 

Shadow has the same issue - if it is not out of the box Windows compatible then it is essentially a separate platform that requires its own testing at a minimum. As there are 'thousands' not tens or hundreds of thousands of user then it is perfectly reasonable that it is not a priority until they get the mainstream system up and fully working. Sad for those on the platform but true. I also suspect you have not seen the last of the price rises.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blazemonger said:

Some of the major engines may "support Linux" to some extent but the mountain of problems and issue to overcome is massive and varies depending on what Linux distro you try to target


Yet it appears that steam does not have any "too many distros" problems.

 

"Valve officially released Steam for Linux on February 14, 2013. As of June 2020 the number of Linux-compatible games on Steam exceeds 6,500."

Current games are already at 40GB size. And use 8GB+ ram
Why should you even bother with depending on distro related libs? To save 1% disk space? Or 1% ram? Just pack your own libs with the game...
All you need from the distro are a few libs that connect to the kernel and the graphics card. And those are common in all distros.

If the engine (the part that really needs to use distro libs) supports linux. And that's a BIG IF.
Then the game not working on Linux is a result of bad programming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Cheith said:

As to Steam - like it or not it is predominantly a Windows platform - the 2020 survey had over 95% Windows, a few percent Mac and I didn't even see Linux mentioned. Bad example.

 

Steam supporting and pushing developers to support multiple platforms is not a bad example. 

 

Ubuntu has a share of 0.2%.

I would say that if the work needed to put it running on Ubuntu is lower than 0.2% then its worth it.

 

As for testing, low budget games often say that the game "should work" on linux. 

And knowing the linux share, linux users accept this. 

 

But that is different from: "lets use visual studio proprietary libs and F you linux" 

 

Windows has a monopoly in PC gaming.

That wont end until developers do something about it. 

 

Most triple A engines already support linux. Its just up to the end developer to opt not to include BS visual studio crap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If DU was in a different place feature and quality wise, NQ could consider which additional platforms to support. The resulting business case (cost-benifit analysis) for Windows 7 (also supported by Steam) is FAR stronger than Linux. And I use Linux (currently Fedora) for software development exclusively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is.
Most of the reasons why any game won't run in Linux are common on to why the game is not ported to a console or does not run in mac.
 

Number 1 reason: The engine does not support it.

In DU i can admit that the engine has suffered a very hard customization. And the choice of the engine had the ease of that customization into account. 

But most gaming develop companies don't have a hard requirement to use this engine over that engine. Those companies should use an engine that has been ported to consoles  and other OSs. Instead of a windows only engine.

 

Number 2 reason: We can't find this library in that platform.

Simple solution, before importing libraries to your project, check of those are available on other platforms.
Like, something that needs VC redistributes should not be used....

Number 3 reason: This custom part of the code does not run in other platforms (example: hardcoded C:\ as path...).
You are probably not using the engine as you should.

Most/all current engines have abstraction layers to deal with OS stuff.

The programmer that decided discard the engine abstraction layer has no business in working in your company.

 

Number 4 reason: But this cutting edge technology only exists in windows.

And you wonder why you have tuns of bugs? (dark screen back in alpha on some GPUS anyone?)

Stop using untested technologies without a good reason to use them and your code will be stable......

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, blazemonger said:

If NQ would change their mind and see how Shadow is a platform which would solve many potential problems and offer opportunity for them to grow their player base, it would actually be a perfect middle ground. at $37/month you get a full blown gaming PC running windows which is accessible on your Linux desktop, your phone, your tablet or whatever.

 

Considering that your average GFX card suitable to run DU would come in around €600 by itself at least. even that above monthly cost is not unreasonable an offers some unique advantages.

Honestly, saying that a €7/mo subscription is "fairly pricey and will quickly add up to an upgrade to my system" is, frankly speaking, nonsense.

 

 

 

$36US per month for this absolute builds up to an upgrade quickly. Thats at the time of writing $48 australian per month  that's basically 6 months and i have a second GPU that i can run and solve this issue. 

 

and thats assuming they are going to keep that price in the last week or so tweeting that they have to restructure the pricing to make the business model sustainable. that's corporate language for "this is costing us too much renting out  high end gaming blades for cheaper than any VPS service offers servers for, we are loosing money fast" so expect a price hike and a substantial one at that.

 

Furthermore even if i sign up to it now. looking at their offering they say it will be ready by march 29 2022. there is clearly something wrong there.

 

8 hours ago, GraXXoR said:

I was under the impression that WSL was there to allow Windows to run Linux code.

 

it is but since this has happened volkan has reverse engineered it and directX 9  through to 12 are now supported

4 hours ago, blazemonger said:

I get why people may choose to go with Linux, I also feel many of the arguments are no longer valid or relevant today and bottom line is simply that there is not enough market share for Linux to be a viable platform to support for game developers in general as there no reasonable expectation of recovering the time and resources spent supporting these platforms.

Why i choose Linux is because i am a red hat certified engineer and i also pay to use the operating system. it is substantially more expensive that windows and far more stable. essentially given the OS is a subscription model look at it this way. every time i dual boot into windows and spend time on windows to the exclusion of RHEL it costs me money in lost subscription time for a vastly superior operating system.

 

I understand most people prefer windows however I use Linux for work, i am much more accustomed to using linux and essentially linux users are being penalized by some members on this forum for the choice of operating system, essentially to play a game that is essentially a cross between Eve online and space engineers but full of bugs, both i might add work perfectly on Linux they didn't seem to have members on their forum essentially asking linux users to justify their choice in operating system. i have to admit that is getting rather old.

 

you should also be bundling OSX in with Linux as far as development is concerned because the kernel arch from the same unix source so the market share you are screwing your nose up at is more like 23% when you take ChromeOS (linux) and OSX into consideration 

 

additionally windows market share is as of May this year 73.5% and it is dropping. probably largely due to the linux gaming implementation improvements over the last few years. some of those improvements such as Vulkan have made it across to OSX too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@joaocordeiro

LOL.. Are you _really_ implying that governments should intervene and basically enforce developers to support an OS that has next to no market share? You really have a knack for derailing a thread  it seems.

 

Facts here are very straightforward;

The player base is not there to support a native Linux version of most games

The creator of Linux has made several public statement where is says that Linux on Desktop will simply not ever be a thing due to the fragmentation and segmentation caused by different distros.

 

the roughly 6000 games supporting Linux on Steam may sound like a big number, but when you realize that as of last month there were 50,361 games on Steam that becomes a not so large number. If you then check what percentage of those 6000 games are actually played on Linux as opposed to Windows .. well .. a pattern starts emerging.

 

Linux is not and will never be a mainstream (gaming) OS for desktop, it just will not happen. And that is not taking away anything from the many excellent possible applications for Linux in the field where it shines (even when it is not the market leader there either). When Steam announced it's push on Linux support two years ago the entire 2% of the market share using Linux sang praise and glory.. today, that hype  resulted in .. well.. nothing.

 

 

Going back to the OP questions, it's just a matter of resources and money. The question comes up every now and then and the arguments are mostly the same every time. But the number simply are not there. I'm pretty sure ore people got impacted by and now can play because of the issues DU has on Shadow than there are potential players on Linux and NQ doe snot have the time or resources to prioritise fixing that issue. 

 

 

1 hour ago, bazzybtec said:

$36US per month for this absolute builds up to an upgrade quickly. Thats at the time of writing $48 australian per month  that's basically 6 months and i have a second GPU that i can run and solve this issue. 

 

and thats assuming they are going to keep that price in the last week or so tweeting that they have to restructure the pricing to make the business model sustainable. that's corporate language for "this is costing us too much renting out  high end gaming blades for cheaper than any VPS service offers servers for, we are loosing money fast" so expect a price hike and a substantial one at that.

 

The new price is €30/month up from €15 .. If you can get a GPU suitable to play DU for 300AUD hen by all means.. go for it..

 

 

1 hour ago, bazzybtec said:

 they didn't seem to have members on their forum essentially asking linux users to justify their choice in operating system. i have to admit that is getting rather old.

 

No one here is asking you to justify using Linux. You are free to do so but will need to accept that this will have consequences. in the case of DU it means that as the anti cheat framework NQ choose for DU doe snot support Linux and from their FAW will not do so, you are out of luck.

 

 

1 hour ago, bazzybtec said:

you should also be bundling OSX in with Linux as far as development is concerned because the kernel arch from the same unix source so the market share you are screwing your nose up at is more like 23% when you take ChromeOS (linux) and OSX into consideration 

Based on what you wrote earlier I must assume you are just trying to make a point here you know is not valid. In actuality, OS X is much closer to Unix than Linux is and ChomeOS is based on a Linux kernel (while not being Linux). But this is really a non argument that has no merit here and I expect you know as much.

 

You can't make the case that by combining these three you create a viable player base that will require a singular approach to support all of these.

 

NQ manages to barely stay alive right now just having to deal with Windows. Unless they change their chat engine framework, supporting another OS is simply not going to happen.

 

1 hour ago, bazzybtec said:

additionally windows market share is as of May this year 73.5% and it is dropping. probably largely due to the linux gaming implementation improvements over the last few years. some of those improvements such as Vulkan have made it across to OSX too

 

LOL.. Linux accounts for 2.38 of desktop OS installs, and that is probably 70% Ubuntu/Debian, 20-ish % RH and then the rest.. That number has not budged at all after the Valve push.. It's also interesting how ppl keep bringing in Vulkan where that support for that framework has hardly seen any change, most games still are on DX11 today, if not DX9

 

Again, no one here is asking you to defend your choice of OS, you do that all by yourself. All I and presumably most other s here will tell you is.. you choose to go with an OS which is and will remain a footnote in desktop market share when you go by the years of statistics around this. And you are obviously able and allowed to make that choice but it's like you are bringing a footstool to go harvest apples while you should have brought a ladder.

 

 

TL;DR:

DU support for Linux will not happen because the numbers are not there to make it viable and invest resources towards it, the engine does not support a Linux native GFX framework and the chosen anti cheat framework does not support Linux

 

 

You want to play DU, you will need to get a solution that includes Windows.. simple as that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

Are you _really_ implying that governments should intervene and basically enforce developers to support an OS that has next to no market share?

 

Not implying. Its a clear application of the law to break a monopoly. 

 

And there are precedents. 

EU forced MS to open up office document standards to allow for other office programs to open them. 

 

How far away is to require binaries to also be portable? 

 

MS abuses its monopoly positions in many fronts. One of them is the binary ecosystem. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:

 

Steam supporting and pushing developers to support multiple platforms is not a bad example. 

 

Ubuntu has a share of 0.2%.

I would say that if the work needed to put it running on Ubuntu is lower than 0.2% then its worth it.

 

As for testing, low budget games often say that the game "should work" on linux. 

And knowing the linux share, linux users accept this. 

 

But that is different from: "lets use visual studio proprietary libs and F you linux" 

 

Windows has a monopoly in PC gaming.

That wont end until developers do something about it. 

 

Most triple A engines already support linux. Its just up to the end developer to opt not to include BS visual studio crap. 

0.2% - sorry, but the testing alone is not worth it. Should work and do work, as you know, are not exactly the same things. Ubuntu also isn't all of Linux and all Linux clients are not the same. I also have a feeling that the DU client might be a tiny little bit more complex than your average Steam game. Once you get into threading and the like it usually gets harder to move between the platforms as their models are different. If it is a single event queue type game not so much.

 

Frankly Linux is still ultra niche in the desktop world and this is a reflection of that.

 

Also, why would developers push Linux over Windows if it gives them what they want? As a game developer why would you care? Indeed as a developer a single platform monopoly makes your life easier. It would be one thing if we have one version of Linux but we don't even have that. So the order goes Win, Mac, and then maybe Linux.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:

This issue is only solved by legislation.. 

 

If govermemts would ask for extra in taxes if a software is only available in a certain OS, then managers would instruct programers to make portable code. 

And which OS would you favor? Linux is still not a great choice anyway. Should we fund Apple to promote MacOS? Or lets give Google some more market share by funding a desktop Google OS. Seriously, have you even thought about this? Linux is NOT a standard in any way and apart from developers no one else gives a zot about it. So, what is the alternative? GovOS - one per country of trading bloc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Cheith said:

And which OS would you favor? Linux is still not a great choice anyway. Should we fund Apple to promote MacOS? Or lets give Google some more market share by funding a desktop Google OS. Seriously, have you even thought about this? Linux is NOT a standard in any way and apart from developers no one else gives a zot about it. So, what is the alternative? GovOS - one per country of trading bloc?

Instead, we could create a binary standard.

Binaries within the standard would pay 5% less taxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:

Instead, we could create a binary standard.

Binaries within the standard would pay 5% less taxes.

You know they already did that, right, its called Java!! Sadly (relatively speaking) it doesn't perform all that well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Cheith said:

You know they already did that, right, its called Java!! Sadly (relatively speaking) it doesn't perform all that well.

Yes, i have that example in mind. 

And most of the problems of java are related to the crappy programers doing code in it. 

 

But java is not a true binary standard. 

Java vm only allows "binaries" written in java language. 

The idea would be for any .obj created by compiling a code file to be able to  linked into that new binary format. 

 

Those binaries, instead of preforming kernel calls directly, would provide a place in memory for the address of those calls to be added by the OS. 

 

Instead of assuming maloc calls kernel on address 0xNNNNN the binary would require that address to be fulfilled by the kernel on program start. 

 

Understand that this things already exist. 

There is a windows standard, very well known. And a Linux standard, and a Playstation format, etc... 

 

We just need regulation to force them all to adopt a single standard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...