DCS World Support Linux

I have another PC that is mostly empty, it is my scratch-built PC based on the i7-920 CPU.

I've been thinking about playing with Linux with it. A public library IT guy is one of my PC gurus that I am friendly with and he has helped me a lot, though using Windows based stuff.

His home PCs, 4 of them, are all Linux based and not Windows. His hobby is creating graphics based creations. He dates back with Linux before the likes of Ubuntu, and such.

Will DCS World run well on a Linux based system?

Does anybody here run Linux with DCS?

I have only played a little bit with Ubuntu. I definitely do not know much about Linux, but my local library has old and new books about it that just sit on the shelf unused and my buddy is a wealth of knowledge from the old days to present.

I was hoping some serious LINUX gurus would come on and comment about it.

It won't work. It's too complex to be ported via wine and there's the activation issue.

Too bad, I've often wondered the same thing. Completely understand the limitations and that the demand is probably almost incalculably low.

I do wonder what neat things a Linux version would make available in terms of customization/scripting/what else?

Just musing!

Too sad that there is this stupid DRM. I'd prefer to have the game bound to an user account (like in multiplayer) but have no DRM in return (i.e. you would need to be online to play in singleplayer).

I have a Windows install that literally just has DCS World, Nvidia drivers, HOTAS drivers and profiling software, and Track IR drivers installed so I can play DCS. Of all of these the only one not available in Linux that I know of is the Track IR drivers, and honestly I'm so lazy about actually using it that I could care less about losing it if I could just run the game and ditch windows.

There is actually an open source TrackIR driver/software for Linux (it's not made especially for TrackIR, works with most cameras, but apparently works with TrackIR too). Here's the link (BTW, I haven't used it myself):http://code.google.com/p/linux-track/

Not all games on Steam require steam to run though. But I get your point.

One of the reasons I don't hesitate to say I run games 'in Steam' is because Steam _is_ DRM and as such is proof that it is possible to do something that isn't so horribly invasive and still protect your stuff. It's a happy medium that protects the game makers/distributors and is an account based system that lets me run them on Linux if I am entitled to....

I have never used Steam.

I like steam a lot, since it allows me to easily run any game I own on any PC I want as long as it has steam installed am I sign in with my account there. Too sad, that ED doesn't trust the Steam DRM. That would allow me to run DCS on any PC but only as long as I'm signed in to my Steam account.

And - most importantly - Steam is coming to Linux. Very, very soon. The beta is already there.

I know that Steam is a bit difficult for ED, but it would be AMAZING to have *full* DCS/Steam integration (w/ ingame Steam chat, Steam DRM instead of Starforce, etc.). Third-Parties could also make use of Steam to sell and protect their DLCs!

i.e. you would need to be online to play in singleplayer.

@xaoslaad (or anyone else who's knowledgable on the subject), I don't know much about WINE, so maybe you can answer some of the following questions/stipulations...

1: I would assume that running anything through WINE would incur a detectable performance hit, especially something like DCS A-10C?

2: Graphics are **usually** going to be worse in Linux because most of the time the drivers are written first (and optimized for) Windows and the Linux version (if it exists) is usually not given as much attention (is usually significant versions back from Windows version)?

3: In your mind, what would running on Linux offer as an advantage to running on Windows, other than making it so you don't have to buy Windows?

4: Like I said before, I figure there would be some better scripting support and server support that would come with Linux, but what would you say to that?

1: I would assume that running anything through WINE would incur a detectable performance hit, especially something like DCS A-10C?

Not necessarily. WinE is not an emulation layet, it's a Linux implementation of the same API you'd use on Windows. So this would depend entirely on how good said implementation is.

2: Graphics are **usually** going to be worse in Linux because most of the time the drivers are written first (and optimized for) Windows and the Linux version (if it exists) is usually not given as much attention (is usually significant versions back from Windows version)?

That was a bit simplified, but pretty much.

3: In your mind, what would running on Linux offer as an advantage to running on Windows, other than making it so you don't have to buy Windows?

To my mind, it would be Linux. That's pretty much the only advantage. Not being glib either - I just like Linux and the control it offers, but there's no specific advatnage I can think of to gaming on it. (But many disadvantages, some of which you have mentioned.)

4: Like I said before, I figure there would be some better scripting support and server support that would come with Linux, but what would you say to that?

I see no reason why a Linux server/application would have better scripting support.

The reason Linux applications generally have more/better scripting support than windows application is cultural, not anything to do with the OSes in question; Linux is a product of the open source community, and customization is part and parcel of what it has always done, so whenever an application is written for/by this community it'll typically have lots of fun stuff you can do with it (not to forget it being open source in the first place). On the other hand, the same community has traditionally been craptastic at user interface design, so...

But anyhow, there's noting magical about Linux that makes applications running on it suddenly have better scripting support. DCS already has extreme scripting support.

Thanks for the replys.

I wish the server could be standalone (without graphics requirement, headless, ssh into or something like that, command line) but do NOT want to lose the ability to run a server AND play on the same physical computer, since many of us just don't have more than one comp capable of that.

Wonder if there is any chance for an open-source / community port of the DCS server?

4.) I think as far as scripting/utility support I would suppose whatever is aloud via them for either. You can just as easily create a Windows service as a Linux daemon. You could do a powershell scripts instead of a bash script, etc. The big headache with DCS and dedicated servers right now, as I understand it, is the graphics card requirements. You can't have a AWS or some other hosted vm for a server; you need a full blown windows system with some decent graphics card, which i not common for racked servers.

Rendering can be turned off with configuration string in LUA.

You still need a DX9-capable video device onboard, but this exists already on iGPU's. I have however not seen performance tests of how well this works in practice - here we have the problem that the good CPU's (Intel) have the crappy iGPU's, while the good iGPU's (AMD) sit on crappy CPU's (for DCS purposes, that is).

Wonder if there is any chance for an open-source / community port of the DCS server?

Impossible both legally and practically. Legally because it is ED property. Practically because you'd need source code access first. That source code is what pays the bills at ED offices, so odds of it being released are obviously slim.

Linux is becoming better for the gamer/homeruser. Is it up to a certain standard? I dont know, every popular distro i try always has something concerning hardware. Like the video and audio drivers that lack behind. Is it just me or is there alot of difficulty reaching a certain quality standard? Might it have something to do with the fact its actualy all little projects that come together and have incompatibility?

Anyways, things might be changing in the next couple of year by having linuxbased open source consoles which might create a higher quality standard in linuxgaming.

Commodore OS has a funny Linux distro, the deep blue is kind of meh, but it supports most of the old commodore devices and games. Is also fun to show and use this with the kids to see where things started off from in the 80's. Remember the 'press play on tape'? :D

I still have my old commodore 64 with a tapedeck and floppydrive, showed it to my young nephew to learn him something about the old days.

He loved it more than his Xbox, asked if he could play at home and the Xbox is in the corner.

The big deal with Linux is that it is "by hackers for hackers", so to speak. "Consumer packaging" is sort of an afterthought, so we sohuldn't be surprised that there are issues that come up; it's made by and for users that not only know how to tinker with their systems - they actually like to and want to tinker with their systems!

...whereas Windows, OSX etcetera are built specifically for people that don't want to tinker with them - their fundamental design idea is that you shouldn't need to know anything about how a computer works in order to use those operating systems.

So well, that there are the differences that there are isn't exactly strange. Some distros, like Ubuntu, have come a long way though.

Regarding incompatibilities, depends and varies. Remember for example that Android is Linux too. So while the practical differences between a Gentoo and Slackware system might be minimal, you can also have the much greater difference between what is running on a Beowulf Cluster and what's running Angry Birds on your cell phone... So saying a given system is "Linux" really is a bit dangerous; all it really tells us is which codebase the kernel is taken from, and in many cases (like Android, but also others) has then been extensively modified from.

Which leads us to another important question: when talking about "supporting" Linux: which linux? Which route to go towards handling dependencies and package management? etcetera etcetera. Doesn't have to be a big problem, indeed most likely isn't, but it is none the less an issue that is easy to forget when we talk about "Linux" as a singular thing. It's not. It's "just" a Kernel and people do a lot of varied things to said kernel.

I have also found the idea of Microsoft moving to only allowing the install of formerly-called-Metro apps from their store, and what I am sure is the eventual death of legacy apps to be distasteful. Same with Apple and their latest move with newer versions of OS X that I have heard only allow the install of Apps that don't come from the store, by first disabling some setting. I imagine someday you won't have that option anymore. May be equal parts misinformation and paranoia, but I like installing what I want, thank you very much.

Windows is still alive just because of long support for legacy apps. This is the strongest point of Windows. There are too much business apps created, and enterprises just can't stop using them. They would rather continue using legacy OS, than investing into new software, so Microsoft always avoids breaking backward compatibility as much as possible (even if that means keeping some stupid aspects of OS), or else they would loose lots of sales.

There is lots of fuss about Metro apps, because lots of sites mixed Windows 8 for Desktop with Windows RT for ARM based mobile devices. Only the later has Microsoft Store as the only mean to get software.

Which leads us to another important question: when talking about "supporting" Linux: which linux? Which route to go towards handling dependencies and package management? etcetera etcetera. Doesn't have to be a big problem, indeed most likely isn't, but it is none the less an issue that is easy to forget when we talk about "Linux" as a singular thing. It's not. It's "just" a Kernel and people do a lot of varied things to said kernel.

Because of it's market share among more "common" users, I'd say Ubuntu (debian) rather than RedHat (rpm), which is more or less enterprise'ish (IMO). Well... at least that's my perception.

I've used Ubuntu a LOT over the last 2 years and have found that there are lots of answers available online to resolve various issues, so I've never been 100% hosed by any issue. Plus... just nice to be able to download my OS as an ISO, burn to media, and install, re-install whenever I want / without being required to purchase and enter an activation key.

The big deal with Linux is that it is "by hackers for hackers", so to speak. "Consumer packaging" is sort of an afterthought, so we sohuldn't be surprised that there are issues that come up; it's made by and for users that not only know how to tinker with their systems - they actually like to and want to tinker with their systems!

Well, I suppose that changes - at least a bit - when there is a stable Steam on Linux.

Well, I suppose that changes - at least a bit - when there is a stable Steam on Linux.

You still need to convince a lot of developers to actually make versions of their games for Linux.

Porting steam to Linux does absolutely zero towards actually making any of the games run on the OS. There would basically have to be serious success for Valves own ports for other than a brave few (and those indies that already have portable codebases) to hop on there.

What do you guys think of the upcoming Linux Ouya? Still its going to be very open for modification and hacking unfortunatly. Im still wondering if tha will do any good to the developed games.

@EtherealN, I would say that Steam opening up on Linux is a.) indicative of some market research they've reviewed (i.e. it's been deemed worth their dollars to do the work), b.) "if you build it... they will come" (chicken or egg... digital download or titles argument).

I would say it is a significant step for Steam to show up for Linux, though it's not as if tomorrow every game developed will have Linux support (as you've indicated). Just like Linux's history... it's a slow, burgeoning market segment, but... it's growing. Now that there's a reputable platform for downloading and DRM'ing titles on Linux, it seems pretty logical that you'd start seeing more titles support Linux. Ubuntu is a good example of how adoption has been increasing in general. IMO.

@BRooDJeRo, first I've heard of it. Interesting to see that Valve says Left 4 Dead 2 runs better on Ubuntu. Big titles like that getting that kind of press is going to help drive more dev to support Linux. A gaming "flavor" of *nix seems good to me. Focus it on all the key parts demanded by gaming.

Big players have hard time recognize Windows as a valuable platform to develop/port games for.

I find it hard to believe that some on-line market will convince them that Linux with it miniature market share and 'not so fond on payed SW' community reputation is worth the effort for them.

Steam was ported for Mac 2years ago, and I don't see that platform getting any bigger in terms of gaming.

Indie devs benefits the most from steam on linux. They finally have a big, well known, platform that they can use for distributing their games on Linux.

You still need to convince a lot of developers to actually make versions of their games for Linux.

 

Porting steam to Linux does absolutely zero towards actually making any of the games run on the OS.

I respectfully disagree with you on that one. Steam will provide an infrastructure to build upon. Of course devs will still have to do all of the porting BUT steam WILL provide them with many things that has stopped companies even considering Linux for a long time:

- a well defined environment (i.e. Ubuntu)

- high-quality graphic drivers (Valve is working w/ Intel and Nvidia, and they have already made noteable progress)

- easy packaging/deployment

Of course it is still a HUGE task to port all that nifty DX10/11 "tricks" to OpenGL, but it's getting increasignly more easy. ID Software has shown that it is very well possible to make games that run perfectly fine on any major OS (Win, Mac, Linux). They did it right (used OpenGL) and alas porting was a no-brainer for them.

Just a couple of points:

1. Steam on Linux is an extension of Valve's position that Windows 8 is death to PC gaming. See more here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/07/26/windows-8-is-a-catastrophe-according-to-gabe-newell-valve-hedging-with-steam-on-linux/

2. Market-wise, gaming on PCs, and even consoles, is in decline. The way consoles took the market from PCs, the same way smartphones and tablets are taking it away from consoles. Ouya BTW is Android - basically guts of a smartphone/tablet, plus peripherals and better rendering (

3. Long term, all developers that can't port to tablets and phones, should look at Linux - simply because Windows and Mac OS/iOS are much more focused on tablet and phone markets, and will neglect (or already are neglecting) desktop/workstation (or even full sized notebooks) as a platform. Long term, in my industry parlance, is five years let's say.

4. What does it mean for ED? With their long development cycles, they should look at the possibilities of a Linux port.

5. Due to its lack of IP burden, and lack of commercial interests driving the development, Linux can accommodate much better to what an application such as DCSW requires, not vice versa. This is a much better situation to be in, both for a developer, or a user. If ED finds a distro that works for them, it requires no investment on the client side to install it or run it. Compare it with the current situation - if you want to run DCSW properly you need 64-bit Win 7. For some people those 100 or so US$ is a bit of an obstacle I'd say. 0 US$ for Ubuntu is no obstacle at all.