Sorry your browser is not supported!

Alright,i am gonna argument why would Linux be a good platform for fps creator games.Also i want you to know that I am not talking about FPSC x9 and not even about x10,I am talking about a hipothetical far future version of fps creator.
Also,i don't know exactly how complicated would it be on a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 would be Chuck Norris kind of things.

Also even if FPS creator gets Linux support it does not mean that it has to swtch to an open source licese,it can stay proprietary software,and yes it is allowed to sell software on open source sistems,there are even open source sistems that are being sold for a price..

Basically switching to Linux would need either Directx ported to Linux and then simply porting the map creator(simpler for The game creators but less likely) or Darkbasic and Fps creator ported to Opengl(less simple for The game creators but 1% more likely(i think)).

I would even be satisfied if I the map editor would not support Linux as long as I could build games for Linux.

And now I am going to tell you the ''One good reason'' why FPS creator should get Linux support:
-99% of the existing Linux games suck 99% more than the games made by fps creator,including those fps creator games made by total noobs(no offence).Linux has about 1% of desktop market share,and compared to the market share of FPS creator games that is A LOT(compare 1% to 0.0000001%).Now since Linux games suck we could easily sell a lot of FPS creator games on Linux.See where I am getting at?We could flood Linux with games made by FPS creator.

I say we hit the games market at its weakest point before anyone else does,and that point is Linux

DirectX can't be ported to Linux(except through WINE, and that only kinda supports DirectX 9.0c) and porting FPSC to C++ and changing graphics engines(to OpenGL), input engines(OIS?), sound engines(irrKlang?), network libraries(???), and who knows what else FPSC uses from DarkBasic Professional/DirectX would take an extraordinary amount of time and Herculean effort.

I think it's a good idea, it's just not practical at the moment.

Considering how few people actually use Linux, and how fewer still actually play games on it, I think it'd be a poor investment of time and money.

@chaos: simply accept it that linux sucks^^

its made for pro-users, and also in the future it will be made for pro-users who only do pro-things on it. these people normally have 2 other highend-pcs or consoles or another windows-config on their board to do the non-pro-things, like... 99,99% of the things you would do with a computer

linux runs fast and (best configured) without errors. but macosx nearly does this too, and also win7 is not far away from that when you consider that the needed hardware costs less a pair of tomatoes. linux has its powers when microsoft comes out with incoherent win95/98 etc., but nowadays it only makes sense for time-passed hardcoders who still remember win-dos. there is no need for linux anymore, eqquivalent to vhs-cassettes since there are cheaper dvd/br-burners in the markets.

first there will be a version for macosx, but i dont believe in this, and lesser believe in a linux-version.

just my 2 cents to this.

@maho76 "its made for pro-users"

Umm so i guess my 5 year old is pro then lol. he knows how to use it to play games etc. my main computer witch is my day to day is linux. Also have 2 unix box's i use for a server. I can also say im not a (pro user) its an easy system to use, And these days you can do almost anything with it (sorta). linux dont suck, It all depends on the user (just need to know how to read webpages for help).

I read this thread last night but didn't want to respond to get caught up in technically heated debate, but the simple question is: Waste of time.

Linux is an OS primarily for speed and performance. The OS doesn't hog resources like windows does. One Main Reason? GUI... the main hog of windows is it's Graphical User Interface. Whilst this has always been a problem since 95, it remains today, BUT with the evergrowing speed of commercial hardware distribution (ie: RAM/Processor speeds) it is easy to override that hog.

Linux is good for one thing and that is performance. Also with the market share it just isn't worth bothering with.

Serverside applications and memory hogging applications are more than welcome on a linux server, when it comes to windows servers no matter how much tweaking you do you wouldn't reach a 10th of the performance linux would

The other problem with windows is the services and the amount of proceses running with an updated computer. Windows consumes memory like a boss.

I run linux myself, I have three main pc's however. A debian linux server. A windows development computer. Lastly an all around linux computer. I use all three. I love linux because of the performance. I have seen people port FPSC to linux. Probably some moding is nedded.

@Benjamin I am not sure if you read my post...
But if you compare the overall alltogether usage of FPSC and FPSCx10 games with Linux usage Linux will be in advantage a whole lot.And fpsc games are twice the quality of most Linux games so we could basically take over the whole Linux game market in the long run.That is what I meant.And Linux usage is still growing.Tens of millions people use Linux(Over 15 million use Ubuntu alone).Now how many people do buy FPSC games?

Maybe,perhaps i hope it will be in a future new ''big'' version of fpsc.