Jump to content

WINE Versus PlayOnLinux


The Sorrow
 Share

Recommended Posts

So i just came across PlayOnLinux and was wondering if anyone else had used it before that could tell me yeah or neigh on its performance versus WINE. Personally i dislike WINE at the moment and am looking for another option for windows gaming in linux and am open to other ideas besides WINE and POL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

battle net on starcraft seems to throw a fit under wine for me but, hey it is emulation.

It's because of the custom protocol that BNET uses, wine hasn't been coded to handle it properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

PlayOnLinux is just a candy coating on top of wine.

PlayOnLinux is an application to ease the installation of Windows games using Wine. It uses an online database of scripts to apply to different games that need special configurations and if the game is not in the database, a manual installation can be performed. Aside from games, any other programs can also be installed and each one is put in a different container (WINEPREFIX) to prevent interference of one program in another and provide isolation, the same way that CrossOver's bottles work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i second with wh1t3 and n3rdy, emulation requires the act of 'emulating' a hardware bundle of some type, and then running the software on top of the emulated hardware. Wine is a linux program made to utilize dll files and libraries available in windows to assist in running windows software.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im messing with linux atm...and i love it, it's bloody awesome. But until they can run a game (ie any major title) straight out the box from a retailer, in linux without the need to use an emulation or interpretive layer or shell or whatever else you want to argue with, people are not going to readily embrace linux. Why are consoles so popular?...coz games work straight outta the box. Even windows ppl have to contend with possibility of their chosen game not running as it should without a little or a lot of tweaking and even these little trivial problems can cause the most loyal pc gamers to opt for an easier console option... Why should linux be adopted as a gaming platform when we're faced with shit like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imo if distributors did put out for linux, it would become the gamers choice of OS. Why? Because even though there are a lot of things linux does not do so well compared to windows, Native Gaming is superior.

Doom 3 was a killer example. I only had 768mb of mem, w/a single core AMD 1.2ghz cpu and a 64mb TNT2 card... it ran HORRIBLY in win98... In linux, it ran @ 1024x768; medium settings; @ around 45 to 60 fps.

Matter of fact, the only game that does not natively beat the crap out of the same game in windows that I know of is Sauerbraten.. but idk... could be my video drivers, and tbh, have had problems with it in Vista, 7, and linux, so either way it's safe to say it's buggy atm.

If the industry could come up with a unified game installer for linux, and it could be closed source.. I could care less really. I personally think Richie Stallman is a weirdo. But either way, if you could have even a dedicated distro you could throw on a compy with a really small form factor (something around 300mb) with a simple interface that could natively use NTFS so you would'nt have any more space taken up but that, and would use the NTFS partition that is already there to install the game, That would be EPIC. Matter of fact, not only would it be epic, but maybe even Microsoft would jump on the band wagon (hell, they would just take suse, cut it down, do the same thing, and say it's the new 'Game Acceloration Layer' for Windows! :P)

BTW.. isn't steam supposed to go linux soon? or was that just p.r. when linux was getting alot of attention in the mainstream media?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because even though there are a lot of things linux does not do so well compared to windows

I will never agree with this statement

f the industry could come up with a unified game installer for linux, and it could be closed source.. I could care less really. I personally think Richie Stallman is a weirdo.

I agree with RMS principles but I think he can get overzealous at times and has unreal expectations at times. I would be happy to pay for games that run on Linux natively. ID software has led by example in the area imo, and will happily purchase games made by them.

But either way, if you could have even a dedicated distro you could throw on a compy with a really small form factor (something around 300mb) with a simple interface that could natively use NTFS so you would'nt have any more space taken up but that, and would use the NTFS partition that is already there to install the game, That would be EPIC.

Try crunchbang for small and fast (Based on ubuntu). Partition your drive whilst installing manually. You can install games to a NTFS formatted drive. It's just a file system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im messing with linux atm...and i love it, it's bloody awesome. But until they can run a game (ie any major title) straight out the box from a retailer, in linux without the need to use an emulation or interpretive layer or shell or whatever else you want to argue with, people are not going to readily embrace linux. Why are consoles so popular?...coz games work straight outta the box. Even windows ppl have to contend with possibility of their chosen game not running as it should without a little or a lot of tweaking and even these little trivial problems can cause the most loyal pc gamers to opt for an easier console option... Why should linux be adopted as a gaming platform when we're faced with shit like this.

a number of free & open source games do work out of the box and install with a few clicks, such as https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Games#Nat...0Ubuntu%20Games

wine has gotten pretty good, the interface might be improved to run automatically for many of the supported windows games

as the number of linux users grow, more developers may consider native ports, similar to how games are currently released for both pc and console

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why they develop for OS X over *nix? Well lets see here, people like new macbooks and ipods and hmmm... oh wait! Unless you\'re a tech savy person you want everything working out of the box just like you would if you\'re buying a new PC, without a *nix OS.

Sir you fail and you are irrelevant. Not only that, you support communism and are a steve jobs dick sucker.. If you would have phrased that a little differently, then maybe I would not have posted this retort. the sorrow said nothing negative to you about apple or mac, and you are acting like the little mac fanboy you are. So from all of us @ pc\'s that cost normal money for the proper hardware and software, screw you.

Vako, your cool, I dont hate you, I know you like macs and that is fine, but this guy is the reason why people hate a lot of people who like macs. I don\'t really hate on macs.. But I do hate on 31337357 fanboys.

So back to you somethingtochatwith.. Why do people ask the question why they develop for OSX over nix? because fanboys like you flock to pretty things... Funny as hell though that a SHIT TON of people dual boot OSX with nix... Probably just as many as x86... oh wait.. Is not mac an X86 based system now? hmmmm... Maybe the real question is, why dont they press the button on the compiler that makes the file compatible with nix as well.. Hell they are pretty close to the same system, and code can be cross compiled without even flinching.

(VaKo, dont read this part, not aimed @ u)

Also while were at it, I\'ll bet you love my post here mr \'im so cool cause I spent $2500 on a macbook pro. I\'ll bet you just love the fact too that I am typing this on a $450 laptop that has a video card thats perfectly compairable to that 9400m (8200m g), just as much hard drive space, and the only thing I lack is bluetooth (which i really would not use anyways)

And the best thing about this whole bitch:

http://www.apple.com/getamac/faq/

Is a Mac safe from PC viruses?

Yes, a Mac is 100 percent safe from viruses designed to attack PCs. And although no computer connected to the Internet is completely immune to all viruses and spyware, the Mac is built on a solid UNIX foundation and designed with security in mind. The Mac web browser, Safari, alerts you whenever you’re downloading an application — even if it’s disguised as a picture or movie file. And Apple continually makes free security updates available for Mac owners. You can even have them download automatically.

Mac is based on a solid UNIX foundation..

Linux is heavily derived on the solid UNIX foundation..

You do the math.. Thanks for playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why they develop for OS X over *nix? Well lets see here, people like new macbooks and ipods and hmmm... oh wait! Unless you're a tech savy person you want everything working out of the box just like you would if you're buying a new PC, without a *nix OS.

/slap

Mac IS *nix, in fact it was developed before Gates even thought hed make his own OS. So what was the main base out there? Some flavor of red hat or similar.

HINT:Confucius say, when company happy fan jab mouth, he best look at facts before posting on web forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well.. OSX is not really nix.. it's a unix derivative (just like linux though)

OSX is based on whatever Unix someone feels like throwing out atm.. I'm surprised I havent heard that it's based on HPUnix yet.. lol.

But origionally Apple OS was based on Berkley Unix, which is also what BSD is derived from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Linux is not and never was based wholly or partially upon Unix or variants of it. It was, however, developed as a hobbyist alternative to the then very expensive commercial Unix variants.

OSX contains some amount of FreeBSD code which is, as far as I'm aware, based partially upon AT&T Unix. Then again, OSX isn't really MacOS at all, it's NeXTSTEP with a side of fairy dust. Perhaps I'm wrong, I need to read up a little more on the topic, but to the best of my knowledge the BSD code is in Darwin which OSX is based upon, and which is itself based on XNU (a combination of Mach, FreeBSD and some extra crap Apple .threw in for a laugh). So when you look at it that way, how much of OSX really is Unix?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well technically *BSD *isn't* UNIX, but OSX is. This is because OSX is actually certified as UNIX 03 and conforms to the Single UNIX Specification Version 3, where as the BSD family are derived from an older version of UNIX and does not conform to SUS V3. This is actually very important.

All linux can be regarded as is a school project that got way out of hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
Not being able to run on linux is the fault of the developers of the games, not the distribution. Any games that run on linux natively run flawlessly. Heroes of Newerth looks great on my PC.

I agree, I use Windows but I know any game would play way better on my Linux box

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...