[NTLUG:Discuss] Re: Games on Linux (was: Wine presentation)

[Steve]

cbbrowne at cbbrowne.com wrote:

> Starving folk need to have _some_ of the money now...  If the
> negotiations are centred around the notion that "you'll be spending
> time on my project, and be _worse_ off it it doesn't fly high," that's
> _not_ going to sell well.


Sure, but we're talking about a relatively small project (but I guess 
they all seem small on paper, don't they?), not some contract to agree 
to be exploited for X amount of time regardless of cost.

It depends on the profile of the person, what he's starving for, and 
what he can do about it. And of course, what you're willing to settle 
for to get this type of person. If I'm a newbie looking to break into an 
area, I may consider doing some work for free on a project for future 
reference. I may also dump you like a bad habit if something more 
interesting comes along or if the cost to me is too great.

Starving is probably a bad word selection, but the end result, is that 
people are flexible in what they'll do if you can convince them that 
it'll be worth their time one way or another. But the flexibility cuts 
both ways as the developer is "starving" for people as well.


> The problem is of getting some money out of people up-front, and
> that's a tough problem.


True. In this respect, any community as a whole deserves whatever it 
gets when a solution is in front of them but as a whole it doesn't act. 
The community, for better or worse, has spoken as to its priorities.


> The MacOS folk are accustomed to paying a fair bit of money to get
> software; that makes them a fairly different "culture" than the Linux
> "culture," where vast quantities of software is available "for free."


Although I do agree with this to some extent, I think Linux users will 
pay for things that're useful to them. The criteria as to what meets 
that threshold of what is useful/entertaining vs. the alternatives is 
the main sticking point.

I am not going to pay for another Microsoft Office because I have 
OpenOffice. Somebody else will complain that the latter is too damn slow 
and bloated; so what's fungible for one may not be for another. However, 
that range decreases when you start talking about something like games 
or movies.

 
>>I think it's same with the current Linux user composition. There
>>just aren't enough people out who either (a) want to play these
>>games on Linux or (b) want to pay for these games to justify a port
>>or (c) something else I can't think of on the top of my head. It
>>could be (b), but I think it's mainly (a) and wil cover my ass and
>>say some (c).  Again, I think this will change as time goes on.
>>
> 
> I'd have an easier time buying (b), personally.  (Read that sentence
> several times, interpreting the context differently; it's full of
> horrible puns...)


I think so would I. I screwed up that paragraph. I should have saved 
some space by just saying "want to play these games enough to pay for 
them." People who want to play the games and the % of those who would 
pay price X. I think (a) is somewhat true that in absolute #'s, there 
aren't enough to compensate for the low %'s manifested in (b). Even so, 
I still think that as time goes on, the makeup of these two groups will 
change.

Steve