[Assist] Gaming system for linux

[bill-auger]

jonathan - you sent your last two messages only to me, not the mailing
list BTW - the mailing list has only seen the key points i quoted from
you


On Mon, 01 Oct 2018 10:53:16 -0400 lapointe.jonathan wrote:
> You are right, I should not mixed proprietary software with parabola
> linux. 

i did not say what software you should or shouldnt mix - i only said
that if you do mix them, then dont call the mixture "pure"


On Mon, 01 Oct 2018 10:53:16 -0400 lapointe.jonathan wrote:
> Gaming should not force me to spill all my money on expansive
> videocard.

gaming does not "force" you to do anything - you are a creature of free
will - are you not? - furthermore, playing atari and superNES still
qualifies as "gaming"; and those are very inexpensive


On Mon, 01 Oct 2018 10:53:16 -0400 lapointe.jonathan wrote:
> On linux few games are asking for a greater
> videocard and more likely it dont require 3d capability. Steam has
> some games for linux asking for such videocard, but steam is wrong.

it seems that you are conflating "3D capability" with "hardware
acceleration" - every computer that can start X on parabola has "3D
capability" via software rendering - there are several 3D games in
parabola that play just fine even with software rendering
('puzzlemoppet' for one example) - even MS-DOS games have 3D capability
and they can run on computers with dramatically less power than
what is required to boot parabola

what some programs may require is a specific version of openGL or
specific hardware features of the graphics card - the software renderer
may not be able to emulate those, and so hardware support may be
required for those programs; but there are few or none of those in
parabola repos


On Mon, 01 Oct 2018 10:53:16 -0400 lapointe.jonathan wrote:
> Opensource dont seem to have a futur in 3d game.  

there are opensource 3D video games - there are some of them in parabola
repos now; and more will be made in the future - i know what you are
trying to say there; but the words you used express something different
- what you really meant was that the most advanced and most popular
games will never be opensource, yes? - that may true; but that is not
the same as saying "there is no future for opensource games" - that is
just another pessimistic self-defeating prophecy - the games will
continue to be made; but they will be about 5 years worth of R&D behind
the bleeding-edge proprietary technology - and thats not really any
problem, BTW - the real problem is the lack of open hardware, and
the fact that not enough gamers recognize that as a problem, nor will
they tolerate anything in danger of having the dreaded "outdated" label
associated with it (the l33t kiss of death) - that is the real problem,
if there is any

the entire point of my last post was that people expect too much of the
people who make free software, who are almost exclusively unpaid
volunteers working in their spare time on a "labour of love" - anyone
who expects the most advanced technology to be free of restrictions and
free of cost, or holds the bleeding edge of technology as their
entitlement, is a spoiled addict - the only way that could ever be the
case is if bleeding-edge technology was not so obscenely profitable,
and it's stewardship were taken up by the community

if that were to happen, then you would get crowd-funded game platforms
that are far more "open", such as ouya; and they would be the newest and
most advanced gaming platforms in the world (and therefore, by every
gamers definition, *the* most awesome and "must have" toy on the
planet) - and those open platforms would continue to improve and become
more and more awesome each year just as people expect; but it would
need to start that progression at about 5 years behind where the
bleeding-edge is today (i.e. today's gamers would need to be satisfied
with the ouya level of awesomeness for a few years until it improves);
but stepping back even six months would be gaming blaspheme so i dont
expect to see that happen unless the gamer community as a while can
learn to recognize control their addiction


On Mon, 01 Oct 2018 10:53:16 -0400 lapointe.jonathan wrote:
> Should we worry
> about what the market is going.

if you care about your computing freedom then, yes - if the only reason
you own a computer is as an entertainment toy then probably, no


On Mon, 01 Oct 2018 10:53:16 -0400 lapointe.jonathan wrote:
> Could it affect the futur of our next
> machine.

yes - gamers have been driving the graphics card market since the
beginning


On Mon, 01 Oct 2018 10:53:16 -0400 lapointe.jonathan wrote:
> It is wrong to add expansive components to our computer to
> make it more powerfull.

you would need to ask a priest if it is "right or wrong"; but i suspect
he would not see this an a moral issue that is important enough to
warrant a papal decree - what i can say, is that this extra "power"
that a graphics card adds to that computer only serves to make it a
more capable entertainment toy; which is among the least important
things it can do - adding a new graphics card does not make a more
powerful computer for any practical use by most people who think they
need one