yeah, the source is " they're not making one".
there's no productive discussion to be had. they're not making it, they dont want to, they aren't going to explicitly explain themselves with a press release, and you're not changing their minds.
that's not how it works. an interview where they said they'd "like to do something" isnt a contractual promise. they dont want to do it. end of. its like sexual consent. maybe at the start of the night, she wanted to do something freaky, but in the middle she wants to stop. thats the end of the story, she doesnt owe you a written explanation for why she wanted to stop.
i dont think you know what this word means at all.
i hope they do that so you'll finally have the indisputable proof that the userbase isnt big enough to support the costs.
to be perfectly frank, you dont know a damn thing about what there needs would be for porting it. you dont develop on Red Engine and you don't work for them. You literally know nothing valuable about that situation.
That's not a source, let's not get back to this, otherwise I don't see a point of discussion with you.
Then I recommend you to avoid this thread, since flaming here isn't helping anyone.
Then count again. There are more than 11 thousand requests for TW3 for Linux just in the GOG wishlist. Let's say CP2077 would cost what, $50 at release give or take? That's already $550,000+. So enough to cover your number above.
Sure, it will be good to bust the skeptics here who think that Linux gaming market isn't big enough.
Until they'll publish any technical info (which probbaly won't happen until release anyway) - yes. We can't estimate based on nothing. Once it comes out, estimating it is quite doable.
im not flaming, the only productive thing that can happen here is you coming back to reality.
1) the numbers were hypothetical. i have no clue how much they would need to spend. I really didnt think i'd have to explain the analogy but the point was that, if they reduce their costs, and STILL dont sell enough, its not worth it. i used hypothetical numbers to illustrate that, i didnt look into my crystal ball and see that now they only need to spend 250000 instead of 500000 on development. they are FAKE numbers.
You are flaming though, and unless you'll stop, I really recommend you to leave the thread.
Then there is no point in comparing your hypothetical number with your another hypothetical number. My number above is based on some actual data.
They aren't accurate, but they give some rough idea. Crowdfunding is way better, since there people are actually committed to pay for their pledge and it's actual money that developers get in case their campaign is successful.
The point is, there is also no point in bothering to speculate how it can be ported either because there are as many possibilities for why as for why not.
Sure, CDPR can explain why they cancelled TW3 and why they didn't want to make CP2077 for Linux at release. But they didn't explain, so we can only evaluate external things. We can however use their own statements, to exclude reasons that some suggested above.
And they've said next to nothing, so that's about as useful as trying to reverse-engineer a fusion bomb using only the Ancient Greek understanding of atomic theory.
Without knowing the thought process the simple answer is, as you said, the will to do it isn't there. I'm sure they could do it. It's never been about whether it's financially viable or possible. It's about whether they have decided it's worth it. If they don't offer Linux support the answer is clear. I'm not sure there is much ground to be gained by speculation on why they came to this conclusion (as you said yourself). About the best one can do is lobby for Linux support, as you've done here.
Eh, the numbers may not tell the entire story (common problem when stats get tossed around). It's difficult to say there is no market for Linux when a number of people are not using Linux for gaming because certain developers do not offer Linux support.
Presumably his issue with Windows is philosophical in nature. "Buy Windows this way", is not at all a solution to his problem.
disagreeing is not flaming.
no, there really was, really, are you unaware of how analogies work? the point of the hypothetical is to explain why exapnding the user base might not be actually helpful.
we're long past the window of altering the path though. it may have been a positive feedback loop but at this point its also just a fact of the market. people don't use linux en masse for anything, not just gaming. you cant force a market by offering products hoping that people will switch.
The above rule applies. If they didn't say anything new on specific topic, their previous statements remain valid.
Good, we agree on that unlike some above who claim it's not viable.
They want to, but they have no plans to do it at this point. They also have no plans to continue trying it with Witcher 3.
We know that. My comment was about refuting repeated claims about how it's not viable. They are bogus and don't fit with what CDPR themselves said.
I was summarizing what they said. At no point did they state anything about it being viable or not; just they're not planning to do it.
Yes, about claims I was referring to several people commenting in this thread, not to CDPR's statements.
