You'd be surprised by the amount of current high tech companies that have the underpants gnome revenue model.

1. Open Source
2. ???
3. Profit!

twiz11 wrote:

hmm though i imagine blood is getting sales because of bloodGDX...

More like Blood is getting sales because of DOSBox

I wish Blood! was open source, as then (as with open source games like Doom, Doom 2, Duke Nukem 3D, Shadow Warrior 3D, Alien vs. Predator, Descent 1 and 2, etc) Blood! would get fan-ported to the original XBox.

If there was a Java program* for the original XBox then we could run BloodGDX (the Java version of Blood!) on the original XBox, I'd imagine. I know there's a Java program for the PSP, but not for the orignal XBox as far as I know.

* Does Java run on an emulator, or environment, or interpreter, or what is it called?

Yea its called me, I use Java on me and it gives me emulation, so much environment and interpreter as i am speaking in strange tongues.

But yea Java works in any environment, linux, mac, etc. and AvP 2, Blood and NOLF is Monolith Productions and I am afraid we wont get the source code until after they are shut down...

You could try selling shit for free and it would still sell less than a quality product sold at any price.

Blood source release would be awesome to finally get a proper release. Maybe Lucius will one day finish his LX variant.
Carmack, in more ways than one, did the "right thing", so to speak.

Now I am not sure if Carmack did the "right thing"... Epic Games never released their source code to Unreal 1, Tournament 2, 3, and they are still independent. I think releasing the source code would be good, but it would be highly obsolete and with planned obsolescence, it would mean a lot of worthless code. I think they should have released the source code to one party, in order for source ports to be developed like call to power 2 apolyton mod, where we did get a source port but without the commercial mess in liabilities. If Atari was like Activision, I imagine if one party had exclusivity to the source code, you'd think atari or WB would be charging a developer to make source ports since Monolith it seems is too lazy to do it themselves, plus it could spur Blood 3, though it too long and of course Blood 2 killed the IP. Hmm... Maybe a reboot of Blood with other elements like FEAR, Blood 3:F.E.A.R 4 : She lives again!

twiz11 wrote:

Epic Games never released their source code to Unreal 1, Tournament 2, 3, and they are still independent.

That sounds like a non-sequitur to me.

twiz11 wrote:

I think releasing the source code would be good, but it would be highly obsolete and with planned obsolescence, it would mean a lot of worthless code.

Perhaps, but even so, from Doom came the ZDoom family of ports, from Quake came the Darkplaces engine that powered Classic Nexuiz and ATM powers Xonotic, and with Quake 3 came the Daemon engine that Xonotic is hoping to get ported to. Even though the source code is released from "obsolete" game engines, it can still be modified to something much more modern.

twiz11 wrote:

I think they should have released the source code to one party, in order for source ports to be developed like call to power 2 apolyton mod, where we did get a source port but without the commercial mess in liabilities. If Atari was like Activision, I imagine if one party had exclusivity to the source code, you'd think atari or WB would be charging a developer to make source ports since Monolith it seems is too lazy to do it themselves, plus it could spur Blood 3, though it too long and of course Blood 2 killed the IP. Hmm... Maybe a reboot of Blood with other elements like FEAR, Blood 3:F.E.A.R 4 : She lives again!

I'm sorry, I don't understand any of this at all. What does "a source port but without the commercial mess in liabilities" mean? Why would a company bother making source ports for obscure platforms like fans do with actual source ports?

no they give the source to one group exclusively that way the code is not out there but we get ports

Suuuuuuuurrrrre

Danfun64 wrote:

Perhaps, but even so, from Doom came the ZDoom family of ports, from Quake came the Darkplaces engine that powered Classic Nexuiz and ATM powers Xonotic, and with Quake 3 came the Daemon engine that Xonotic is hoping to get ported to. Even though the source code is released from "obsolete" game engines, it can still be modified to something much more modern.

It also presents an opportunity for those just learning about graphics engines to examine ones which are relatively recent, discuss them openly, and otherwise play with the code freely.

twiz11 wrote:

no they give the source to one group exclusively that way the code is not out there but we get ports

That is not called releasing the source-code. Any company that does that, would not be "releasing" any source code.

If I was the prime minister (of Great Britain), then one of the many changes I'd make would be too encourage software companies to release their source code free to the public after a suitable period of time. I don't mean I'd force them to, of course, it would be their choice, but I'd offer tax incentives or free advertising for their next game or something, I don't know - I'm just an idiot who knows nothing about politics, or copyright, or business, etc, so I can't give a good suggestion about it, but I do know that open source is good for gamers (as they can add new features and bug fixes, and port them to old and new systems) and also for programmers (who can improve their own programming skills by seeing how other programmers handle tasks).

It's fantastic that id Software, and a few other companies have released their source codes, but sadly it's very uncommon for a company to do that. But at least we now have ports of some great ex-commercial games on machines that the games were never released for, plus some cleverly enhanced game engines for some of those games. But I do wish that many other games were open source, even though I know that there's little if any benefit at the moment for any company to release their source codes. Plus source code can contain parts owned by other companies, so making it open source might not depend on just one company, plus no doubt there are other real-world obstacles (real life is rubbish).

amadeus777999 wrote:

Blood source release would be awesome to finally get a proper release. Maybe Lucius will one day finish his LX variant.
Carmack, in more ways than one, did the "right thing", so to speak.

But at least we have BloodGDX for modern Windows systems. It really is first class, and v0.780 has just been released (http://m210.duke4.net/index.php), and hopefully M210 (the creator of BloodGDX) will make it open source.

Kerr Avon wrote:

If I was the prime minister (of Great Britain), then one of the many changes I'd make would be too encourage software companies to release their source code free to the public after a suitable period of time. I don't mean I'd force them to, of course, it would be their choice, but I'd offer tax incentives or free advertising for their next game or something, I don't know - I'm just an idiot who knows nothing about politics, or copyright, or business, etc, so I can't give a good suggestion about it, but I do know that open source is good for gamers (as they can add new features and bug fixes, and port them to old and new systems) and also for programmers (who can improve their own programming skills by seeing how other programmers handle tasks).

It's fantastic that id Software, and a few other companies have released their source codes, but sadly it's very uncommon for a company to do that. But at least we now have ports of some great ex-commercial games on machines that the games were never released for, plus some cleverly enhanced game engines for some of those games. But I do wish that many other games were open source, even though I know that there's little if any benefit at the moment for any company to release their source codes. Plus source code can contain parts owned by other companies, so making it open source might not depend on just one company, plus no doubt there are other real-world obstacles (real life is rubbish).

Hmm if I make a game on Linux then does that mean I have to release the source code?

Kerr Avon wrote:

amadeus777999 wrote:

Blood source release would be awesome to finally get a proper release. Maybe Lucius will one day finish his LX variant.
Carmack, in more ways than one, did the "right thing", so to speak.

But at least we have BloodGDX for modern Windows systems. It really is first class, and v0.780 has just been released (http://m210.duke4.net/index.php), and hopefully M210 (the creator of BloodGDX) will make it open source.

But will it convince a jury of atari/wb to release source code?

twiz11 wrote:

Hmm if I make a game on Linux then does that mean I have to release the source code?

No.

If you develop your own engine from the ground up, and don't use any GPL or LGPL licensed code, you are not obligated to release source.

But you will get yelled at and disdained for it.

Nowadays open sourcing your engine the way id did it back then is not as much necessary. Almost all games use one of the 3-4 big engines with Unity, Unreal and (next gen) Gamebryo being the most used. And the 2 most popular engines already give their engine for free (if you do not want to make money off it). While I understand that this is not the same as when Quake became open source, it dampened some the need for modern games to do that.