Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Huh, id Tech 5 Engine To Be Open-Source?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    It would be a big step for linux

    The driver developers of the free driver would have a new toy to play with. They only support randomly some propriatary tools but they benchmark and have the main focus on supporting the free software that works on linux.

    Linux as gaming plattform could get a very strong boost, I dont think propretary games will gain much from that because the games we have today with quake3-engine or even q2-engine-ports (Nexuiz), are not that ugly yet. Ok maybe I dream a bit to much with something like that and even idtech4 will be a nice step soon, but it would be great and a big step that would give linux much attention and also id soft and this engine. Idsoft and the free/open software community could benefit much from such a step.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by DrYak View Post
      It could be open-source in the literal meaning.

      <-snip->

      So it could be all possible, for a limited definition of "open source".
      It is definitely possible and it would be more true to the original definition of what open source was before open source became a battle of licenses. Simply open for all to see and modify for their own personal use.

      Comment


      • #23
        No. That is Microsoft's "Shared source".

        Do you have the definition (which you refer to) of what "open source" meant before the Open Source Initiative came up with the definition that everybody has been using for the last decade?

        You're running a bit of a crusade against free and open source software around here. It's a bit odd, given that it's a site dedicated to exactly this kind of software.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
          No. That is Microsoft's "Shared source".

          Do you have the definition (which you refer to) of what "open source" meant before the Open Source Initiative came up with the definition that everybody has been using for the last decade?

          You're running a bit of a crusade against free and open source software around here. It's a bit odd, given that it's a site dedicated to exactly this kind of software.
          Before open source became a bunch of licenses the term was used by the literal meaning. People didn't even fathom the idea of actually making money off of software. The idea was just as preposterous as charging for air back then.

          Comment


          • #25
            BTW they changed it now:

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by deanjo View Post
              Before open source became a bunch of licenses the term was used by the literal meaning. People didn't even fathom the idea of actually making money off of software. The idea was just as preposterous as charging for air back then.
              Do you have a source for the term "open source" used back in that time.

              You are right that source was freely shared, but was there a "definition" of "open source"?

              The first such definition I'm aware of was when Perens and ESR coined it in order to essentially distance themselves from the FSF, which some people found not business-friendly enough, and the term "Free software", a name with well known problems

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                Do you have a source for the term "open source" used back in that time.

                You are right that source was freely shared, but was there a "definition" of "open source"?

                The first such definition I'm aware of was when Perens and ESR coined it in order to essentially distance themselves from the FSF, which some people found not business-friendly enough, and the term "Free software", a name with well known problems
                It wasn't defined other then it's literal meaning:

                open: Affording unobstructed entrance and exit; not shut or closed

                source: such as a person or document, that supplies information

                It is much like how the term "free software" was somehow twisted into FSF terms.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                  It wouldn't shock me if they did this. It would be what I consider the ideal future model for gaming development, open source engine, pay for the game assets.
                  Now wouldn't that be awesome? One of the game developers here on [Phoronix] said that the most valuable and expensive asset these days is actually the game artwork, so this model/strategy would make a lot of sense if he's right.
                  I really love the idea and I just keep pouncing on every game doing this - I even bought 2 copies of Penumbra: Overture (1st was a part of The Humble Indie Bundle and 2nd came with the rest of the series) and I don't regret a single cent I have spent on that.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    It's a shame. That nearly made me press the pre-order button.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      It was a marketing ploy to increase page views and pre-orders from the Phoronix readership.

                      Has anyone mentioned whether Bethesda was using this engine for TES5?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X