Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hexen/heretic source finally gpl'd

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

  • #11
    Hmm, not sure I understand.

    There is a Linux version of Freespace2 already, just the license is quite restrictive.

    Or are you talking about a commercial rerelease under the LGP banner?

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Julius View Post
      Hmm, not sure I understand.

      There is a Linux version of Freespace2 already, just the license is quite restrictive.

      Or are you talking about a commercial rerelease under the LGP banner?
      There is an engine release under a somewhat restrictive license. LGP doesn't have publication rights over the assets, which until recently, have been difficult to obtain save by scoring a used game disk set.

      However, Good Old Games, an online distribution division of CD Projekt, dedicated to resurrecting some of the best of the best in the "old" space, including titles such as Redneck Rampage, Fallout, Fallout Tactics, and Freespace 2 have started closed beta testing on the online store and community system TODAY. I just bought the assets for a mere $5.99 and just downloaded them. There's been some indication from them that they might be interested in seeing to Linux versions, but they don't have the skillsets or the time to obtain them right now.

      Comment


      • #13
        IMHO, the best thing right now to show off the FS2 engine is Battlestar Galactica Beyond the Red Line.

        /patiently waits for the next beta this month

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by deanjo View Post
          IMHO, the best thing right now to show off the FS2 engine is Battlestar Galactica Beyond the Red Line.

          /patiently waits for the next beta this month
          No kidding. I'd have to concur. However, there may be a way for you to show Linux sales by way of buying FS2 over at GoG- I'm checking into it as part of the Wishlist thread activities.

          We'll know more probably within a week or so.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
            Yes, though you could mostly do this anyhow with the license that was on that- we had clients using this same source base; they were just under a much more restrictive license from Raven. Having said this, the content's still decidedly Raven's and whomever has publication rights. You can't spread it around liberally, much like you can't distribute around Freespace 2, even though the engine's on a restricted, but open sourced, license...

            From what i've read up on, zdoom (engine used by gzdoom which is used by skulltag) had nicked code from the hexen/heretic source and Ken Silverman's build engine (with its accompanying home made licence http://www.icculus.org/BUILD/downloads/LICENSE.txt), so this code release should edge zdoom closer to legally free software...

            except for the fact that zdoom uses FMOD and an OPL emulator...

            See http://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=18876 for more info.

            now if only Doom Legacy 2.0 code could hit beta grrr...
            Last edited by hmmm; 09-11-2008, 12:51 AM.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by hmmm View Post
              From what i've read up on, zdoom (engine used by gzdoom which is used by skulltag) had nicked code from the hexen/heretic source and Ken Silverman's build engine (with its accompanying home made licence http://www.icculus.org/BUILD/downloads/LICENSE.txt), so this code release should edge zdoom closer to legally free software...

              except for the fact that zdoom uses FMOD and an OPL emulator...

              See http://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=18876 for more info.

              now if only Doom Legacy 2.0 code could hit beta grrr...
              Yep, but the build engine code is still under ken silverman's weird restrictive build engine license.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by xav1r View Post
                Yep, but the build engine code is still under ken silverman's weird restrictive build engine license.

                As I understand it, that zdoom thread has someone mention tha the build code was somehow open sourced by 3d Realms when they released duke3d and shadow warrior under gpl...

                but the code is dual licenced to BOTH 3dRealms and Ken so until Ken clarifies its status, its unknown what licence it's under....

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by hmmm View Post
                  As I understand it, that zdoom thread has someone mention tha the build code was somehow open sourced by 3d Realms when they released duke3d and shadow warrior under gpl...

                  but the code is dual licenced to BOTH 3dRealms and Ken so until Ken clarifies its status, its unknown what licence it's under....
                  No, its not exactly like that, i researched this. It's as follows: 3d realms released the source code of both duke nukem 3d and shadow warrior's game-specific code, and both game codes depend on the build engine .OBJ files that are produced in the intermediate step of compiling the build engine. Ken Silverman mentions that specifically in his site. While the game specific code to both games is gpl, the .OBJ files that are generated from build that need them to compile are not. Apparently Ken Silverman is very worried that someone might use his mightly DOS era build engine to make a commercial game and make lots of $$$ from it without him seeing a dime. I think even new more recent polymost engine is under that same license.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    i like his entry on his faq about the build source http://www.advsys.net/ken/buildsrc/default.htm:

                    "Why did you write a custom license instead of using GPL (GNU's General Public License)?

                    Short answer: to satisfy my ego Long answer: I know GPL is an industry standard, but I felt that it was way too long and boring for anyone to read seriously. I chose to write a nice short license that everybody could understand. This way, people unfamiliar with GPL would understand their rights."

                    ah well its his code...

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by hmmm View Post
                      i like his entry on his faq about the build source http://www.advsys.net/ken/buildsrc/default.htm:

                      "Why did you write a custom license instead of using GPL (GNU's General Public License)?

                      Short answer: to satisfy my ego Long answer: I know GPL is an industry standard, but I felt that it was way too long and boring for anyone to read seriously. I chose to write a nice short license that everybody could understand. This way, people unfamiliar with GPL would understand their rights."

                      ah well its his code...
                      Yes, and he can keep it.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X