Sorry I didn't have time to read all 5 pages of comments, but this topic quite interests me nonetheless.
Right at the beginning, I've read this:
This is pragmatically true, but I think it completely forgets the history of free software. Free software didn't happen one day, just like that. It started with persons that profoundly believed in the idea that sharing is more important than profits. Profit is a mean, it is not an end. From that point, a lot of stuff happened and eventually some dudes started to see how to make this sharing philosophy profitable. Open source happened (for better or worse), and you all know the rest...
Then I've read this:
And I think it's pretty clear that there is a pattern here. Artistic communities didn't find their "open source" yet. The philosophy is already here (and may have been here for more time than computer software), and we can see it with the rise of Creative Commons and other artistic licenses. It is just that they haven't find yet how to be profitable while having this philosophy.
So I think that what would be interesting would be to find a business model that would work in the game industry, which is not computer software or artistic assets only, it's a combination of both. Maybe one day, we'll have programmers and artists being well paid for open source games, as we have programmers right now paid for open source software.
What I see now, that we didn't have a few years ago, are free (as in beer) AAA games with well paid developers (e.g. Dota 2). We're not talking about open source yet, but we're clearly aiming into a direction where the product is less important than the community around it... I think that the mentality has changed and all we need is a business model now.
Right at the beginning, I've read this:
Like seriously, as a hardcore engine developer, which would you choose? 100k salary at a gaming company, or free work, "kind donations", crybaby users/trolls on the forums and endless arguments with other devs in a "superior" democracy model at an open source project?
Grow up.
Grow up.
Then I've read this:
As for the point you made, there's always been a bit of a gulf between the technical community and the artistic community and the artistic side tends to 'get' open-source less.
So I think that what would be interesting would be to find a business model that would work in the game industry, which is not computer software or artistic assets only, it's a combination of both. Maybe one day, we'll have programmers and artists being well paid for open source games, as we have programmers right now paid for open source software.
What I see now, that we didn't have a few years ago, are free (as in beer) AAA games with well paid developers (e.g. Dota 2). We're not talking about open source yet, but we're clearly aiming into a direction where the product is less important than the community around it... I think that the mentality has changed and all we need is a business model now.
Comment