Are Open-Source Games & Community Game Engines Fading Away?

[ssokolow]

About the id Tech 4 engine, there is at least one community game that uses the open sourced id Tech 4 engine: The Dark Mod, and this time it's not “Another Quake 3 clone”.

Seconded. I didn't have Doom 3 when TDM announced standalone status, so I was very pleased to see that. (my copy of Thief Gold is still one of my most favoured things on my CD shelf)

Sadly, fate seems to have conspired against me. At the time, I didn't have a good enough GPU and, now that my GPU is better, I can't scrape together long enough contiguous spans of time for it to be satisfying.

[ssokolow]

The entire idea that a game has to be commercial to be high quality is a joke. Anyone with half a brain can look at projects like Skywind and The Crysis Mechwarrior project and see that high quality game experiences can be created by teams working for free driven by their passion for a game/series. The problem stopping a lot of this enthusiasm being directed towards Open Source games remains a distinct lack of tools and resources for modifying open source game engines. Most of the Open Source games do not have editing tools, and unfortunately the FPS games which do have editors (quake/doom) have fallen out of favor with the community for making mods. exitcode0 is doing a fantastic job with Doom3, and there are other projects doing the same. Again it's because the engine has tools available. Where the engines don't have good tools we see project stagnation/death. How many years were the Tux Kart games dead for before there was a concerted effort to upgrade the graphics?

The notion that something has to be made for pay or made for profit to be high quality is completely false... It's kind of funny that Linux users would think that about games when their own platform is the proof of the idea's falsehood... Games aren't some magical unicorn thing to be put on a pedestal. They require certain types of programs to work. It's like Linux itself, in the start there was no GUI and people probably claimed that with no GUI Linux was dying. Linux got a GUI and now it's becoming a legitimate Desktop OS alternative compared to Windows/OSX. Build the tools, the artists will come and the games will be great. There are a ton of people out there wanting to make great open source games. They just don't know howto because they can't program and will never have the aptitude for it. Help them and you'll help your projects.

To be fair, it is at least part of the problem that games are more "disposable" than other types of applications. You can iterate on a browser or an OS kernel or an office suite for a decade as long as it's "sufficiently useful" to keep interest... but, for games, it's a lot harder to maintain that state for long enough to pay off and, since the technology is still advancing more quickly than other areas, you can't easily iterate on the underlying componentry either.

That's why things like ScummVM and DOSBox are the big successes on the open-source gaming side of things. The fact that people want a specific game and not just any play-alike knock-off restores the balance that makes open source's turtle beat proprietary's hare in the race.

[F1esDgSdUTYpm0iy]

Message purged...

[gamerk2]

The entire idea that a game has to be commercial to be high quality is a joke. Anyone with half a brain can look at projects like Skywind and The Crysis Mechwarrior project and see that high quality game experiences can be created by teams working for free driven by their passion for a game/series. The problem stopping a lot of this enthusiasm being directed towards Open Source games remains a distinct lack of tools and resources for modifying open source game engines. Most of the Open Source games do not have editing tools, and unfortunately the FPS games which do have editors (quake/doom) have fallen out of favor with the community for making mods. exitcode0 is doing a fantastic job with Doom3, and there are other projects doing the same. Again it's because the engine has tools available. Where the engines don't have good tools we see project stagnation/death. How many years were the Tux Kart games dead for before there was a concerted effort to upgrade the graphics?

The notion that something has to be made for pay or made for profit to be high quality is completely false... It's kind of funny that Linux users would think that about games when their own platform is the proof of the idea's falsehood... Games aren't some magical unicorn thing to be put on a pedestal. They require certain types of programs to work. It's like Linux itself, in the start there was no GUI and people probably claimed that with no GUI Linux was dying. Linux got a GUI and now it's becoming a legitimate Desktop OS alternative compared to Windows/OSX. Build the tools, the artists will come and the games will be great. There are a ton of people out there wanting to make great open source games. They just don't know howto because they can't program and will never have the aptitude for it. Help them and you'll help your projects.

Pretty much this. Even if you have a solid engine, you need the ability to do high level debugging. This is one area where Windows has every other OS dominated.

You also have the issue of time/money. Hobbyists can only go so far when a project gets to several million SLOCs.

[sdack]

To be quite frank, I would answer with a question -- "Why not simply release said title to all platforms?". The sole reason I can think of -- shorter release cycle. But, in my humble opinion, a longer release cycle wouldn't be all that bad, given the vast majority of junk amongst the more modern titles. Again, not being nostalgic, just being critical about what I spend my money on.

What is "all platforms"?! The moment you actually start thinking about your question will you hopefully notice how unrealistic it is to develop a game for all platforms, because there are quite many platforms one can write games for and you will not be able to release a game for all of them. So before you even know it will you have to make the decision of which platforms you are going to support and which you do not support.

As an average developer do you need to pay bills just like most people do and you just do not develop a game for all platforms. Even for you as a gamer does a game not actually need to run on all platforms, but you foremost want it to run on your platform. And what is "your platform"? It is the one you have invested most of your money into, the one you had to pay bills for, and which you now want to see perform your money's worth and want to see all games released for.

So you may be a Linux fan and want to see games run on your Linux box, but the majority of gamers just do not want Linux. They want a simpler platform, one that requires little to no extra learning, and they do not care if it is an open, or a cheap or a free operating system. Most gamers are in fact willing to pay extra money as long as it means everything can stay this way, which is why Microsoft can sell yet another copy of their operating system and why Nvidia, Intel & Co. can sell 25% faster hardware for double the price.

Most gamers do not care for Linux, because they have money that they can throw at their problems. It has no technical reasons for why Linux just is not picked as a gaming platform. It is a mindset. As funny as it may seem, but Roberts Industries and his game Star Citizen may possibly be the best example for this mindset: people are willing to throw money at a game that has not been released yet, a game of which is little known and that could well end up staying in development forever, and comes with ridiculously high hardware requirements. And people love it! They keep throwing their money at the idea. That mindset is why there is currently no future in Linux gaming.

[F1esDgSdUTYpm0iy]

I think you would be better off asking yourself that question, not me. As stated in my response to your hypothetical scenario of a game developer being asked why he/she is not releasing their game to Windows or mobile devices, my hypothetical response (from the perspective of the hypothetical game developer) would be a question. A question that is mostly rhetorical in nature than it is an actual question.

Still, what is all platforms? I'll go with your original post -- Windows and mobile devices in addition to Linux.

And you're right in your final paragraph about people throwing endless amounts of money at their hardware simply because Windows and game developers demand ever more stupidly ridiculous amounts of processing power. However, I would not call such people gamers. I'm a gamer, I've been a gamer for over 30 years now (no joke) and I don't feel the overwhelming need to play games at ZOMGOVER9000 settings just to be able to gloat. Because, well, 2 years from now, no one will care about what game X or Y looked like at said settings. True hardcore gamers really are in it for the competition, to be the best at playing the game, not be the best at spending money on the game. There is a reason why a lot of the world's best SC2 players play it at the lowest settings possible -- to reduce the performance latency in the game as much as possible, to make it as responsive as possible.

[sdack]

I think you would be better off asking yourself that question, not me. As stated in my response to your hypothetical scenario of a game developer being asked why he/she is not releasing their game to Windows or mobile devices, my hypothetical response (from the perspective of the hypothetical game developer) would be a question. A question that is mostly rhetorical in nature than it is an actual question.

Still, what is all platforms? I'll go with your original post -- Windows and mobile devices in addition to Linux.

And you're right in your final paragraph about people throwing endless amounts of money at their hardware simply because Windows and game developers demand ever more stupidly ridiculous amounts of processing power. However, I would not call such people gamers. I'm a gamer, I've been a gamer for over 30 years now (no joke) and I don't feel the overwhelming need to play games at ZOMGOVER9000 settings just to be able to gloat. Because, well, 2 years from now, no one will care about what game X or Y looked like at said settings. True hardcore gamers really are in it for the competition, to be the best at playing the game, not be the best at spending money on the game. There is a reason why a lot of the world's best SC2 players play it at the lowest settings possible -- to reduce the performance latency in the game as much as possible, to make it as responsive as possible.

It does not matter what you wish for. The industries have their own opinions, ideas, wishes and dreams. They have no use for yours when they can have their own. So you can go ahead and compare yourself to the world's best SC2 players, or you can call yourself the oldest gamer in the world - or take a relativistic view on everything to make yourself feel good about it when you know a situation is bad. It makes no difference whatsoever.

Linux could likely be the most reasonable, most reliable, most stable, most sensible, most rational - it could be the world's best operating system, but it still is not what the average gamer wants. Gamers want games and for that are they willing to install an operating system that is probably best known for its malware properties. An operating system by a semi-monopolist, running on over-clocked and unstable hardware, to pay unreasonably high prices for bug-ridden games, to accept the most restrictive license agreements, to then expose themselves to the bullying of game masters and moderators, while waiting for yet another gigabyte-sized patch that promises to fix the bugs of a previous patch, to then fight off spammers and gold sellers, fight against unbalanced game mechanics and cheaters and bots, just to watch one day how their game disappears in some investor's "drawer for intellectual property" to never be seen again - even though the gamers have paid for it in full. Obviously am I not being quite serious here, but I mean, we all know the "suffering" of gamers and the "burdens" they endure to play a good game, right? And it still has not changed a thing about it. If anything has it only gotten more and worse. So you go ahead and ask yourself why you would want to have this on Linux.

[F1esDgSdUTYpm0iy]

There are several things off in that rant of yours just now; few I feel any kind of need to respond to directly. In particular the first paragraph just comes off as an insult more than anything, so, I'll just chose to ignore it. Particularly since I did not even use the word 'wish', not implying I 'wish' for anything. In other words, that first paragraph bordered on being pointless.

Now, as far as that 2nd paragraph is concerned -- The average gamer's lack of intelligence does nothing to invalidate the inherent strengths of Linux. I agree wholeheartedly Windows is plagued to no end by malware (in part as a result of its massively dominant market share, it simply is the biggest target out there on PCs, so obviously the focus for malware coders is there) and I also agree that there is something off about game developers in general, the most recent Tomb Raider game being an interesting example. Fixing a very minor bug (the Dutch language selection crashing the game) resulted in a patch of almost 1 Gb. Yeah, really, seems legit. So, we're in agreement that something about gaming on PCs is off in general, I'd say. So, I ask of you -- Why would we put up with that any longer? As in, why do we? Your question, why would I want that on Linux... is incorrect and irrelevant. I don't want the shit on Linux, obviously. But I recognize its strengths over Windows and how they could benefit gaming in more ways than one. So, yes, I'd love for game developers to spend the time and crossplatform more readily.

And I fail to see what is wrong with that. As long as people keep buying crap, game developers, software giants and hardware manufacturers will simply keep providing us with exactly that... crap. So, yeah, I'll switch to Linux, "emulate" Windows best as I can and revel in the knowledge I'm using an OS which is far more resistent to malware of any kind, with a filesystem that is vastly superior to NTFS and which gives me far better bang for my buck. Anyone who would not want that is just being silly. Or a waste of organic matter. Take your pick.

[sdack]

There are several things off in that rant of yours just now; few I feel any kind of need to respond to directly. In particular the first paragraph just comes off as an insult more than anything, so, I'll just chose to ignore it. Particularly since I did not even use the word 'wish', not implying I 'wish' for anything.
... The average gamer's lack of intelligence ... I'd love for game developers to spend the time and crossplatform more readily. ... Anyone who would not want that is just being silly. ...

So you are saying you do not want and wish for anything, but you find the intelligence of gamers is lacking (which is quite the insult), you'd love to see the devs spending some more time and anyone who would not want that would be silly or a waste of organic matter. And to top it off do you fail to see what is wrong. That is just awesome.

I bet if everyone did listen to you then the whole world would be a different place.

[F1esDgSdUTYpm0iy]

Oh yes, because, you didn't insult the general gaming public at all. No, none whatsoever. *cough* sarcasm *cough* And, talk about pulling things out of context and demonstrating a complete lack of comprehensive reading skills. No, sir, I did not strike first. I will however strike harder.

I bet if you ended up procreating, the world would not be a different place at all... for the record, that was not a compliment. At least, I hope you don't think the world is in any particularly good state. That'd just be so very telling, if you did. Thanks for playing though, loved the tete-a-tete but I really must be off now. Saving the world and all. You know how it is, very time consuming business. *cough* sarcasm *cough* Let me draw you a schematic of that.