Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Godot Game Engine 3.0 Alpha 2 Released

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

  • Godot Game Engine 3.0 Alpha 2 Released

    Phoronix: Godot Game Engine 3.0 Alpha 2 Released

    The second alpha release of the Godot 3.0 Game Engine is now available for testing...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...pha-2-Released

  • #2
    Typos:

    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Gotdot-3.0-Alpha-2-Released
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    Game developers wishing to learn more about the Godot Alpha 2.0 changes can do so over at GodotEngine.org.

    Comment


    • #3
      Another project devoured and tainted by the Mono bullshit where some parts of .NET they can not implement due to patents.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by plonoma View Post
        Another project devoured and tainted by the Mono bullshit where some parts of .NET they can not implement due to patents.
        More like a software patent bullshit. Mono doesn't have the fault of software patents being retarded.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by plonoma View Post
          Another project devoured and tainted by the Mono bullshit where some parts of .NET they can not implement due to patents.
          What do you mean? As far as I know, it just has support for C# through mono.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by plonoma View Post
            Another project devoured and tainted by the Mono bullshit where some parts of .NET they can not implement due to patents.
            Mono, owned & maintained by Microsoft, cannot implement parts of .NET, owned and maintained by Microsoft, because of mythical patents held by Microsoft that Microsoft might infringe, resulting in Microsoft suing Microsoft for billions. And definitely not in any way covered by Microsoft's patent agreements regarding Microsoft's Mono or Microsoft's .NET

            Not too bright, are we?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by directhex View Post

              Mono, owned & maintained by Microsoft, cannot implement parts of .NET, owned and maintained by Microsoft, because of mythical patents held by Microsoft that Microsoft might infringe, resulting in Microsoft suing Microsoft for billions. And definitely not in any way covered by Microsoft's patent agreements regarding Microsoft's Mono or Microsoft's .NET

              Not too bright, are we?
              Mono is a runtime to be packaged and distributed for Linux distributions.
              Microsoft suing and blocking distros they don't like.
              Thus keeping the Windows market for itself.
              If Microsoft is nice, then why isn't Microsoft using a stronger legally binding agreement than a covenant?

              Not too bright are we?

              Comment


              • #8
                The most interesting stuff to follow:

                https://github.com/godotengine/godot/pull/9545

                https://github.com/BastiaanOlij/godot_openvr & https://github.com/BastiaanOlij/godot_openvr/issues/17

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by plonoma View Post

                  Mono is a runtime to be packaged and distributed for Linux distributions.
                  Microsoft suing and blocking distros they don't like.
                  Thus keeping the Windows market for itself.
                  I don't think you have even the slightest grasp of the computing market - especially cloud services, Microsoft's biggest growth area - in 2017.

                  Or of how software gets packaged and distributed, for that matter. Or the relationship between upstreams and downstreams. Or software licensing as it relates to distro-scale distribution. Or literally anything about any of this shit.

                  If Microsoft is nice, then why isn't Microsoft using a stronger legally binding agreement than a covenant?
                  There is literally no thing in existence which would satisfy you. You just want to stir up shit against FOSS projects you don't like.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by directhex View Post

                    I don't think you have even the slightest grasp of the computing market - especially cloud services, Microsoft's biggest growth area - in 2017.

                    Or of how software gets packaged and distributed, for that matter. Or the relationship between upstreams and downstreams. Or software licensing as it relates to distro-scale distribution. Or literally anything about any of this shit.



                    There is literally no thing in existence which would satisfy you. You just want to stir up shit against FOSS projects you don't like.
                    Overreacting much?
                    It's because I have knowledge about dependnecy management and some past events that I see mono in any project as a problem.
                    My reaction is based on experience, not armchair philosophy.
                    Not to mention other, non-mono related Microsoft reactions such as Microsoft suing Lindows out of existence.
                    And for the thing that satisfies me.
                    Stuff under the MIT license with expired or lapsed patents would be nice.
                    Last edited by plonoma; 29 November 2017, 06:31 AM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X