Gaming and software Freedom
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires
I like to show you 3 things. 1: Fully Proprietary games (GTA, Call of Duty, Battlefield, NFS, Etc). 2: Proprietary games with freely available source code (Source code must be under a free software license: Proprietary games with Free-Software game engines are Doom/Doom II (My favourite), To heart 2, etc) And 3: Fully Free as-in-freedom games (Skyscrapersim, OpenArena, Lincity, 0AD, Etc)
Which ones would you play and which ones would you NOT play (Like GTA) Because the game has Proprietary game engine and DRM). Does the license of the content (game files) matter when it comes to playing games (Like would you reject a game because the game files are proprietary, Even through the engine is Free-Software?) After all, proprietary game content can't leave us vulnerable (Because it's not under a programming language of any kind), But you cant redistrubute or modify it (commercialy or otherwise). But in most cases (i think) you can study the artwork.
I AM RESPECTING THE COMMUNITY GUIDELINES! I AM NOT SUGGESTING PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE IN ANY WAY! THIS IS JUST A DISCUSSION ABOUT GAMING AND SOFTWARE FREEDOM!
> Which ones would you play
I think Games must have their full source code (this includes both engine and game logic) available under a free license. They must as well not have any proprietary dependencies like Steam.
This excludes games like Warsow and Urban Terror, whole game logic is either not under a free license (Warsow) or binary-only (Urban Terror).
For now, it is acceptable to compromise on artwork. But, once enough fully free games are released, this will probably no longer be the case.
I think we need a fully libre realistic FPS; it just really doesn't exist yet. There is Uebergame, but it has no players and its development is inactive.
I want to develop such a thing, but my programming skills aren't that good yet. Moreover, I'm waiting for Godot's 3D to improve.
> THIS IS JUST A DISCUSSION ABOUT GAMING AND SOFTWARE FREEDOM!
Many people say free software development is not compatible with gaming (as in, development "must" be closed in order to be good). I wholeheartedly disagree with such a closed-minded vision.
>>I think Games must have their full source code (this includes both engine and game logic) available under a free license.
By game logic, do you mean the game data? So the game data must be free as well?
>>They must as well not have any proprietary dependencies like Steam.
0% of the people on this forum (excluding former steam users) would run steam at all.
>>For now, it is acceptable to compromise on artwork.
Is said artwork distinctive from the game files itself (like drawings)? or is it stuff like model skins, wall textures or speech files?
>>Many people say free software development is not compatible with gaming (as in, development "must" be closed in order to be good). I wholeheartedly disagree with such a closed-minded vision.
Of course. But people think about making money first, Not the freedom of users Like me and you. That's why many people say it is not compatible with gaming.
By "game logic", I mean "software", not data as in textures, models and sounds.
One can make money with free (as in freedom) software. In particular, video games can be crowd funded.
Does the game data have to be under a free-software license? Or can it be Proprietary with Free-Software engine (like Doom)
I think that ultimately, it is not acceptable. It also tends to have practical consequences like fragmentation, and discouraging people from sharing.
What discourages people from sharing? The Game engine, or the Game files? And what's fragmentation?
If the game files are not under a free license, people can't make remixes of the game legally. Moreover, they also need to pay if they want to access the full game - something they don't have to do with fully free games (since they can ask their friends for a gratis copy, even if the official game is paid for).
Fragmentation? Just read the first lines of http://sourceforge.net/projects/nquake/. That game wouldn't be nearly as fragmented if the whole thing was fully free. Moreover, additional map authors would be more likely to release their work under a free license if the base game was fully free.
Well, Most companies dont see sharing a game a good thing (Unless it's licensed under a creative commons license). In fact, People did ask their friends for a gratis copy (In other words, Share games) since the 80s. There were posters stating that sharing games was 'piracy' that i found. if you want the link, Just reply to me.
Note: Warsow 2.0, recently released, now has most artwork and game logic under CC BY-SA 4.0, and some (with "nonfree" in PK3 name) are under CC BY-ND 4.0. The Warsow Content License is no longer used. This probably makes it acceptable to play now.
I think refusing to view, read, or otherwise enjoy non-libre culture would be counter-productive, because it would only serve to keep me isolated from our culture. Software is a special case because it's executed (controls what your computer does), not just viewed. So while I think the art licenses of games like The Ur-Quan Masters, Doom, and AssaultCube are unethical, I do sometimes play them.
It's important to pay close attention to what is in the non-free "data" of these games, though. Sometimes it includes scripts, which are programs. Someone helpfully pointed out to me that this is the case for ScummVM games and Ren'Py visual novels, which renders them unacceptable when they are not completely libre. I've heard that the same is true of some of Frogatto's "data", though I haven't thoroughly examined this.
>> So while I think the art licenses of games like The Ur-Quan Masters, Doom, and AssaultCube are unethical, I do sometimes play them.
I do the exact same thing. I play Doom all the time. It is one of my favorite games of all time. The source code is under the GNU GPL (A copyleft license), so it makes it a little bit ethical, Because Doom's source code grants us the 4 freedoms we deserve. Running it for whatever purporse, Studying it, Giving verbatim (perfect) copies and giving away modified versions. It was under a restrictive license at first, But it got released under the GNU GPL in about 1998-99 i think.
Returning to the topic of Frogatto, I've examined that, and it definitely includes software in its "data". Not only several small scripts in the .cfg files, but also OpenGL shader code. So Frogatto is an example of unacceptable non-libre "data".
Is this software in binary or source code form? Just curious. Because i dont have Frogatto.
Source code is there, but it's not under a libre license.
I think shaders are not data. BTW, there are games with actually just non-libre data but a free engine like Sauerbraten. and Arx Libertatis.
Exactly, they're programs. That was my point. A lot of the time, a game's "data" includes programs, and Frogatto is one example of a game you should avoid because of such "data" programs being proprietary.
OpenArena, Xonotic, Red Eclipse, and and plethora of emulators. All free, IIRC.
Some (not all) emulators are libre, but the games you usually run on them aren't.
Check this!
0 A.D. - http://play0ad.com/
RedEclipse - http://redeclipse.net/
Pioneer space simulator - http://pioneerspacesim.net/
OpenClonk - http://openclonk.org/
Cube2: Sauerbraten - http://sauerbraten.org/
Odamex - http://odamex.net/
Gotta love red-eclipse!
The Cube and Cube 2 engines include use of ".cfg" files in their data which are programs. In Cube, AssaultCube, and Cube 2: Sauerbraten, these programs do not carry licenses; they're proprietary.
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires