Proposal for getting this project done

Moderator: Example suite forum moderator

K0kt409P
Posts: 145
Joined: 06 Aug 2013, 09:14

Re: Proposal for getting this project done

Post by K0kt409P » 08 Jun 2016, 12:14

PeterBitt wrote: Also I want to make a game myself, but no one offers me a talented coder who works for me for free.
Sure they do. Here are some.

User avatar
DestinedToDie
Posts: 1056
Joined: 29 Jun 2015, 09:08

Re: Proposal for getting this project done

Post by DestinedToDie » 08 Jun 2016, 12:42

I actually got Damiel to write the starting scripts for character creation (thanks dude). But I think this discussion point is irrevelant.

Let´s stop beating around the bush. You want to use the Example Suite to make your own game, but you don´t like the license. Have you ever thought about turning it upside down? As in, make a game that is your personal IP, but use CC-BY-SA-3.0 scripts, game files and assets from the Example Suite? Ironically, you´d be doing to the Example Suite what you don´t want to be done to your assets. But you´d be able to have an iron grasp over the assets you produce.

User avatar
PeterBitt
Posts: 144
Joined: 25 Mar 2013, 18:49
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Re: Proposal for getting this project done

Post by PeterBitt » 08 Jun 2016, 13:03

But I cant even assemble finished code snippets, that still requires the skills of a coder I think. While placing graphic models requires no skill whatsoever. A coder with access to open source art can make a whole game by himself, a artist with access to open source code cant do a thing with it.
I doubt that any of the coders in that list will code a game for me for free.

But I am not arguing, I understand that this open source thing is a big thing for you guys. Just explained my weak reasons why I dont think its fitting for me.
This whole idea of sharing is nice and all and something I practice in the real world. For the internet I have different standards. The internet is a bad place and I dont like it, basicly :p

Loriel
Posts: 116
Joined: 28 May 2015, 00:44

Re: Proposal for getting this project done

Post by Loriel » 08 Jun 2016, 17:26

PeterBitt wrote:But I am not arguing, I understand that this open source thing is a big thing for you guys. Just explained my weak reasons why I dont think its fitting for me.
This whole idea of sharing is nice and all and something I practice in the real world. For the internet I have different standards. The internet is a bad place and I dont like it, basicly :p
I sympathise with this view, and I think that many Morrowind modders will have similar reservations about loss of control of their products.

Perhaps we could encourage a separate project - I will use the provisional name "OpenMW Demo" for it - with different licensing requirements. There are several disadvantages to this - splitting limited production resources over multiple projects, confusion with the differently-licensed Example Suite, inability to include it in Debian-based releases - but encouraging reluctant artists and modders to come at least half-way on board might make it worthwhile.

During the recent "Skyrim paid mods" dispute, it was clear that many modders failed to understand Bethesda's licence (best description I have seen is viewtopic.php?f=28&t=3523&start=10#p40024), so I strongly support the attempts to explain licensing to modders/artists, and to encourage them to use appropriate licences for their work (and also not to base their work on Bethesda products...).

Loriel

User avatar
AnyOldName3
Posts: 546
Joined: 26 Nov 2015, 03:25

Re: Proposal for getting this project done

Post by AnyOldName3 » 08 Jun 2016, 17:54

Would it be terrible to keep the template CC-By, but make the example suite CC-By-SA? That removes the risk of someone selling a game with PeterBitt's meshes, which was one of the complaints, but doesn't really take away any other freedoms - if a new game wanted to use OpenMW, it only really needs the template. Either way, though, someone could still create and sell a game using Example Suite assets by selling a mod for it, as we don't have Bethesda's restrictive licence. This would be possible even with what I'm interpreting to be the guy's ideal licence, as he still doesn't have any right to files produced by the Open Construction Set.

User avatar
DestinedToDie
Posts: 1056
Joined: 29 Jun 2015, 09:08

Re: Proposal for getting this project done

Post by DestinedToDie » 08 Jun 2016, 18:58

AnyOldName3 wrote:Would it be terrible to keep the template CC-By, but make the example suite CC-By-SA? That removes the risk of someone selling a game with PeterBitt's meshes
How does that remove the risk? Unless I am misunderstanding something here.

Here´s my understanding. Let´s say that PeterBritt makes a cart for the Example Suite, licensed under CC-BY-SA-3.0. Now, if I change the cart texture, then that texture transforms what is there in the asset, and thus has to be licensed CC-BY-SA-3.0 as well. However if I make a pickaxe, then I needn´t license it under SA, because it´s a separate asset that was neither built on, transformed from or remixed from his PeterBritt´s cart.

Or are you saying that if I include a single CC-BY-SA-3.0 asset into my game, my whole game has to be licensed under CC-BY-SA-3.0?

User avatar
psi29a
Posts: 3432
Joined: 29 Sep 2011, 10:13
Github profile: https://github.com/psi29a/
Contact:

Re: Proposal for getting this project done

Post by psi29a » 08 Jun 2016, 19:17

PeterBitt wrote:But having every random dude use my models, which I worked hard and had to learn plenty to get done, without even asking me or letting me know is just no way to treat other peoples work respectfully imo. I am a very opinionated guy, what if some person I would despise used my most loved models in some monetized game that is a piece of crap? Do I really want to see my stuff there? Would you?
That is what "the-team" is doing with OpenMW... people are going to use it, people that we probably don't like or rather see being launched into the sun and will likely make money off of it. They are allowed and we're OK with that.

I feel a bit ashamed as others have given more than I on this project, but I'll have to use the word "We" here...

We have given the world an GPLv3 game engine. We agreed, with this license, to allow anyone regardless of their intentions to use OpenMW so long as they too abide by the license.

At this point, We, would like to see the same from the other side of the aisle here that content creators also give back to this "OpenMW Officially Supported Template and Example Suite" with a similar open license. Zini has made it clear that there won't be an Officially Supported Game (as in, OpenMW team isn't going to work on it), that is up to other people.

Why do I get the feeling that the engineers seem to be more altruistic than their artistic counterparts?

Even Phoronix says "Most Open-Source Game Artwork Is Awful":
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page= ... px=MTExODg

It would be nice if the "modding community" put their money where their mouths are and give a bit back to the community that is so open to them. We're making this engine not only for ourselves but for you too! :)

I've been busting my ass to track down everyone who has contributed (unknowingly or not) to the Template (and ES)'s Contributor file. Complete with their name, contact information and license so that everyone that has worked it is remembered and recognized.

No hard feelings though, if you really feel like CC-BY and CC-BY-SA are not for you... no worries! :) It is just a damn pity!

This does not stop you from making your own project though, under your own license or even CC-BY-NC-SA
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
^-- NC (non commercial) means it cannot be sold.

This license however will never be used with the Template nor ES.

User avatar
DestinedToDie
Posts: 1056
Joined: 29 Jun 2015, 09:08

Re: Proposal for getting this project done

Post by DestinedToDie » 08 Jun 2016, 19:38

Amazing to get a statement like this from the OpenMW team. I think we could use parts of it when announcing the Example Suite project, with the message being something like "we built you a new engine, now it´s your turn to build a game on it".

I think it´s too early to tell if one side is less altruistic. The modding community makes mods free for players to use all the time, just as a hobby. They´re simply not familiar with open licenses, so it may come as a culture shock of sorts.

User avatar
damiel
Posts: 28
Joined: 16 Apr 2016, 11:46

Re: Proposal for getting this project done

Post by damiel » 08 Jun 2016, 20:01

DestinedToDie wrote:I actually got Damiel to write the starting scripts for character creation (thanks dude).
You are more then welcome.

Hit me up here in the forum or on irc if you get some more scripting tasks to do. :)

User avatar
johndh
Posts: 124
Joined: 25 Jan 2015, 18:20

Re: Proposal for getting this project done

Post by johndh » 09 Jun 2016, 02:19

AnyOldName3 wrote:Would it be terrible to keep the template CC-By, but make the example suite CC-By-SA?
Wasn't that already the plan?
DestinedToDie wrote: Or are you saying that if I include a single CC-BY-SA-3.0 asset into my game, my whole game has to be licensed under CC-BY-SA-3.0?
Copyright law is complicated and deliberately left open to interpretation. If you create a derivative work of a CC-by-SA asset, the derivative work has to be CC-by-SA, but I believe that we're talking about a collective work. What exactly constitutes a derivative work, I'm not qualified to say, but to quote myself from another thread:
If the entire addon [or game] constitutes a compilation or collective work ... then according to Title 17 of US Copyright Law, "The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material."
Here's some reading material:
https://creativecommons.org/faq/#What_i ... ptation.3F
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf
http://copyright.gov/title17/circ92.pdf
Loriel wrote: Perhaps we could encourage a separate project - I will use the provisional name "OpenMW Demo" for it - with different licensing requirements.
I'd like to make it known that I am 100% opposed to this. If some artists want to serve only their own interests, they are free to do so (everybody's gotta eat, right?), but this is not the project for them.
PeterBitt wrote:A coder with access to open source art can make a whole game by himself, a artist with access to open source code cant do a thing with it.
I am an artist with no coding skills. Given enough time, I could make an entire game with any of many free and open source game engines available to me. That's exactly what the example suite is, albeit on a small scale.
PeterBitt wrote:I only do my work for OpenMW or not at all ;)
I think you're completely missing the point of a free and open source project. If you're making it for OpenMW, you are making it for everybody, because that's who OpenMW is for. If you're not making it for everybody, you're not making it for OpenMW. If you donate a bunch of clothes to a shelter, you don't tell them not to give them away to poor people, because that's the point of their project.
Free/libre assets for OpenMW, updated frequently: http://opengameart.org/content/openmw-s ... sibilities

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest