Games: The Boundary Of Open Development?

Clyde writes "Computer games represent an interesting frontier for Open Source development. Unlike other desktop applications, games tend to be hybrid organisms -- half software program, half artistic work. This discussion with Scott Draeker, president and CEO of Loki Entertainment Software and Jorrit Tyberghein, volunteer project leader for Crystal Space sheds some light."

Comments

Re:Unfortunately true

[Ian Wolf]

Art is important too. The problem with many games is that art (sub: eye-candy) is the basis of the game (Myst). Some games put a premium on their art, and usually pay the consequences. However, there are quite a few that draw from these qualities and make for a much richer experience. There are games out their that achieve a good balance between art and gameplay. Starcraft, European Air War, Rainbow 6, the Quakes, and most of the EASports games, as well as many more examples that I'm leaving out, do an excellent job of mixing good visuals and good gameplay.

BTW my favorite game of all time is the graphically spartan Civ2. I have to admit that sometimes you don't need flashy graphics to make a great game, but they can certainly make it better.

Re:Long-term benefits of open source code

[Black Parrot]

> Why do I need to change the source if I can change the .ini files anyways?

Ever tried changing Civ II to use a hex map rather than a faked oblique square grid? Tried changing it to let units cooperate like real armies? Tried making the AI smarter?

Yes, lots of commercial games now come with customization features. But if you don't like some of the features of the actual design, there's no way to fix it yourself. With OSS you can. I have a .diff that I apply to every new version of Freeciv that I download, because I have a difference of opinion with the maintainers as to what makes good human engineering for the display.

ps - The Freeciv maintainers have now implemented most of the features of Civ I/II, and are increasingly talking about launching out on arbitrary extensions. I think that's the paradigm for OSS - rather than "embrace, extend, extinguish", it's "imitate, enhance, perfect". Admittedly, many are still in the "imitate" phase, but that's no reason to think OSS can only imitate.

--

Half open-source

[gavinhall]

Posted by 11223:

The ideal format of a game is to be half open-source. As the article said, a game is half a programming matter and half an artistic matter. So, the programming parts (the graphics engine) is open source and the artistic part (the game files, wad files, hog files, whatever your game calls them-files) is distributed as the game. It's the perfect compromise. That way, people have the opportunity to improve the state of their game (doesn't work quite right on XYZ 3D Blaster? Fix the game yourself!) while the artists/writers/programmers/modelers who put their time into developing their artistic work can still get the reward for the public appreciation.

The question is, why do some games suck as much as some art sucks?

Open Source and 'Open Art' at work

[P_Simm]

Take a look at WorldForge, a fully open-source development project creating a massively multiplayer online gaming system. They already have a very large team of volunteer artists as well as volunteer coders and managers. While discussion has gone on within the project as to what license to use, they are implementing copyright licenses for artwork which allow both reusability, distribution, and editing.

It's been a while since I've had time to watch the development more closely, but it's still a superb example of the potential of open source game development. It's a very highly ambitious project which looks like it can pull off it's goals.

You know what to do with the HELLO.

Unfortunately true

[FascDot Killed My Pr]

"...games tend to be hybrid organisms -- half software program, half artistic work."

This is true--and unfortunate. Think of all the computer games you've played in your life. Rank them in order of "playability" (judged by how often you replayed). Now look at the top ten: How many of them had good (or even ANY) artwork? Of those that did have good artwork, for how many of them did the artwork contribute to the playability?

For me, the answer is 1 and 0. The only game I've liked enough to keep playing AND that had decent art was Civilization--and some would argue that the art sucked. In any case, the art itself had almost no contribution towards the playability.

Right now I'm hooked on xscorch . The art is pitiful. The game is addictive.

Clearly, YMMV--I'm not saying everyone is like me. But I exist (and I know I'm not the only one). Why is this market not being exploited? Make some good fun games that cost half as much (fire the art staff) as the art-filled wonders that crowd the shelves.
--

Re:Unfortunately true

[Destrius]

Art doesn't mean just the graphics. It could mean the storyline. What license does the plot go under? If I create my own RPG based on a story I wrote myself, and then release it under the GPL, what happens to the storyline? Since the story and the characters are figments of my imagination, and maybe I feel emotionally attached to them, is there any way I can prevent people from warping the story into something I do not like?

artists and copyleft

[bytesex]

The artists that I know (I'm trained as one myself), are, generally speaking, the least, of all kinds of people that I know, positively inclined towards the idea of copylefting. Which,to me, seems a bit strange; it seems to me that any graphic designer should jump to occasion of having to rebuild the coca cola-logo and -image again every so many years, but hell no; instead they are afraid of the possiblity of anybody running off with their work. They provide no service, run no help-desk. Their work is like walking for ages up a gradual slope, only to drop it into the ravine on the other side. It begins hidden, secretively, closed-off from the outside world, until whatever presentation comes along. The work gets sold; the artist never sees it again. Then the nagging begins. What if I sold it too cheap ? What if I sold it to a reseller ? What if someone else runs off with the idea now ? Fear. No way to exercise control. No versions 1.1. No shrink-wrap licenses. No license-revoking. No court-cases (because no money). It won't be easy to sell these people copyleft; they live because they think that what they make is unique, and it's pure form as well; no function; there is no such thing as can't do without. We know how musicians, high and low, react to mp3; well, that basically sums it up.

The problem.

[Matt2000]

The problem with open source initiatives seems to with creativity, and this hurts in game developement the most.

I have yet to see an open source project that is not a clone or a close relative of something that already exists in the world. Perhaps it's done better, but that's not the point.

Open source breeds innovation, not invention and in the world of game design this is death.

My current theory is that new ideas need alot of high-bandwidth discussions, i.e. face to face meetings, to hash out and transfer the idea from one brain to another. Open source projects rarely have this luxury and so perhaps are forced into pointing their efforts at a well understood problem.

Summary: I find it unlikely that an amazing open source game will emerge under the current community conditions.

Hotnutz.com - Funny

To quote ESR

[Life Blood]

The software industry is a service industry masquerading as a manufacturing industry. OS works because people want to "scratch the itch." The problem is the game development is actually a true manufacturing industry not a service industry. Thats one reason why OS games haven't really become popular.

The other reason is of course the cheating issue. A GPL'd game has the source code easily available, it has to by law. So anyone can take that code an recompile it an allow themselves to cheat. This is especially bad in multiplayer. See quake for an example. The GPL and code availability means that lots of good efficient designs have to be discarded because they lack the necessary security. For instance Worldforge has to use an untrusted client and server side AI. It doesn't have a choice, despite the fact that trusted clients and distributed client-side AI would be more efficient.

As for a commentary of current projects. I like worldforge, but they seem to have lost sight of their goal of a MMPOG with all the effort they are putting into this pigs game they're making. However I think in the end they may at least move online roleplaying away from the godawful D&D model of RPGs.

Re:this is more of what we need

[Jon Peterson]

"In one area (PC) the best games are the ones left half, or completely, open"

REALLY??? Angband springs to mind as a game that benefited from OS development. Yes, there were some truly nice mods to Quake and Doom.
But,
Day of the Tentacle
Dungeon Keeper
Populous
Elite
X-com series
Civ series
billions of others

They were all very very very closed source. Games are imaginative. Committees don't have good imaginations. OS games generally suck unless they are simply feature-crammed implementations of tried and tested formulas.

I hereby invoke the Roman Rule...

[Daniel]

FreeCiv, NiL, Pingus, XPilot, NetHack, Crystal Space, GFingerPoken, Koules, Liquid War, XConq, WorldForge, SpellCast. To name the tip of the iceberg; I don't have time to do this all day :)

Or, in other words: The one who says it cannot be done should never interrupt the one who is doing it.

Cheers,
Daniel

Long-term benefits of open source code

[Jon Erikson]

I think that an open source environment for games has two potential benefits - firstly for allowing bugs to be quickly fixed, and secondly to allow the game to be enhanced and updated in reponse to user requests and ideas.

The first point has already been covered many times here on /. but it is the second that interests me the most. Whereas some games aren't in particular need of new features or concepts, others can hugely benefit - think strategy games like Civilisation or role playing games like Worldforge as mentioned by another poster.

The transition from Civ to Civ II was not one of a radical change in the core concept of the game - instead it was a tweaking of rules, adding new features and expanding player options. Having the source code for the game would mean that these additions could me made as and when people wanted them, making the game improve over time.

So for this sort of game, open source would offer both of these advantages and could allow a program to outlast the platform it was written on :)

---
Jon E. Erikson

Open Art in Software and Independent Film

[Izaak]

The article seems critical of the idea of volunteer provided 'open art'... but my experience is that there are many talented musicians and artists who are willing to get involved, if you just approach them about it. At least that is what I am finding with my own video game SDK project www.gridslammer.org and with my independent film project. Here is what I had to say in the Linux Today forum about this article:

From the article:
It's difficult to imagine how Open Source developers could match the speed, quality and quantity that the commercial gaming industry gives us each year. It would be like trying to film Star Wars with your friends on weekends.

Difficult, but not impossible. If an open source game project were to collect a large enough following of programmers and artists, it could 'pull a linux' on the game industry. It will take time to build that sort of following, but I am beginning to see it happen with several projects.

As for 'open art', I can see one big reason that a musician or graphic artist might donate their efforts to an open game project: exposure. Art is a competitive field. Getting your name out there by showcasing your art on a popular game could really advance one's career. The same could be said about the 'weekend Star Wars' comment. We are currently undergoing a renaissance in independent film making. I've seen some incredibly high quality films churned out by teams of talented volunteers. The lower cost of newer digital video technologies even allows for some amazingly good special effects. If the game industry falls into the pattern of Hollywood and begins churning out the same old big budget crap, look forward to the independent, volunteer game developers to pick up the flag.

Lets face it, video games are a type of art, and art is something that comes from individuals (sometimes working with other individuals), not faceless corporations. I see no reason why a properly motivated team of volunteer artists and programmers cannot produce a 'professional' level game. Time will tell I guess.

Thad