Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FreeCraft Forks Offer RTS Alternatives

Posted by simoniker on from the good-free-titles-with-no-added-copyright-fun dept.

TekPolitik writes "Blizzard's attempt to shut down the multi-platform freeware RTS, FreeCraft appears to have backfired. There are now two replacement projects - Project Inferno and Stratagus. The new sites are making some effort to catalog all the games that use the new engine. Stratagus lists Wargus, Aleona's Tales and RoboVasion. Project Inferno lists ShadowConflict." The Stratagus FAQ page constructively explains: "Stratagus aims at being a generic realtime strategy engine, with no special focus on Warcraft2."

8 of 43 comments (clear)

  1. Re:So, Wait... by Blackknight · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Emulation is not illegal, nor is reverse engineering a game engine. Freecraft required you to use the graphics from the Warcraft 2 cd, or the free graphics set. There was nothing illegal about it.

    Writing an emulator for any system is not illegal, no matter what the game companies want to make you think. Look at sites like Zophar's Domain for a list of emulation projects out there.

  2. Re:So, Wait... by slug359 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It wasn't illegal, the project was a game that played like Warcraft 2, but was rewritten 100% from scratch, with new graphics (you could load the WC2 graphics from your WC2 CD if you bought it). There was no infringment then and there is not now (the C&D letter was about the name?!)

  3. Reasons for shutting down FreeCraft by neglige · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As I recall, the original reasons for shutting down FreeCraft were that the name was too similar to WarCraft and that the engine borrowed a few too many ideas from WC. With this in mind, the new games and the engine have a different names, thats good, but what about the engine functionality?

    From the Stratagus FAQ:
    [...] since the Warcraft2 support is already there we don't indent break it [...]

    Does this mean it's still close to the original? If so, is the new name enough to keep Blizzard at bay?

    --
    My cats ate my karma. They also wrote this comment.
    1. Re:Reasons for shutting down FreeCraft by mugnyte · · Score: 4, Informative


      Why would the engine functionality mean anything? Games seem to repeat models quite often. Perhaps if there was an official list of the unique aspects of WC that people cannot copy without infringing on Blizzard's copyrighted/patented/trademarked IP (notice, IANAL). Without that, its kinda vaporous. Even if they could produce such a list, its questionable if those aspects alone make WC a unique game, and repeating them or any part of them "confuses" a game player into thinking they are playing a Blizzard game.

      MS has lost to "Lindows" and Fox just lost to "Fair and Balanced". I've never heard of any law that says you can't imitate an existing behavior by writing it yourself, unless there's a unique algorithm involved, the GIF compression. Did WC employ a unique algorithm that had a patent?

      mug

    2. Re:Reasons for shutting down FreeCraft by NetDanzr · · Score: 3, Informative
      Does this mean it's still close to the original? If so, is the new name enough to keep Blizzard at bay?

      I'm no legal expert, but I think Blizzard doesn't have a case here. Defining what's "too close to original" is very hard, and can easily backfire. For example, if I compare Diablo to Gauntlet (or Rogue for that matter), I see the same game only with different graphics. So as long as the new projects keep to their own graphics, they should be as safe as Blizzard was when it decided to release Diablo.

      However, that doesn't mean that Blizzard doesn't try to sue them, and you know how such lawsuits go: the big guy sues the small guy who doesn't have the money for a defense, and even though the small guy is wully within his rights, he rather settles.

  4. Re:So, Wait... by Snowspinner · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Blizzard almost certainly has a trademark on RTS games with names in the format of "XCraft". So when people are making a game that "plays like WC2", and furthermore has a title in the same format as Blizzard's games, they are entirely within their rights to say "Stop that, or we'll sue your bitch ass."

    Are the new projects illegal? Probably not, though they want to be careful about trumpeting their connection to Freecraft. But the fact of the matter is that making new versions of WC2 is not exactly useful or productive...

    --
    Philip Sandifer's academic website
  5. Why has it backfired? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Freecraft" got in trouble because of the similarity to the names "Warcraft" and "Starcraft" - and because they were offering compatibility with Warcraft 2.

    (Rant: What the hell were they thinking? That's like making a shooter called "Dooom" and not expecting to get sued - and were they that short on talent that they didn't have an original game idea?)

    It's not like Blizzard has a monopoly on strategy games and anyone can make them. Just not blatant clones of other people's ideas and content.

    So the headline that screams "BlIzZArD'z PL4Nz B4CKF1R3 - LOL1!!!!" is stupid, and I'm pleased to see that people's efforts are going in a unique direction.

  6. Shadow Conflict by MichaelKVance · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ah, poor Linux gaming. Since Loki shut down (I used to work there), things have really been grim. As it is, Shadow Conflict is a "game" written by a 19 year old kid in Maine who spends his day in #sdl--and isn't anything more than a collection of bad fiction. And this is what gets written about on /. now. Too sad.

    You guys should be sending money to Ryan Gordon of icculus.org instead of complaining about Blizzard shutting down reverse-engineering sites.

    m.

    --
    "Sebastian you're in a mess. They called you King of all the Hipsters, is it true or are you still the Queen?" -- B