Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Releases MechCommander 2 Source Code

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the free-for-all dept.

SpectreHiro writes "In a shocking move, Microsoft has open sourced... err, 'shared the source' of MechCommander 2. From the site, 'This is the Shared Source release for MechCommander 2. This release contains all of the source code an source assets required to build MechCommander 2. This release can be used with the Microsoft XNA Build March 2006 CTP.'

12 of 115 comments (clear)

  1. Not really shocking by reanjr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Don't know how this is that shocking, MS has been releasing shared source all over the place, including Allegiance, a multiplayer opline space real time strategy/shooter.

  2. Cool! by mrseigen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    More open sourced games can only be a good thing. How does Microsoft's shared-source license affect me as a professional game developer, though? I'm afraid of looking through a lot of other games' source code for fear of taint.

    1. Re:Cool! by GeekDork · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is kind of paranoid. It's like saying that after looking at, say, the Linux source for some drivers, you can never write a closed-source driver, or that you can never, ever write a game after having your hands at the TuxRacer source (or even after downloading the source, it's the thought that counts).

      --

      Fight hunger. Filet a politician and send him to a 3rd world country of your choice.

    2. Re:Cool! by Pofy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >More open sourced games can only be a good thing. How does Microsoft's
      >shared-source license affect me as a professional game developer, though?
      >I'm afraid of looking through a lot of other games' source code for fear of
      >taint.

      I guess as a professional book writer I would have to stop reading other books, otherwsie my own books could be "tainted" or "contaminated" by what I read. What a shock!!!

    3. Re:Cool! by mgblst · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hence the trial over the da vinci code. Becareful what you mock, what may seem ridiculous today, is the law tomorrow.

      Of course this trial hasn't ended yet, and the decision may go against the so-called infringed, but it seems to be taking a while for judgement.

  3. What license? by chill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Downloading source is great, but not if looking at said source "contaminates" you. They call the GPL viral, but what if in the networking code for this "shared source" game they have all sorts of stuff that would help the SAMBA team? Can they use it? Hell, can they even look at it and still be able to contribute to SAMBA?

    Heck, what about WINE? Is this something they should grab, or treat like free chocolate coated leprosy tablets?

      -Charles

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  4. W00T! by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not since Gorilla.bas have I been this excited!!!

  5. Killing Innovation!!! by mnmn · · Score: 3, Funny

    So Microsoft has stagnated so much, some people there are killing innovation now!

    I wonder how much more innovation Microsoft plans to kill this way in the future? I hope they kill Windows 2000 innovation to benefit WINE or ReactOS.

    To the uninitiated: Microsoft has repeatedly called opensourcing killing innovation.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
  6. Forget MechWarrier, what about the kernel... by jonwil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Microsoft has released the "Windows Research Kernel".
    From what I can tell, it is a release of a large part of the windows kernel sources (some parts are released as source, some parts like the kernel debugger, plug & play manager and power manager are released as library files) for use by academics to teach operating systems classes.

    Whats notable is that the licence for this allows creation of derived works. The only things it seems to have is a clause requiring copyright to be not misattributed (i.e. you have to keep the microsoft copyright on it), a "no commercial use" clause and a "if you make changes you have to send them to MS" clause. It aint GPL but hey, it IS a BIG change from what microsoft normally does with their code.

    I dont know more details than this and a google for it finds very little information (from MS or otherwise)

  7. EULA text by jarom · · Score: 5, Informative

    Shared Source Limited Permissive License for use of MechCommander® 2 This license governs use of the accompanying software. If you use the software, you accept this license. If you do not accept the license, do not use the software. 1. Definitions The terms "reproduce," "reproduction" and "distribution" have the same meaning here as under U.S. copyright law. "You" means the licensee of the software. "Licensed patents" means any Microsoft patent claims which read directly on the software as distributed by Microsoft under this license. 2. Grant of Rights (A) Copyright Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, Microsoft grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright license to reproduce the software, prepare derivative works of the software and distribute the software or any derivative works that you create. (B) Patent Grant- Subject to the terms of this license, including the license conditions and limitations in section 3, Microsoft grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free patent license under licensed patents to make, have made, use, practice, sell, and offer for sale, and/or otherwise dispose of the software or derivative works of the software. 3. Conditions and Limitations (A) Limitation on Commercial Distribution- Notwithstanding the rights granted in section 2(A) above, you are not granted any rights to commercially distribute any artwork from the software ("Art Assets") in any derivative work or otherwise. Microsoft grants you a limited, non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright license to use, reproduce and distribute the Art Assets on a non-commercial basis only. (B) No Trademark License- This license does not grant you any rights to use Microsoft's name, logo, or trademarks. (C) If you begin patent litigation against Microsoft over patents that you think may apply to the software (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit), your license to the software ends automatically. (D) If you distribute copies of the software or derivative works, you must retain all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices that are present in the software. (E) If you distribute the software or derivative works in source code form you may do so only under this license (i.e., you must include a complete copy of this license with your distribution), and if you distribute the software or derivative works in compiled or object code form you may only do so under a license that complies with this license. (F) The software is licensed "as-is." You bear the risk of using it. Microsoft gives no express warranties, guarantees or conditions. You may have additional consumer rights under your local laws which this license cannot change. To the extent permitted under your local laws, Microsoft excludes the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement.

    --
    This signature is far too complex to have been created by chance.
  8. Re:license? by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Microsoft has instead decided to adopt Shared Source, which not only opens up source code, but allows anyone to use freely, freelier than free Open Source.

    The only major difference is once a Shared Source is shared, it can be modified, opened, shared or even closed in future release.

    I find it unlikely it's more free than, say, a BSD license or the Apache licenses.

    And, depending on which of the shared source licenses this is released under, what you say may not be true.
    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  9. Re:but what is it? by MMaestro · · Score: 3, Informative
    Just think of it as an EXTREMELY tactical RTS game (think Ground Control, if you've played it). You get no bases, but you get off the screen support fire (such as artillery and air strikes). Theres no resource gathering, but other than scripted events theres no reinforcements during missions. Since you often times (read: always) go up against superior forces, TACTICS are extremely important (aiming for the weaker, rear armor, using flame weapons against energy and thus prone to overheating enemies, aiming for the legs to decrease mobility and then just bypass/pick off from the distance, etc etc).

    Even the forementioned artillery and air strikes took thinking to use. Artillery was fairly inaccurate and air strikes could be shot down if you tried simply trying to air strike an enemy target objective to death. You could get vehicles but they weren't customizable so that made things even harder to plan. You got aircraft but those were pitifully armored compared to the Mechs.

    And to top it all off, the Mechs themselves had weight, heat and power limitations. You COULD give a Light Mech one of the biggest weapons in the game, but then it'd be so heavy it could be equiped with anything else. You COULD strip a Mech of its heatsinks in exchange for more weapons, but then it'd overheat in a matters of seconds in combat. You COULD arm a Mech with tons of lasers but then it'd only have enough energy for one volley before overheating and shutting down.

    Oh and don't confuse this with MechWarrior (a game where YOU were the pilot.) YOU don't have direct control of the units, the AI pilot statistics played a major role. And I bolded pilots because they COULD be killed, which of course would spelled disaster if you suddenly found yourself on the last mission with no one but rookies to pilot your Mechs.