Slashdot Mirror


The Next Unreal Tournament: Totally Free, Developed By Public

Nerval's Lobster (2598977) writes "Epic Games is rebooting Unreal Tournament, but not in a typical way. A small team of veteran developers will begin work on the next edition of the popular, multi-player shooter, in collaboration with pretty much anyone who wants to participate. "From the very first line of code, the very first art created and design decision made, development will happen in the open, as a collaboration between Epic, UT fans and UE4 developers. We'll be using forums for discussion, and Twitch streams for regular updates," reads a note on the company's blog. All code and content will appear on GitHub, and development will focus on Mac, Linux, and Windows. What's the catch? According to Epic, it'll take months to forge a playable game. "When the game is playable, it will be free. Not free to play, just free," the blog adds. "We'll eventually create a marketplace where developers, modders, artists and gamers can give away, buy and sell mods and content. Earnings from the marketplace will be split between the mod/content developer, and Epic. That's how we plan to pay for the game.""

122 comments

  1. so by hypergreatthing · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If it's free, as in free to download, compile and use, why would anyone want to use a market place to buy and sell skins/artwork?

    1. Re:so by gman003 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ease of use? Installing mods in previous games (UT99, UT2004 and UT3), while not particularly difficult for the tech-savvy, isn't exactly user-friendly, and when you mess up there's little information on how to fix it.

      As for "why would you sell it on Epic's marketplace instead of on your own?", that's almost definitely going to be what most gamers will be using, so that's where all the customers are. I certainly wouldn't mind selling maps for a dollar a pop.

    2. Re:so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because the stuff they develop for use in the market place is not included in the original free game. Moron.

    3. Re:so by stewsters · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Some people want to make a profit, some don't. It gives the people who want to make a few dollars of their model get paid, and lets those who just want to make something offer theirs free. See https://www.assetstore.unity3d... for an example of this now. If you don't have all the skills to make a game, you can still make money off of selling assets.

      I have no idea how this will go, but it will be interesting.

    4. Re:so by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I assume they'll not be making this extra content Open Source, and perhaps have official servers which any old compiler will not be able to connect to.

      The greater benefit here is that there will be a very public log of what it takes to make an AAA title. A super in-depth tutorial for all those devs who might want to license it.

    5. Re: so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'll probable be free but not DRM-free. Forcing to use only market content in the process.

    6. Re:so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because you would have to be always logged in to the market place to actually play the game. nobody said free to compile and use.

    7. Re:so by hypergreatthing · · Score: 1

      "All code and content will appear on GitHub"

    8. Re:so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think "free to compile" means the entire UT4 engine is open sourced or anything. Sounds like this is more like what Valve has been doing with Team Fortress 2 on Steam w/ open/public/visible development. Which sounds potentially fun, though there's probably all kinds of thorny licensing well-then-who-owns-what stuff to figure out.

    9. Re: so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is just for the main program, and it will most certainly be non-DRM-free, to avoid mods/content being installed from sources other than the market.

    10. Re:so by Himmy32 · · Score: 1

      People like to pay for convenience.

    11. Re:so by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      I am no longer interested in this cheat infested type FPS's. I totally lost interest in deluging a person with a rocket launcher only to be killed by him with a knife.
      Best of luck folks.

    12. Re:so by MrTester · · Score: 2

      When I first heard this earlier today what came to mind is Minecraft.
      If they can create a good stable base product with good enough <Insert developer jargon for "information people need to develop mods" here> support then there very well may be a market for good mod packs.
      I know I would have been more than happy to pay $20 or $30 for Feed The Beast for MineCraft.

      If they can turn that into a market where they skim some money off the top from the mod pack sellers to pay for a free base product (the opposite of the charge for Minecraft with free mods model of Mahjong) more power too them.

    13. Re:so by MrTester · · Score: 1

      oh.... and we are talking about a LOT more than just art and skins here. IF they are going the Minecraft route.

    14. Re:so by dubbayu_d_40 · · Score: 1

      Skins, for example.

    15. Re:so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you that stupid or are you trolling?

    16. Re:so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See Android, open source, free to download, modifiy and develop for. Third party developers develop and sell in the google market place despite the fact that google takes a cut because it gives them visibility, and drastically increases sales.

      It doesn't matter that users can bypass it, developers who want money don't want to bypass it, and they allow their apps to be sold in the store where some company takes a cut, it works, look at android, the Mac App store, etc. Nobody really gives a crap about the free programs/mods out there, it makes nobody money either way.

    17. Re:so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't have all the skills to make a game, you can still make money off of selling assets.

      And if you have the coding chops but not the time nor the artistic bent to make textures, models, etc., you can still make something that looks good.

    18. Re: so by khellendros1984 · · Score: 2

      "All code" doesn't mean a subset of the code. It means "all code". Anyhow, if one has the game code and the art assets, then there's nothing to stop you from replacing the assets in the game. If there's some DRM-encumbered binary blob for talking to the store, there'd be nothing stopping someone from coding their own replacement that points to another store.

      Personally, from the tone of the announcement, I'd expect something like Google's app market. The official market would be the default, but there's nothing stopping you from connecting to an alternate market, or from installing modpacks you grab off some modder's website. Of course, if Epic doesn't make any money on the game, it'd be counted as a failed experiment, and we wouldn't see something similar from them anytime soon.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    19. Re:so by DrMcCoy · · Score: 2

      Source says this:
      "All code and content will be available live to UE4 developers on GitHub"

      I.e. you can view the code if you are an UE4-licensee. Just like how the UE4 code is on GitHub, available to UE4-licensees.
      It will not be "free software" for free as in freedom/libre. I will only be "open source" for a very weird, non-OSI-approved definition of the term.

    20. Re: so by DrMcCoy · · Score: 2

      RTFA. It doesn't say anything about it being under the terms of a FLOSS license; or a liberal license. It will probably be the standard UE4 license, possibly even forbidding changing the store code.

    21. Re:so by DrMcCoy · · Score: 1

      I'm going to repeat what the other Anonymous Coward above said: "nobody said free to compile and use". TFA says that the code is available to UE4 devs. I.e. people who pay the subscription money for an UE4 license.

    22. Re:so by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      I am no longer interested in this cheat infested type FPS's. I totally lost interest in deluging a person with a rocket launcher only to be killed by him with a knife.
      Best of luck folks.

      So you're saying his skill won out over your cheats?

    23. Re:so by tysonedwards · · Score: 1

      Think of it this way... Sure you *can* use the Amazon App Store on your Android Phone, and even get some Android Apps cheaper than you would on Google Play, however you would need to seek it out and install it yourself versus just using the one that is pre-loaded on your phone.

      As such, using the Unreal Store will create immediate visibility to all users, as well as put the onus of distributing and more importantly tracking patch levels and updating the content on Epic instead of the user.

      Still, the tech-savvy can just do it themselves and save a few bucks.

      --
      Thirty four characters live here.
    24. Re:so by aliquis · · Score: 1

      - I'm sick of cheaters!

      * Brings rocket launcher to knife fight *

    25. Re:so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Umod package format was designed for ease, but since most people play pirated copies that never installed it properly (umod extension setup happens at install time) there was often complaints about that (and less about not being able to use umods on Linux or Mac platforms which is a valid issue, but definitely the minority.)...

    26. Re:so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why would anyone want to use a market place to buy and sell skins/artwork?

      If it's an Apple-like market, ruled with an iron fist with content reviewed and validated, sign me the hell up.

      If it's Android-like (or, every-goddamned-Bethesda-game-mod-site-ever)... Yeah, I'll pass. I have enough of my time wasted fishing out a few gems from a sea of HURR LUERK PIXEL BOOBEHZ KWADRUPLE Z LOLOLOL without paying for the privilege.

    27. Re:so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hopefully some kind of value-add checksumming, virii-scanning and ease-of-use testing would go a long way towards making the standard a VIABLE one. =$

    28. Re: so by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      I can't get to Polygon from here, so I read the entry on the Unreal Engine blog/wiki prior to my previous post. The game code doesn't look like it'll be under some kind of copyleft, but it *does* look like access to the data will be cheap ($19/seat/month and 5% of income from games based on the engine). In the EULA (which appears to govern licensee actions with the engine and UT Project game assets), I don't see anything stopping a developer from making a modified version of the main game executable and distributing it for free (presumably, the developer would be on the hook for hosting charges, since 5% of gross income from the game would go to Epic).

      You can't distribute licensed source, licensed tools, or enough to allow users to create a "standalone product". You might be able to give them enough leeway to freely create content that relies on the product that you built (and are giving away for free). I'd imagine that someone will take at least that twisted of a view of their developer license, at some point.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    29. Re:so by Kjella · · Score: 2

      For the user the game will be free as in beer, not "freemium" with in-game micro transactions. The code will neither be free as in beer nor free as in speech, but if you are already a UE4 subscriber ($19/month) you can use and extend the code for no extra charge, presumably under the same license and terms as mods to the engine itself so basically it's a reference implementation FPS. If you sell anything you owe them 5% of the gross revenue, if you give it away you owe them nothing. Which makes their pricing make sense, any subscriber can basically compile UT4 as-is and release it as freeware so instead they do it "officially". If you implement your own skin/artwork store they'll still take 5%, if you want to sell through the UT store they might charge more. Either way if you make money off it, they'll make money off it.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    30. Re: so by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      Fuck those app stores.. just give me a download for the zip file..

    31. Re:so by Z80a · · Score: 1

      The "evil" is most likely simply creating a gigantic programmer and user base of the unreal engine, so they can shift a lot of the indie and big games to use their engine instead of lets say crytech.

    32. Re:so by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      take it up with careserv newb!

    33. Re:so by complete+loony · · Score: 1

      More importantly, since they want a royalty payment on sales, why are they charging developers per month up-front? Wouldn't this reduce the number of developers willing to experiment with their engine?

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    34. Re:so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The question wasn't who wants to make money, it's who would pay if the game is absolutely free. You download and play a fully functional game... why would you pay to have a customized texture or model on your character? That's a pretty tiny market we're talking about here... if there is even a market to speak of.

    35. Re:so by Khyber · · Score: 0

      "Ease of use? Installing mods in previous games (UT99, UT2004 and UT3), while not particularly difficult for the tech-savvy, isn't exactly user-friendly, "

      What the fuck crack are you smoking? You either copy the mod to the game directory or run the self-extracting and installation-detecting executable.

      Speaking as I have all UTs instaled on my system and still play and mod them regularly.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    36. Re:so by Khyber · · Score: 0

      As if someone else can't make the same or equivalent thing and simply not charge for it.

      Moron.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    37. Re:so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There's a market, at least for the innovative.

      I once sold an open pit mine design by importing it into UT and walking the client down the ramp, showing all the orebody layouts as I went.

      I probably could have broken some rock for them with a rocket launcher while I was there, but it wasn't necessary for the sale...

    38. Re:so by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      As if someone else can't make the same or equivalent thing and simply not charge for it.

      Ok, I'm sure you will then volunteer to do all that extremely hard work for not a single penny.

    39. Re: so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would just like to point out Path Of Exile. A Diablo-like where the only thing you pay for is purely cosmetic and they seem to do well enough.

    40. Re:so by kiddygrinder · · Score: 1

      the code availability has exactly zero to do with how it's licensed

      --
      This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
    41. Re: so by loufoque · · Score: 1

      More inventory space is hardly cosmetic.

    42. Re:so by rwven · · Score: 1

      I take it you're not the kind of person to donate to OSS projects, then?

    43. Re:so by Threni · · Score: 2

      Don't you report them, and then they get watched/videod and if there's evidence they're cheating they're kicked/banned?

    44. Re:so by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "Ok, I'm sure you will then volunteer to do all that extremely hard work for not a single penny."

      It's only hard if you're totally inept at understanding tutorials provided by many many many other communities dedicated to modding.

      But you seem the ill-educated type.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    45. Re:so by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Ill-educated, eh? :) How about you? Have you created a full playable deathmatch level from beginning to end?

    46. Re:so by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      No, I am saying his cheats on invulnerability won out on a standard in-game weapon

    47. Re:so by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      I have a better idea, why don't you keep using your cheats and I will move on to a game that utilizes skill and not mods to overcome opponents.

  2. This sounds great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As someone who played endless hours of UT2004, UT3 was such a disappointment in so many ways... And I could play UT2004 it in Linux, like 8 years ago. When UT3 for linux was abandoned, my heart broke. It took a long time for me to finally play it and realize it kinda sucked anyway.

    Epic's decision to build the game in public isn't the only change that reflects the passage of time. Unreal Tournament will be free -- but not free-to-play, according to the developer.

    "Free means free -- no microtransactions," he said. "Just free."

    How does that square with the $19/mo that's mentioned earlier?

    1. Re: This sounds great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's for the Engine, for developers... (?)

    2. Re:This sounds great... by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      Your heart was broken because they didn't support your OS of choice? I'd prefer to play my games on Linux too (and I do with those I can) but really? Isn't that a bit of hyperbole?

    3. Re:This sounds great... by Maltheus · · Score: 1

      Right there with you. That was the last regular FPS I played. Quick, fast, brutal action. One of my favorite games of all time. And having it on Linux meant I actually played it, rather than just have it sit on a shelf. All they needed to do was slightly improve on the UT2K4 concept.

      I hope this works out, I'm very much looking forward to this.

    4. Re: This sounds great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The $20/month is the fee for continuing updates to the Unreal Engine 4, that cost won't impact UT4 in any way except that I believe modders would nee to licence the Unreal Engine 4 to create mods for UT4

    5. Re:This sounds great... by Bugamn · · Score: 1

      Consider that there are few games for Linux and there were even fewer at that time. It probably is a bit of a hyperbole (and I don't think there is any problem with that), but I can see how someone would have their heart broken over that. Maybe they use only Linux normally, so it means they cannot even play?

  3. RealCTF by mfh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Former RealCTF level designer here.

    This is a really good idea, and I welcome this as great news! :-)

    If anyone needs some level design, hit me up!!

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    1. Re:RealCTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That UID.

    2. Re:RealCTF by stewsters · · Score: 1

      Woah. Woah.

    3. Re:RealCTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they aren't included, you could make a lot of money releasing the classic maps from Unreal and UT99. Hell, there are still active Face-only servers for UT99.

    4. Re:RealCTF by sexconker · · Score: 0

      He bought / stole the account, and he's been spouting a lot of bullshit lately.
      For example: http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    5. Re:RealCTF by mfh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      He bought / stole the account, and he's been spouting a lot of bullshit lately.

      And you're spouting a little right now! ;-)

      Suggesting this acct was stolen is just a patent falsehood. The original owner of this acct sold it for $100 in a very well publicized Ebay auction. I happened to win the auction and I felt at the time that a piece of Slashdot history (a beta account -- 2digit already) was well worth the money out of sheer novelty. A 3digit acct later sold for around $700 and another for $200-300, from what I could tell.

      Love or hate the low-uid, you have to admire any piece of Slashdot history. CmdrTaco is probably the only person posting with a lower UID than me and he's not posted here in a long time (2011). I donated quite a bit of time to helping CmdrTaco on a revamp of the moderation system over several emails back and forth, and he was appreciative of my feedback. I'm a programmer and system designer so he didn't just outright reject what was said. There was a small think-tank of us working on it. But shortly after that Slashdot was sold and the changes were never implemented.

      Come on man. I enjoy Slashdot. I've posted my wacky opinion here for quite a long time. My other acct was 6 digit. The one before that was a 4-digit low to mid 2000s uid. I've since lost access to both of those. A good friend was very involved with this site early on and tried to get us all into it back on the TWCTF mailing list back in the day.

      So you're not wrong... except you are wrong about the stealing thing.

      --
      The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    6. Re:RealCTF by mfh · · Score: 1

      I was thinking I'll do the Quake1 maps but now that I think about it, Spill the Blood would be awesome to update for the new UT, with TWCTF.

      --
      The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    7. Re:RealCTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are you still standing? On your knees in front of the elders!

    8. Re:RealCTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God bless you and RealCTF

    9. Re:RealCTF by sexconker · · Score: 1

      I said "He bought / stole the account". According to your own story, I was correct. It is not a "patent falsehood" as you claimed. The truth is your account UID is NOT an indicator of how long you've been on Slashdot, or an indicator of any experience, knowledge, etc. in anything tech-related.
      It IS an indicator that you prefer to masquerade and misrepresent yourself. Your recent posting history is absolute proof that you enjoy spouting bullshit.

    10. Re:RealCTF by mfh · · Score: 1

      After this comment to you, I've said all I am going to say to you about this. You can live in denial if you prefer.

      Don't like what I have to say? Tackle the issues. Stop attacking the person presenting them.

      When I first started posting from this acct I acquired about 25-40 new cyber stalkers, and each loooooved the ad hominem attack because it is a cheap way to smear someone and try to ruin someone's day. They would reply after everything I said that I bought the acct on Ebay... just to warn everyone that I was not special. They would say that anything I said was false because I said it. I could say the sky is blue and they would argue that the deflection of blue light meant the sky was not actually blue that it was in fact REPULSING BLUE. You get me?

      They aren't wrong... they are just assholes. You can join them if you like. That's your choice.

      But I think I finally frustrated them all enough that they stopped caring at the time. They realized that what I'm saying is what matters, not who I am. I was one of the people in World of Warcraft to receive the Insane title pre-nerf, so you know I'm not easily deterred from something. Of course you'll think of all kinds of negative things to hook into about this reply to you but you'll be wasting your time.

      The fellow you used to post from this acct wasn't particularly special. He sold it for beer money.

      The fact that he sold it at all says something about him. I would never have sold it. He gave up the one cool thing about him on the internet... for beer money.

      He wasn't some rocket scientist... he was a college student who accidentally got into Slashdot's beta just because he was hanging around the place it was being developed and he was one of the earliest adopters if memory serves. He stopped caring about the site and actually never really liked it. Too many trolls.

      I've done beta testing and system design. Arguably I am of a higher technical systems background than the previous owner of UID#56 if memory serves correctly.

      I certainly value(d) it more than him. The new beta design appears to be eliminating the UID altogether. Think about that for a sec... still want to attack?

      So you have no life, and you want to make sure others don't enjoy theirs. Enjoy your meaningless journey. I don't care if you cyber stalk every thread I post in. I will hold my opinions as long as they make sense to me, and offer them freely to others. Don't like it? Cry about it in a reply. Stalk me if you must do so...

      Is your life that meaningless?

      --
      The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
  4. Interesting.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I will tell you this if our government was shaped up like these open market games, we would have far fewer problems to DE with. It's like bartering in a way.. I'll give you something in return for your services. It's presented in a fair way..

  5. UWindows by damicatz · · Score: 2

    I hope they bring back UWindows. That, IMHO, was the pinnacle of interfaces for games and the consolized interfaces of the later versions are crap by comparison.

    1. Re:UWindows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope they bring back UWindows. That, IMHO, was the pinnacle of interfaces for games and the consolized interfaces of the later versions are crap by comparison.

      Oh hey I didn't know that interface had a name.

      Yeah, definitely a cut above the rest in terms of combining user friendliness and in-depth settings. Would be cool to see it brought back.

    2. Re:UWindows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly the best UI of any game. Looking at it now is akin to what admiring the Colosseum was to people of the middle ages.

  6. This should be amusing by idontgno · · Score: 1

    As anyone who's watched the most famous recent use of Twitch will realize, this should result in epic loltrolling and griefing of the development process.

    That or else the development process will be sufficiently insulated from the rabble that this announcement boils down to just marketing.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  7. SLightly offtopic, but... by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Holy hell, I don't think I've ever seen a 2-digit ID post before.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:SLightly offtopic, but... by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      Uh oh. Now you've done it. Watch a 1-digit roll over in it's grave, and post to top that.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    2. Re:SLightly offtopic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nor did the current account owner; He bought his 2-digit ID for a few hundred dollars...

    3. Re:SLightly offtopic, but... by mfh · · Score: 1

      The only one who would is CmdrTaco but he hasn't since 2011. I haven't seen anyone post lower than 56.

      --
      The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    4. Re:SLightly offtopic, but... by BTWR · · Score: 1

      I have a friend w/a 1-digit UID. He's not interested in selling but I wonder what it would go for...

  8. Conflicting statements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Free means free — no microtransactions," he said. "Just free."

    When asked how Epic will earn income with a free game, Polge said that Unreal Tournament will "eventually" have a marketplace where modders can post and give away or sell their maps, mods and other content.

    How is a marketplace not microtransactions?

    1. Re:Conflicting statements by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      If all the content is third party, it's not really their game being charged for.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  9. Xonotic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Xonotic and it's various mods like chaosesque anthology are similar to the original unreal tourny

    1. Re:Xonotic by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      But Quake 3 clones like that tend to be less fun, less optimized versions of the real thing. May look too dark or something, sound effects worse, maps worse, runs slow on old PC, inequal quality, unfinished game, lack of players and even sometimes the little issue that people installing the game from distro's package manager will have an older version.

      I'll have to try Xonotic 0.7, expecting it to barely run on open source driver, I expect to have to set the keyboard to qwerty before launching it so I can access console and weapons. Would be nice if it reaches version 1.0 some day - Quake 3 did in 1999.

  10. Unreal Tournament Forever by mrbluejello · · Score: 1

    I don't see this launching soon.

  11. open = being able to have your own build bypass by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    open = being able to have your own build that bypass the DRM.

    1. Re:open = being able to have your own build bypass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it's open it's not going to have any damn DRM, that's half the point of it being open source.

    2. Re:open = being able to have your own build bypass by DrMcCoy · · Score: 1

      Really, you too: Read the actual article. It says nothing about it being open source or free software. It only says the UE4 developers will have access to the source on GitHub.

    3. Re:open = being able to have your own build bypass by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      If it's open it's not going to have any damn DRM, that's half the point of it being open source.

      It can be open source, but still have licensed technology. For instance Shake's source code was available for I believe $100,000. But you couldn't distribute the code nor use any of the patented technology contained within.

      If you license the Unreal 4 engine you get the source code. But you still have to pay to distribute your game based on that source code.

    4. Re:open = being able to have your own build bypass by hobarrera · · Score: 1

      Github requires that you pick an open source license for public repositories. Their saying it's "Not free to play, just free" also makes me think it'll be free software.

    5. Re:open = being able to have your own build bypass by DrMcCoy · · Score: 1

      Yes, exactly, and this is not a public repository! No one said this will be a public repository!

      Hell, they already do that for the Unreal Engine 4! Look at that, here, ffs: https://www.unrealengine.com/ue4-on-github

    6. Re:open = being able to have your own build bypass by DrMcCoy · · Score: 1

      Also, GitHub /doesn't/ require you to pick an open source license for public repositories. You can choose whatever the hell damn license you want.

      The only thing you do by accepting the GitHub terms of service is grant some rights, namely that everyone can see and fork your repository (which might qualify as "open source" in your book, but I view as a cop-out). Of course, this still doesn't give anyone the rights to actually do anything with the code besides looking at it.

      Which is one of the reasons many free software proponents have been dismayed by the amount of license-less GitHub repository. To answer that, GitHub added the license picker for newly created repositories, but that thing still is completely optional.

  12. Longlived game development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Open for 3rd party development is an interesting decision and sadly not seen often enough. The ability to gain new ingame content for years to come will make paying players interested for years.

    One of the best examples I can think of is Civilization 4. Released in 2005 + 2006 expansions and the colonization standalone in 2008. Looking at how other games from that time became history, civ4 should have been a thing of the past too. However the ability to mod more or less anything in the game (even C++ core features) mean that mods are still being improved and even here in 2014 new mods show up. Looking at the steam forum, people talk about which mods to use meaning presumably new buyers buy because the game core is modder friendly.

    Had civilization 4 been released like the next UT, then I don't think it would have been much different. In fact the only thing which comes to my mind as possible additions would be better portability and 64 bit support. Any other addition that I can think of is possible with due to having access to modify the DLL file. My experience tells me that getting C/C++ coders, who will work for free on open source projects is a lot easier if linux is natively supported.

    Time will tell how well it will go with attracting external development people for UT as well as how long lived the game will be. The setup looks promising and the fact that it will be supported natively on linux will likely make it a bit easier to attract coders.

  13. Interesting... by Dega704 · · Score: 2

    They seem to have taken a leaf from Valve's book with Team Fortress 2, but are taking it a step further by opening the development itself. If this works out well, it could have a lot of ramifications for the future of game development. I'll be happy enough as long as the lightning gun comes back. That thing made headshots so much more fun.

    1. Re:Interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TF2 succeeded as an F2P because it had excellent gameplay that Valve continued to build upon after release.

      UT4 or whatever they want to call it, is a complete unknown. One hopes that they learned their lesson from the UT3 debacle but, even if Epic manages to recapture the goodness of UT2004, will they commit to sustaining the game with new gameplay and features?

  14. GIANT BATHROOM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bring back the GIANT MAPS. I'm jonesin' to play in the giant bathroom again.

    1. Re:GIANT BATHROOM! by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      Man, I saw that in action just last weekend. A buddy had a retro-game LAN party in place of a bachelor party. Good times.

      If they were going to bring it back, I'd suggest adding the family pet as a dynamic object that generally tears the shit out of you. Or the occupants of the house going about their business. "I'm sniping behind timmy's left ear" "Lookout, Dad is coming into the kitchen and he's full of rocket whores!" "Player 3 chewed like a cheap plastic toy"

    2. Re:GIANT BATHROOM! by WheezyJoe · · Score: 1

      Bring back the GIANT MAPS. I'm jonesin' to play in the giant bathroom again.

      Yes! These maps were great! I used to hide out in a drain in the sink (there was a redeemer hidden in there) or take a sniper position on top a piece of crown molding. 2 inches high in a kitchen with a super shock rifle? and the TV actually worked!

      --
      Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
    3. Re:GIANT BATHROOM! by WheezyJoe · · Score: 1

      Yes. Yes. and Yes.

      --
      Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
  15. Avid UT player here... by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    Avid UT player here (the original "UT99") and it was almost *entirely* because of the 3rd-party content (particularly the "Land of the Giants" maps) that I played the game as much as I did...

    1. Re:Avid UT player here... by WheezyJoe · · Score: 1

      This. It's ancient, but there's something about UT 99 and it's great maps and mods that's un-matched for quick, dirty, mad crazy carnage.

      I would love nothing more than re-creating the feel of that game with a few modern updates (maybe modern, smoother graphics for better eye-candy, destructible map elements (leave a crater where a redeemer went off, drop a wall on an enemy), rockets that actually fly fast like real rockets, blast waves, simulated vertigo/shock on impact, more useable gadgets in maps). It'd also be great to skin yourself as anything you want. Deathmatch with Bart Simpson, Teletubbies, Ronald MacDonald comin' at ya with a flak cannon. Game so good you quit your job and leave your wife. Mayhem!

      --
      Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
    2. Re:Avid UT player here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still love UT99. So much so that when it wouldn't play on my new Mac, I bought Parallels, Windows XP and the Windows version of UT.

    3. Re:Avid UT player here... by WheezyJoe · · Score: 1

      Still love UT99. So much so that when it wouldn't play on my new Mac, I bought Parallels, Windows XP and the Windows version of UT.

      That's dedication, my friend. It runs fine with Windows 7, too, if you ever find yourself forced out of XP.

      --
      Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
  16. Re:Costs $19 Per Month! by Renozuken · · Score: 1

    You don't seem to get it, you're already paying the subscription to use the engine, subscribers just get access to the source code of the game where they can make changes and whatnot. Totally different.

  17. just modernize UT2k4 by Lehk228 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    just upgrade UT2k4 with the things that have become standard in the last 10 years.....

    actually fuck that, FPS has only gotten worse over the last decade, re-release with only the most minor tweaks to take advantage of modern hardware and improve the map and mod cache a bit (really just upgrade so hash collisions can't happen and add a browser function to delete only specific cached data when the cache grows to over 9000)

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    1. Re:just modernize UT2k4 by Pubstar · · Score: 0

      Just about your Sig, its Chelsy Manning now or some crap like that.

    2. Re:just modernize UT2k4 by DirePickle · · Score: 1

      UT2k4 would be acceptable, but U2:XMP was the epitome of multiplayer Unreal games for me. It was the saddest Internet day when the master servers went down and scattered the player base. :(

    3. Re:just modernize UT2k4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And make custom maps permanent downloads instead of that shit temporary files mess they implemented.

    4. Re:just modernize UT2k4 by drsquare · · Score: 1

      If old FPSes like UT were that great, people would still be playing them. People still play Counterstrike 1.6 and Starcraft, yet they don't play UT or Quake.

    5. Re:just modernize UT2k4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Source? Because last I checked, I can find plenty of UT and Quake games online these days.

    6. Re:just modernize UT2k4 by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      people still do play 2k4, I have never been unable to get a game.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    7. Re:just modernize UT2k4 by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      it wasn't shit when it was made, but it is out dated. the fact that the server can hand out mods real time is something that is still rarely seen in online gaming.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    8. Re:just modernize UT2k4 by godztempus · · Score: 1

      Actually they do still play UT. Check out globalunreal.com it is an active community of around 300 players with draft leagues run 4-6 times a year in various mods.

  18. Re: open = being able to have your own build bypas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You only pay if you receive money from releasing a game, if your game is free you don't pay anything.

  19. WOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine all games are made like this! Holy shit! Now imagine how great BF3/4 would have been... or Assassins Creed... or Spore (sigh in sadness)... or... you get the picture.

  20. eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's wrong with that? A hobby of mine is recreating popular Photoshop styles then uploading them for people to download free of charge. Actually there is a reason and that would be I got tired of seeing people freeload off of remaking movie styles, naming them something similar, and then selling them.

    1. Re:eh by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      All right, I'm cool with that, but around Slashdot it's often the opposite: people see making a buck somehow wrong, when it comes to software and entertainment.

    2. Re:eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Creating game content is a lot more time consuming and requires more skill than simply creating Photoshop styles.

  21. This is to sell the engine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Epic is really pushing UE4. Looks like they've finally got some good people in charge.

    What they're doing with this is getting people to pay them to enhance the UE4 engine.

    The content they'll have people sell on the market? Drop-in resources companies developing with UE4 can purchase to build their game up faster.

    After all, a chair is a chair.

  22. Its all about marketing the engine by Aphadon · · Score: 1

    Even though the UT series were great games in their own right, in reality their purpose have always been to serve as tech demos for the latest iteration of the Unreal Engine. The full UT3 source code is also available to UE3 subscribers as an example of how to implement a game using the engine.

    However there hasn't really been any significant changes to UE3 in the last couple of years while they were ramping up development on UE4, so there wasn't much need for another UT game. Now that UE4 is ready to go though, it makes perfect sense to push out another UT. This model has served them incredibly well in the past, and in fact Unreal is still one of the most popular engines in the world today (in contrast to its original competitor Quake/Id Tech) in large part due to the popularity of the UT games.

    So although they claim they'll be offsetting the development cost from marketplace sales, really that will be pittance compared to the revenue they will gain from engine licenses. That's what it's all about.

  23. Fucking MODs by ArcadeMan · · Score: 3, Funny

    Every game these days supports MODs but nobody ever supports S3Ms anymore.

    1. Re:Fucking MODs by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      I settle for some HSC support.

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    2. Re:Fucking MODs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where's the love for OctaMED, I tells ya

  24. Meh. The world has moved on. by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    UT ceased to be relevant a very long time ago.

    DOATA2 and League of Legends are were it is at now for competition. Before that Starcraft 2. Before that CS. Team Fortress 2.

    Making UT open isn't going to change anything, the world has long since moved on to bigger and better things.

    If you want to bring something back that is relevant, bring back Enemy Territory with an open update. Now that would be awesome. Though much of the reason it was great, were features that have since been integrated into all FPS now, such as classes, experience, and abilities. Though few have adopted the objective based team play (with the exception of Brink which apparently sucked for different reasons).

  25. No, it's not free. by reiserifick · · Score: 1

    You have to be a paid Unreal Engine 4 developer to access the source on GitHub...

  26. Re: open = being able to have your own build bypas by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

    Whether you pay or not, you're licensing the source. So it's both open and restricted in what you can do with the code. Similarly Epic can both gives you the source code to Unreal Tournament and restrict how you use it.