Well, it could also be that Open Source in a game (or at least in some kinds of games) is just a rotten idea.
Basically, what Open Source gives you is unlimited peer reviewing, and (if the project is cool), free bug fixes. This happens because the difference between an application working and an application not working is self evident and clear, and subjective elements of taste have nothing to do with it.
On the other hand, in an Open Source environment, how would you go around fixing, say, Quake2's AI? What is OK for somebody is way too agressive for somebody else, or too wimpy for somebody else yet. How do you choose what is a good ending and what isn't? There is just too many variables and too much subjectivity involved.
On the other hand, I agree that the community should have Open Source game **engines**, and luckily, there are a few of those out. But as far as the end user is concerned, he benefits more from giving the money to Activision for the game he wants to play than from giving it to a group of developers for their own project.
Consider this... Why are so many more people working on conversions of Quake and Quake2 than there are working on entirely new games based off the (free now) Doom engine?
Most games are going to stay propritary, at least when they come out, so learn to live with it. The Open Source model just doesn't work for games, where stability and bug-free code are less important that a coherent and unique vision. Too many cooks spoil the broth, you know that.
Thankfully, a few enlightened developers such as id release the source code after they have milked the games.
Yep... I couldn't agree more. And in the particular case of my credit union, I think they are perfecty Y2K safe, given the fact that they seem to carry out all their transactions on paper...:(
Heh... Frankly, I find a lot easier to believe that ION Stom is so FUBAR is not even funny, than there is some kind of libelous conspiracy of ex-employees to badmouth their former employer. Use Occam's Razor, kid.
"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity"
Well, fuck, I guess that the fail-safe formula for finding boring game genres is "whatever the hell I don't personally like".
I love both first-person shooters and fighting games (the finest of which, VF3, has a depth of gameplay comparable to any game on any genre), and guess what, RPGs bore the living hell out of me. This does not necessarily mark me as stupider, shorter, uglier or younger than you.
The success of hunting games originated a lot more from an influx of people who just bought their first Packard Bell to go on AOL and want a game to go with it than from any hypothetical backlash against the FPS genre.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it could also be that Open Source in a game (or at least in some kinds of games) is just a rotten idea.
Basically, what Open Source gives you is unlimited peer reviewing, and (if the project is cool), free bug fixes. This happens because the difference between an application working and an application not working is self evident and clear, and subjective elements of taste have nothing to do with it.
On the other hand, in an Open Source environment, how would you go around fixing, say, Quake2's AI? What is OK for somebody is way too agressive for somebody else, or too wimpy for somebody else yet. How do you choose what is a good ending and what isn't? There is just too many variables and too much subjectivity involved.
On the other hand, I agree that the community should have Open Source game **engines**, and luckily, there are a few of those out. But as far as the end user is concerned, he benefits more from giving the money to Activision for the game he wants to play than from giving it to a group of developers for their own project.
Consider this... Why are so many more people working on conversions of Quake and Quake2 than there are working on entirely new games based off the (free now) Doom engine?
Most games are going to stay propritary, at least when they come out, so learn to live with it. The Open Source model just doesn't work for games, where stability and bug-free code are less important that a coherent and unique vision. Too many cooks spoil the broth, you know that.
Thankfully, a few enlightened developers such as id release the source code after they have milked the games.
I'm sure as hell glad you weren't in charge of the space program back in the sixties...
Most people who have spent all their time in the Windows world have never seen a good GUI...
Yep... I couldn't agree more. And in the particular case of my credit union, I think they are perfecty Y2K safe, given the fact that they seem to carry out all their transactions on paper... :(
Thief's 3d engine is not comparable to even GLQuake... But fun, nonetheless... :)
I always heard it referred as Heinlein's razor, but you are right.
:)
What I meant is that stupidity is a simpler explanation than conspiracy, at any rate...
Heh... Frankly, I find a lot easier to believe that ION Stom is so FUBAR is not even funny, than there is some kind of libelous conspiracy of ex-employees to badmouth their former employer. Use Occam's Razor, kid.
"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity"
It was an amusing read, though.
Well, fuck, I guess that the fail-safe formula for finding boring game genres is "whatever the hell I don't personally like".
I love both first-person shooters and fighting games (the finest of which, VF3, has a depth of gameplay comparable to any game on any genre), and guess what, RPGs bore the living hell out of me. This does not necessarily mark me as stupider, shorter, uglier or younger than you.
The success of hunting games originated a lot more from an influx of people who just bought their first Packard Bell to go on AOL and want a game to go with it than from any hypothetical backlash against the FPS genre.
Funny... The one thing I hated about System Shock was the controls. Horses for courses.