Nah, you're right: They're definitely political too, and I've always been amazed at how much slack other (violent) games received, while the WWII games seem to be spared, as "hey, you are fighting nazis, so what's wrong with that?".
The reason why I mentioned Americas Army was because of them excluding the possibility of using the 'bad' side: As it's only multiplayer, two teams are opposing eachother but both, from their POV, are the Americans... One could of course reason that I shouldn't be expecting more from a game named "AMERICAS Army", but together with the overall propaganda of the game, it has been a game that has bothered me for some time.
Is there room for politics in gaming, or do you just want to shoot stuff?
Is there room for politics in art, or do you just want to listen/watch/taste/sense it?
Of course there is place for politics in gaming: It's not as if there -haven't- been any 'political' games around yet, some might be more upfront about it (random example: www.powerpolitics.us), while others still give out a political message, but are very clever in hiding it (see americasarmy.com).
For myself, I don't mind if a game has 'politics' in it: But I think that the game from the article is a lame attempt at trying to intermix all the popular elements of today, together with some hot mix of controversial sauce. Trying to pass it off as anything more than that, is ridicilous.
Whereas it's not usual around here;) I read the article, and I think he makes some excellent points.
The Slashdot headline is a bit misleading as it isn't only about plagiarism, but more about the influence of external factors/one's environment on the output of an artist:
Whereas the author cites a few real cases of famous writers of the past literally copying other people's work, he makes a good case that most of that has unknowingly been used: The author's quote:
...Most artists are converted to art by art itself
seems to be very true.
From my personal experience I can say that the previous quote, and the article's explanation of how one gets influenced by his/her environment to produce an artwork, is very true (in my case, that is).
For me my big inspirations were architecture and games, which both formed me into my hobby/work I do nowadays (leveldesigner).
Other influences (of particular my gaming-past) only became apparent when the other day, I finished a gamedesign document (of a GPL-ed game I am working on) and showed it to some co-developers, who almost immedeately recognised and pointed out the various game elements/style from my most beloved games of the past, which I'd unknowingly woven into the total design. (to name a few; Lazy Jones, Jumpman, various NES/SNES classics)
Whereas I didn't anticipate on creating clones of those games, I'd somehow formed my idea around it (and -enhanced- it), by the external imprints of the past.
It's a shame that nowadays people/companies are becoming overeager to try to squash any sort of infringement on their work (I'm not talking about blatant copyright infringements), whereas most of the times the artists only builds on the existing intellectual property, thus imo enhancing it for people who are interested in views from third-parties (one could compare it to Mods for games).
To point out the computer-art bit some more; I'd like to think that the GPL is a prime example of how proper 'plagiarism' can take place, and create several new/enhanced products, as GPL-ed code is still attributing the initial authors/source, and on top of that there is the obligation to release the source too; Making the whole art-foodchain bigger and better.
Now if only the big media conglomerates would start to see that, for example, Dangermouse's "Grey"-album (which mixed the Jay-Z's "open-sourced" beats of his "Black"-album, with the Beatle's
"White"-album) was an excellent example of how different age-groups can get exposed to the oldies: Thus, in the end, making more sales.
Hehe, reminds me of my history-classroom's ceiling in highschool, which depicted various tetris pieces all Escher-esque fitting into eachother, and which I'd use to keep myself busy 'playing' virtual tetris.:)
Also, with this vandalism will never be the same again:)
I've been playing (mainly) first person shooters since Wolfenstein 3D, and my vision has only become worse over the years: On the other hand, I've become a lot better at visual processing of situations/environments (which I think the article is actually talking about).
I really liked Google vids clean layout, and served perfectly for putting up my (private/nonsearchable) testing videos for a game I am working on.
A shame I have to resort to the cluttered YouTube interface, I hope they at least keep the 'private' option available.
Don't get me wrong: I love YouTube when I want to randomly browse videos one after the other, getting appropriate links from the suggested videos: I just don't think it serves me well in publishing such a video (without resorting to implementing it in my site) with a clean interface.
Were did you read I was saying that people aren't allowed to use tools to keep an eye on their kids?
I was merely contesting that it -isn't- the best way, as the company put it. Try reading, it helps.
Ha, and here I was thinking that the best way to protect your children online was having an honest and open relationship and giving them decent social/online education: What a fool I am.
It's already dead in the water for me if they stick with being limited to one carrier. I don't care if it's possible through some loops to make it work with other carriers; If they limit my choice from the start, I won't be wasting my money on it.
Then again, it is also a very nice bottle opener, an electronic razor, a blowdryer, a mousetrap......
Thanks people! Great to have some second thoughts on this, and whereas I understand that none of you people are lawyers, you gave me quite some more insight in the whole situation.
As mentioned before, I will be getting into contact with id software (and btw wrook, yes I -did- chuckle at you not having played Quake;-) ) and from there on see where this will end up.
I am very happy that my understanding of the GPL seemed to resemble what was said by you people; So I got good hopes that I can get this one on the road soon enough.
Thanks again all; and if you're curious if any of these plans of mine are working out, be sure to check out nosoup.net in the near future, as I will be keeping track of the progress I will eventually (and hopefully) be making.
Thanks a lot for bringing some insight into this: I'll elaborate a bit more of what I had in mind:
First of all, I am very aware of the obligation of including (or at least making publicly available) the source of a derived work: I don't even mind, because I certainly think it's fair to do so when given the opportunity to work with such an awesome piece of code/engine. I am a level designer myself, and I've been including my 'source'-maps with every release, as I think that people can learn a lot from other people's work, so the concept of sharing is not too strange to me.
My plan, which I've been playing with in my mind for some time, is to create a game which I would like to make available for free and at the same time having it 'sponsored' by in-game advertising.
As stated before, I wouldn't mind sharing the end-result of the code that would be in the final game, but I am not too sure as to how 'protected' the rest of the assets would be (think of sounds/textures/maps/models), and I am not to sure of how others could misuse these assets (read: Copy the game/software, which they would then either distribute on their own, or worse, start selling it).
I am also aware that if I am afraid of such misuse, I could still license the Q3-engine, but lack of funds (and maybe lack of courage to take the risk;) ) prohibit me from doing so, and that's why I am looking for other ways around that.
My main question would be if such misuse can be countered (so, for instance, the assets besides the code: Do they also have to be made publicly available?), and if it's allowed for me to make money out of GPL'ed code like this in the first place.
I very much appreciate your advice of getting into contact with the authors (in this case id software), and am slapping myself in the head of not having thought of that before: I very much want to respect the work of said authors, so I definitely think it's a step into the right direction.
I want to make clear that in no way I want to find ways around the GPL, and fully respect the hard work id software has put into this: Just very curious as what -is- allowed (or accepted within the GPL community), and what isn't.
A bit offtopic, but since this topic is about the GPL I thought I might be able to get some more information from here.
Could anyone point me to a good resource/site where I could ask some specific questions about the (commercial) use of GPL-ed code (more specifically the Quake 3 engine source), as the GNU/GPL site doesn't offer me all my answers I am looking for; And when I contacted them by email with those specific questions, they referred me to talk to a lawyer specialised in this (which I am currently not able to do moneywise).
I -did- do some Google-searches for it, but most came up empty.
I've been waiting some time for a GPL-topic to come up on Slashdot, so I could pose this question: So here I hope someone is able to point me in the right direction.:)
I bought it as soon as it was available on Steam, as I very much enjoyed the original Sin game.
My CD of Sin has received some scratches over the years, and when I tried to install it the other day it wouldn't: So since Sin: Emergence also came with the original Sin as an extra, I thought it to be quite a bargain for 17-something dollars (pre-release price on Steam).
Whereas I enjoyed the (very outdated) original Sin, I didn't quite get into the main game: Somehow I got really annoyed by being limited to three weapons (iirc, the second episode would add more), and the gameplay wasn't very good.
It's a shame when the original game (which runs on the Quake 2 engine) beats the sequel several years down the road: There could have been way more versatility within the gameplay/story, but I think the way that Valve is able to 'tell their story' has raised the bar for quite some other single-player-only developers.
Got to give credit where credit is due though: Sin: Emergence has one of the most memorable introduction ever : You are woken up by the 'bad girl' (who's just injected you with some sort of virus), showing some very realistic *cough* bouncing physics on the tits area.:D
Ahyes, thanks for that: Doesn't seems so strange now I couldn't find any reference to it anymore on any of the developer's sites:)
And then to think I considered to buy it through Triton as Steam really did a topnotch job (imo), and I was curious if any of the competitors were able to match/beat it... I am now taking a little time to hug my hardcopy if you don't mind;-)
From the article it seems that 3DRealms didn't have any direct stakes in it (the company responsible for Triton), so my assertion of that was wrong: Still I think my 'being sour' is quite on the spot: They obviously picked the wrong company and with the exposure of Steam they would have gotten a lot more sold games, one fact I am sure of.
Off topic: Are you still working on Minerva at the moment, or any new projects you're working on?
I remember there also being a online distribution system that had the possibility of buying Prey online (I think it was even offered at closing of the demo of Prey), with a service which name eludes me now: Since the name was new, I wouldn't be too surprised if 3DRealms had their own system set up, failed miserably, and are now a bit sour about it.
I agree that lining the pockets of your competitor isn't the smartest thing to do, but nor is -not- being able to properly distribute your content online.
There are a lot of independent developers that don't give a rat's ass at this stage as Steam offers them an excellent platform, and why wouldn't you want to reward the company who is doing it succesfully ?
And if Steam actually becomes 'another' company: Why wouldn't its success -not- be beneficial for Valve too? It's not as if it isn't allowed to throw money in between companies.
I think I am more informed of the parties out there than the general dutch man and I did my research of what I wanted to vote for this time around, and -why-.
I used the Stemwijzer merely as to see if it would fit my final decision; Which it didn't.
Most of the questions (as opposed to other years) also seemed to have an unfair balance in how they were asked (think of the 'would you like to trade in more privacy for less terrorism'-question).
And yes, I looked after the results afterwards (and so did my friends); and found several odd stances of the different parties there: Odd as in, the parties' public appearances on those issues varied a lot more than the absolutes of the answers could match.
The same happened to me; As a dutch voter I also tried out the 'Stemwijzer', and encountered a very strange advice of what to vote for, namely the 'Partij voor de Dieren' ; or 'Party for Animals', a leftish party who is fighting for more animal rights, but has not too much opinions on stuff that -also- matters.
The strange thing though; Second on the advice was 'EénNL' ; Or One NL , a party who is very much leaning to the right.
Other friends of mine also got very strange advices (ranging from hardcore religious to far-right parties), and while we could see that the tool was clearly unbalanced (either by asking the wrong questions, or by having some weird measurement being used) and its results should be taken with a grain of salt, we were worried for others who would take this advice regardless.
The end-result, where both extreme-left as extreme right had a victory, might have had some of its origin in the advice dealt out by this site.
Then again, relying on twenty one-liners to determine a final vote is not really that good a thing in the first place.
Lol, screwed up the subject: Taibo and old people somehow gets me these horrid images of Billy Blanks (or whatever the dude's name was) practising some of his Tai-Bo (or Tae Bo) in his cheap-ass videos.
I once seen a (dutch) documentary in which researchers handed over some Aibo-dogs to elderly people:
Whereas I thought they would immedeately reject it (scary technology and such) I was amazed that not only did they accept it, they also embraced it because of its multiple functions an 'ordinary' pet couldn't offer.
For one, it didn't need any care that one, once forgetting starts to be a daily part of life, tends to forget (hell, some even forget feeding themselves once dementia has been set in).
Also, whereas normal pets could be too exhausting, the Aibo with its 'react-to-impulses-from-the-owner'-mechanism, was much easier to comprehend and adjust to.
It was endearing to see how some of them used the doggy to attract other people's attention in the elderly home, who normally they would have shyed away from talking too; But once the curiousity broke the formality-barrier, they would be socialising very quickly with them.
I was amazed how some of them really started treating them as real pets (calling it names, talking to it as if it really understood them), and were shattered when, at the end of the research, they were taken away from them.
I really -do- think there is an opportunity here, where we could start some more research in this area as to start to make the last stages of life more enjoyable for the less fortunate... Hell, we should be donating Wii's to kids -and- elderly homes;).
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, I feel a bit pedantic today.
Nah, you're right: They're definitely political too, and I've always been amazed at how much slack other (violent) games received, while the WWII games seem to be spared, as "hey, you are fighting nazis, so what's wrong with that?".
The reason why I mentioned Americas Army was because of them excluding the possibility of using the 'bad' side: As it's only multiplayer, two teams are opposing eachother but both, from their POV, are the Americans... One could of course reason that I shouldn't be expecting more from a game named "AMERICAS Army", but together with the overall propaganda of the game, it has been a game that has bothered me for some time.
Is there room for politics in gaming, or do you just want to shoot stuff?
Is there room for politics in art, or do you just want to listen/watch/taste/sense it?
Of course there is place for politics in gaming: It's not as if there -haven't- been any 'political' games around yet, some might be more upfront about it (random example: www.powerpolitics.us), while others still give out a political message, but are very clever in hiding it (see americasarmy.com).
For myself, I don't mind if a game has 'politics' in it: But I think that the game from the article is a lame attempt at trying to intermix all the popular elements of today, together with some hot mix of controversial sauce. Trying to pass it off as anything more than that, is ridicilous.
The writer violates a basic concept of writing, and writing well; get your point across with as few words as possible.
You could have shortened your post to "This article sux0rz!!!oneeleven!!"
Whereas it's not usual around here ;) I read the article, and I think he makes some excellent points.
:
...Most artists are converted to art by art itself
The Slashdot headline is a bit misleading as it isn't only about plagiarism, but more about the influence of external factors/one's environment on the output of an artist:
Whereas the author cites a few real cases of famous writers of the past literally copying other people's work, he makes a good case that most of that has unknowingly been used: The author's quote
seems to be very true.
From my personal experience I can say that the previous quote, and the article's explanation of how one gets influenced by his/her environment to produce an artwork, is very true (in my case, that is).
For me my big inspirations were architecture and games, which both formed me into my hobby/work I do nowadays (leveldesigner).
Other influences (of particular my gaming-past) only became apparent when the other day, I finished a gamedesign document (of a GPL-ed game I am working on) and showed it to some co-developers, who almost immedeately recognised and pointed out the various game elements/style from my most beloved games of the past, which I'd unknowingly woven into the total design. (to name a few; Lazy Jones, Jumpman, various NES/SNES classics)
Whereas I didn't anticipate on creating clones of those games, I'd somehow formed my idea around it (and -enhanced- it), by the external imprints of the past.
It's a shame that nowadays people/companies are becoming overeager to try to squash any sort of infringement on their work (I'm not talking about blatant copyright infringements), whereas most of the times the artists only builds on the existing intellectual property, thus imo enhancing it for people who are interested in views from third-parties (one could compare it to Mods for games).
To point out the computer-art bit some more; I'd like to think that the GPL is a prime example of how proper 'plagiarism' can take place, and create several new/enhanced products, as GPL-ed code is still attributing the initial authors/source, and on top of that there is the obligation to release the source too; Making the whole art-foodchain bigger and better.
Now if only the big media conglomerates would start to see that, for example, Dangermouse's "Grey"-album (which mixed the Jay-Z's "open-sourced" beats of his "Black"-album, with the Beatle's "White"-album) was an excellent example of how different age-groups can get exposed to the oldies: Thus, in the end, making more sales.
Hehe, reminds me of my history-classroom's ceiling in highschool, which depicted various tetris pieces all Escher-esque fitting into eachother, and which I'd use to keep myself busy 'playing' virtual tetris. :)
:)
Also, with this vandalism will never be the same again
I've been playing (mainly) first person shooters since Wolfenstein 3D, and my vision has only become worse over the years: On the other hand, I've become a lot better at visual processing of situations/environments (which I think the article is actually talking about).
I really liked Google vids clean layout, and served perfectly for putting up my (private/nonsearchable) testing videos for a game I am working on.
A shame I have to resort to the cluttered YouTube interface, I hope they at least keep the 'private' option available.
Don't get me wrong: I love YouTube when I want to randomly browse videos one after the other, getting appropriate links from the suggested videos: I just don't think it serves me well in publishing such a video (without resorting to implementing it in my site) with a clean interface.
Were did you read I was saying that people aren't allowed to use tools to keep an eye on their kids? I was merely contesting that it -isn't- the best way, as the company put it. Try reading, it helps.
Triangel Hero
Ha, and here I was thinking that the best way to protect your children online was having an honest and open relationship and giving them decent social/online education: What a fool I am.
It's already dead in the water for me if they stick with being limited to one carrier. I don't care if it's possible through some loops to make it work with other carriers; If they limit my choice from the start, I won't be wasting my money on it.
Then again, it is also a very nice bottle opener, an electronic razor, a blowdryer, a mousetrap......
Thanks people! Great to have some second thoughts on this, and whereas I understand that none of you people are lawyers, you gave me quite some more insight in the whole situation. ;-) ) and from there on see where this will end up.
As mentioned before, I will be getting into contact with id software (and btw wrook, yes I -did- chuckle at you not having played Quake
I am very happy that my understanding of the GPL seemed to resemble what was said by you people; So I got good hopes that I can get this one on the road soon enough.
Thanks again all; and if you're curious if any of these plans of mine are working out, be sure to check out nosoup.net in the near future, as I will be keeping track of the progress I will eventually (and hopefully) be making.
Cheers!
Thanks a lot for bringing some insight into this: I'll elaborate a bit more of what I had in mind:
;) ) prohibit me from doing so, and that's why I am looking for other ways around that.
First of all, I am very aware of the obligation of including (or at least making publicly available) the source of a derived work: I don't even mind, because I certainly think it's fair to do so when given the opportunity to work with such an awesome piece of code/engine. I am a level designer myself, and I've been including my 'source'-maps with every release, as I think that people can learn a lot from other people's work, so the concept of sharing is not too strange to me.
My plan, which I've been playing with in my mind for some time, is to create a game which I would like to make available for free and at the same time having it 'sponsored' by in-game advertising.
As stated before, I wouldn't mind sharing the end-result of the code that would be in the final game, but I am not too sure as to how 'protected' the rest of the assets would be (think of sounds/textures/maps/models), and I am not to sure of how others could misuse these assets (read: Copy the game/software, which they would then either distribute on their own, or worse, start selling it).
I am also aware that if I am afraid of such misuse, I could still license the Q3-engine, but lack of funds (and maybe lack of courage to take the risk
My main question would be if such misuse can be countered (so, for instance, the assets besides the code: Do they also have to be made publicly available?), and if it's allowed for me to make money out of GPL'ed code like this in the first place.
I very much appreciate your advice of getting into contact with the authors (in this case id software), and am slapping myself in the head of not having thought of that before: I very much want to respect the work of said authors, so I definitely think it's a step into the right direction.
I want to make clear that in no way I want to find ways around the GPL, and fully respect the hard work id software has put into this: Just very curious as what -is- allowed (or accepted within the GPL community), and what isn't.
Anyhows, thanks for your advice.
A bit offtopic, but since this topic is about the GPL I thought I might be able to get some more information from here.
Could anyone point me to a good resource/site where I could ask some specific questions about the (commercial) use of GPL-ed code (more specifically the Quake 3 engine source), as the GNU/GPL site doesn't offer me all my answers I am looking for; And when I contacted them by email with those specific questions, they referred me to talk to a lawyer specialised in this (which I am currently not able to do moneywise).
I -did- do some Google-searches for it, but most came up empty.
I've been waiting some time for a GPL-topic to come up on Slashdot, so I could pose this question: So here I hope someone is able to point me in the right direction.:)
Thanks in advance, and any help is appreciated.
Since when is a star of 1000 times the mass of the Sun a humungous star? The Sun is a pretty small star compared to others...
;)
*holds back urge to make a "Your mom"-joke*
I bought it as soon as it was available on Steam, as I very much enjoyed the original Sin game.
:D
My CD of Sin has received some scratches over the years, and when I tried to install it the other day it wouldn't: So since Sin: Emergence also came with the original Sin as an extra, I thought it to be quite a bargain for 17-something dollars (pre-release price on Steam).
Whereas I enjoyed the (very outdated) original Sin, I didn't quite get into the main game: Somehow I got really annoyed by being limited to three weapons (iirc, the second episode would add more), and the gameplay wasn't very good.
It's a shame when the original game (which runs on the Quake 2 engine) beats the sequel several years down the road: There could have been way more versatility within the gameplay/story, but I think the way that Valve is able to 'tell their story' has raised the bar for quite some other single-player-only developers.
Got to give credit where credit is due though: Sin: Emergence has one of the most memorable introduction ever : You are woken up by the 'bad girl' (who's just injected you with some sort of virus), showing some very realistic *cough* bouncing physics on the tits area.
Ahyes, thanks for that: Doesn't seems so strange now I couldn't find any reference to it anymore on any of the developer's sites :)
;-)
And then to think I considered to buy it through Triton as Steam really did a topnotch job (imo), and I was curious if any of the competitors were able to match/beat it... I am now taking a little time to hug my hardcopy if you don't mind
From the article it seems that 3DRealms didn't have any direct stakes in it (the company responsible for Triton), so my assertion of that was wrong: Still I think my 'being sour' is quite on the spot: They obviously picked the wrong company and with the exposure of Steam they would have gotten a lot more sold games, one fact I am sure of.
Off topic: Are you still working on Minerva at the moment, or any new projects you're working on?
I remember there also being a online distribution system that had the possibility of buying Prey online (I think it was even offered at closing of the demo of Prey), with a service which name eludes me now: Since the name was new, I wouldn't be too surprised if 3DRealms had their own system set up, failed miserably, and are now a bit sour about it.
I agree that lining the pockets of your competitor isn't the smartest thing to do, but nor is -not- being able to properly distribute your content online.
There are a lot of independent developers that don't give a rat's ass at this stage as Steam offers them an excellent platform, and why wouldn't you want to reward the company who is doing it succesfully ?
And if Steam actually becomes 'another' company: Why wouldn't its success -not- be beneficial for Valve too? It's not as if it isn't allowed to throw money in between companies.
I think I am more informed of the parties out there than the general dutch man and I did my research of what I wanted to vote for this time around, and -why-.
I used the Stemwijzer merely as to see if it would fit my final decision; Which it didn't.
Most of the questions (as opposed to other years) also seemed to have an unfair balance in how they were asked (think of the 'would you like to trade in more privacy for less terrorism'-question).
And yes, I looked after the results afterwards (and so did my friends); and found several odd stances of the different parties there: Odd as in, the parties' public appearances on those issues varied a lot more than the absolutes of the answers could match.
The same happened to me; As a dutch voter I also tried out the 'Stemwijzer', and encountered a very strange advice of what to vote for, namely the 'Partij voor de Dieren' ; or 'Party for Animals', a leftish party who is fighting for more animal rights, but has not too much opinions on stuff that -also- matters.
The strange thing though; Second on the advice was 'EénNL' ; Or One NL , a party who is very much leaning to the right.
Other friends of mine also got very strange advices (ranging from hardcore religious to far-right parties), and while we could see that the tool was clearly unbalanced (either by asking the wrong questions, or by having some weird measurement being used) and its results should be taken with a grain of salt, we were worried for others who would take this advice regardless.
The end-result, where both extreme-left as extreme right had a victory, might have had some of its origin in the advice dealt out by this site.
Then again, relying on twenty one-liners to determine a final vote is not really that good a thing in the first place.
Lol, screwed up the subject: Taibo and old people somehow gets me these horrid images of Billy Blanks (or whatever the dude's name was) practising some of his Tai-Bo (or Tae Bo) in his cheap-ass videos.
:)
Should be Aibo of course
I once seen a (dutch) documentary in which researchers handed over some Aibo-dogs to elderly people:
;).
Whereas I thought they would immedeately reject it (scary technology and such) I was amazed that not only did they accept it, they also embraced it because of its multiple functions an 'ordinary' pet couldn't offer.
For one, it didn't need any care that one, once forgetting starts to be a daily part of life, tends to forget (hell, some even forget feeding themselves once dementia has been set in).
Also, whereas normal pets could be too exhausting, the Aibo with its 'react-to-impulses-from-the-owner'-mechanism, was much easier to comprehend and adjust to.
It was endearing to see how some of them used the doggy to attract other people's attention in the elderly home, who normally they would have shyed away from talking too; But once the curiousity broke the formality-barrier, they would be socialising very quickly with them. I was amazed how some of them really started treating them as real pets (calling it names, talking to it as if it really understood them), and were shattered when, at the end of the research, they were taken away from them.
I really -do- think there is an opportunity here, where we could start some more research in this area as to start to make the last stages of life more enjoyable for the less fortunate... Hell, we should be donating Wii's to kids -and- elderly homes
Found this blog article (from a few days ago), which seems to have about the same pics and a translation.
Ahyes, was already in doubt if it was the right name. It's indeed the yellow "... for Dummies"-series I am referring to.