Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 91

Thread: To release or not to release...

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1

    Default

    The existence of easier Angband variants doesn't take away from the original, IMO. The main concerns I'd have are that people would make it too easy (winning loses meaning) and be able to reverse engineer savefiles too easily; that people would muck with the story; and that all the SECRETS and code would be revealed...

    I'd say that the first thing isn't a huge loss (cheating is always possible anyway, just hard); the second one is potentially cool (it might not all suck, and a mod with more options would have a lot of neat stuff with it), and the third...well, I don't care, I wanna see it!

    Yeah you'd get mods pretty quick that totally change the world, just using the combat engine. And mods that change the story and muck with the cosmology. Is that the worst thing that could happen to a project? Becoming a base for other, potentially also cool stories? There's going to be an early flood of simple hacks and cheats, but you'll also get some -really- advanced stuff. And you'll draw back old players who stopped playing, too.

    I'd say use a noncommercial license that keeps ownership of the original, doesn't require modders to release their source, but that requires a prominent link to the original ADOM on the title screen. (I say don't make other people release their source because...well, it will have taken other players many many years to ever get the whole story, you might as well let modders have the same satisfaction...)

  2. #42
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    199

    Default

    Regardless of anything else, this issue is certainly causing a lot of people to register to the forums, both for and against the source being released.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sowelu View Post
    The existence of easier Angband variants doesn't take away from the original, IMO. The main concerns I'd have are that people would make it too easy (winning loses meaning) and be able to reverse engineer savefiles too easily; that people would muck with the story; and that all the SECRETS and code would be revealed...
    So the main problem you see are the various forms of cheating. There's already AdomBot, no source code needed. I doubt having the source code will make it easier to cheat than it is now.

    Of course there is the "mystery" thing.. well, it's a loss, but having the source outweighs that, in my opinion. Some people might disagree, but then they are free not to look at the source code and not to read spoilers (guidebook, for example, which is already fairly complete). Their choice, isn't it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sowelu View Post
    Yeah you'd get mods pretty quick that totally change the world, just using the combat engine. And mods that change the story and muck with the cosmology. Is that the worst thing that could happen to a project? Becoming a base for other, potentially also cool stories? There's going to be an early flood of simple hacks and cheats, but you'll also get some -really- advanced stuff. And you'll draw back old players who stopped playing, too.
    Thing is that TB might dislike those... things.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sowelu View Post
    I'd say use a noncommercial license that keeps ownership of the original, doesn't require modders to release their source, but that requires a prominent link to the original ADOM on the title screen.
    Errm, do you know such a license? I hope you don't suggest TB creates one, because that would mean you had no idea what you were talking about.
    [btw, to the native english speakers, was the previous sentence correct? just curious if i got it right.]

    Quote Originally Posted by Sowelu View Post
    (I say don't make other people release their source because...well, it will have taken other players many many years to ever get the whole story, you might as well let modders have the same satisfaction...)
    Bad idea, I think. I thought the goal was to help with ADOM development, not encourage forks. IIRC, TB stated somewhere that he did not want any forks, anyway. And if the only codebase is the one of ADOM (- not some fork), that means people would have to a) release their contributions under the same license and therefore b) release their code.

    Quote Originally Posted by Covenant View Post
    Regardless of anything else, this issue is certainly causing a lot of people to register to the forums, both for and against the source being released.
    Which is a good thing

    Anyway, we are getting nowhere here, we already agreed that it's up to TB, and everything that might influence his opinion has already been said, I think.
    Of course it's unfair - that's the whole point.

    The Adom wiki: everything you don't want to know about Adom.
    http://ancardia.wikia.com/

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Epythic View Post
    I'd say use a noncommercial license that keeps ownership of the original, doesn't require modders to release their source, but that requires a prominent link to the original ADOM on the title screen.
    Errm, do you know such a license? I hope you don't suggest TB creates one, because that would mean you had no idea what you were talking about.
    There is the Floodgap license, but I don't like that one. One possible better way is license by GNU GPL version 3 or later version, or use a dual-license allowing you to select either the free as in speech license or the free as in beer license, at your choice. It is also worth trademarking, so if someone selects the GNU GPL and does sell it, then they might have to rename it and remove some trademarked stuff first before selling it (and it also requires you to release the source-codes as well because you are using the GNU GPL)

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Who are you? How did you get in here? What has ADOM wronged you, that you want to reach your goal at any price? All while hiding behind various types of licences in virtually each post of yours?
    ▼ All their fault. ▼

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Ok, Thomas, here's the thing: You could be free. You could let this thing go, and it would be loved and nourished by a supportive and intelligent community of dedicated players. You wouldn't have to walk around with this nagging feeling that the project isn't done, that there are still bugs, that it isn't everything it could have been.

    This game is a big project, and a big responsibility for you. I've played for years and I have this sense that it is as close as current roguelike games have come to perfection. There are still loose ends, though, and it seems like you have too many responsibilities to continue to support it, and that it has fallen from your list of priorities.

    Nevertheless, I totally understand your hesitation. ADOM is a beautiful creation. It is engrossing, thorough, and immersive. You should be intensely proud of what you have created. As things stand, though, the game is being held stagnant.

    The only way for this game to survive long-term is to allow it to continue adapting. I would be happy to see you doing this, or see the roguelike community continuing your vision. What you have made here will not be lost when other people step in.

    People have waited for nearly a decade for news of any kind of development with this game. That's a true measure of the extent to which this game can grip the player. If this code is released, the news of it will completely sweep the roguelike community. No one will talk about anything else for months. Long-time players will swarm back. The game will live on, and you will be free.

    I really do think it's the right thing to do, but ultimately, this game is the creation of your ingenuity and vision, and it's up to you to do what's best to ensure the survival of that vision, or to let it lie as-is.

    My personal opinion is that it is a shame to hoard the source of something so amazing when the game could continue to grow. I get the impression that this is a common opinion. Either way, though, you have the respect of the community.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Esslingen, Germany
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    Thank you, xerophile. You apparently signed up because you needed to say this, and it shows. The only thing left for me to do is agree. Enthusiastically.
    ADOM Guides - whatever you wanted to know about playing a certain class, but have been afraid to ask!

    Check out my youtube channel to see my ADOM videos, including a completed playthrough of the game. I try to give instructions, so if you want to see some place you haven't been before and get some hints on how to deal with it, this might help! There's also some other games featured there that you might find interesting.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5

    Default

    I think ADOM code should be opened.

    The two arguments against opening the code with the most plausible reasoning (for me) are the cheating/spoiled secrets effect and then "Those Variants." (Du dum dum!)

    ADOM has kept its secrets for a long while. I remember playing 0.9.3 and reading the guides available then - some of the things about it haven't been solved to this day. The roguelike players of today have had a long many years of time to enjoy the puzzles provided by ADOM. It's as good time as there ever will be to unveil the dirty details.

    Cheating seems easy enough even without the source code, though. I don't think much will happen in that department.

    About the possible variants -- Angband has its merry household, born from that community's efforts of creating such a forking development plan. On the other hand, I don't know much about Nethack variants. There's SLASH and SLASH'EM, but that's about it. At least I don't remember any of the rest by name. (Some years back I actively tried a lot of Nethack versions) If there's a billion random slapstick variants of Nethack around, good for them.

    Having run into Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup, it kind of made me stop and think about the discussion in this forum subsection here. They've developed so much, and so interesting things into the game. When I think about ADOM having that kind of future...

    I don't suggest ripping autoexplore or dungeon generation routines from DCSS to ADOM. Just from having access to the code, supplied with thinking minds, and in a common world-wide forum for everyone, a sort of programming photosyntesis can start to take place.

    Okay, when I search for DCSS spoilers, there's the occasional list copied from the code. I blame myself for looking at spoilers.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Personally, I think that opening the source code would be a good idea, as long as either TB or an appointed dev team provides a strong sense of direction. I see little risk of variants; Angband encourages them in every way (code, documentation, culture, and community), while ADOM discourages them in every way.

    I would be happy to help code, whether the code's completely open or under NDA, and whether it's to continue development or only to fix bugs under TB's direction.

    Josh Kelley (author of ADOM Sage)

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jokkey View Post
    Personally, I think that opening the source code would be a good idea, as long as either TB or an appointed dev team provides a strong sense of direction. I see little risk of variants; Angband encourages them in every way (code, documentation, culture, and community), while ADOM discourages them in every way.
    Actually, one might extend this concept of a "dev team" to the whole community: say, nothing goes into mainline until consensus was established on a development mailing list (or forum category or something). I think "we", as a community, have a fairly precise idea of what ADOM is. For tricky cases, TB-or-whoever-he-appoints has veto rights.

    ...or under NDA...
    I pretty much doubt TB will want to go that road. "International law" is a tricky thing, and even if we were all Germans (I have an advantage here ) I believe an NDA would be *practically* unenforcable.

    EDIT: I think you are all focusing a little too much on the legal aspect - that won't stop the wrongdoers (here or there). What stops them is the community standing behind TB, and that's how it should be.
    EDIT 2: Follow the second link, then search for "adom-admin". No hits. What does that tell us?</rhetorical question>
    Last edited by Epythic; 02-11-2009 at 09:45 AM.
    Of course it's unfair - that's the whole point.

    The Adom wiki: everything you don't want to know about Adom.
    http://ancardia.wikia.com/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •