Pros and cons

[gurupunt]

If you would release ADOM source code,someone will definetly steal it.They might call their game as their own,with no relationships to ADOM.But,think.Why do you think that the nethack and a lot of more games are so popular even dozens of years after its release?Because people can edit them,add mods,so the game lives much longer.Also,it will be nice to compile the ADOM source at exotic machines,so you could play ADOM at your calculator :) Also,the binaries does NOT always work.Also,the whole developing thingies wouldnt take so long,if everyone could develop.I think that there are more pros then cons for release of the code.

[Epythic]

If you would release ADOM source code,someone will definetly steal it.They might call their game as their own,with no relationships to ADOM.But,think.Why do you think that the nethack and a lot of more games are so popular even dozens of years after its release?Because people can edit them,add mods,so the game lives much longer.Also,it will be nice to compile the ADOM source at exotic machines,so you could play ADOM at your calculator :) Also,the binaries does NOT always work.Also,the whole developing thingies wouldnt take so long,if everyone could develop.I think that there are more pros then cons for release of the code.

First, please learn how to set commas and periods.
Not,like,this.

- Even with the source code, one can not port ADOM to all platforms (you mentioned calculators; most things I've seen that go under the name "calculator" would never ever be able to run ADOM...). And even if it was possible, it is not a trivial thing.
- Releaseing the source code does not automatically get you a large developer base.
- Releaseing the source code does not automatically make the "binaries [...] always work".
- "developiing thingies wouldnt take so long" -- sure? Throwing in more manpower does not always have a positive effect, IOW collaboration *does* have a cost. And then, TB is really familiar with the codebase (since he wrote it all). ADOM is huge. I doubt others could get to a point where they can help without investing quite a bit of time. IOW, there is a huge entry barrier.
- This is not only about the pros/cons *for you*, its also about what TB likes / doesnt like. If I understood it correctly, he did it for fun, not because he wants to please you... And TB stated in the manual that he does *not* want to see crappy derivates where the only real change is in the copyright line.

Yes, I too want the code released. But some of your reasonings are a bit weird.


EDIT: Welcome to the forums ;) I hope I was not overly harsh.

[Soirana]

If you would release ADOM source code,someone will definetly steal it.

do you imagine it is encrypted straight now?

With nowadays tools you can reach code very fast and comfortable.

Release is more moral thing and hopefully would give version with sort of comments.

[Epythic]

do you imagine it is encrypted straight now?

With nowadays tools you can reach code very fast and comfortable.

Release is more moral thing and hopefully would give version with sort of comments.

It is - kind of - encrypted. You know, assembler is not really easy to read, and we are missing all the comments. Thanks god we still have symbol names, but still.

Of course for some kind of minor modification (tweaking a few stats or something), what we have would probably be enough. But once you want to do some real stuff, there is no way around the original C soure code.

Oh and by the way, I don't like how gurupunt is using the word "steal". He uses it like the RIAA is using it. But you know the difference?

Case 1: I have an apple, you have none. So you take me my apple away. No I have no apple but you do.
Case 2: I have the source code. You copy it. Now we both have the source code.

Which one of those is stealing and which one aint? (Yes, it *IS* a rhetorical question)

"Copyright infringement" is more fitting. But then, if the code is released (under a free software license i mean), you can't do copyright infringement (at least not by just modifying the thing in a way the author didnt intend it to).

The only word that really really fits here is "disrespect". Stop mistaking that with stealing.

</rant>

(note: i didnt proofread this post. really too lazy.)

[Soirana]

It is - kind of - encrypted. You know, assembler is not really easy to read, and we are missing all the comments. Thanks god we still have symbol names, but still.


Huh? I run random disection tool from disc. shows primary machine code in less than minute. You can extract most if not all message text directly from there [i think it even had function of dumping that to text file].

With some debug programs and experimental modification of code it can be analysed rather rapidly.

C? you can butcher machine code right away. At least i can hire few students in my living place more or less capable for this rather cheaply [box of bear for a weekend mostly do].

Having comments would be nice, but honestly not necessary.

[Al-Khwarizmi]

If you would release ADOM source code,someone will definetly steal it.They might call their game as their own,with no relationships to ADOM.

This sort of thing does not happen, or at least it is not important. Lots of free software code gets released everyday and problems with plagiarising are anecdotic. Free software licenses such as the GPL or the BSD preserve the author's right to be recognised as such (they are all based on copyright, after all). If ADOM were a totally unknown game played by two or three people, there could be the problem of effectively enforcing this (i.e., someone could say "hey, TB is an imposter, I really wrote ADOM"). A problem which is solvable by TB going to a registry before releasing the code. But anyway, this issue doesn't exist in this case because everyone in these forums knows who wrote ADOM, so if an imposter appeared we would just scoff at him.

[Al-Khwarizmi]

- Releaseing the source code does not automatically get you a large developer base.

Probably not "large", but it would surely be larger than the current developer base, which is zero.

Yes, working with the ADOM source code must be really hard, but I'm sure there are things which would get done fast. For example, there are unofficial patches to the executable that reportedly fix bugs (like the ingot bug patch). If people have done that without access to the code, I'm sure they could do the same and much more if they had access.

As a programmer, I think that things like the Skilled crash, Kelly crashes, or the uberjackal effect must be very easy to fix regardless of how messy the code is. They should reduce to find some messy pointer operation (in the first two cases) and altering a constant value or at worst adding an "if" somewhere (in the third). Fixing piety wrapping and moloch speed wrapping would also be adding an if, fixing positive effects of dooming in the ToEF probably amounts to changing a couple of lines of code, etc.

Of course, things like adding new classes or races are probably much *much* harder, but that's not relevant IMO. I would like to see ADOM released so bugs can be fixed and the game can be actively maintained, patched and adapted to new platforms, rather than dying or being confined to an emulator like other good old games. And also so that I can look at the source and learn how some things were done. I'm not interested on seeing versions of ADOM on steroids with new content, so I don't mind if this is very difficult to do (although I'm sure there are some skilled and stubborn people who could if they wanted... I mean, if Soirana actually understands the assembly code -or parts of it-, what couldn't he do with the source?)

[vogonpoet]

There is no need to fix the uberjackal effect. Am I crazy??? How many bloody jackals do you guys kill? Or gremlins for that matter?

Problem with bug fixing is some people have different ideas of what a bug is. Crashes, and weird integer overflows, sure, fix them. But leave the jackals alone :)

[Laukku]

There is no need to fix the uberjackal effect. Am I crazy??? How many bloody jackals do you guys kill? Or gremlins for that matter?

Problem with bug fixing is some people have different ideas of what a bug is. Crashes, and weird integer overflows, sure, fix them. But leave the jackals alone :)

Jackals and gremlins are not the only ones that get powerful too quickly... bees, ants, chaos servants, spiders are just a few other rare but commonly summoned monsters. After just a few hives, the queen bee is typically easier to kill than a bee warrior. :P It's an annoying balance problem.

[vogonpoet]

Yeah, I still don't have a problem with it, or think its annoying.

If my PC can go from being stone-block-death vulnerable to utterly bad-ass in 90 days, why the hell can't the other monsters? Think of it as accelerated survival of the fittest. Imagine all those territorial dark-elven wizard wars going on below Dwarftown whilst your PC is elsewhere. Of course the wizards who can summon the strongest spiders survive....

[mike3]

Jackals and gremlins are not the only ones that get powerful too quickly... bees, ants, chaos servants, spiders are just a few other rare but commonly summoned monsters. After just a few hives, the queen bee is typically easier to kill than a bee warrior. :P It's an annoying balance problem.

I know. Maybe if the idea was to prevent one from "abusing" it for easy XP, why not just make the XP gains fall as more kills of the given monster type are done (makes more sense when you think about it from a "realism" perspective too, after a while you've got the monster "all figured out" and so don't gain as much)?

Addendum: Hmm... looks like this might already be in there. Maybe tone it up more and tone down the monster-XP gain a good bit for the jackals as they're generated and summoned so frequently. It wouldn't be so bad if they weren't summoned so darn often (another option -- reduce the generation rate of jackal summoners?).