Open source TGE?

#1 The community here alone is worth far more then a measly 100$

#2 Because you can't release games for sell with Quake 3 unless your millionare.... maybe that's why game developers buy Torque ;) Modders can go ahead and mess with Quake 3 all they want for all I care.

#3 As Ben indicated, unless you purchase a license for Q3, you'll have to release it under the GPL - i.e. FREE mod.

Checkout id's website for licensing info - then come back and buy a Torque license. =P

Incidentally, by the tone of your post, I'd say you're underestimating the power of TGE...

#4 As a note: source code is covered by the GPL, not content. All content would be part of your intellectual property ownership, but the source code would have to be released as per the instructions of the GPL. You could use the souce code and Quark and create some damn cool levels, and those levels would be yours. Any changes to the source code, OTOH, would fall under the GPL unless you purchase a separate license from id.

However, one cannot use Radiant for a commercial venture without getting a license from id. You can modify and extend it (as it operates under a restrictive OS license based on the distribution of the final product).

But, to the question of TGE being open-sourced (usually whenever a Quake engine is mentioned in the same breath...er, stream; it has been brought up many times, and after the activity with TNL, I'm doubt it will happen. Plus, the licensing changes are more than adequate for a proven game engine.

I can't wait to play with the Q3 source (I loved playing with Q1 and 2 as well), but I don't see the need to TGE to enter the open-source arena. Sure, there are several successful OS projects, but there are almost as many failed ones as there are games that will never be made in the dusty recesses of every gamer's head. Unfortunately, open-sourcing a closed-source product doesn't necessarily mean that it will be a successful OS project. It would be nice if it guaranteed it, but it doesn't.

#5 Actually, the GPL doesn't extend to game content. Only the code aspects have to be free. Music, graphics, all of that. You can charge for. Example: Q1 and Q2 source code have been released, but the games Q1 and Q2 aren't freeware. id still expects you to buy them if you want them. The engine and al of that is free but the game itself isn't so the GPL can still be used for profitable games.

#6 Honestly, this topic has been discussed (and at length) before. TGE is not going to go open source, it wouldn't be cost beneficial to Garage Games. Enough people steal the engine on a regular basis (by piracy) that is lost profit, so what do you think opening up the source would do to GG? These guys have to eat too, ya know.. they aren't rolling in the dough because a few people spent $100 on their engine.

To maintain this community, evolve the engine, provide new an improved features (TSE, Atlas, etc), and to create content packs takes time and money. If they were to open source TGE, what would they get from that?

There is already a huge committment from the community to grow the engine, they don't need to expand the base at all. They get plenty of feedback, and it's rather controlled in the private forums. Opening it up to just any Joe Schmoe and it would become useless to visit the forums. I think going open source, or GPL-ing the engine is a bad idea.. very bad for GG and for us.

- Brett

#7 @Brett, well said. You summed up my thoughts and feelings exactly. I want to see this engine evolve and get better as well as allow GarageGames the opportunity to do their part to grow the independant games market as well as this community. Personally I think we should all be paying a lot more for Torque so we should all be dammed grateful for what we have gotten.

#8

Quote:Personally I think we should all be paying a lot more for Torque so we should all be dammed grateful for what we have gotten.

Amen to that :)


Guess you just can't please everyone.

#9 It's extremely difficult (impossible?) to run a business based on DEVELOPING gpl'ed software. You can support it, document it, maintain it, but you can't BUILD it.

GG /developes/ their engines. Unless they can start charging for support, docs, and consulting (which they may do already), they really need to charge for their egine(s).

There are people out there who would love to use the TGE but can't affort it (kids mostly). Heck, MY grasp of business isn't all that good, so I'm willing to cut them some slack... but this is a wish that isn't going to be fulfilled.

OTOH, you can mess around with the demos and a stock engine all you like. The standard demos come with all the CS files... knock yourself out. If you get to a point where you have a saleable product, I don't think coming up with the $100 will be an issue.

Yes, that confines you a bit... but the stock engine can do A LOT. Don't knock it till you've tried it.

#10 And this is different from being able to create game content (without the rights to release it) with the existing demo version HOW?

The stark reality of it is that 99% of wannabe game developers complete NOTHING. They end up with a few screenshots and an out-of-date website with six months of ranting about how awesome their game will be one day. The engine doesn't matter. Or maybe it does - maybe the more advanced engines are too much for them to handle. The barrier to entry is a technical savvy and commitment that most people just don't have. The more advanced the engine, the more that barrier goes up. Unless the engine has a big ol' button that is labeled, "Read my mind and create my game for me."

For the 1% that actually do get something done - does the engine really make a difference? Marble Blast certainly looks prettier in its pixel-shaded glory on the XBox now - but how much of an improvement is it really? Would it be THAT MUCH of a better game using the Unreal 3 engine? Most of the top-selling indie games out there aren't even 3D titles. They are games like Snood, a 2D game that has graphics my children could do better. Or Pretty Good Solitaire - a massive tax of any system to render those 2D cards. Or PopCap's incredible 3D massively multiplayer extravaganzas --- oh, right. They don't do those. They do (so far) pretty casual, 2D games that don't even require 3D hardware.

If your budget is such that you are put off by a token $100 price tag (for which you get customer support and ongoing upgrades!!!), then you DON'T have the budget to create content that will truly take advantage of a vastly superior engine. Unless it has that aforementioned game-building button.

IMO, the "best" engine out there isn't the one with the most whistles and bells, but the one that allows you to put your dream on the screen in a finished, commercially viable format at the lowest OVERALL cost available. If I get an engine for free but I waste hundreds of man-hours trying to get your workflow to the point that you'd have it with a premium engine with a scant $1000 price tag, you paid WAY too much for that free engine.

EDIT: Maybe when TGE dies a natural death, is no longer supported by GG, that might be a good time to release it with the GPL - which is essentially what id Software has done with all of their engines. But they generally wait until their "next gen" engine is a good year or so old with multiple products in the pipeline, and nobody is bothering to license their older engines anymore, before they'll open-source it.

#11

Quote:IMO, the "best" engine out there isn't the one with the most whistles and bells, but the one that allows you to put your dream on the screen in a finished, commercially viable format at the lowest OVERALL cost available.

Yup.

-Josh Ritter
Prairie Games

#12 You can release a commercial game under the GPL ... you just also have to release the source code with it.

In this article Carmack states that he hopes someone does in fact release a commercial product with the open sourced engine.

www.gamespy.com/articles/641/641662p1.html

I personally see no reason for Torque to go open source just because Quake 3 is. $100 is nothing for the right to reserve your source code.

#13 @Eman: Myself like most people around here enjoy the focused and continual development of the Torque Family of products. I have personally purchased and will continue to purchase game development related products in order to support the GG team. In case you haven't noticed there is a huge difference between a supported (ie:$$) project, and an open source one. A funded project has continual stable direction and focused development that is responsive of consumer needs.

If you don't like having to pay a lousy $100 for a 'supported' and growing family of products then visit any of the dozen or so open source projects. I have personally researched many of the more supported open source engine projects, and I assure you there is a big difference; but you already know that.

So the real question is why would you choose not to support a company that has been continually developing awesome products for independent developers? Would you have Torque become open source and leave the guys that have been developing this product without income? Do you think that little of them?

I suspect that most everyone in this community knows how great it is to have a funded core of developers working for them. In the end do you know anywhere else you can go to get a group of professional developers to invite you into their family (with support) for a $100? Honestly, I felt bad about just paying $100, so I also purchased TSE, ShowToolPro, and a number of content packs just to feel better about supporting this company.

I've started and run companies for a number of years, and quite frankly I don't see how they make ends meet just charging $100 for Torque, I know they have other sources of income, but even starting a thread like this is really a slap to the face of the team that works hard day in and day out to help Indies.

So I apologize for you, and again thank the GG crew for all the hard work and time they pour out consistently every day for us independent developers who know first hand how hard it is to make ends meet.

Keep up the great FUNDED work GG! I for one can't wait to purchase the Torque Constructor that they have been working on. But that is another story..

B--

#14 I hope it doesn't sound like I'm trying to get the engine for free. Certainly not. I actually have no real interest in either Q3 or TGE. If I were going to buy an engine, I would probably be looking at TSE and I suspect that's the way most other people who haven't bought an engine feel. In which, case, by all means, charge full-price for TSE, and hand off TGE to the OS community. It seems this would free up the developers and staff to concentrate more fully on TSE too. (And by all means charge for support). Maintaining two engines, one that's 5 years old, indefinitely, doesn't make much sense to me. Perhaps TSE isn't ready yet.

If the GPL is really as onerous as it sounds (and it probably is), GPLing TGE wouldn't hurt GG much. Anyone who wants to sell a game would still pay the $100 to get the non-GPL version. All it would do is gain the goodwill of the entire Slashdot community if GG open sourced TGE. Not a bad thing, eh?

I guess I also don't understand the concern that opening TGE would drastically change the signal to noise ratio in the forums. Sure, you'll get a lot more people on the forums, some whiners and complainers, but they'll get bored and move on to the next shiny download in a week or two. The ones that stay mature and go on to help out those below them. So, overall, you get more people on the forums, but the quality remains the same (if not higher). I've been a part of a couple open source projects and can assure you the mailing lists and forums are often very high caliber.

Is it really that bad - 99% failure? That's depressing. Your post makes it sound like one should not buy TGE at all - or even a 3D engine for that matter! :) Probably good advice, but if people took that seriously, GG would go out of business faster than if they open sourced TGE :)

As I said, I'm not really interested in making a game. I'm realistic enough to know that Jay's right. It intrigues me, though, how GG will sustain itself in the long term. I'm more interested in the markets and economics of the whole thing and it just seems that the Q3 engine GPLed could spell real trouble for TGE, because let's face it, most people do judge an engine by features and published games. I don't know how much money GG actually makes from selling TGE, I guess I assumed by now they were making more money on TSE (or soon would be) and the advantages of open sourcing TGE (to combat the 99% failure rate with the law of large numbers) could ultimately prove a more successful model. If they can make more money selling TGE at $100, I guess that works. But, how long until Q3 starts to cut a chunk out of that revenue stream?

Interesting comments, though.

#15 I (as a buyer) rather keep the $100 fee because I think it will ensure a even progress in the development of the core engine.

The only added value (for GG and GG's customers) gained by going open source would (IMHO) be a stroinger community.
But there would also be negative effects (like less closeness between GG and the Community as the number of contaces explode).
Bigger isn't always better.
I agree with Chris Wilson that the current community alone is worth the $100 (and more).

I would though applaed if Garage Games worked out an open source like process for how the community could be more of a part of the core engine development. (from my experiences with the Zope Community (www.zope.org) I would say that could be very fruit full.

Johan Carlsson

#16 Who cares about /. ? I don't think anyone would want the goodwill, much less the attention of the whole /. community : the bandwidth costs + GPLed TGE would kill GG in a matter of days, nah minutes, while preventing the community from doing the community thing : accessing the website, forums, etc.

If you're really interested in the economics, why didn't you start with that ? Why didn't you do a bit of research on the past discussions on why TGE is not open source ?

With Q3 being free, it can't really eat the revenue stream now, can it ? It's not the only alternative out there, and GPLed it has restrictions that TGE doesn't on the release of games, as quite a few people have already tried driving the point to you.
Btw, if you want closed source Q3A, it's going to be at least 10k, like q1 and q2, if not more...
I don't think Q3A getting open sourced really matters in the long run to GG, even in the academic markets where a lot of schools would rather count on a central repository of knowledge, the possibility of paying for support without having to fork out the kind of dough Id asks for in those instances, etc.

Rate of failure is the same rate as for most creative endeavours : most musicians never get bands out of the embryonic stages, people using other engines to make games face the same dismal results.
Making your dreams reality is hard, period.

Sheesh.

#17 Using the subsequent Quake releases, they haven't cut into the profit (at least there is no way to directly determine it). And I can't think of a single Q1/2 GPL project that is commercial. I know of several that started and died, but I don't know of one that reached completion. I keep hoping to see one that will.

The slashdot community isn't a homogenous mass, even though they have the common trait of logging into the same web site. It's like saying everyone at GameFAQs will like Alien Hominid 2 if The Behemoth releases a demo to the net (most likely on Newgrounds where the original appeared). Sure, a lot of scroller-shooter fan will love it, but there are a lot of people who hate 2D action games.

#18 I remember reading in a forum that part of the reason for the $100 price tag is to keep away people who aren't serious. If you can't afford $100 for a game engine, then you can't afford to make a game. If there is just no possible way to earn $100 for the engine but you just must have it... go donate blood a few times. BAM. You got your engine. If you are a kid... go use the Q3 engine. You can't publish a game anyway.

Good question though. Don't feel to bad for asking. I thought the same thing once. It seems to be more complex than it first appears. Really though... $100 is less than the price of Doom3 and Half Life 2 right now. So. Show me someone without $100 bucks that is interested in TGE and I'll show you someone with $1000s in games.

#19 GPL-ing TGE is probably the most retarded thing I have read on these forums. It's just plain stupid.

#20 I agree with Josh. And you can't compare TGE to Q3 which ID has earned a butload of cash from already.