Community modders are hard at work to convert the idTech 4 source code into a workable SDK to enable entry-level developers to design games using id Software’s idTech 4 Engine for indie projects.
Apparently they are taking the C# Mono Approach for coding a game so its a compile once to multiple platforms concept (similar to Unity) however the engine will still be in C++ for speed (and accessible under GPL licence). They are also working on integrating third party plugins for UI - Scaleform (optional licence, similar to Unity) and physics (not sure what they are planning on using).
Anyway it looks like Unity will have some competition in the “democratization” of game development.
good news, the future of gaming industry is for the indie developers, but today the GPL license isn´t good for a game engine, the LGPL, MIT and microsoft MS-pl licences are more viable in indie commercial projects.
Agreed, its 100% useless if you want to sell anything. Not even sure why they mention licensing scaleform. It’s an exercise in futility or linux support (where it would make sense I guess).
… and that’s why software patents suck. They stifle innovation as you cannot apply the real world to software, it’s an entirely different field of study and exploration. The competition in software is always there, you don’t need patents for it.
Why wouldn’t GPL licence be good for a game engine? Open Source will allow the engine to evolve alot faster that way. Also it does not mean your game’s code will be open source, only low level engine stuff.
for me GPL is not a good license for a game engine because a game engine is a tool that in many cases is used for commercial and non comercial projects, and in the GPL rules you may public your projects under same license, and this means that you need public your code depending of the tool, and in commercial projects publish the code and make this code free is not a very good idea if you think that at final you are trying sale the result of this code, for non commercial games really not exist problems, but the economy of the world day a day is more complicate as develop free games, i am not have nothing again free games but in my personal case i have not a single second for develop free games.
I would expect that the GPL license applies to the core engine itself, not the games you make with it. So if you’re making a game that requires new engine features (rather than C#-scriptable features), you’d have to release those modifications back to the community.
The first reason would be marketing - UDK has incredible tech demos and the Unreal Engine has a reputation in commercial games, whereas Unity is primarily used by indies. The second reason is that when an immature, overambitious developer inevitably fails at making good graphics, it’s more convenient to blame the engine than their own lack of skill.
I am not sure, the GPL license in very restrictive, a game that use the engine code would be can considered a derived work depending of the code of the engine that is used in the game build, because many times the GPL tools are used as external libraries for resolve this problems and i not know a game engine that separate the game build of the engine with linked libraries, i think because this some engines as the XNA frameworks XEN or monogame are licensed under MS-PL license and torque now is licensed under MIT license, Ogre 3D is licensed under MIT license too, personally i only use for apps development tools with code under LGPL, MIT, MS-pl and similar licenses.
If that would be the case applied for all people, we would have rather quiet forum:smile:
Being part of conversation and wrong is still okay, if you are proved wrong you learn something as long as one is open to seek the truth.
Go look at any of the games in the Unity show case and you will see that the best looking game made with Unity thus far is Interstellar Marines and while the game looks good the graphics are weak compared to other engines with more powerful rendering engines (like UDK, CryEngine, etc). Unity is a great engine for making mobile and web games, but its definitely no comparison to any of Id Tech, Source, or the previous engines I mentioned.
Well technically the rendering engine is 100% responsible for graphics and it really comes down to having talented artists who understand the constraints of the engine and know how model accordingly to get the most performance out of the game. Ever notice how all Unreal Engine games look the same.
Thats something that is brought up on a pretty much daily basis. Anyone is free to choose whatever framework suits his likes and dislikes.
Engine competition is a great thing, as we as their users will profit from this.
However the “Unity doesn’t look good enough” argument is growing a beard…I don’t understand why someone joins a community of a product he is not planning to use because of other competitors offering “better” rendering technologies. There’s so much more to choosing the right engine than more spectacular outofthebox rendering features nowadays.
And it should be obvious that arguing these things when 98% of the peope in here actually work and are satisfid with the toolset (or bend it accordingly) is kinda redundant. It should be clear that your counterarguments will not lead to people changing engines and its also quite obvious that this thread is “this” close to flamewaring and/or trolling.
Again, threads like that can be found tons and tons and tons all over the gossip forums. So, yeah, let’s move on
