2 ms·

I do not wish to appear overly cynical (and apologies if this does), but what is stopping me investing all my time/effort into this, and finding out the licensi

by laythea 10y ago

I do not wish to appear overly cynical (and apologies if this does), but what is stopping me investing all my time/effort into this, and finding out the licensing terms have changed such that it becomes more on par with commercial offerings? Seems like the only benefit would be short lived, whilst I would take on a lot of the disadvantages of not going to a more commercial offering immediately. I'm genuinely interested. I can imagine this putting a lot of people off "committing".

mikulas_florek 10y ago
You/I/Anybody can not change the license retrocatively. It means that current source code is MIT and it always will be. I/Anybody might fork the engine under different license or even close source it, but that won't change the fact that current source code is still MIT licensed. Me close-sourcing it is the same as me abandoning it - you can still continue using/developing it under any license you wish.
- laythea 10y ago
  Appreciate the answer, thanks. I guess that would rule out the people who definitely do not even want the possibility of the prospect of maintaining their own engine. I would be curious to know what kind of percentage we would be talking about...
  - mikulas_florek 10y ago
    No engine is guaranteed to be maintained, not even the UE/Unity. Look at CryEngine, once a big, popular engine. Now with all the CryTek's problems, I would not bet it won't get dumped.