4 ms·

Why not? I mean out of all the commercial projects that could be open sourced, games are actually great to have under GPL, because the assets (art, animations,

Why not? I mean out of all the commercial projects that could be open sourced, games are actually great to have under GPL, because the assets (art, animations, etc) are are still under copyright but the code and logic isn't, which isn't as important to a game as to, say, enterprise CRUD software. Plus with open source game code, modders could make much out of your game.

dash2 6y ago
So why do absolutely no game companies do this?
- kuschku 6y ago
  Some actually did, back in the day of point and click adventures. But nowadays games obfuscate everything as much as they can for DRM and anticheat purposes. If you consider your own customers your enemies, of course you wouldn't open anything to them
- mhitza 6y ago
  id used to GPL license their engines, but then Carmack left and they stopped open sourcing them.
Tuna-Fish 6y ago
Because the requirement to make replacing the LGPL code possible means that there is no possible way of preventing cheaters in online play. Because like everyone else, I am using 20 different pieces of proprietary middleware which have licenses that are incompatible with GPL. (Not just that I can't GPL them, but which cannot be shipped as part of a distribution where some of the code is GPL.)
- monocasa 6y ago
  Anyone that can recompile the code can also easily figure out a patch for client side. There are easy to use tools that assist with this.
- josephcsible 6y ago
  If your attempts to prevent cheating rely on a "trusted" client, you're going to have cheaters whether or not your code is LGPL. The only right way to stop cheaters is to run game logic on the server.
  - singron 6y ago
    It's non trivial. A lot of games require trusted clients because of client side latency compensation. Also any game that requires mechanical skill (e.g. aim in an fps or actions per minute in rts) is susceptible to cheating even if all logic is serverside. Of course trusted clients are problematic, but there is no simple solution.
    - josephcsible 6y ago
      But just not releasing the source code doesn't even stop those kinds of cheats. Even games that make you install a privacy-invading kernel driver to play still get cheaters.
      - saurik 6y ago
        Yeah. Realistically, this is like trying to reprogram your opponents brain to prevent them from cheating at basketball... even if you make it work, it is morally untenable: you need a referee.
  - Xixi 6y ago
    A lot of cheats are visual cues and only alter the rendering, not the game logic: wallhacks or texture hacks for instance. You also have auto-aim cheats, etc. Running the game logic on the server, which you should do, will not help in these cases. Running the rendering itself on the server (Stadia) would probably help, but even then with a hacked client you could add auto aims, and alter the visual stream.
    - josephcsible 6y ago
      Can't you fix wallhacks by just having the server not send the position of things that the client doesn't have line-of-sight to? And as for auto-aim, can't cheaters do that no matter how draconian your anti-cheat measures are, by, e.g., connecting a fake USB mouse connected to a camera pointed at their screen?

dash2 6y ago

So why do absolutely no game companies do this?

kuschku 6y ago
Some actually did, back in the day of point and click adventures. But nowadays games obfuscate everything as much as they can for DRM and anticheat purposes. If you consider your own customers your enemies, of course you wouldn't open anything to them
mhitza 6y ago
id used to GPL license their engines, but then Carmack left and they stopped open sourcing them.

Tuna-Fish 6y ago

Because the requirement to make replacing the LGPL code possible means that there is no possible way of preventing cheaters in online play. Because like everyone else, I am using 20 different pieces of proprietary middleware which have licenses that are incompatible with GPL. (Not just that I can't GPL them, but which cannot be shipped as part of a distribution where some of the code is GPL.)

monocasa 6y ago
Anyone that can recompile the code can also easily figure out a patch for client side. There are easy to use tools that assist with this.
josephcsible 6y ago
If your attempts to prevent cheating rely on a "trusted" client, you're going to have cheaters whether or not your code is LGPL. The only right way to stop cheaters is to run game logic on the server.
- singron 6y ago
  It's non trivial. A lot of games require trusted clients because of client side latency compensation. Also any game that requires mechanical skill (e.g. aim in an fps or actions per minute in rts) is susceptible to cheating even if all logic is serverside. Of course trusted clients are problematic, but there is no simple solution.
  - josephcsible 6y ago
    But just not releasing the source code doesn't even stop those kinds of cheats. Even games that make you install a privacy-invading kernel driver to play still get cheaters.
    - saurik 6y ago
      Yeah. Realistically, this is like trying to reprogram your opponents brain to prevent them from cheating at basketball... even if you make it work, it is morally untenable: you need a referee.
- Xixi 6y ago
  A lot of cheats are visual cues and only alter the rendering, not the game logic: wallhacks or texture hacks for instance. You also have auto-aim cheats, etc. Running the game logic on the server, which you should do, will not help in these cases. Running the rendering itself on the server (Stadia) would probably help, but even then with a hacked client you could add auto aims, and alter the visual stream.
  - josephcsible 6y ago
    Can't you fix wallhacks by just having the server not send the position of things that the client doesn't have line-of-sight to? And as for auto-aim, can't cheaters do that no matter how draconian your anti-cheat measures are, by, e.g., connecting a fake USB mouse connected to a camera pointed at their screen?