14 ms·

Id Software Open Source releases on GitHub

310 points by gmcabrita 15y ago

libin 15y ago
Wow! This is a really bold move. Thank you, Id!
- jaredsohn 15y ago
  Most (all?) of this has been released in the past. I think the news here is that they're putting the code on github.
- pmr_ 15y ago
  Certainly not. All this has been available under GPL for ages, except Doom 3 which has been released under GPL just recently.
mikehuffman 15y ago
Before Valve and Gabe-mania my first dev crush was John Carmack. His postings and .plan files where were not only shockingly open and honest, but, I guess, genuine... it was apparent that here was a very successful man that was like me...an unrepentant nerd and geek! It is nice to know that that attribute of the company in general has not changed.
- alanning 15y ago
  Every once in a great while I will get the feeling that I am the most productive coder on the planet. Then I remember Carmack's .plan files and am humbled.
  - LearnYouALisp 15y ago
    Where can I read some of those plans? Edit: Actually, they were easier to find than I thought: http://www.google.com/search?q=carmack+plan+files http://www.google.com/search?q=carmack+plan+files
  - db42 15y ago
    This just gave me the motivation to write my own dev logs every day. Thanks!!
    - follower 15y ago
      You might like to check out my Labradoc site which is designed to make it easier to create project/dev logs: http://labradoc.com/ http://labradoc.com/ Here's an example of a project log for a current project I'm working on: http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/notes-qualcomm-apq8060-dragonboard http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/notes-qualcomm-apq8060-... My style is more verbose than Carmack's but Labradoc can be used with either approach.
program 15y ago
It will be interesting to see how id (or Carmack himself) will react to eventual pull requests. As far as I know the code has been frozen once released as Free Software on id FTP server.
- nknight 15y ago
  I really doubt they'll react at all. id releases source code when they're done with it. There's little reason for them to invest much time in a commercially dead codebase, they've always got new stuff to work on.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
  - aiscott 15y ago
    A git pull request is a request for the owner to merge a change or fix you have done back into the original. It's called a pull request because you are asking that they pull the change from your fork.
    - cleverjake 15y ago
      time is spent evaluating pull requests. time they will almost certainly not want to invest, as they are no longer using it themselves.
      - jeffool 15y ago
        I imagine communities will manage a few forks until there's mainly one or two main builds people use.
        jaredsohn 15y ago
        Already exists (at least for many products). This happens when the source is released, not when id posts the pre-community source to github.
timothya 15y ago
It'd be really interesting to see more game development companies from the 80's and 90's release the source code for old abandonware. I was hoping to see Commander Keen (one of my favorite old games from my youth) on this list, but apparently it's still closed source.
- albertzeyer 15y ago
  Afaik, there are (were?) some licensing issues why Keen stayed closed. There is a compatible Open Source clone, though: http://clonekeenplus.sourceforge.net/ http://clonekeenplus.sourceforge.net/ (Disclaimer: I work on that project.) Btw., a very nice history of Keen (also referencing some of the licensing issues): http://www.3drealms.com/keenhistory/index.html http://www.3drealms.com/keenhistory/index.html
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- aeturnum 15y ago
  If you feel the need to own the assets, you can get Quake 2 for $2.50 from Amazon. Though I suppose it's harder to be a curmudgeon about ID if you look for solutions like that.
  - bittermang 15y ago
    I think it raises a valid observation of the role a site like The Pirate Bay actually plays in regards to preservation. When they did their little press stunt sending a letter to the King of Sweden [1], in part they said "We now have the honour to report that The Pirate Bay now archives 200 000, by the citizens donated, documents of culture and we're tracking more then 500 000 cultural treasures globally." They keep old stuff around. I have no idea where I would go dig up a Win95 disc (or stack of diskettes, for that matter), but I am fairly certain I could find it on TPB, and it would be seeded. Beyond that, preservation of anything is an ongoing effort. Who is to say that copy on Amazon won't sell out? How do you know if it will even work when you get it. Some day physical media will go away, and you won't be able to read the CDs the game was pressed to. Git Hub will go away one day too. But moving the code to Git Hub represents a continued preservation effort on id's part, because previously this stuff was just hosted on id's FTP where no one could find it unless they knew to look for it. Being on Git Hub now makes it available to more people, for longer, should (god forbid) anything happen to id software. So, despite the fact that his flame bait comment has been deleted, it raised some valid points about software and media preservation overall. [1] http://thepiratebay.org/blog/60 http://thepiratebay.org/blog/60
    - aeturnum 15y ago
      I agree about the archival nature of torrents, but I was reacting to the rude insistence that "only" giving away source code wasn't enough. I hope that, in time, more credence will be given to the idea of "abandonware." Right now it's piracy of titles that publishers no longer care to protect, but I hope that some legislative body will enact limits on copyright based on availability. Though it's not particularly important in the grand scheme of things.
bittermang 15y ago
I don't think the games industry will ever be able to adequately thank or appreciate all that Carmack has done over his career. Most of which because the man is too humble to accept any of it.
- Caligula 15y ago
  They thanked him by the millions of dollars in licensing and fees paid. He certainly took the money he rightfully earned :)
  - arctangent 15y ago
    You're right. But even if money wasn't at stake I think he'd have done it all anyway.
    - VMG 15y ago
      Well he still doesn't release the source code straight away and wants to earn a few dollars with every new game. Remember, this guy has some pretty expensive hobbies.
  - peripitea 15y ago
    I'd argue that despite those millions, his wealth_created:income_earned ratio is still exceptionally high. Many people earn far more doing much less for the world.
    - chii 15y ago
      "wealth_created:income_earned ratio is still exceptionally high." i say his ratio is 1:1 - some people have negative (that is, they suck wealth out of the system). Most, normal hardworking people have a ratio of 1:1
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- palish 15y ago
pyalot 15y ago
No assets released, which is a problem for the following reasons: - Piece of history lost - Makes it harder to boot up anything because not a complete, running application. - Derivatives of the art are impossible - Artists will have a hard time starting to tweak things, because there's nothing to tweak. - Coders will despair trying to provide even a basic set of art (because we're usually crap at art) so they could start poking at the code. Sadly, this "here you have the source, off you go" thing seems to be very prevalent, and it always irks the hell out of me. If you don't want to release everything, alright, that's workable. But something, at least some basic art, say the first level or whatever suits you. I don't get it why that should be a bad thing. I also don't get why people seem to think that idea is bad.
- nanexcool 15y ago
  id Super Pack is 70 USD on Steam... http://store.steampowered.com/sub/440/ http://store.steampowered.com/sub/440/ That'll get you every asset you need. Also it always gets a discount during Steam sales. You can probably get it for 30 bucks if you time it right.
  - pyalot 15y ago
    It's not about getting something for cheap. It's about being able to make derivations and incrementally tweak things. It's about that not having any base tweak makes it quite hard for both Artists and Coders. It's about that there's many ways that things could be tweaked that would be fun, but if you're beset by a wish to do that you're gonna spend a year creating art for a total conversion. It's about that culture in games is not code, it's assets as well, and if the assets aren't released, they're lost and never to be derivable of, because of the perpetual copyright crap.
  - AndyJPartridge 15y ago
    At a UK price of £38 the amount of software for the money is incredible, just to play it all. Along side all that source as a learning tool it's astounding. Wish I could make use of it :-) Thanks ID!
- bittermang 15y ago
cookiecaper 15y ago
Carmack is in a perfect position to provide another boon to the free software world: a license that doesn't allow unlimited redistribution by every recipient. I know this isn't "free software" per Stallman's definition (precludes freedom 2), so don't all rush to flame me at once here. I believe, however, that the GPL's requirement that all software can be resold and redistributed by any recipient has been a big blight on the image of open-source software and has caused companies to actually tighten up lest their software and work become entirely unprofitable. Someone needs to write a license that can be easily reused which a) releases all source code and requires the release of derivative versions, b) allows derivative works by users who own a license (perhaps up to a certain commercial limit) and allows them to share their changes with other licensed users, and c) restricts distribution of the code or any of its derivatives to persons whom the recipient in good faith believes to have a valid license to the software. Unfortunately the GPL has ingrained in people that releasing source is the same as negating your whole investment. I don't believe things have to be this way. I believe that every software owner deserves a copy of the source, but I don't believe that every software owner has the right to redistribute that program practically without limitation as the GPL allows. If we have someone to lead the way in profitable source releases, I believe many companies will follow and at least part of the free software vision would be fulfilled: source code would come distributed with every program. Companies like id who resell their engine techs to other commercial developer studios would still be able to do so due to the commercial limitations in such a license and the requirements to own a valid license for id's particular piece of software and the code wouldn't have to wait five years to see the world. Anyone with the money to pay for the license isn't going to infringe because they know the court costs would be futile and cost 3x+ as much as just buying a license straight out. The open-source contributions could be incorporated into the commercial editions immediately (and hopefully vice-versa). I really don't think id et al have much to lose from this approach, so I hope someone would do it. id is not beholden to a large corporate publisher and Carmack clearly has the interest and understands the benefit behind a source release. Carmack has the vision to do something like this, imo, and I really hope he does.
- JoshTriplett 15y ago
  Short answer: no, FOSS couldn't possibly work without the ability to modify and redistribute, and licenses that attempt to suggest otherwise get rightfully rejected before they can proliferate. Source code has little value without the right to make and distribute modified versions. Attempts to create open ecosystems around proprietary products typically turn out badly, with very few exceptions. Also, since you brought up engines like id's, I'd point out that copyleft licenses like the GPL make it trivial to profit even if releasing the engine on day 1, given that the numerous makers of games based on those engines don't want to ship their entire game under the GPL.
srean 15y ago
The collision in namespace is amusing. For a second I thought this was about a modern open source compiler for the programming language called Id. It was an influential language with strong stress on functional style implicit parallelism and efficient array like data structures called I-structures. I would kill to play around with such a tool. (and kill double if a free CM-5 came with it) The real deal is no less exciting. The clash in name space does not end there. Cormac is the first name of one of the developer's of a distributed memory implementation of the language called phLuid. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id_%28programming_language%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id_%28programming_language%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CM-5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CM-5
jf 15y ago
So awesome! I know it's unlikely, but I'd like to think that I helped put GitHub on Carmack's radar: https://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/141589146522230785 https://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1415891465222307...
dan00 15y ago
I had to giggle, looking at the quite large interface of 'Entity.h'. Also Carmack has to do it in this "ugly" way. In a way that's relieving.
stephth 15y ago
Id Software feels like an anomaly regarding to open source in video games. In web development for example there is such a strong and diverse community supporting frameworks and libraries under permissive licenses. Why hasn't something like it happened with video games?
- pyre 15y ago
  1. Consoles. This could be due to wanting to keep libraries in-house as a competitive advantage, or just due to console-maker licensing restrictions. 2. There is more competition. For the most part, all games are competing for the same audience within genres, and there is a lot of cross-genre intersection of audiences (e.g. people that are into both JRPGs and fighting games). On the other hand, there doesn't necessarily need to be as much cross-over between the intended audience of web sites. 3. There are fewer complementary products (related to #2). GMail doesn't compete with eBay, but Mario competes with Sonic. 4. 'The Evil Empire' A good portion of game development now happens under the Electronic Arts umbrella (at least as I understand it). Their corporate culture seems to scream 'big company' with all of the stories of them living off of the life that they suck out of new hires working 80+ hour weeks.
- talmand 15y ago
  It would ruin revenue streams.
mumrah 15y ago
Here's a link to the infamous fast inverse square root function: https://github.com/id-Software/Quake-III-Arena/blob/master/code/game/q_math.c#L552 https://github.com/id-Software/Quake-III-Arena/blob/master/c...

310 points by gmcabrita 15y ago

libin 15y ago

Wow! This is a really bold move. Thank you, Id!

jaredsohn 15y ago
Most (all?) of this has been released in the past. I think the news here is that they're putting the code on github.
pmr_ 15y ago
Certainly not. All this has been available under GPL for ages, except Doom 3 which has been released under GPL just recently.

mikehuffman 15y ago

Before Valve and Gabe-mania my first dev crush was John Carmack. His postings and .plan files where were not only shockingly open and honest, but, I guess, genuine... it was apparent that here was a very successful man that was like me...an unrepentant nerd and geek! It is nice to know that that attribute of the company in general has not changed.

alanning 15y ago
Every once in a great while I will get the feeling that I am the most productive coder on the planet. Then I remember Carmack's .plan files and am humbled.
- LearnYouALisp 15y ago
  Where can I read some of those plans? Edit: Actually, they were easier to find than I thought: http://www.google.com/search?q=carmack+plan+files http://www.google.com/search?q=carmack+plan+files
- db42 15y ago
  This just gave me the motivation to write my own dev logs every day. Thanks!!
  - follower 15y ago
    You might like to check out my Labradoc site which is designed to make it easier to create project/dev logs: http://labradoc.com/ http://labradoc.com/ Here's an example of a project log for a current project I'm working on: http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/notes-qualcomm-apq8060-dragonboard http://www.labradoc.com/i/follower/p/notes-qualcomm-apq8060-... My style is more verbose than Carmack's but Labradoc can be used with either approach.

program 15y ago

It will be interesting to see how id (or Carmack himself) will react to eventual pull requests. As far as I know the code has been frozen once released as Free Software on id FTP server.

nknight 15y ago
I really doubt they'll react at all. id releases source code when they're done with it. There's little reason for them to invest much time in a commercially dead codebase, they've always got new stuff to work on.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- aiscott 15y ago
  A git pull request is a request for the owner to merge a change or fix you have done back into the original. It's called a pull request because you are asking that they pull the change from your fork.
  - cleverjake 15y ago
    time is spent evaluating pull requests. time they will almost certainly not want to invest, as they are no longer using it themselves.
    - jeffool 15y ago
      I imagine communities will manage a few forks until there's mainly one or two main builds people use.
      - jaredsohn 15y ago
        Already exists (at least for many products). This happens when the source is released, not when id posts the pre-community source to github.

timothya 15y ago

It'd be really interesting to see more game development companies from the 80's and 90's release the source code for old abandonware. I was hoping to see Commander Keen (one of my favorite old games from my youth) on this list, but apparently it's still closed source.

albertzeyer 15y ago
Afaik, there are (were?) some licensing issues why Keen stayed closed. There is a compatible Open Source clone, though: http://clonekeenplus.sourceforge.net/ http://clonekeenplus.sourceforge.net/ (Disclaimer: I work on that project.) Btw., a very nice history of Keen (also referencing some of the licensing issues): http://www.3drealms.com/keenhistory/index.html http://www.3drealms.com/keenhistory/index.html

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

aeturnum 15y ago
If you feel the need to own the assets, you can get Quake 2 for $2.50 from Amazon. Though I suppose it's harder to be a curmudgeon about ID if you look for solutions like that.
- bittermang 15y ago
  I think it raises a valid observation of the role a site like The Pirate Bay actually plays in regards to preservation. When they did their little press stunt sending a letter to the King of Sweden [1], in part they said "We now have the honour to report that The Pirate Bay now archives 200 000, by the citizens donated, documents of culture and we're tracking more then 500 000 cultural treasures globally." They keep old stuff around. I have no idea where I would go dig up a Win95 disc (or stack of diskettes, for that matter), but I am fairly certain I could find it on TPB, and it would be seeded. Beyond that, preservation of anything is an ongoing effort. Who is to say that copy on Amazon won't sell out? How do you know if it will even work when you get it. Some day physical media will go away, and you won't be able to read the CDs the game was pressed to. Git Hub will go away one day too. But moving the code to Git Hub represents a continued preservation effort on id's part, because previously this stuff was just hosted on id's FTP where no one could find it unless they knew to look for it. Being on Git Hub now makes it available to more people, for longer, should (god forbid) anything happen to id software. So, despite the fact that his flame bait comment has been deleted, it raised some valid points about software and media preservation overall. [1] http://thepiratebay.org/blog/60 http://thepiratebay.org/blog/60
  - aeturnum 15y ago
    I agree about the archival nature of torrents, but I was reacting to the rude insistence that "only" giving away source code wasn't enough. I hope that, in time, more credence will be given to the idea of "abandonware." Right now it's piracy of titles that publishers no longer care to protect, but I hope that some legislative body will enact limits on copyright based on availability. Though it's not particularly important in the grand scheme of things.

bittermang 15y ago

I don't think the games industry will ever be able to adequately thank or appreciate all that Carmack has done over his career. Most of which because the man is too humble to accept any of it.

Caligula 15y ago
They thanked him by the millions of dollars in licensing and fees paid. He certainly took the money he rightfully earned :)
- arctangent 15y ago
  You're right. But even if money wasn't at stake I think he'd have done it all anyway.
  - VMG 15y ago
    Well he still doesn't release the source code straight away and wants to earn a few dollars with every new game. Remember, this guy has some pretty expensive hobbies.
- peripitea 15y ago
  I'd argue that despite those millions, his wealth_created:income_earned ratio is still exceptionally high. Many people earn far more doing much less for the world.
  - chii 15y ago
    "wealth_created:income_earned ratio is still exceptionally high." i say his ratio is 1:1 - some people have negative (that is, they suck wealth out of the system). Most, normal hardworking people have a ratio of 1:1
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
palish 15y ago

pyalot 15y ago

No assets released, which is a problem for the following reasons: - Piece of history lost - Makes it harder to boot up anything because not a complete, running application. - Derivatives of the art are impossible - Artists will have a hard time starting to tweak things, because there's nothing to tweak. - Coders will despair trying to provide even a basic set of art (because we're usually crap at art) so they could start poking at the code. Sadly, this "here you have the source, off you go" thing seems to be very prevalent, and it always irks the hell out of me. If you don't want to release everything, alright, that's workable. But something, at least some basic art, say the first level or whatever suits you. I don't get it why that should be a bad thing. I also don't get why people seem to think that idea is bad.

nanexcool 15y ago
id Super Pack is 70 USD on Steam... http://store.steampowered.com/sub/440/ http://store.steampowered.com/sub/440/ That'll get you every asset you need. Also it always gets a discount during Steam sales. You can probably get it for 30 bucks if you time it right.
- pyalot 15y ago
  It's not about getting something for cheap. It's about being able to make derivations and incrementally tweak things. It's about that not having any base tweak makes it quite hard for both Artists and Coders. It's about that there's many ways that things could be tweaked that would be fun, but if you're beset by a wish to do that you're gonna spend a year creating art for a total conversion. It's about that culture in games is not code, it's assets as well, and if the assets aren't released, they're lost and never to be derivable of, because of the perpetual copyright crap.
- AndyJPartridge 15y ago
  At a UK price of £38 the amount of software for the money is incredible, just to play it all. Along side all that source as a learning tool it's astounding. Wish I could make use of it :-) Thanks ID!
bittermang 15y ago

cookiecaper 15y ago

Carmack is in a perfect position to provide another boon to the free software world: a license that doesn't allow unlimited redistribution by every recipient. I know this isn't "free software" per Stallman's definition (precludes freedom 2), so don't all rush to flame me at once here. I believe, however, that the GPL's requirement that all software can be resold and redistributed by any recipient has been a big blight on the image of open-source software and has caused companies to actually tighten up lest their software and work become entirely unprofitable. Someone needs to write a license that can be easily reused which a) releases all source code and requires the release of derivative versions, b) allows derivative works by users who own a license (perhaps up to a certain commercial limit) and allows them to share their changes with other licensed users, and c) restricts distribution of the code or any of its derivatives to persons whom the recipient in good faith believes to have a valid license to the software. Unfortunately the GPL has ingrained in people that releasing source is the same as negating your whole investment. I don't believe things have to be this way. I believe that every software owner deserves a copy of the source, but I don't believe that every software owner has the right to redistribute that program practically without limitation as the GPL allows. If we have someone to lead the way in profitable source releases, I believe many companies will follow and at least part of the free software vision would be fulfilled: source code would come distributed with every program. Companies like id who resell their engine techs to other commercial developer studios would still be able to do so due to the commercial limitations in such a license and the requirements to own a valid license for id's particular piece of software and the code wouldn't have to wait five years to see the world. Anyone with the money to pay for the license isn't going to infringe because they know the court costs would be futile and cost 3x+ as much as just buying a license straight out. The open-source contributions could be incorporated into the commercial editions immediately (and hopefully vice-versa). I really don't think id et al have much to lose from this approach, so I hope someone would do it. id is not beholden to a large corporate publisher and Carmack clearly has the interest and understands the benefit behind a source release. Carmack has the vision to do something like this, imo, and I really hope he does.

JoshTriplett 15y ago
Short answer: no, FOSS couldn't possibly work without the ability to modify and redistribute, and licenses that attempt to suggest otherwise get rightfully rejected before they can proliferate. Source code has little value without the right to make and distribute modified versions. Attempts to create open ecosystems around proprietary products typically turn out badly, with very few exceptions. Also, since you brought up engines like id's, I'd point out that copyleft licenses like the GPL make it trivial to profit even if releasing the engine on day 1, given that the numerous makers of games based on those engines don't want to ship their entire game under the GPL.

srean 15y ago

The collision in namespace is amusing. For a second I thought this was about a modern open source compiler for the programming language called Id. It was an influential language with strong stress on functional style implicit parallelism and efficient array like data structures called I-structures. I would kill to play around with such a tool. (and kill double if a free CM-5 came with it) The real deal is no less exciting. The clash in name space does not end there. Cormac is the first name of one of the developer's of a distributed memory implementation of the language called phLuid. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id_%28programming_language%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id_%28programming_language%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CM-5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CM-5

jf 15y ago

So awesome! I know it's unlikely, but I'd like to think that I helped put GitHub on Carmack's radar: https://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/141589146522230785 https://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1415891465222307...

dan00 15y ago

I had to giggle, looking at the quite large interface of 'Entity.h'. Also Carmack has to do it in this "ugly" way. In a way that's relieving.

stephth 15y ago

Id Software feels like an anomaly regarding to open source in video games. In web development for example there is such a strong and diverse community supporting frameworks and libraries under permissive licenses. Why hasn't something like it happened with video games?

pyre 15y ago
1. Consoles. This could be due to wanting to keep libraries in-house as a competitive advantage, or just due to console-maker licensing restrictions. 2. There is more competition. For the most part, all games are competing for the same audience within genres, and there is a lot of cross-genre intersection of audiences (e.g. people that are into both JRPGs and fighting games). On the other hand, there doesn't necessarily need to be as much cross-over between the intended audience of web sites. 3. There are fewer complementary products (related to #2). GMail doesn't compete with eBay, but Mario competes with Sonic. 4. 'The Evil Empire' A good portion of game development now happens under the Electronic Arts umbrella (at least as I understand it). Their corporate culture seems to scream 'big company' with all of the stories of them living off of the life that they suck out of new hires working 80+ hour weeks.
talmand 15y ago
It would ruin revenue streams.

mumrah 15y ago

Here's a link to the infamous fast inverse square root function: https://github.com/id-Software/Quake-III-Arena/blob/master/code/game/q_math.c#L552 https://github.com/id-Software/Quake-III-Arena/blob/master/c...