5 ms·

I open-sourced Even the Ocean

92 points by generichuman 3y ago

seanclayton 3y ago
From the repo's License [0]: > This is NOT an Open Source license I think it's fair to say this is not an open source project, but instead has the source available for viewing and restricts who can compile and distribute it or not. [0]: https://github.com/analgesicproductions/Even-The-Ocean-Open-Source/blob/5e7202e6fdf35e7847fc7218cce716c05b2dd77d/License.md https://github.com/analgesicproductions/Even-The-Ocean-Open-...
- zem 3y ago
  honestly, i wish the spirit behind that license were easier to formalise and publish - it roughly says "look, this is a game i made and am selling, and i don't want people taking this repo and just cloning the game for free. but we are a community of people making games, and i would love to provide the code and other assets as building blocks that will let other people make their own games more easily."
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - warkdarrior 3y ago
    So... not open source, but pretending to be.
    - amelius 3y ago
      Open source, in the literal sense of the word.
      - a1369209993 3y ago
        Open source in only the literal sense of the word. It's like calling a wild boar from the midwestern coast of Africa a "Guinea pig". It's not actually lying (/pretending/cetera), since they clearly expect people to understand the distinction they're making, and so far it looks like most do, but it's still unforunately unclear (and rather needlessly so, since "source available" works just as well, if equally imprecisely).
    - Tao3300 3y ago
      They didn't say "Open Source", they said "open-source".
  - weaksauce 3y ago
    > and i don't want people taking this repo and just cloning the game for free. they don't mind that actually... they just want you to not sell it or anything too close to the original game. if you want to figure out how to compile it and play it they are fine with it. it seems to be the don't screw me over license.
    - zem 3y ago
      right, i should have made that distinction!
  - seanclayton 3y ago
    I honestly believe AGPLv3 for the software and CC BY-SA 4.0 for the non-software assets would absolutely be everything one would need for this project. Is there an example of a commercial AGPLv3 (or even any other copyleft license) game being cloned and sold without modification? I feel like this extra effort towards restrictions is rather unnecessary and putting the cart before the horse.
    - zem 3y ago
      AGPL3 doesn't cut it if you want to allow "take literally every piece of this code and remix it into your own possibly closed-source game, just don't try to appropriate my game". it's sad that such a common-sense intent is so hard to work into a legally sound license.
      - gaganyaan 3y ago
        Isn't that covered by trademark? Or what do you mean by appropriate?
        zem 3y ago
        they spell it out in the license - don't essentially republish "even the ocean" with a few tweaks and the serial numbers filed off. use their code (and maybe even assets? that wasn't entirely clear) for your own work, not their game-as-a-whole.
- weaksauce 3y ago
  the source is open and fairly unrestricted. the assets and game itself are not though. > Non-legal summary of license: Anyone can use or compile the code EVEN WITHOUT OWNING THE GAME. The code is open to everyone. If you're doing noncommercial or commercial things with a low budget ( < $50k/year), you can do anything, so long as you credit us. Don't sell anything unaltered (don't sell our sprites or music unaltered, or compile and try to sell the game unaltered.)
- facorreia 3y ago
  Indeed, the title needs to be edited. It clearly states: > This is NOT an Open Source license
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
otachack 3y ago
Seeing as the license is derived from VVVVV's I was interested in comparing comments so far to a similar one there: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22011655 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22011655 I very much enjoy Melos and Marina's games. "Anodyne 2" is a must play to anyone who loved the Zelda series as it's a mishmash of 3D N64 gameplay with over the head 2D dungeoning. It has such uniqueness and strangeness that I still remember it years later. "Even the Ocean" was also memorable to me. It is not the masterpiece A2 was IMO but the issues held weight. And having an unconventional protagonist in terms of body type, ethnicity, and sexual orientation was so novel at the time to me. Thanks for opening the source code! I know HN members will be super critical as to "Oh this isn't Open Source" but you have the licenses available for review and that's where it really matters. The fact that the code is out there for review is a huge step and I hope more devs do it as it's a form of historical preservation in my eyes.
- Pannoniae 3y ago
  >"I know HN members will be super critical as to "Oh this isn't Open Source" but you have the licenses available for review and that's where it really matters. The fact that the code is out there for review is a huge step and I hope more devs do it as it's a form of historical preservation in my eyes." Exactly, and every time something like this happens, the inevitable "this is not really open" comes up, often in a quite hostile way. That's an absolutely destructive approach (because if it was fully open source, and some large studio just stole the game and re-released it, the same crowd would say they knew the consequences of open sourcing) The "open code but not under an OSI licence" approach is I think the most beneficial for everyone (if we are talking about commercial software): users can inspect their copies, developers can learn from it and modify it, and the developers can live safely knowing that no one will steal their work or threaten to fork it.
  - kiba 3y ago
    Nobody is demanding that you should open source it. Just don't call it open source if you are not going to make it open source.
jrm4 3y ago
I'm curious as to whether the creator here is purposefully being disingenous, or simply deeply misunderstands what "open source" means?
- Tao3300 3y ago
  The intention and explanation is all right there in TFA.
  - jrm4 3y ago
    You're right. It more highlights the ambiguity of "Open source" than anything. Sigh, Stallman, as usual, was right.
ramesh31 3y ago
I think the biggest culture shock to me that occurred while getting into game development for the first time was seeing how vastly opposite the embrace of open source is versus the web world. I mean I get it, games are often based on some "secret sauce" that developers don't want to give up or something, or maybe it's the licensing deals from publishers that cause this. But up until the ubiquity of Unreal/Unity in the last few years, game dev has been an almost strictly closed source affair it seemed. Every single third party tool or library seems to have some kind of licensing fee involved.
seagaia 3y ago
Thanks for sharing this! This is the programmer/co-developer Melos (posting from my ancient college-era HN account...) As other comments point out, yeah this is technically NOT Open Source, but other terms don't communicate the intent as quickly at a glance (I would argue the general understanding of the term would include Even the Ocean/Anodyne's repositories)... and as someone mentions, it's basically a "come on, we're two people, don't screw us" License that's otherwise pretty generous, and the license does distinguish the repos from Open Source (tm).
butz 3y ago
Now that's a great way to make sure that your game will keep working in the future. Some interested devs will be required to port it to future platforms, but, hey, those devs just keep appearing somehow, look at Wipeout rewrite.

92 points by generichuman 3y ago

From the repo's License [0]: > This is NOT an Open Source license I think it's fair to say this is not an open source project, but instead has the source available for viewing and restricts who can compile and distribute it or not. [0]: https://github.com/analgesicproductions/Even-The-Ocean-Open-Source/blob/5e7202e6fdf35e7847fc7218cce716c05b2dd77d/License.md https://github.com/analgesicproductions/Even-The-Ocean-Open-...

zem 3y ago
honestly, i wish the spirit behind that license were easier to formalise and publish - it roughly says "look, this is a game i made and am selling, and i don't want people taking this repo and just cloning the game for free. but we are a community of people making games, and i would love to provide the code and other assets as building blocks that will let other people make their own games more easily."
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- warkdarrior 3y ago
  So... not open source, but pretending to be.
  - amelius 3y ago
    Open source, in the literal sense of the word.
    - a1369209993 3y ago
      Open source in only the literal sense of the word. It's like calling a wild boar from the midwestern coast of Africa a "Guinea pig". It's not actually lying (/pretending/cetera), since they clearly expect people to understand the distinction they're making, and so far it looks like most do, but it's still unforunately unclear (and rather needlessly so, since "source available" works just as well, if equally imprecisely).
  - Tao3300 3y ago
    They didn't say "Open Source", they said "open-source".
- weaksauce 3y ago
  > and i don't want people taking this repo and just cloning the game for free. they don't mind that actually... they just want you to not sell it or anything too close to the original game. if you want to figure out how to compile it and play it they are fine with it. it seems to be the don't screw me over license.
  - zem 3y ago
    right, i should have made that distinction!
- seanclayton 3y ago
  I honestly believe AGPLv3 for the software and CC BY-SA 4.0 for the non-software assets would absolutely be everything one would need for this project. Is there an example of a commercial AGPLv3 (or even any other copyleft license) game being cloned and sold without modification? I feel like this extra effort towards restrictions is rather unnecessary and putting the cart before the horse.
  - zem 3y ago
    AGPL3 doesn't cut it if you want to allow "take literally every piece of this code and remix it into your own possibly closed-source game, just don't try to appropriate my game". it's sad that such a common-sense intent is so hard to work into a legally sound license.
    - gaganyaan 3y ago
      Isn't that covered by trademark? Or what do you mean by appropriate?
      - zem 3y ago
        they spell it out in the license - don't essentially republish "even the ocean" with a few tweaks and the serial numbers filed off. use their code (and maybe even assets? that wasn't entirely clear) for your own work, not their game-as-a-whole.
weaksauce 3y ago
the source is open and fairly unrestricted. the assets and game itself are not though. > Non-legal summary of license: Anyone can use or compile the code EVEN WITHOUT OWNING THE GAME. The code is open to everyone. If you're doing noncommercial or commercial things with a low budget ( < $50k/year), you can do anything, so long as you credit us. Don't sell anything unaltered (don't sell our sprites or music unaltered, or compile and try to sell the game unaltered.)
facorreia 3y ago
Indeed, the title needs to be edited. It clearly states: > This is NOT an Open Source license
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

otachack 3y ago

Seeing as the license is derived from VVVVV's I was interested in comparing comments so far to a similar one there: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22011655 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22011655 I very much enjoy Melos and Marina's games. "Anodyne 2" is a must play to anyone who loved the Zelda series as it's a mishmash of 3D N64 gameplay with over the head 2D dungeoning. It has such uniqueness and strangeness that I still remember it years later. "Even the Ocean" was also memorable to me. It is not the masterpiece A2 was IMO but the issues held weight. And having an unconventional protagonist in terms of body type, ethnicity, and sexual orientation was so novel at the time to me. Thanks for opening the source code! I know HN members will be super critical as to "Oh this isn't Open Source" but you have the licenses available for review and that's where it really matters. The fact that the code is out there for review is a huge step and I hope more devs do it as it's a form of historical preservation in my eyes.

Pannoniae 3y ago
>"I know HN members will be super critical as to "Oh this isn't Open Source" but you have the licenses available for review and that's where it really matters. The fact that the code is out there for review is a huge step and I hope more devs do it as it's a form of historical preservation in my eyes." Exactly, and every time something like this happens, the inevitable "this is not really open" comes up, often in a quite hostile way. That's an absolutely destructive approach (because if it was fully open source, and some large studio just stole the game and re-released it, the same crowd would say they knew the consequences of open sourcing) The "open code but not under an OSI licence" approach is I think the most beneficial for everyone (if we are talking about commercial software): users can inspect their copies, developers can learn from it and modify it, and the developers can live safely knowing that no one will steal their work or threaten to fork it.
- kiba 3y ago
  Nobody is demanding that you should open source it. Just don't call it open source if you are not going to make it open source.

jrm4 3y ago

I'm curious as to whether the creator here is purposefully being disingenous, or simply deeply misunderstands what "open source" means?

Tao3300 3y ago
The intention and explanation is all right there in TFA.
- jrm4 3y ago
  You're right. It more highlights the ambiguity of "Open source" than anything. Sigh, Stallman, as usual, was right.

ramesh31 3y ago

I think the biggest culture shock to me that occurred while getting into game development for the first time was seeing how vastly opposite the embrace of open source is versus the web world. I mean I get it, games are often based on some "secret sauce" that developers don't want to give up or something, or maybe it's the licensing deals from publishers that cause this. But up until the ubiquity of Unreal/Unity in the last few years, game dev has been an almost strictly closed source affair it seemed. Every single third party tool or library seems to have some kind of licensing fee involved.

seagaia 3y ago

Thanks for sharing this! This is the programmer/co-developer Melos (posting from my ancient college-era HN account...) As other comments point out, yeah this is technically NOT Open Source, but other terms don't communicate the intent as quickly at a glance (I would argue the general understanding of the term would include Even the Ocean/Anodyne's repositories)... and as someone mentions, it's basically a "come on, we're two people, don't screw us" License that's otherwise pretty generous, and the license does distinguish the repos from Open Source (tm).

butz 3y ago

Now that's a great way to make sure that your game will keep working in the future. Some interested devs will be required to port it to future platforms, but, hey, those devs just keep appearing somehow, look at Wipeout rewrite.