4 ms·

Are open source tools banned on playstation and switch?

cableshaft 3y ago
Not banned, just that every build platform has to be supported and not every open source project prioritizes each platform. Godot, for example, doesn't support console builds, only working with a third party to facilitate porting to those platforms (that may change in the future now that they're getting a lot more support from the community after all this).
- amrocha 3y ago
  Gotcha, so it's not that open source isn't possible, the industry just needs to invest in community support for an engine
- follower 3y ago
  > Godot, for example, doesn't support console builds, only working with a third party to facilitate porting to those platforms For the full nuanced details I've listed the relevant links here: * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37649430 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37649430
  - amrocha 3y ago
    That's a really useful comment, thank you!
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ndiddy 3y ago
The issue is that console SDKs are under NDA, meaning that open source tools can't target consoles because they would reveal details about the SDK. Some projects have workarounds for this, for example SDL maintains a private Switch port that you can get access to by emailing one of the maintainers with proof you're a Nintendo licensee.
miohtama 3y ago
There is no one open source, but various open source licenses. Nintendo Switch and Playstation and titles from Sony and Nintendo incorporate BSD-licensed open source code, so it is obvious that “open source is banned” is not true. It’s only GPL and other viral licenses that lawyers argue is too risky, because it might require disclosing proprietary source when linked. Same goes for Apple App Store as well https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12827624 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12827624
- amrocha 3y ago
  Look at the other comments in this thread, the reason is more complicated than that. Open source tools might be fine but game engines can't be open source if they want to support console builds because that would disclose proprietary information.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > game engines can't be open source if they want to support console builds because that would disclose proprietary information. Technically, they could. It would require someone who hasn't actually licensed the SDK, and so aren't subjected to an NDA, to reverse-engineer things and produce their own implementation under an open source license. Certainly would be an enormous project, but it is well within the realm of the possible. It's been done with complex systems before.
    - amrocha 3y ago
      We're talking about a viable alternative to proprietary game engines. Yes, I know it's possible to reverse engineer the consoles, but that doesn't make it a viable alternative for the games industry.
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        > that doesn't make it a viable alternative for the games industry. It makes it legally viable, in that it would allow the production of an SDK that isn't restricted by any NDA, and therefore could be incorporated into opens source projects.

Not banned, just that every build platform has to be supported and not every open source project prioritizes each platform. Godot, for example, doesn't support console builds, only working with a third party to facilitate porting to those platforms (that may change in the future now that they're getting a lot more support from the community after all this).

amrocha 3y ago
Gotcha, so it's not that open source isn't possible, the industry just needs to invest in community support for an engine
follower 3y ago
> Godot, for example, doesn't support console builds, only working with a third party to facilitate porting to those platforms For the full nuanced details I've listed the relevant links here: * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37649430 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37649430
- amrocha 3y ago
  That's a really useful comment, thank you!

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

ndiddy 3y ago

The issue is that console SDKs are under NDA, meaning that open source tools can't target consoles because they would reveal details about the SDK. Some projects have workarounds for this, for example SDL maintains a private Switch port that you can get access to by emailing one of the maintainers with proof you're a Nintendo licensee.

miohtama 3y ago

There is no one open source, but various open source licenses. Nintendo Switch and Playstation and titles from Sony and Nintendo incorporate BSD-licensed open source code, so it is obvious that “open source is banned” is not true. It’s only GPL and other viral licenses that lawyers argue is too risky, because it might require disclosing proprietary source when linked. Same goes for Apple App Store as well https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12827624 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12827624

amrocha 3y ago
Look at the other comments in this thread, the reason is more complicated than that. Open source tools might be fine but game engines can't be open source if they want to support console builds because that would disclose proprietary information.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > game engines can't be open source if they want to support console builds because that would disclose proprietary information. Technically, they could. It would require someone who hasn't actually licensed the SDK, and so aren't subjected to an NDA, to reverse-engineer things and produce their own implementation under an open source license. Certainly would be an enormous project, but it is well within the realm of the possible. It's been done with complex systems before.
  - amrocha 3y ago
    We're talking about a viable alternative to proprietary game engines. Yes, I know it's possible to reverse engineer the consoles, but that doesn't make it a viable alternative for the games industry.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      > that doesn't make it a viable alternative for the games industry. It makes it legally viable, in that it would allow the production of an SDK that isn't restricted by any NDA, and therefore could be incorporated into opens source projects.