3 ms·

What, you mean like selling a piece of software? Why is this any different than any other game that is sold, e.g. as an early access. They sure aren't open sour

What, you mean like selling a piece of software? Why is this any different than any other game that is sold, e.g. as an early access. They sure aren't open sourcing most games.

secstate 11y ago
Nope, but the business model of most games is nothing like this. It's more like movies, where advance sale of licenses gets you the money to hire the team and then the clock starts and if you don't hit the milestones, the shit hits the fan and before you know it, you've turned into Electronic Arts ;) But seriously, this isn't selling software. Strangely, if this were like Kerbal Space Program, and the dev were offering to SELL it for $40, $50, $60 with the promise that that price includes upgrades up to a certain version (1.0 + minor releases in the cycle?) I'd probably do that. I am not, however, going to donate money to a project that literally states in the license that their software is a trade secret. What is this, 1980?
- themartorana 11y ago
  I'm confused how software is so different from any other type of invention. If you've ever backed a single Kickstarter project you're being hypocritical. I'd much, much rather code be a "trade secret" than a patent. It's how closed source should work. It feels like you're arguing semantics - it says "trade secret" so you're put off. If it didn't say anything and was just closed source... would you care as much? Nothing in this world requires you to like or participate in anything else - you don't have to donate or participate. But the level of entitlement is off the charts.
  - rbanffy 11y ago
    > I'd much, much rather code be a "trade secret" than a patent. These are not the only two options. If I understood it right, the programmer is asking for money to develop something that will be available for download for free, but whose source code would be secret. As a programmer myself (who writes free-as-in-speech software), the source code is the most relevant artifact and the only one that interests me. I would not sponsor the development of a project where the only deliverable is an opaque binary executable where other development models are possible.
    - sqeaky 11y ago
      I agree completely. This space engine software runs on 0 of my computers, with source and the game dev experience I have I might change that. With the binaries provided I cannot change that. This software may as well from a naive self concerned viewpoint.

What, you mean like selling a piece of software? Why is this any different than any other game that is sold, e.g. as an early access. They sure aren't open sourcing most games.

secstate 11y ago

Nope, but the business model of most games is nothing like this. It's more like movies, where advance sale of licenses gets you the money to hire the team and then the clock starts and if you don't hit the milestones, the shit hits the fan and before you know it, you've turned into Electronic Arts ;) But seriously, this isn't selling software. Strangely, if this were like Kerbal Space Program, and the dev were offering to SELL it for $40, $50, $60 with the promise that that price includes upgrades up to a certain version (1.0 + minor releases in the cycle?) I'd probably do that. I am not, however, going to donate money to a project that literally states in the license that their software is a trade secret. What is this, 1980?

themartorana 11y ago
I'm confused how software is so different from any other type of invention. If you've ever backed a single Kickstarter project you're being hypocritical. I'd much, much rather code be a "trade secret" than a patent. It's how closed source should work. It feels like you're arguing semantics - it says "trade secret" so you're put off. If it didn't say anything and was just closed source... would you care as much? Nothing in this world requires you to like or participate in anything else - you don't have to donate or participate. But the level of entitlement is off the charts.
- rbanffy 11y ago
  > I'd much, much rather code be a "trade secret" than a patent. These are not the only two options. If I understood it right, the programmer is asking for money to develop something that will be available for download for free, but whose source code would be secret. As a programmer myself (who writes free-as-in-speech software), the source code is the most relevant artifact and the only one that interests me. I would not sponsor the development of a project where the only deliverable is an opaque binary executable where other development models are possible.
  - sqeaky 11y ago
    I agree completely. This space engine software runs on 0 of my computers, with source and the game dev experience I have I might change that. With the binaries provided I cannot change that. This software may as well from a naive self concerned viewpoint.