Would be nice to know which ones are actually open source too.WNivek wrote:On a slightly more productive note, It might be a good idea to list, along with the links, whether each one is
- a source-port/recreated engine (AFAIK, DarkXL isn't a 'source-port' as the Dark Forces source was never released)
- a TC (and what game/engine it runs on)
- or something else (like Voxelstein - a self-contained game)
FPS source ports and TCs
Moderator: ScummVM Team
-
MusicallyInspired
- Posts: 1138
- Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 8:03 am
- Location: Manitoba, Canada
- Contact:
Apparently, DarkXL is going to be branching out to support a couple additional games: Outlaws (another FPS from LucasArts) and Blood.
http://darkxl.wordpress.com/2010/12/22/ ... mas-bonus/
http://darkxl.wordpress.com/2010/12/22/ ... mas-bonus/
I knew Outlaws would be supported eventually (was mentioned in the FAQ, Outlaws uses an enhanced version of the Jedi engine). However, while I have always been a big fan of Dark Forces/Outlaws, I still haven't had much interest in this project. It really bothers me that the source code remains closed for the project...WNivek wrote:Apparently, DarkXL is going to be branching out to support a couple additional games: Outlaws (another FPS from LucasArts) and Blood.
http://darkxl.wordpress.com/2010/12/22/ ... mas-bonus/
Just had a look. There is a project on codeplex:clone2727 wrote:I knew Outlaws would be supported eventually (was mentioned in the FAQ, Outlaws uses an enhanced version of the Jedi engine). However, while I have always been a big fan of Dark Forces/Outlaws, I still haven't had much interest in this project. It really bothers me that the source code remains closed for the project...WNivek wrote:Apparently, DarkXL is going to be branching out to support a couple additional games: Outlaws (another FPS from LucasArts) and Blood.
http://darkxl.wordpress.com/2010/12/22/ ... mas-bonus/
http://darkxl.codeplex.com/
and lucius uploaded a README:
http://darkxl.codeplex.com/SourceContro ... 84#1062260
The DarkXL source code will go here once the Beta is released. In addition the code will be updated and maintained from this location.
Note that access is read-only at this time. The source code is available to anyone, as per the GPL license agreement, but I plan on maintaining control of the main source code at this time.
Right now you can download the current version of the CoreLogics script, but everything else will be up in the near future.
--lucius
Which is advertised very well...md5 wrote:Just had a look. There is a project on codeplex
Q: Is this project open source? Will the source code be released?
A: DarkXL is not open source at this time and the source code is not available. However the source will be opened up down the road, mainly so that others can maintain and extend the project once I’m “finished” (i.e. my goals are met and I’m not going to work on it much any more). I have reservations about standard open source projects (for reasons I really don’t want to repeat here) and really want to avoid excessive forking and fragmenting of the community (how many Doom source ports are there?). On the other hand I don’t want the project to die when I won’t/can’t continue it, which is why I’ll release the source anyway before then. So in summary the source code will eventually be released but not any time soon.
I decided a while ago to release the source when the Beta was released but neglected to update the FAQ - my apologies (I really have to do a better job keeping that thing updated). The Open Source answer has been revised to match the current plans. I'll revise other aspects of the FAQ once I get closer to preparing for the Beta release.
The point is moot since the source will be released, I suppose, but why did DarkXL being closed source bother you so much clone2727? Does having the source available really change the amount of work put into the project or the quality of the results? Or do you not care for DarkXL for other reasons and being "closed source" was just one of them?
Sorry for all the questions, I just don't understand the viewpoint. There are other "Indie" projects that are closed source (though I stated already this will change very soon for DarkXL) that people enjoy - such as Dwarf Fortress.
The point is moot since the source will be released, I suppose, but why did DarkXL being closed source bother you so much clone2727? Does having the source available really change the amount of work put into the project or the quality of the results? Or do you not care for DarkXL for other reasons and being "closed source" was just one of them?
Sorry for all the questions, I just don't understand the viewpoint. There are other "Indie" projects that are closed source (though I stated already this will change very soon for DarkXL) that people enjoy - such as Dwarf Fortress.
It's quite simple: When a project is open source, you bring the full community in, IMO. People can contribute patches openly and it adds to the whole experience of a project; it's more than just reimplementing the game, I feel. You also get to use some other open source code out there like, for instance, ScummVM's iMuse implementation and DOSBox's AdLib emulator which would definitely add to DarkXL.luciusDXL wrote:The point is moot since the source will be released, I suppose, but why did DarkXL being closed source bother you so much clone2727? Does having the source available really change the amount of work put into the project or the quality of the results? Or do you not care for DarkXL for other reasons and being "closed source" was just one of them?
I disagreed with your point about all the Doom clones very much. id released the Doom source and everyone started different projects based off of that. And, even if that would happen to your project (which would be very unlikely in any case), I don't really see why that would be a bad thing. Forks happen, it's just the nature of open source. Since it's in the GPL, they would have to have theirs open source and you may even get code back from those forks.
What I think you're doing with the project is great, I just disagreed with your decision to keep it closed for so long (though, I'd prefer to play without some of the new features you added
). I think I was more disappointed with your position in old FAQ entry, tbh.While I disagree about the forking, that excessive forking would not necessarily be a good thing - I respect your opinion.
As for Open Source, my views have changed somewhat in that regard. There is no harm in making the source available and it does open up the possibility of using other open source software, such as FluidSynth, to enhance the project. And I had always planned on making the source available eventually but you're right, no need to wait so long.
Finally, the Beta will include the "Pure Renderer" which emulates the software rendered look of the original - from resolution, palette and color map use, skewed perspective and so on. The next build will also allow you to control the player using just keyboard controls and disable mouse look if you want. For the regular renderer, you've been able to turn off filtering, turn off bloom, turn off dynamic lights and disable crosshairs for a while now. So you really only need to play with just the features that you want.
As for Open Source, my views have changed somewhat in that regard. There is no harm in making the source available and it does open up the possibility of using other open source software, such as FluidSynth, to enhance the project. And I had always planned on making the source available eventually but you're right, no need to wait so long.
Finally, the Beta will include the "Pure Renderer" which emulates the software rendered look of the original - from resolution, palette and color map use, skewed perspective and so on. The next build will also allow you to control the player using just keyboard controls and disable mouse look if you want. For the regular renderer, you've been able to turn off filtering, turn off bloom, turn off dynamic lights and disable crosshairs for a while now. So you really only need to play with just the features that you want.
Well, excessive forking probably wouldn't be a good thing (such as forking just for the sake of forking). I just don't think forking is inherently bad and is quite good with gitluciusDXL wrote:While I disagree about the forking, that excessive forking would not necessarily be a good thing - I respect your opinion.
Sounds good to meluciusDXL wrote:Finally, the Beta will include the "Pure Renderer" which emulates the software rendered look of the original - from resolution, palette and color map use, skewed perspective and so on. The next build will also allow you to control the player using just keyboard controls and disable mouse look if you want. For the regular renderer, you've been able to turn off filtering, turn off bloom, turn off dynamic lights and disable crosshairs for a while now. So you really only need to play with just the features that you want.
Excessive forking of open source projects is a hoax.
Basically it happens only when somebody with heaps of time and big energy comes to work on some project but there are serious disagreements with the author. And only in this case there is some chance of getting a fork. People are lazy and it is much easier to add a small part than to maintain the whole thing. In fact, this is exactly what constitutes the driving force of opensource.
Heh, take a look at ScummVM. We're almost 10 years old. Where are the forks?
Eugene
Basically it happens only when somebody with heaps of time and big energy comes to work on some project but there are serious disagreements with the author. And only in this case there is some chance of getting a fork. People are lazy and it is much easier to add a small part than to maintain the whole thing. In fact, this is exactly what constitutes the driving force of opensource.
Heh, take a look at ScummVM. We're almost 10 years old. Where are the forks?
Eugene
-
ezekiel000
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 5:17 pm
- Location: Surrey, England