If someone like this thing

  • wiki_me@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    I would argue that even having a project as source available is better then closed source and can still be pretty good, look at for example the FreeSpace 2 Source Code Project.

    If anybody want to ask a game creator to make a game open source and he refuses, suggesting a source available license might still be a good idea.

    • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      But how does source-available benefit anybody? If you get inspiration from the code you can get accused of copyright infringement so you’re better off never looking at it, and since it’s not actually FOSS you don’t get any of the usual benefits.

      • wiki_me@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        source available can allow a lot of things including modification of the source code (and in particular adding quality of life improvements and updating the code to run on modern platforms). Some restrictions like not allowing selling or even not allowing competition (for example allowing the game engine to run only the original game , or disallowing the removal of monetization).

        If you look at openage (age of empires 2 reimplementation) the game is not playable 25 years after release and that game is considered a classic, we could lose a lot of very good games or software.