tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460906122833508895.post1304234860177765976..comments2024-02-13T00:25:34.752-06:00Comments on Graphic Rants: UE4 available to allBrian Karishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03069330593380092516noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460906122833508895.post-29622750073025504672014-04-16T13:14:41.994-05:002014-04-16T13:14:41.994-05:00The legal aspect of GPL isn't very scary, what...The legal aspect of GPL isn't very scary, what's needed to stay compliant is well-known (to the point that V2 was heavily evaded). The unacceptable linking/platform limitations are the real problem, and are why the lawyers won't touch it, but we'd also need to have a very high-quality GPL game to test that theory and I don't think that will ever happen.<br /><br />My point though was that even if a small developer was okay with the GPL limitations, one of the main advantage of open source is supposed to be community contribution, and the GPL license guaranteed that commercial developers wouldn't be interested and in turn contributing.OneEightHundredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15917532861521845279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460906122833508895.post-35526613929182098772014-04-16T07:23:54.212-05:002014-04-16T07:23:54.212-05:00Bullet physics is under the zlib license and LLVM ...Bullet physics is under the zlib license and LLVM is under the openBSD license, both of which are permissive for gamedev. They allow use without being forced to expose your own code. Even with limited GPL the lawyers don't want to touch it with a 10ft pole. Even if everyone in your studio is fine with it (rare) a publisher won't fund you.<br /><br />MIT, BSD and zlib licensed open source code is commonly used in gamedev. In fact UE4 uses some code under these licenses (forget which).Brian Karishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03069330593380092516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460906122833508895.post-40740832822164821742014-04-16T02:37:44.430-05:002014-04-16T02:37:44.430-05:00The biggest problem of the GPL engines wasn't ...The biggest problem of the GPL engines wasn't that small developers could only ship for PC, it was that it prevented large commercial developers from kicking code back to it to keep it modern (i.e. as has happened to LLVM and Bullet).<br /><br />I've long lamented the lack of options for new developers to tinker with the low-level internals of a modern game though, so this is definitely a nice thing to see happen.OneEightHundredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15917532861521845279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460906122833508895.post-75000483841015676292014-03-30T06:01:01.138-05:002014-03-30T06:01:01.138-05:00I wish you had done that before I put several full...I wish you had done that before I put several full time months into upgrading Doom 3 (fully working Android support, cool renderer upgrades with my knowledge from XreaL, very flexible Lua GUI system and other stuff).<br /><br />Binary blob solutions like the UDK or Unity 3D were a devastating experience for me because I'm primarily a programmer and there was a lot of stuff I couldn't fix without source access. Working with a black box just sucks.<br /><br />With the very liberal and cheap UE4 license everything has changed and I'm grateful. This also allows to make a lot more potential revenues.<br /><br />You really have a point about the GPL. The GPL was mainly only useful for people how to learn coding. The only successful but free projects derived by the Q3A release were total conversions where everything was already done.<br /><br />There was only one commercial game with the Q3A engine: Space Traders.<br /><br />In the end the primary function of the GPL code in the Quake 1-3 eras was that the community could maintain and port it to wherever it was needed. However there were always problems with the GPL like missing Punkbuster support or the general linking issue against non-GPL compatible libraries.<br /><br />I like the UE4 tools. They have become alot better with the new Blueprint system and Epic removed really everything I had to critisize: Unrealscript, managing assets in control version system unfriendly upks, Flash for GUIs.<br /><br />I hope that Epic keeps this way for the next 10 years or longer. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05974952131648967629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460906122833508895.post-89396041579738808112014-03-29T23:01:38.352-05:002014-03-29T23:01:38.352-05:00I agree with you Brian. I think one of the most im...I agree with you Brian. I think one of the most important aspects of this, beside of the potential to create new games/applications, is the fact that developers with no prior experience working on large commercial games get to see how things are done on a large scale. I think this fills up the huge gap there is between being a developer in a small scale product (or learning from gamedev.net and similar sites), and being a developer on a AAA title.Pablo Zuritahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05940651037841907120noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460906122833508895.post-59712016047207928542014-03-29T22:15:24.646-05:002014-03-29T22:15:24.646-05:00"GPL is simply not an option for commercial g..."GPL is simply not an option for commercial games." - as long as you don't target consoles and are ok to share your code, it's fine.<br /><br />Also: I agree that this is an incredible move from Epic and I like the idea of engince licensees collaborating on Github.<br />However, one thing I don't like: AFAIK as a game developer you're not allowed to ship tools (level editor, ..) with your UE4 game, so every gamer who wants to create levels or whatever for your game would have to get the $19,99/month subscription as well, right?Danielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00508018378115314618noreply@blogger.com