| |||||||||||
Gaming as a service...Gaming as a service...Posted Mar 6, 2008 20:55 UTC (Thu) by GreyWizard (subscriber, #1026)In reply to: Gaming as a service... by pizza Parent article: Ryzom returns?
maintaining a persistent game world for Massive numbers of users is a lot of work and carries some substantial hardware/bandwidth/management expenses Distributions like Fedora and Debian require considerable management, hardware and bandwidth yet these problems get solved. Your claim that Wikipedia doesn't count because some people involved get paid is bizarre. Is the Linux kernel a bad example because Linus Torvalds and others get paid to work on it? There's a legal organization set up to deal with administrative issues for that too. Also, changing the subject to artwork and other non-code resources doesn't address the point that game services can cost money even if the software itself is free. Corbet is addressing the question of free software games in a thoughtful and constructive way. In contrast you seem to be making vague and implausible arguments to the effect that it just can't be done. What exactly are you trying to achieve? From here it appears that your goal is to discourage anyone from even trying.
(Log in to post comments)
Gaming as a service... Posted Mar 6, 2008 22:38 UTC (Thu) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link] > Also, changing the subject to artwork and other non-code resources doesn't address the point that game services can cost money even if the software itself is free. > Corbet is addressing the question of free software games in a thoughtful and constructive way. In contrast you seem to be making vague and implausible arguments to the effect that it just can't be done. What exactly are you trying to achieve? From here it appears that your goal is to discourage anyone from even trying. ...If the code is free but the art (presumably included in the "game services" you menioned) is not, how is this any different than what we have now? We already are in a situation where "game software" is free, both on the client and server. What remains non-free is the "game content" and that is also the most expensive part of game development, in part due to its general non-reusability. If I'm discouraging effort it's only because I'd rather that the effort go into something that is actually lacking.
Gaming as a service... Posted Mar 9, 2008 0:46 UTC (Sun) by GreyWizard (subscriber, #1026) [Link] how is this any different than what we have now? This question seems to have been adequately addressed by man_ls in one of the threads above. We already are in a situation where "game software" is free Some game software is free but most is not. I don't believe there's a good reason for that (with the possible exception of the 1% of mainstream games that truly push the boundaries of hardware performance -- and even 1% is probably overstating things). I think it's just culture and force of habit. Everyone would win if we could change that situation. Companies that make games could reuse solutions to problems outside their core competency and people who play games could do so on any platform they happen to like.
|
|||||||||||