Reasons to Release the Source Code for Warms Armageddon [Archive] - Team17 Forum

PDA

View Full Version : Reasons to Release the Source Code for Warms Armageddon

wormsfan88
3 Jun 2012, 20:47
I am wondering if it would be possible to get the source code to Worms Armageddon released under the GNU GPL.
Reasons for Releasing the Source:
1: Worms Armageddon still maintains an active player base more than a decade after its release.
2: A large part of the success of the game is the ability to modify it. Releasing the source would allow the community to modify the game more extensively than anything else ever could. This could include (depending on the interest of the fans) additions of more weapons and features to the game.
3: It would be a goodwill gesture to the community that has made the game successful financially and popularly.
4: Coders interested could possibly make native ports for the game on GNU/Linux and Mac Operating Systems. Currently, GNU/Linux players have to use a wine wrapper to have the game function at all on their operating systems. After the source of Doom 2 was released, the game is now playable on every platform.
Reasons Why Releasing the Source Shouldn't be a Problem:
1: There are several games that have had their source released to the players after commercial success. (Doom, Doom 2, Doom3, Gish.)
2: If Team 17 were only to release the source code and not the game content (as was done with the aforementioned titles) people would still need to buy the game to play the game and to have all of the missions, graphics, and sounds. This would allow the game to continue to draw in commercial revenue; and perhaps might invigorate more people to purchase the game who didn't before. (Might be a strong perhaps, but perhaps none the less.) This would also allow Team 17 to still keep full copyright of their game content, (such as missions, graphics, and sounds.)
3: Team 17 has already moved on to make and sale other Worms games (2D and 3D.) The only two possible commercial downsides to releasing the game's source that I have thought of are as fallows:
A: Players might do resource replacement and make a stand alone game with their own missions, graphics, and sounds.
Rebuttal to A: Such projects typically don't contain as much content as the already made full games. Examples are FreeDoom and FreeGish. FreeDoom has spent several years trying to replace the resources of the original Doom and are still not complete. FreeGish only has a small hand full of levels. I actually found out about Gish from Free Gish. I enjoyed Free Gish so much, but was so disappointed by the lack of content that I purchased the full Gish game. Effectively, Free Gish acted as advertisement for Gish for me.
B: Other companies might attempt resource replacement and try to release their own versions of the game.
Rebuttal to B: It seems to me like it would be silly to fear this. The game is more than a decade old and Team 17 is already competing for commercial success with their newer 2D and 3D Worms Titles. The idea that an offshoot of a game from ten years ago might pose a problem to the profit potential of a new Worms Game seems silly to me. To me, that would be like ID Software being worried that an offshoot game based on the Doom 2 engine might get in the way of the sales of Doom 3.
4: Games with released source code already exist as competition to Worms Armageddon (Warmux and Hedgewars.) These games aim to do the same basic concept as Worms Armageddon. They, currently, lack the amount of content that Worms Armageddon has. However, in the case of Hedgewars, their player base is decently large and their game receives active updates. They also have the advantage of having anyone interested contribute to the coding process. This, should more people be inclined to show interest, might speed their development process.
5: While Worms Armageddon is currently being updated by two contributors; I would like to imagine that the wealth of talent of the Worms Armageddon community might offer up some programers that might volunteer their efforts to better speed this process along and more actively engage the community in the development of the game.
6: It seems that the idea of releasing the source to limited people was that Team 17 could control the direction of the game's development. But these two people could continue to control the direction of the game's development even if the entire source is released.
Reason A: Deadcode and CyberShadow could still stand as project maintainers and development leads. They could continue to develop the game and have official say over the official patch releases to the game.
Reason B: Most people would rather contribute advances to the core game than make a thousand offshoots. Even if offshoots were to arise, they would mostly be fragmented and ignored as simple test concepts. People would still return to Deadcode, CyberShadow, and the official Team17 site for the official patch.
Reason C: Deadcode and Cybershadow could, as project leads, decide what features should be and should not be included in the official patch that are made by independent developers. If Deadcode and Cybershadow approve of the new features, they could arrange with the independent developer to have them included in a new patch. From my understanding, this is how Warmux got their flamethrower weapon. An independent developer made it, the project leads tried it and liked it, the independent developer gave the project leads permissions to include it in the new versions of the game.
All of the considered, I see many potential positives and only a small handful of highly unlikely negatives to releasing the source code of Warms Armageddon. I think it would give the Warms Armageddon community an opportunity to take a more hands on approach to continuing to develop a game that they have loved and stayed loyal to for more than a decade. Which, from my understanding, was why ID Software released the source code for Doom. (That, and I think I heard somewhere that ID Software realized their game was living so long because people loved making levels for it and thought that allowing people to see the source code might also increase profit for the game. [People might still continue to buy it and tinker with it even though it is older because now they can see and tinker with everything.])
My intention here is not to offend anyone, and I hope I have not done that. Am I the only person interested in this concept, or are there others?

Phantom
3 Jun 2012, 21:54
Well, I am interested, I want to see 4.0 go live already, there is no point in waiting if they're not going to do it, they could've just said "We're not doing it" instead of just keeping us wait.
I don't mean to offend Deadcode or CyberShadow, but it's kind of stupid to wait this much, I honestly think we need someone who can actually finish this within a few months.

Squirminator2k
4 Jun 2012, 01:15
I don't mean to offend Deadcode or CyberShadow, but it's kind of stupid to wait this much, I honestly think we need someone who can actually finish this within a few months.
What an ignorant thing to say. Deadcode and CyberShadow are volunteers working on improving WA in their spare time. They aren't working around the clock to update WA and, frankly, they don't owe you a Goddamn thing.

GreeN
4 Jun 2012, 01:28
Phantom, I don't know how you've missed the fact that cs and dc develop the game in their spare time. When you've got a full time job, there isn't much of that to work with. Find these guys some wages for developing the game and you'll have your 4.0. The only "stupid" part is that a lot of people seem to be oblivious to the fact that an enourmaous amount of work from cs and dc has already gone into the game, since its release. Look at W:A 3.0 and then compare it to the 4.0 plans; in terms of the number of features, you'll see we're half way there already.

wormsfan88
4 Jun 2012, 02:21
I love the work that Deadcode and Cybershadow have done on the game. The idea of getting the source released is by no means meant to offend them. My hope is that sense they are working as unpaid volunteers; perhaps if the source were to be released to everyone more people could come in and help them.
This might help the development move quicker. Also, should they get enough people interested in coding, it might allow them to take more of a project lead stance rather than having to code it all by hand themselves; if they so choose to.
Also, I love the GNU/Linux Operating System and the ethical philosophy of Free Software. (Free as in Freedom.) While I am not specifically a programmer, it seems to me that software projects (including games) do benefit in quality once they are released under the GNU GPL.
If we take Doom for example, not only did it get ported to several different operating system platforms; it also had many features added in. Such as mouse-look and jump that the original designers did not add. ID Software has made great strides in the model of releasing their older game engine's source once their initial average commercial viability life span has ended. (When they decide to come out with a new engine they release the old one. They just recently released Doom 3's ID Tech 4.)
Also, case and point, Doom is still being sold. Long after the source was released, they have had two more commercial releases of the game. One was Doom: Collector's Edition and the other is their digital release on Steam. Releasing the game engine's source did not keep the property from continuing to be commercially viable, even long after its initial run. Some might argue that the community's advancements to the engine might have made the game more appealing and possibly sale more; but that might be speculation. At the very least, it didn't hurt sales any as far as I know.
I know as a player I enjoy the new features added to the Doom Legacy Project's Doom Engine. I'd like to see Worms Armageddon be able to be worked on by the entire community.
1: Because it is a game I love and would love to see it continue to develop in the entire community's hands. (Personally, I love Worms far more than Doom. I played Worms 2 for hours and it was the first time I fell in love with online gaming.)
2: Because a large part of the game's success has been a loving community constantly editing everything they could get their hands on to customize it. What better gift to that community than the very code of the engine itself?

i<3worms:)
4 Jun 2012, 02:34
What a stupid and discourteous﻿ posts, the first two. As the game stands now, there is not even a need for 4.0, to have those ranks reintroduced and a few other planned features or enhancements would of course be absolutely fantastic but even without it the game is a definition of perfection all thanks to CS and DC. There can't be anyone better out there than these two so no thanks, let these two men take care of WA's future.

wormsfan88
4 Jun 2012, 03:02
What a stupid and discourteous﻿ posts, the first two. As the game stands now, there is not even a need for 4.0, to have those ranks reintroduced and a few other planned features or enhancements would of course be absolutely fantastic but even without it the game is a definition of perfection all thanks to CS and DC. There can't be anyone better out there than these two so no thanks, let these two men take care of WA's future.
My goal is not to be thankless. I'd like to use an analogy. When watching a movie, all you get to do is see the finished product. When watching the behind the scenes specials, you achieve a new level of appreciation by seeing how the movie was made.
Right now, with a binary, all we get to see of Worms Armageddon is the finished product. If we were able to see the source, we'd be able to see how it works.
I'm not a programer, so I can't speak from personal experience directly. However, having worked a little in college on films; explaining to people how the film was made is as fun as watching them watch it. I would imagine that a programer would be flattered to allow other programers to appreciate their work with peer review.
However, some or and some aren’t and I can't speak directly for Deadcode and Cybershadow.

KRD
4 Jun 2012, 05:07
It's not so much about the proposition being rude, more about it being uninformed and/or not quite thought out all the way. And that's okay, that's why we're here. ;)
All of the considered, I see many potential positives and only a small handful of highly unlikely negatives to releasing the source code of Warms Armageddon. I think it would give the Warms Armageddon community an opportunity to take a more hands on approach to continuing to develop a game that they have loved and stayed loyal to for more than a decade.
You're missing a whole host of other negatives as well as potential legal and emotional complications that would get in the way even if it was decided that this was the way to go. Not to mention many of your positives lack argumentation and examples without which they sound more like negatives to me. For one thing, WA still having an active and competitive player base is surely a reason against releasing the means for flawless cheat development into the wild, wouldn't you agree? Likewise, I imagine it would help your case if you were able to point out at least a few individuals who would be interested in contributing to the project once its source was made available. I mean sure, maybe some would appear out of nowhere after the fact, but would there really be so many that they couldn't be doing the same under the current system already, except without compromising security nearly as much?
Don't take this the wrong way, though. I'd say the WA community is as happy as the next to discuss the possible futures for our favourite game, but we've been over this particular suggestion before and time and time again, the people asking for the source to be released fail to demonstrate why it would be a better/faster/safer approach than the current one with the two trusted developers. It's not like Deadcode and CyberShadow wouldn't love having more maintainers working on the project, they've always been happy to try and get people involved. In the very 4.x draft article (http://worms2d.info/4#Code) on the wiki, they themselves argue for more open development of the parts of the code that aren't directly related to the game. Whether or not they can (and how soon) get to work on realising all of that just isn't entirely up to them.
tl;dr: Lurk moar, the devs are not the problem. :p

StepS
4 Jun 2012, 07:21
:D
first, as KRD said:
1. It will lead to easy cheating, no matter which build you'd use, official one or the modified one. You (wormsfan88) probably don't know that a source code would give the extreme ease, since basically a lot of things are synchronized and stored locally...
2. Yes, it would be good to wait for 4.0 with its partial open-source solution. Again, to prevent cheating and to have a more stable and feature-packed game. Not to mention that the current 3.x source has inaccuracies and flaws (frontend or network model, for example), which would lead to confusions and lots of bugs.
3. It would make wormkit partially obsolete due to lack of supported modules, although this won't be important after 4.0 is released.
4. There can be GPL violations
5. I think that's it

Phantom
4 Jun 2012, 15:03
I'm well informed that they're working on that on their spare time, I've been on this forum a lot for the past 2 years, and enough of threads like this have been posted.

Squirminator2k
4 Jun 2012, 18:35
Ah, you're not ignorant, then. Just stupid.

Phantom
4 Jun 2012, 18:46
Thanks, I appreciate the comment.

Squirminator2k
4 Jun 2012, 18:50
You're quite welcome.
If I may be more critical for a moment, as opposed to just snarky: You honestly expect CyberShadow and Deadcode to be able to knock out WA 4.0 in "a few months" when they're working on this game in their free time? Seriously?

Phantom
4 Jun 2012, 19:20
Well, they have the ideas, they have did something (lol) as you can see on http://wormsng.com/ so yeah... I don't know, they surely aren't THAT busy for the last ten years or something so they can't finish it in their spare time...

StepS
4 Jun 2012, 19:33
challenge accepted

Squirminator2k
4 Jun 2012, 20:09
Well, they have the ideas, they have did something (lol) as you can see on http://wormsng.com/ so yeah... I don't know, they surely aren't THAT busy for the last ten years or something so they can't finish it in their spare time...
I was unaware that you had intimate knowledge of their personal schedules.

raffie
4 Jun 2012, 21:09
I was unaware that you had intimate knowledge of their personal schedules.
Well either that wormsng site hast been updated since its launch, or it's actually correct. But I have to wonder what the point is of launching that site if you're never going to update it?

Squirminator2k
4 Jun 2012, 21:30
You're missing my point - Phantom seems entirely convinced that CyberShadow and Deadcode can knock out WA 4.0 "within a few months". Either he has access to DC and CS's personal calendars and knows exactly how much time they have to allocate to such a task, or he's talking out of his ****. Personally, I think it's the latter.

StepS
4 Jun 2012, 21:37
Well either that wormsng site hast been updated since its launch, or it's actually correct. But I have to wonder what the point is of launching that site if you're never going to update it?
It has. I've been looking on it sometimes and I noticed slight pixel differences. So yes, it's actually updating

franpa
5 Jun 2012, 06:58
Well, they have the ideas, they have did something (lol) as you can see on http://wormsng.com/ so yeah... I don't know, they surely aren't THAT busy for the last ten years or something so they can't finish it in their spare time...
Have you taken in to account how long it has taken for them to get that far? Because it doesn't look like you have.

bonz
5 Jun 2012, 09:33
Won't happen, as Spadge has said years ago already:
Too many copy right holders and 3rd parties are involved in the source code of the 2nd generation games (W2, WA, WWP).
Getting approval from them or even work out new deals is virtually impossible and not financially feasible at all.
And I doubt that the new administration of Team17 will suddenly change their mind.

Phantom
5 Jun 2012, 15:43
I have never said I know their personal schedules or something but ten years... Seriously? Anyways, I'm going to stop arguing now, so... Yeah... /ignore

Squirminator2k
6 Jun 2012, 05:12
Wow. Phantom ignored me for pointing out the preposterousness of his (her?) argument. Classy.

wormsfan88
8 Jun 2012, 02:20
Won't happen, as Spadge has said years ago already:
Too many copy right holders and 3rd parties are involved in the source code of the 2nd generation games (W2, WA, WWP).
Getting approval from them or even work out new deals is virtually impossible and not financially feasible at all.
And I doubt that the new administration of Team17 will suddenly change their mind.
That's what worried me might be at the heart of the issue. Source releases typically happen when a company owns the source completely a supports that ethics of that type of programming.
When there are 'too many cooks in the kitchen' where copyright is held by too many hands; then getting the source released becomes a costly and unpractical venture; sadly.
I had hoped this was not the case. Anyway, thank you for letting me know.

Obn3g0n
8 Jun 2012, 06:16
What is Warms Armageddon?

bonz
9 Jun 2012, 10:23
What is Warms Armageddon?
Oh, you're right!
It's probably perfectly possible that T17 can release the source code for Warms Armageddon, the ultimate nuclear winter anorak simulator! :D

Obn3g0n
10 Jun 2012, 08:29
I like that it's spelled Warms consistently all through the OP.

koralatov
30 Jun 2012, 17:16
While I am not specifically a programmer, it seems to me that software projects (including games) do benefit in quality once they are released under the GNU GPL.
What complete rubbish. A license does not automagically lead to an uptick in quality of software. I could name any number of softwares *not* released under GPL that are vastly superior to the GPLed competitor.
Your sentiment is cute, but it’s just that — sentimental. I think most of the people here couldn’t give a toffee whether any of the Worms games are “free as in freedom”. And really, that’s the right attitude: these games were made to be enjoyed, not to be another string in the bow of the Free/Open/Libre movement.

vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.