Darkstar2: You keep blowing all of this out of proportion and type very emotionally. So to wrap it up:
1) There is no automatic suing robot. And GPL doesn't mean that a random person can sue you. The only ones who could sue anyone is ENIGMA dev's.
As I mentioned before, I understand that part.
As to blowing things, sorry but since I am very serious about using ENIGMA and have lots in mind, I want to get all my bases covered. My intentions are to build using ENIGMA from scratch as opposed to simply importing GMS files. I've already mentioned many times the reasons why I don't like GMS anymore (at least for the things I want done). To be honest, the things I can do in GMS I will keep doing in GMS. So far I know people who have sold their games made in GMS and made several hundreds of $ and have not been sued by anyone yet.
2) As you already said, suing is time and money consuming. So it's virtually impossible that anyone from ENIGMA dev team would be active enough to do so. Only maybe Robert during one of his sissy fits could summon the time (but not money)
I'll keep that in mind about Robert (noted
) but he said "some of us are financially independent now" and while we don't intend to sue you, we could do it. I kinda see where he is going, he is covering his base, the same way I want to cover mine.
I don't mean to offend anybody by saying this, but when you (meaning the team) decided to make this project open source, you probably knew the pros / cons and that eventually something like this would come. Perhaps it would have been a better idea not to make it open source but a shareware with limited functionality with a path to upgrade to a PRO version that allows selling, and doing whatever ... Like I said, I would have gladly paid for something like ENIGMA.
3) That is why we a trying to choose a license. It's not that if we don't do so in the next 24h the world will explode.
Nobody said that, however, in my opinion, these discussions have been trailing for ages, and GM is gaining grounds right now despite its flaws, again I stress, in my opinion, I think this matter of licensing is not too healthy for ENIGMA.
The discussions have been massive on the subject and I don't think much more will happen.
I don't think so either. I have never dealt with licensing or distributed software free or paid so forgive my ignorance on the matter, but what if ENIGMA decided to stop becoming open source and simply become a shareware, with possibility of getting a paid version free of all those limits ? Would that be a solution (it would benefit ENIGMA financially to keep working on ENIGMA) and benefit developers without some dodgy license
We basically have two possibilities when thinking about users: MPL and possibly endanger ENIGMA at some point or other license with custom exceptions/custom license which are both a lot riskier (as it normally requires a very expensive legal staff to be done properly).
Exactly, so there is no perfect option and never will be.
4) That "ENIGMA is dying" or "no one will use ENIGMA" are both stupid statements. I have been
I have never said this myself, but read people mention it here and elsewhere. To be honest maybe I agree to some extent, as I see more people mention they could not make any games with ENIGMA and lots of issues than people who claimed to have made complete games. As far as "no one will use ENIGMA" I said it in the context that if there is so many restrictions on what a developer can do with their published games, I don't think people will want to use ENIGMA, in fact nobody would under the current circumstances (by that I mean compile and publish a game).
here since 2008 (that's 6 years for the mathematically impaired) and I can tell you that nothing has really changed. We work on it as we see fit and at the pace we have time for. It will probably be the same in the next 6 years as well. The leaps in functionality have been tremendous during the past year though. And could be as big this year.
....yet the forums are inactive (same people posting) and I don't hear much about game titles released using ENIGMA. Sorry for my skepticism though, I think I am entitled to an opinion, but based on what I am seeing, I have some reservations as to whether ENIGMA will gain more grounds. However I am working hard to trying to do some workarounds and use ENIGMA as much as I can, but with this whole discussion on licensing, it sets me off a little.
And almost exclusively does the opposite. I, like Josh, have paid for games that are available for less or even free, because I enjoyed them.
Good for you, but not everyone is like that. Yes protection when done right can deter piracy to some extent. When it is badly implemented so much that it interferes with paying customers (hint-hint) then that is not a good thing.
Regarding cracks and piracy, not everyone who buys a game is aware of cracks or where to look. The whole idea is to make it harder and more challenging as opposed to publishing a title with zero protection that just about ANYBODY could copy.
game and then even finish the game days before the legit user could. Only because the legit user needed to wait 3 days before DRM servers were back online (happened with AC, Diablo3, Battlefield, COD and so on). In Humbe Bundle you can also see that the ones who pay more are usually Linux users, those who's software are usually free (and GPL'd).
and there are cases where people purchased games and could not even run it due to faulty DRM, many asking their money back or using a crack (UBISOFT anybody
) Right, but fact remains piracy is an illegal right for whatever reason.
Of course people who already paid for the game and use a crack as a temporary measure that is another issue, still the law is the law, and illegal is illegal, but in my opinion are one of the more permissive reasons. I don't recall UBISOFT going after people with cracks when they had problems with some of their past games and DRM, people were openly admitting to using cracks. In fact if not mistaken even UBISOFT allegedly encouraged it and used it at some point to break their own damn DRM. lol.
I for example now buy games almost exclusively from GOG.com. They never have DRM and so I can buy a game, install it and play it within 15minutes. No fuss with DRM's.
Exactly, but it means it has the potential of being copied more. No protection, anybody can copy. Protection, limits the damage, because only people who are familiar on how things work or know where to get those cracks, etc. will get through. Try polling
10,000 PC gamers who buy their games and you'd be surprised that not everyone knows what "CRACKS" is, or where to get them..... Some people simply buy games, install and play and don't have the know how about serials, cracks, etc.
Personally I would not use DRM in my games, however I would use my own encryption and resource system. YES it's pointless to keep telling me about debuggers and how people can rip my content from memory, I know this already, BUT it will deter most people, as not everyone is familiar or has the knowledge to do so.
BUT release a game with the WAV and graphics file in plain view, and it makes it much easier.
That is the point I'm making.
They weren't trying to get back money because the software was free. They were trying to get money back because they were essentially scammed.
You and I both know, but try telling this to a customer who just purchased your game online, only later to find out it was distributed freely because of some GPL license allowed it.... Who do you think the customer will blame...... He/she will blame you and call you the scammer and charge back.
In the case of FlightPro not only were they ripping off people with an inflated price for software that was not their own, but they were selling the entire DVD contents which could be had FREE through download from the authors.... More so the version sold on Clickbank has a wrapper (adware/spyware) - Luckily some people did their researched and started blogging about this and warning people.
Do you want the same happening to your games ?
Those are only children who even make "fake companies" just to have a logo in front of the game.
Sorry but 1) I am not "children" and 2) I have strong principles ! I don't rip software developers, and so I expect mine not to be ripped. You don't have to be a kiddie to want to protect your games, especially games that are 100% original in all aspects. Maybe you can laugh at the "kids" who want to protect their catch the clowns, stick figure games and mario clones, but it is only reasonable for a dev who makes an original game to want to protect themselves.
don't you think ?
AAA games or even Inide devs couldn't give less shits about that. GPL, as far as I know,
How so ? a developer spends years making a game from scratch and they would not care if people were to use their source to make their own shit and sell it ? freely using their content ?
doesn't even require you to provide other resources. So you can provide the code, but all the other resources could be removed from that.
Doesn't ENIGMA save the resources inside the 1 EGM file ? so if I am forced to include the EGM with my game, I am automatically including its resources too.
If I use external resources and only code in EGM, then distribute only the EGM, the person opening the EGM would get errors, BUT they would be able to see the custom decryption code and rip my game to pieces.
If you download any Source engine game, for example, then in the folders there are plain resources for your taking. Same with Unreal, Cryengine and so on.
They already made their money and they get paid big bucks for game companies to license their engine.
Point being if I make a really good game and earning a couple of $ from it, I don't want some wrong doer to be using my shit and making a killing from it. I don't think that is fair. But anyhow, to each their own. Cayman islands here I come !