At 15:11 2-6-00 +0200, you wrote:
>so: exactly how many ppl here are still seriously about making a
>scrolling-rpg engine like stated a few weeks ago?
I am interested in working on the toolkit (editors and other tools) and on
the design.
I want to make a toolkit on PC, preferably in Java.
>selling copies.. well.. do you want to get rich of selling msx-games?
>suppose you get 20$ clean in your hands for each game.. x 20 games is
>400$.. divided by about 4 persons is 100$, for 8 months work :) Even in an
>economicaly broken country like the Chech-republic average ppl get 350$
>per month. So: just make the game, make it PD, put it on some site and
>make sure ppl can run it in some emu. who care$ about selling is at the
>wrong platform :)
I agree.
In addition, when there are a lot of people involved, it would be hard to
split the money fairly (not everyone puts in the same amount of time). And
distributing over the net is so much simpler than selling disks.
>PA3: A nice initiative, but I miss the scrolling :) (no offence P ! :)
>We'll see what happens with this engine.
Too bad it won't be released. :(
>If we get tired of RPG's after a while.. what about an aleste-engine, or a
>platform-game engine like Usas... also nice games!
Parts of the project could be re-used. Especially the editor parts. The
engine would need some significant revision, because the requirements are
different for each. Platform games need fluent animations and more complex
movement routines, shoot-em-ups need fast collision detection.
>The point is: keep this conversation a bit more creative and forget about
>all irrelevant discussions..
I'm sure the engine won't use the cassette port... ;)
Anyway, we need some agreement on the copyright/license status of the
design, code etc. I think anyone who contributes should keep the copyrights
to whatever he submitted. But there must be certainty that something that
was brought into the project will not be pulled out later, since by then
other people's work will depend on it. Also, if someone no longer maintains
his part of the project, someone else should be able to take over,
continuing where his predecessor left off instead of starting all over again.
I propose to use an existing license (GPL, BSD, Mozilla etc), I don't know
the exact details of each of them but one is bound to fit our desires. If
that is not the case, we could create a new license for the project.
I also think that there should be as much of the project as possible
visible publicly on the net. It doesn't matter if for example source code
is not nicely commented or contains bugs, as long as the description states
accurately that those flaws are present. It's better to publish a quick
hack and be honest about it, than to publish code and not giving any
indication about its quality, or not publishing at all.
I've been reading about open source projects a lot lately, and the best
strategy seems to be to release something early. It doesn't have to be even
nearly finished, just as long as it shows the potential of the project and
also proves that the people already involved can actually create something.
If that succeeds, new participants are more likely to join the project and
speed up the developing process.
Bye,
Maarten
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and put "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the quotes) in
the body (not the subject) of the message.
Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More information on MSX can be found in the following places:
The MSX faq: http://www.faq.msxnet.org/
The MSX newsgroup: comp.sys.msx
The MSX IRC channel: #MSX on Undernet
****
