The biggest argument against gaming here seems to miss the entire point.
ID Software has created the Free Software Gaming Model. Really, it's the
only one I've ever seen be successful (by my standards anyway.)
What most people don't realize is that the art content of the game does not
have to bee Free Software as it is not software. That's a copyright/creative
commons/public domain debate around art that has nothing to do with software.
Doom has been Free Software for more than a decade, but they still own the
copyright to the Imp Graphics.
ID Software realized that people editing WAD files made for more
re-playability in their games. This increased their live spans and thus made
the idea of investing into the games (buying the games) are greater choice
for customers.
ID Software took it another step forward and went all the way when they
decided to release the entire source code for Doom. At first it wasn't Free
Software; it was just out there under some other license.
Later, ID Software re-licensed the engine under the GNU GPL and, thus, it was
Free Software. People went forth and ported it to other operating systems
after this.
This is important to the discussion because from then on ID Software has
always re-licensed their engines for their major games under the GNU GPL
whenever they are old. ID Tech 4, aka Doom 3's engine, was released a couple
months ago.
Here is ID Software's Engine Life Cycle.
1: Create new engine.
2: Release pilot game developed on new engine.
3: Create or commission 3rd party development of either a sequel or an
expansion pack to the pilot game.
4: Optional step of creating second in house game.
5: License engine off to other third party developers for about four to
seven years (however long the engine is still seen in the gaming community as
advanced enough to stay current and thus make money off of.)
6: When the engine is old (and thus no longer a viable property to develop
on for in house or third part games) create a new engine (typically their a
massive re-expansion of the original engine or an major ground up re-build.)
7: Re-license the old engine under the GNU GPL so that the entire gaming and
software community can benefit from investing in the engine (aka buying the
game.) This step is done after the inaugural pilot game is released on the
new engine. (For example, we got ID Tech 4 about two to three month after
Rage was released on ID Tech 5.) This step allows for mods to become stand
alone games. It also might encourage some people to go back and buy the old
games now that they can do so much more with them.
I have not heard of any other video game company fallowing this model. All
the other companies, as far as I know, do steps one through six but never
seven. They keep the old engine's code locked up, even though its outdated
and there is no reason it can not be Free Software.
ID has encouraged other companies to fallow their example; but no one else
seems to have cared to.
Some companies release really old game engines; but they don't fallow a
regular step plan like ID Software does.
The real reason that most of the Free Software games are almost never as
'done' as proprietary games is because a game is more than an engine. Most
Free Software games are games that programmers and developers either do for
fun, and or for resumes. It might help them land a job writing proprietary
code some day if their Free Software game gets good enough and popular
enough.
It's a hobby for them, which is why they almost never have the advertising,
marketing, or art department for their games. Their games almost never have
full stories (no money for writers) as much variety in graphics (no money for
3D Modelers and 2D Artists) sound variety (no money for sound developers)
music variety (no money for composers or performers) much awareness (no money
for advertising.)
Instead, they typically have really great game-play engines with donated
amateur graphics (not in a mean way, it's just true) repetitive sounds
libraries from creative commons (ever get tired of hearing the same 'jump'
sound or 'gun shot' sound in almost every game... this is way) repetitive
music (ditto) and almost no story [the game is usually not long enough in
content or levels to host a story anyway.]
Most of your favorite Free Software games are almost always, when you think
about it, mod projects that started up around engines that grew out of
engines that were donated by ID Software.
Xonotic come from Nexuiz which came from Dark Places, which came from Quake,
which came from ID Software.
Tremulous came from Quake 3 which came from ID Software.
About the only games that are close to maturity I have seen that did not come
either from ID Software or as a MOD of an ID Software game are Secret Maryo
Chronicles and Hedgewars. There are a small number of other candidates, I
would guess, but none that really stand out to me.
What most people don't understand is that the programmer gets payed the same
(more or less) for writing the code from the business (or charity)
commissioning the project regardless as to whether the project will be
licensed as Free Software or not. Most programmers don't own he copyright to
the code, because [like books, music, and movies] these copyrights is ceded
to the publishers.
If you notice, about half of the Free Software programs people actually use
are either donated from businesses as their old stuff, or are funded by mass
charity movements.
If was want Free Software game worth whistling about, we almost have to do
one of two things.
1: Convince more companies to be like ID Software and release their old code
once it's old and not cutting edge anymore.
2: Create a Free Software Gaming charity.
The problem with option two is that, as you pointed out, gaming software
isn't really much of a tool. As such, most people are not interested in
donating to something that is entertainment only and not a practical work.
The difficulty with option one is that gaming companies are usually afraid of
being out-competed by their own past works. Truly Free Software Licenses
allow for commercial product derivatives. Meaning, if someone wanted to use
the source code from ID Tech 4, strip all the Doom 3 content out, and create
their own game content; they could proceed to sell their new game for a
profit.
ID Software doesn't have to worry about that. They are constantly
innovative. ID Tech 5 games should kick the pants off of ID Tech 4 games.
If ID Tech 4 games are beating ID Tech 5 games; then ID Software is loosing
their edge.
But, other companies are not so innovative and their engines or more or less
the same as they have been for five to ten years or so. They mostly add new
light a shadow things, and that's about it. Super Mario Galaxy 2 is about
the same as Super Mario Galaxy 1 which is about the same as Super Mario
Sunshine. That's why Nintendo is likely to feel that it can't release the
engine for Super Mario Sunshine from 2002. Because their new games are
basically just a modifies engine of the same one from a decade ago.
So, getting other companies that are not as innovative as ID Software (most
other video game companies) to re-license their old engine as Free Software
is not going to be easy.
Also, as a third challenge, most games based on the ID Software engines
aren't even complete games. This is, again, because of a lack of funding to
generate new game content. They typically don't have a storyline for single
player and they don't have single player missions about half the time. Think
of Xonotic, it's single player is mostly just regular multi-player set ups
with some goals to achieve. Not at all like Doom 3, where there is an entire
storyline with voice actors and plot points unfolding.
This is why, sadly, I do not see any major movements in Free Software gaming
coming to us in the near future. Even if we did get more engines from more
companies, like we do from ID Software, they are usually just used for hobby
modding and not serious game development. And the independent projects are
typically hobby too, typically never getting 'finished' by proprietary
standard of having a full game.
It seems the real solution for us to independent Free Software games that
were not proprietary games first is to go against the odds and create a Free
Software gaming charity.
Of course, there is nothing with having our best Free Software games having
been proprietary first, many of our Free Software tools were once Proprietary
before being re-licensed.
I just don't see any other way for Free Software gaming to go forward in any
major sense without it being mods of ID Software Engines. Nothing generated
independently has ever come close to being modern. Most Free Software games
look like they're something from the 80s and 90s at best.
