I''m confident everyone here knows about open source software. How does it relate to games, you might say? From an individual project perspective, not so much - if your gameplay and content is open sourced, then you have nothing to sell. But for the development of an engine, tools, IDE, etc., OSS works great and has been used in other tech fields as an R+D lab: make the base code open-source, hire people to develop for it, which will then be widely used and tested etc. due to its freeness, and then make money off of the code by adding your company''s product onto it. However, I don''t see game developers following this model. Why is this? I would think that the company that tries it would gain a lot by having an "instant community" that would encourage a strong mod scene.

I''m not an expert, but maybe thigs are this way because commercial games are final products intended primarily with the only objective of making money. Maybe is the syndrom of the cocacola''s formula. dunno

I also agree. Commercial game publishers are interested in nothing besides the bottom line. The way they see it most likely is: "Why would anybody pay $50 for this game when they can download it for free?". So its not a good selling point. Even look at the posts in the help wanted forum. 99% of the people posting help aren''t programming games to learn or to have fun. They''re doing it for money: "You will be paid off royalties after we all become millionaires from our new game."

Game companies still value their intellectual property. The game engine code, the media, etc. all have huge value and companies, understandably, don't want to give up those revenue streams.

ID licenses its engines for $250,000 and up. How are you going to convince them that its better to level the playing field so that all other games made have the same tech and at the same time cut off their revenue streams? Its not going to happen any time soon.

There are open source game engines, physics libraries etc. that any developer and use if they chose. I believe the reason why the tools aren't use by big companies is because of one maturity and support.

There are a lot open source 3d engines out there, but I don't know of any that close to what you would get from licensing the Q3 engine. If a company wanted to use one those engines, they would have to expend considerable resources to 'bring it up to snuff' with what's expected in the market place.

Companies want support from technology they use. If they run into a problem with converting something in the Q3 engine, they have someone they can call or fly in to fix the problem. There is no one to call if you use an open source product. You are dependent on the community which may or may not have a specific answer to your problem. If you recall, it wasn't until Red Hat, IBM, and others starting providing support for Linux that it starting gaining steam in the enterprise.

One final reason I believe that game companies won't jump on the open source wagon is that they sell software. I mean if you look at the companies that are pushing Linux, they are hardware companies. They support Linux because it lower their costs because they no longer have to license or solely develop software to go with their hardware. Game companies would have a hard time making any money if they couldn't sell software.

Now, I believe that open source tools can be a boon for indie developers. These tools have the power to enable the creation of unique game ideas that would never get funded from a publisher.

BTW, ID has release the source code to both Quake and Quake2.

[edited by - yspotua on July 14, 2003 12:41:27 AM]