OPP2017 - Cave and mine cart
This set contains the cave tiles from the Open Pixel Project. Free high quality pixel art tiles, 32x32.
Platformer tiles for rocks, crystals, slopes, mushrooms, a mine cart track, various objects and more. Over 400 tiles in total
All tiles match in style with the other OPP assets, and use strictly the DB32 palette.
These tiles are free to use, modify, sell, for any purpose, they are in the public domain!
Over 35 artists have been collaborating on the OPP. To download ALL our tiles and sprites at once, the most updated versions, go to our website openpixelproject.com
Also, we're looking for more contributors and organizers, if you're willing to help out, come say hello at our forums or chat!
If you use these tiles, please drop a note too, we always love to hear from developers. You can even make requests on our website or forums, we might be able to help you :)
opp3_cave_tiles.zip 194.8 Kb [1741 download(s)]
Comments
your project is cool, but why all the license's? its very confusing, is it public domain? or is some of it reserved, or what ever, i think a lot of developers get unsure about licenses and there use, and this can be a put off, be a shame for this to not get used if the license are a cause of concern for developers. :)
Sorry, I've added all the licenses to try and avoid confusion!
Everyting is in the public domain, which it says in the description and also in the attached files. This means that you're also free to relicense it, if you happen to be searching for something cc-by you can still find our set this way.
If they're truly Public Domain (CCO), it means you're not asking for credit. The other licenses say you ARE asking for credit...I think that's the confusion.
Your website implies they are CCO - which means anybody can use them for any purpose with or without credit.
Yeah, i see that you have written in the description that they are public domain, and that your site says the same which is great! I also understand your reasons for including all the license's now, but by doing so it makes it sound 'condradictive', and confusing.
Maybe it needs clarifying about those licenses on the left of the work for users, that it 'Can be' used under any of those licenses, instead of 'This is' the license. for me and others i think it says 'This is' the license.
maybe admin can comment on it.
It is a great work, look forward to seeing more. :)
There's nothing wrong with having all the licenses selected. The attribution instructions are not in conflict since they are optional.
That being said, it is probably a good idea to just list CC0 since a lot of people have a hard time understanding that multiple licenses means you can choose the one you want instead of having to obey all of them simultaneously. OP's decision. :)
Great stuff, by the way!
I would be interested in listing just CC0 if the OGA search function was changed, so that when one searches for e.g. CC-BY, it would automatically also include CC0 results. Which isn't the case right now.
An excellent argument for the inclusion of all licenses.
I didn't realise listing all license's means you can use any of them. Good to know. :)
This is exactly what I was looking for. Nice!