this is a great feature, I just spent quite a bit of time assembling credits for the game I am working on, will definitely try this feature for the next one as it could save a lot of searching.
since you have a game on greenlight, one more follow-up question, does going on greenlight restrict you from distributing the game through any other channels/services?
> My game gets a few thousand views/votes per day.
that's pretty impressive! I was thinking anything past 2 digits would be huge for my game.
I think the legally hairy part is authorizing distrubtion in DRM from contigent upon non-DRM being available. Especially when you consider the party doing the DRM-form distributing will most likely not be the same as the party handling the DRM-free distribution.
GPL handles this by distinguishing between compiled executables/libraries and source code. With software, source code is what you really care about being free, so distribution of compiled binaries is pretty much unrestricted so long as the corresponding source is freely available.
Perhaps, a similar distinction is needed for game assets, unfortunately, there isn't a convient analog to the source/binary distinction. I guess you could think of it as bundled vs. unbundled. I think this is why Bart was warning the OGA-BY is a simple change, but the 'dual distribution' solution would take alot more work to put together.
I think you are looking at the preview image. If you click the link to download the file ' forest_tileset-32x32.png' you will get the tree tileset without any candy or fog.
As for the gnome, if I had to guess he probably comes from another set on this site, try searching for gnome.
Let me ask a follow up, has anyone on OGA submitted something to Steam Greenlight?
Any luck getting a game actually into the Steam store? Any thoughts on the process, pro or con?
Working on a cross-platform title and wondering what the best avenue for releasing the PC version is. Main conern would be reacing the widest possible audience.
I don't think the OGA site should have a preferred license. It's up to the individual creator to decide how they want to share their work with the rest of us.
> Fonts are vectors; the ability to change the color and freely resize them is built into them and completely misses the point of what I was trying to say.
Speak for yourself, I only use bitmap fonts over here, guess I'm still just an Amiga game maker at heart after all these years! ;)
that's good to know about fonts, I actually almost cited changing color on a font as a simple change that it'd be hard to make a game w/o. I would say in the spirit of share-alike, if you did a really cool color job on a font, it'd be nice to share it back, but good to know it's not mandatory to clutter up the site with alot of basic color shifts.
Just my two cents, I would prefer a new license (OGA-BY) to just a check box for waiving DRM clause. Just seems cleaner, I'd feel better knowing I was using an asset that was explicitly licensed to allow DRM, rather than licensed in a way that prohibts DRM but author waives that portion of the license agreement. It's just nicer to point to a single license agreement, rather than license agreement plus rider. Especially if the point of the rider is to negate things in the license agreement.
I do see the point that calling the OGA-BY may make it seem like that's the preferred license for this site, but that's also a lot in how you present it, eg. if it's the first license listed, then yeah it will look like that's the one you are 'supposed' to use, if it's the last one listed, not as much. I think the important thing is to present things in a way that gets the author thinking about what license is right for the work they're posting.
Tuesday, March 25, 2014 - 09:25
May I have an exemption from the anti-drm clause of CC-BY 3.0 for these fonts? Would like to use geebeeyay 8x8 and 8x16 in a game I am working on but would like to distribute the game on platforms that require DRM.
this is a great feature, I just spent quite a bit of time assembling credits for the game I am working on, will definitely try this feature for the next one as it could save a lot of searching.
thanks for the infos!
since you have a game on greenlight, one more follow-up question, does going on greenlight restrict you from distributing the game through any other channels/services?
> My game gets a few thousand views/votes per day.
that's pretty impressive! I was thinking anything past 2 digits would be huge for my game.
I think the legally hairy part is authorizing distrubtion in DRM from contigent upon non-DRM being available. Especially when you consider the party doing the DRM-form distributing will most likely not be the same as the party handling the DRM-free distribution.
GPL handles this by distinguishing between compiled executables/libraries and source code. With software, source code is what you really care about being free, so distribution of compiled binaries is pretty much unrestricted so long as the corresponding source is freely available.
Perhaps, a similar distinction is needed for game assets, unfortunately, there isn't a convient analog to the source/binary distinction. I guess you could think of it as bundled vs. unbundled. I think this is why Bart was warning the OGA-BY is a simple change, but the 'dual distribution' solution would take alot more work to put together.
@kgsb
I think you are looking at the preview image. If you click the link to download the file ' forest_tileset-32x32.png' you will get the tree tileset without any candy or fog.
As for the gnome, if I had to guess he probably comes from another set on this site, try searching for gnome.
Let me ask a follow up, has anyone on OGA submitted something to Steam Greenlight?
Any luck getting a game actually into the Steam store? Any thoughts on the process, pro or con?
Working on a cross-platform title and wondering what the best avenue for releasing the PC version is. Main conern would be reacing the widest possible audience.
@adrix89
I don't think the OGA site should have a preferred license. It's up to the individual creator to decide how they want to share their work with the rest of us.
> Fonts are vectors; the ability to change the color and freely resize them is built into them and completely misses the point of what I was trying to say.
Speak for yourself, I only use bitmap fonts over here, guess I'm still just an Amiga game maker at heart after all these years! ;)
that's good to know about fonts, I actually almost cited changing color on a font as a simple change that it'd be hard to make a game w/o. I would say in the spirit of share-alike, if you did a really cool color job on a font, it'd be nice to share it back, but good to know it's not mandatory to clutter up the site with alot of basic color shifts.
Just my two cents, I would prefer a new license (OGA-BY) to just a check box for waiving DRM clause. Just seems cleaner, I'd feel better knowing I was using an asset that was explicitly licensed to allow DRM, rather than licensed in a way that prohibts DRM but author waives that portion of the license agreement. It's just nicer to point to a single license agreement, rather than license agreement plus rider. Especially if the point of the rider is to negate things in the license agreement.
I do see the point that calling the OGA-BY may make it seem like that's the preferred license for this site, but that's also a lot in how you present it, eg. if it's the first license listed, then yeah it will look like that's the one you are 'supposed' to use, if it's the last one listed, not as much. I think the important thing is to present things in a way that gets the author thinking about what license is right for the work they're posting.
May I have an exemption from the anti-drm clause of CC-BY 3.0 for these fonts? Would like to use geebeeyay 8x8 and 8x16 in a game I am working on but would like to distribute the game on platforms that require DRM.
Pages