> I am not sure what Morad is trying to accomplish.
Just keeping us on our toes I'd imagine ;)
Tuesday, January 15, 2019 - 11:07
@mold: Thanks! I was actually pulling my hair out on this one because I used one of these leaves for a the Fall AlL-OGA Game Jam winner medal I made and distinctly recall checking out the licensing on everything when doing that, so I was pretty surprised to click the link today and see that 'Pixabay License' stuff.
@morad: Because pistachio obtained the image when it was distributed under the CC0 license, pistachio is bound by that license, and thereby clear to use the work however, including creating and distributing a derivative here on OGA.
Note that if you go to Pixabay /today/ and download the image, you are bound by the Pixabay license and would have to obey it's terms when re-distributing the work. Pixabay cannot change the license agreements they have made in the past (eg. agreeing to distribute the work to pistachio under terms of CC0). However, they can change the terms under which they would like to distribute the works today and in the future. Anyone who obtained the work(s) under a CC0 license is free to re-distribute it as they please, but Pixabay themselves do not have to continue to re-distribute the work as CC0 if they do not want to.
This is true of license generally, although I'll add that proper 'public domain' is something else. Once something is put in the public domain it can't be taken out of the public domain. But CC0 is technically a license agreement, not public domain.
I know what you are saying, but I'm pretty sure this is just a general hazard of the font world.
If you re-assembled the font and tried to SELL it as a FONT, then somepx might do something, and at the very least would be very upset since it's obvious the goal of the license is to keep you from re-selling the font.
Note that all those clauses are tempered by the expression 'by themselves', so I think including snippets of the font as part of a larger package (like you are wont to do with a game) is unlikely to be a problem.
Also note that US Copyright Law provides 0 protection for Bitmap fonts, and protects only source files (true type, freetype, etc) for vectorized fonts. Rasterized renderings of a font saved as jpg, png are not protected. That's US law, other countries are different, see here for a nice summary:
Interesting that somepx deleted your question, did you ask about this submission specifically or just generally about cutting up the font and then re-assembling it?
Tuesday, January 15, 2019 - 07:13
Good point, I hadn't thought to look in the Demo files which are indeed included with the submission.
The demo files do indeed contain characters from the fonts, but not the actual complete font set itself. Just some pre-rendered text snippets like 'Press Enter' and 'thanks for playing'
Pretty sure that all falls safely under:
' "You CAN use these assets in your own free or paid projects. You CAN modify these assets for use in your own projects."
However, I suppose you could debate whether that language allows you to release your modifications under a different license (such as CC-BY 4.0 here) but I'd think that's gotta be implied especially if the license allows paid projects which are almost certain to come under a different license.
I guess you could call this 'fair use parody'. I personally would be anxious about using it in a project, but it does seem like I have mispoken, there's a shot it could qualify as CC0. :)
Tuesday, January 15, 2019 - 06:48
@morad: I only see that line in the demo. There are no fonts in the actual submission files, so I think it's clear.
Tuesday, January 15, 2019 - 06:46
I hate to be a stickler, but open clip art or no, there is no shot that Alien poster is CC0.
Monday, December 31, 2018 - 06:06
nota buena: responding to a bunch of comments from different people here, I haven't attributed them all, hope that's ok.
The idea of sorting the front page stuff by category is great.
Only quibble, what's the difference between 'community favorites' and 'featured art'? I'd suggest we only need one.
The current page does have a 'recent work by your friends' which would be nice to keep.
I don't know if the left/right arrows are strictly necessary. I don't mind the current system where you see what you see on the front page and click on the list headers to see more.
Still, I like it a lot. My favorite of the proposals so far. I think you could take this design, add the community side bars back in, restore the current top menu bar under the title, and you would have a really great refresh that brings a new look and idea to the website without completely upending it. And I say that knowing full well that I was the one advocating for radical redesigns just a few posts ago...
> I doubt that submitting art on OGA is a live-or-die proposition for anyone who comes here, but I would prefer to see it not change so much that people are bewildered until they adjust just in time to wreck it again with OGA v4.
I agree with this 110%. The current submit process works just fine, please don't upend it for the sake of change or addressing some minor quibbles. I'm sure we could all come up with a dozen or so things the current process doesn't do right, but it is a single page process, located a single click off the main page. Please do not add so much as one more click to that process!
> There's no good fix for creators who submit art in such a way that it doesn't format well.
Agree with this.
> Custom thumbnails and a fixed size (or a size recommendation)
Just giving a size and/or aspect recommendation for the preview images would be address 90% of the issue. What you are seeing in the data now is just the predictable result of going years and years with no guidance on the size/shape/number of preview images. That said, the current 'anything is accepted' policy works very well as it allows artists to handle all kinds of corner cases, like submitting a large work with many different environments, etc. So let's just keep that but toss up a suggesting for the size/aspect and a note that the first image given is what will appear on the preview thumbnails for a submission.
so...
> Should I auto zoom in on images that have bad proportions,
Just scale them to whatever the thumbnail size is. It's simpler, works 90% of the time and you'll save yourself the headache of trying to AI up the perfect zoom algorithm. One note though, if possible, use an unfiltered when upscaling 2D art.
> re: social vs. submit vs. browse
OGA has been around for something like 7-8 years now. Great high-quality submissions are still flowing in daily, the community while not huge is strong,varied (programmers, artists, etc) and engaged, and have heard few complaints about the site's browse-ability. So I think you could say the current layout strikes a very good balance. Maybe it's not perfect but there's 7-8 years of real world example to show that it works pretty darned well.
Deviant Art and Furfinity both lean almost 100% towards 'browse', which I can tell you is 100% the wrong direction for OGA. I don't need research for that one, just simple math: no community = no patreon support = no website
(speaking of which, where did the patreon link on the front page disappear to?)
Even samuncle's layout, while visually appealing, leans too far towards browse and submit. Well, I mean it cuts out community entirely so by default it strikes the wrong balance.
> but I think currently samuncle's layout looks very generic, almost like one of those domain squatting pages :p
I see where you are coming from with this. I would definitely put the OGA logo and Sara back in there.
> @withthelove If the front end of the layout works, keep it. That was my rationale and I don't see how it contradicts our goals. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if it's clean and stable under the hood which we're doing anyway you can mess around with the shiny stuff more later.
I think the point MedicineStorm was making is that the new under the hood tech won't work with the existing display/layout tech, so a re-write is required even if the goal is maintaining the exact same layout.
That said, I'll admit that I probably came on too strong about making big changes. My thinking was, the current layout works so don't break it unless you've got something special up your sleeve. In hindsight though, the fact that the current layout has worked so well for so many for so long augurs for hanging onto as much of it as possible. So at this point, I'm willing to entertain pretty much anything from a slight tweak to a wholesale revamp.
> Any ideas on how to bring back the community stuff?
Just bring it all back. Bring it back exactly as it is now, a big busy sidebar that's not perfect but has done the job for years. You can twiddle it from there. But yeah, a ticker or a menu drop down are not going to be a fair substitute.
Finally, I want to apologize if I came off as a bit curmudgeonly earlier. All I can say is the idea of changing OGA really struck a chord with me. I've actually done a lot of thinking about why, and I guess it just comes down to I really love this place and so I'm naturally anxious about any changes to it. That said, now that I've had time to absorb the idea, I'm very excited about the re-design and certainly grateful to MedicineStorm and Botanic and any others that are working hard to make it happen.
Friday, December 21, 2018 - 13:56
For whomever might be interested, I've put out a special post-jam update for Roman Rescue Run Pompeii! Tweaks the controls, adds a few levels and exposes the level editor for all to enjoy.
Thanks again for all the kind words about the game!
> I am not sure what Morad is trying to accomplish.
Just keeping us on our toes I'd imagine ;)
@mold: Thanks! I was actually pulling my hair out on this one because I used one of these leaves for a the Fall AlL-OGA Game Jam winner medal I made and distinctly recall checking out the licensing on everything when doing that, so I was pretty surprised to click the link today and see that 'Pixabay License' stuff.
@morad: Because pistachio obtained the image when it was distributed under the CC0 license, pistachio is bound by that license, and thereby clear to use the work however, including creating and distributing a derivative here on OGA.
Note that if you go to Pixabay /today/ and download the image, you are bound by the Pixabay license and would have to obey it's terms when re-distributing the work. Pixabay cannot change the license agreements they have made in the past (eg. agreeing to distribute the work to pistachio under terms of CC0). However, they can change the terms under which they would like to distribute the works today and in the future. Anyone who obtained the work(s) under a CC0 license is free to re-distribute it as they please, but Pixabay themselves do not have to continue to re-distribute the work as CC0 if they do not want to.
This is true of license generally, although I'll add that proper 'public domain' is something else. Once something is put in the public domain it can't be taken out of the public domain. But CC0 is technically a license agreement, not public domain.
@MedicineStorm:
Just application of the typeface. Like I said, snippets like 'Press Enter' but not the actual complete, assembled font.
I know what you are saying, but I'm pretty sure this is just a general hazard of the font world.
If you re-assembled the font and tried to SELL it as a FONT, then somepx might do something, and at the very least would be very upset since it's obvious the goal of the license is to keep you from re-selling the font.
Note that all those clauses are tempered by the expression 'by themselves', so I think including snippets of the font as part of a larger package (like you are wont to do with a game) is unlikely to be a problem.
Also note that US Copyright Law provides 0 protection for Bitmap fonts, and protects only source files (true type, freetype, etc) for vectorized fonts. Rasterized renderings of a font saved as jpg, png are not protected. That's US law, other countries are different, see here for a nice summary:
https://www.crowdspring.com/blog/font-law-licensing/
Interesting that somepx deleted your question, did you ask about this submission specifically or just generally about cutting up the font and then re-assembling it?
Good point, I hadn't thought to look in the Demo files which are indeed included with the submission.
The demo files do indeed contain characters from the fonts, but not the actual complete font set itself. Just some pre-rendered text snippets like 'Press Enter' and 'thanks for playing'
Pretty sure that all falls safely under:
' "You CAN use these assets in your own free or paid projects.
You CAN modify these assets for use in your own projects."
However, I suppose you could debate whether that language allows you to release your modifications under a different license (such as CC-BY 4.0 here) but I'd think that's gotta be implied especially if the license allows paid projects which are almost certain to come under a different license.
Dug up the souce image:
https://openclipart.org/detail/280776/alien-parody-movie-poster
I guess you could call this 'fair use parody'. I personally would be anxious about using it in a project, but it does seem like I have mispoken, there's a shot it could qualify as CC0. :)
@morad: I only see that line in the demo. There are no fonts in the actual submission files, so I think it's clear.
I hate to be a stickler, but open clip art or no, there is no shot that Alien poster is CC0.
nota buena: responding to a bunch of comments from different people here, I haven't attributed them all, hope that's ok.
> https://chasersgaming.wixsite.com/mysite
I actually like this one quite a bit.
The idea of sorting the front page stuff by category is great.
Only quibble, what's the difference between 'community favorites' and 'featured art'? I'd suggest we only need one.
The current page does have a 'recent work by your friends' which would be nice to keep.
I don't know if the left/right arrows are strictly necessary. I don't mind the current system where you see what you see on the front page and click on the list headers to see more.
Still, I like it a lot. My favorite of the proposals so far. I think you could take this design, add the community side bars back in, restore the current top menu bar under the title, and you would have a really great refresh that brings a new look and idea to the website without completely upending it. And I say that knowing full well that I was the one advocating for radical redesigns just a few posts ago...
> I doubt that submitting art on OGA is a live-or-die proposition for anyone who comes here, but I would prefer to see it not change so much that people are bewildered until they adjust just in time to wreck it again with OGA v4.
I agree with this 110%. The current submit process works just fine, please don't upend it for the sake of change or addressing some minor quibbles. I'm sure we could all come up with a dozen or so things the current process doesn't do right, but it is a single page process, located a single click off the main page. Please do not add so much as one more click to that process!
> There's no good fix for creators who submit art in such a way that it doesn't format well.
Agree with this.
> Custom thumbnails and a fixed size (or a size recommendation)
Just giving a size and/or aspect recommendation for the preview images would be address 90% of the issue. What you are seeing in the data now is just the predictable result of going years and years with no guidance on the size/shape/number of preview images. That said, the current 'anything is accepted' policy works very well as it allows artists to handle all kinds of corner cases, like submitting a large work with many different environments, etc. So let's just keep that but toss up a suggesting for the size/aspect and a note that the first image given is what will appear on the preview thumbnails for a submission.
so...
> Should I auto zoom in on images that have bad proportions,
Just scale them to whatever the thumbnail size is. It's simpler, works 90% of the time and you'll save yourself the headache of trying to AI up the perfect zoom algorithm. One note though, if possible, use an unfiltered when upscaling 2D art.
> re: social vs. submit vs. browse
OGA has been around for something like 7-8 years now. Great high-quality submissions are still flowing in daily, the community while not huge is strong,varied (programmers, artists, etc) and engaged, and have heard few complaints about the site's browse-ability. So I think you could say the current layout strikes a very good balance. Maybe it's not perfect but there's 7-8 years of real world example to show that it works pretty darned well.
Deviant Art and Furfinity both lean almost 100% towards 'browse', which I can tell you is 100% the wrong direction for OGA. I don't need research for that one, just simple math: no community = no patreon support = no website
(speaking of which, where did the patreon link on the front page disappear to?)
Even samuncle's layout, while visually appealing, leans too far towards browse and submit. Well, I mean it cuts out community entirely so by default it strikes the wrong balance.
> but I think currently samuncle's layout looks very generic, almost like one of those domain squatting pages :p
I see where you are coming from with this. I would definitely put the OGA logo and Sara back in there.
> @withthelove If the front end of the layout works, keep it. That was my rationale and I don't see how it contradicts our goals. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if it's clean and stable under the hood which we're doing anyway you can mess around with the shiny stuff more later.
I think the point MedicineStorm was making is that the new under the hood tech won't work with the existing display/layout tech, so a re-write is required even if the goal is maintaining the exact same layout.
That said, I'll admit that I probably came on too strong about making big changes. My thinking was, the current layout works so don't break it unless you've got something special up your sleeve. In hindsight though, the fact that the current layout has worked so well for so many for so long augurs for hanging onto as much of it as possible. So at this point, I'm willing to entertain pretty much anything from a slight tweak to a wholesale revamp.
> Any ideas on how to bring back the community stuff?
Just bring it all back. Bring it back exactly as it is now, a big busy sidebar that's not perfect but has done the job for years. You can twiddle it from there. But yeah, a ticker or a menu drop down are not going to be a fair substitute.
Finally, I want to apologize if I came off as a bit curmudgeonly earlier. All I can say is the idea of changing OGA really struck a chord with me. I've actually done a lot of thinking about why, and I guess it just comes down to I really love this place and so I'm naturally anxious about any changes to it. That said, now that I've had time to absorb the idea, I'm very excited about the re-design and certainly grateful to MedicineStorm and Botanic and any others that are working hard to make it happen.
For whomever might be interested, I've put out a special post-jam update for Roman Rescue Run Pompeii! Tweaks the controls, adds a few levels and exposes the level editor for all to enjoy.
Thanks again for all the kind words about the game!
Pages