@Ataos No, it only applies to the asset. If you modify it, you need to release the modified copy as GPL 3.0. If you use it as it is you need to state its license with a link back to the asset. If you embed it deep in to your source code (so it becomes part of the source code), then I guess you would need to release your code under GPL.
I feel like this still has a licensing issue. If I understood correctly, the submitter said he would remove the warrior image of unknown origin. But nothing happened.
brain ahouga
test
Edit: I guess forum filter is more lax
Keep it in its own file. I don't know what happens if you merge it into an image-atlas or a map.
Even GNU thinks GPL is not a good choice for media assets.
Fortunately, for this submission you can use the less confusing CC-BY-SA license.
Pretty good. Pixatool also looks pretty nice. (Also, TIL, pixelization is a filter and pixelation is an artifact)
@Ataos No, it only applies to the asset. If you modify it, you need to release the modified copy as GPL 3.0. If you use it as it is you need to state its license with a link back to the asset. If you embed it deep in to your source code (so it becomes part of the source code), then I guess you would need to release your code under GPL.
Where did you get the icons? Are they for preview purposes only?
I feel like this still has a licensing issue. If I understood correctly, the submitter said he would remove the warrior image of unknown origin. But nothing happened.
No, I thought they might fit the monochrome style.
might be relevant (from game-icons.net thus CC-BY http://game-icons.net/about.html#):
is what he tried to say, I guess.
I opened the blend file and rotated the model 45 degrees
Pages