design versus coding

[Velociryx]

tniem: An excellent point! Actually, the chief advantage in going open source will be in terms of marketing and awareness. Open source allows us to become the darlings of both SourceForge and Slashdot....LOTS of eyeballs on both of those places. That, combined with our presence on 'poly *should* see us getting the game in front of a whooooole lotta people!

As we have discovered, since our project is above and beyond the scope of many/most of our peer projects on sourceforge, there's really not been any interesting code we've been able to use, to my knowledge, however, if we were to, then yes....we'd have to remove those pieces and come up with our own solutions to whatever problems those code segments were solving for us.

-=Vel=-

[TCO]

Do you have any analysis to show that your hypothesis is correct. (Being the darling of Sourceforge will sell the game?)

[Velociryx]

Don't have any hard numbers behind that, no....however, my thinking is that the more people who know about the game increases the overall awareness, and almost has to increase the chances that some will buy when we get to that point.

Right now though, my main goal is to get as many people as possible *aware* of what we're doing.

-=Vel=-

[TCO]

Just make a good game. Than advertising is easy. if it stinks...no amount of advertising will help it.

[tniem]

Originally posted by GP
Just make a good game. Than advertising is easy. if it stinks...no amount of advertising will help it.

Ah but what Vel is also attempting to do is but it in front enough people that if the team cannot figure something out either coding or grahapically then they will have a base to call on others to help out.

I just was wondering about that part of the game design but I guess if your not really planning on using any code than I guess you will be ok.

[moomin]

There are open-source licences that aren't viral. But as far as I know, most OS game engines go GPL, which is.

[TCO]

Originally posted by tniem

Ah but what Vel is also attempting to do is but it in front enough people that if the team cannot figure something out either coding or grahapically then they will have a base to call on others to help out.

I just was wondering about that part of the game design but I guess if your not really planning on using any code than I guess you will be ok.

Earlier in the thread, they said that there initial hope was to get technical help but since the game will be quite advanced, that is unlikely to be a significant issue. At this point, general marketing goodwill is the rationale for the "drop your skirt" policy.

[moomin]

I think you're somewhat underplaying the very real possibility to get some substancial help with their own code base.

[TCO]

Read their own earlier posts on that issue.

[TCO]

...Actually, the chief advantage in going open source will be in terms of marketing and awareness. Open source allows us to become the darlings of both SourceForge and Slashdot....LOTS of eyeballs on both of those places. That, combined with our presence on 'poly *should* see us getting the game in front of a whooooole lotta people!

As we have discovered, since our project is above and beyond the scope of many/most of our peer projects on sourceforge, there's really not been any interesting code we've been able to use...

[moomin]

Oh, I don't expect them to get any major code done for free, as it were. I'd be astonished beyond belief if they didn't get mucho help squishing bugs, though.

[alva]

You 'd be surprised how many company's started off as
idealistic adventures to change the world and make it a better place

Then somewhere on the line...............

[ravagon]

Originally posted by alva848
You 'd be surprised how many company's started off as
idealistic adventures to change the world and make it a better place

Then somewhere on the line...............

Very true - but then those are the ones you tend to hear about.
In this case I would tend to borrow that old axiom - If you look hard enough you will find something - whether its there or not.

If people start divvying up the profits before such, in fact, exist, poking holes in contractual clauses and looking for loopholes they bring about an atmosphere that makes it much more likely to fail.
This being an entirely voluntary process, taking place in the participants spare time, and with what resources they can scrape together, is pretty much dependent on the very lack of such a mindset.

Should those involved find out the hard way that notions of "fair", "equitable" and "ownership" just don't work out - then well and good - they can take it as a life lesson, at relatively low cost, and move on.

If OTOH things do work out as they're planning, they'll be so much the better off for relying on each other and in a position to build on what they've created.

That came out much more hand-wavy than I'd intended but I'm sure you get the idea...

[TCO]

GGS is dead

Maybe you all should check out their site. Learn something from it? Pick up some volunteers? Interestingly enough they mentioned all the other happening civ projects but not Candy.

[FrustratedPoet]

GGS?