What kind of cockamamie word is opensourceddo? No, just no.
What kind of cockamamie word is opensourceddo? No, just no.
This doesn't even mention the fact the WotC would likely pull the licensing from Turbin if they made this Open Source. The licensing agreement is the only thing allowing Turbin to use the IP that belongs to WotC, and even the Open Gamming License would not allow it.
An interesting thing I’ve noticed about the open source kids is
that all they ever do with their “superior” OS is fiddle with it.
This is like the guys that spend all their time working on a car
that only runs one day out of the month.
You are correct. With the legal rift between Atari and Turbine, the last thing Turbine would do is give Atari any excuse to take away the license. WotC doesn't license directly with Turbine. Unless things have changed recently, WotC does all their video game licensing through Atari.
Coldflame | Toord and many horrible experiments.
True Join Date: Circa mid 2007. Still a noob. My simple forum rules: http://pastebin.com/ftE2V1GG
I'm not suggesting they throw away everything they own. They still own the rights to the game. They still have the final say in what is included or not included. The only difference is that they players can help develop it. They can submit patches and bug-fixes and develop the game for other operating systems. They can still suggest new features (like they've been doing) and they can still tell Turbine when they come across a bug (like they've been doing), however, Turbine won't be the only one having to work on this. Turbine can still develop the core code while allowing the players to design new adventures, classes, gear, PVP systems, etc. In the end, it's less work for them and a better game for the players. Moreover, I already explained how they could continue to profit if they did this -- if $5 a month is too low for them to profit then they could easily increase it to $10 a month and still keep it affordable for the players. Moreover, they would also have access to a free development force, which they could motivate even more by offering discounted rates or a free 3-6 months or so to players who submit accepted code.
With all due respect, Kriss, I'll shut up when I see an official Turbine rep tell me no.
You only need 1 to ruin it for everyone else.
Tell me again where in any point is this good for Turbine?
We don't need Private Servers of DDO... It can also ruin the game's image because game experience in Private Servers is usually tainted and a person can base their opinion on the game from playing on a Private Server while it's a completely different experience on the Official (legal) server.
/notsigned
Sorry. I would love to develop stuff for DDO, as I, myself, am a game dev. But not like this, Turbine is a company and they need to make money. And I hope they do, because I would hate to have DDO close down because of lack of revenue.
A much better suggestion that's been put up is allow players to create and submit content... It's been well formulated and is somewhere around, lazy to find a link right now...
And it gives the not so altruistic people out there every bit of information they would need to create, Bots, Trainers, Hacks, Exploits, etc... and release it upon the world. This would KILL the game. Just look at Open Battlenet (mentioned above) it would turn DDO into that.
Fisrt, talented "hackers" would be able to hide backdoors and worms and such into the code they submitted. If Turbin missed just ONE of thes hidden items then the hacker could have unlimited access to the game servers, which you do realize that includes the account servers, you know the ones that hold everyons credit card data. Look at the Offer Wall feiasco from last year and multiply the ramifications by at least 100.
Secondly, even without inserting malicious code into the game itself, the Hackers would now have access to the communication protocalls and be able to hijack them, piggyback onto them, packet sniffing, enabling them to get peoples login information. There is way too much that would be open and could be made virtually undetectable to Turbin.
Finally, you say "so what if another company produces a clone". You may not think it is a big deal, but I will guarentee that Turbin thinks it is a huge deal, so does WB and their stockholders. Like it or not as a proprietory system they will stay alive, what you suggest would kill the game.
No, not everyone that gets the source will use iy maliciously, but it only takes one to kill the dream.
I think the wall was a better idea that this. And we all remember what a disaster that was.
/not signed
Again, you must not have have never heard the computer age adage "none of us is as stupid as all of us." A user/player-driven game would be a terrible, terrible idea (at least for the multiplayer games, single-player games it's a whole different animal). You need to prioritize, estimate, cost vs. benefit, etc. things that are not possible to do effectively on a multi-player-driven development.
As for what happens when another studio comes about and opens up shop to compete with them? They can't. Turbine has contractual stipulations to have MMO-exclusivity for which they pay a lot of money.
Coldflame | Toord and many horrible experiments.
True Join Date: Circa mid 2007. Still a noob. My simple forum rules: http://pastebin.com/ftE2V1GG
Its a nice wish. But Turbine didn't invest so much capital, raise funds, accept buyouts in order to fund the development of DDO to just give it away.
Furthermore, projects that go from Closed-to-Open source reveal a lot of dirty laundry in the codebase and commit logs.
The threat of competition from other teams of developers who can do a far better job is too real. Don't like Turbine's direction? Hear comes Real DDO! Back to true-to-rules gameplay. AC works again! No blanket immunities, etc.
The closest thing I can think of that Turbine might extend is a build-your-own Adventure Pack (think like a mobile phone app). You design your own areas and quests, loot, XP, favor. It gets approved and sold, you get a revenue share of sales.
Last edited by EyeRekon; 03-03-2011 at 03:51 PM.