Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Quasar

Doom Classic v2.0 source release watch (now released)

Recommended Posts

Expanding the IPA file it looks like they're at least loading resources in a different manner, as the interface images are included in the root folder as png.

Regardless, they're making profit off GPL'd source code, the least they could do is honour the license properly.

Share this post


Link to post
natt said:

The license requires it. There is no need for further justification.


Yep, I heard about it. LOL :) But do any of you really need sources of hacx classic?

Share this post


Link to post
Blzut3 said:

iPhone Wolfenstein source is available as well. Shame it's now on a site that doesn't have an index though.


Could you supply a link please. I can't find it. :(

Share this post


Link to post

Some of the graphics in the Doom-based iPhone game "Bastards" appear to be ripped wholesale from Doom2 or elsewhere.

I'm fairly certain the floor seen here is Doom2's RROCK09 flat, and the fence on the right side of the saloon in this picture is from gothictx. Given the mishmash of visual styles seen in other pictures of the game, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a lot more of it is stolen content.

Share this post


Link to post
esselfortium said:

Some of the graphics in the Doom-based iPhone game "Bastards" appear to be ripped wholesale from Doom2 or elsewhere.

I'm fairly certain the floor seen here is Doom2's RROCK09 flat, and the fence on the right side of the saloon in this picture is from gothictx. Given the mishmash of visual styles seen in other pictures of the game, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a lot more of it is stolen content.


Also, is it just me or are the cowboy sprites just former humans from Doom with hats on? :P I would hazard a bet that the link to the original doom source instead of the derivative source was deliberate and they were hoping noone would notice. Might be worth shooting the devs an email but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Share this post


Link to post
Dark Yoda said:

Can you please tell me why you need source code? If you saw the game you should know that is the same like Doom Classic. So why you need sources?


Like other told you, the licence require it. Maybe i want to look at it, or make changes, or just look what differs from other doom engine powered games on the iPhone, that does not matter. The GPL does not tell me, what i have to do with it, it just say, what i am not allowed to do. Not releasing the source of derivate works for example.

Share this post


Link to post
esselfortium said:

Some of the graphics in the Doom-based iPhone game "Bastards" appear to be ripped wholesale from Doom2 or elsewhere.

I'm fairly certain the floor seen here is Doom2's RROCK09 flat, and the fence on the right side of the saloon in this picture is from gothictx. Given the mishmash of visual styles seen in other pictures of the game, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a lot more of it is stolen content.


Oh, hey! Those enemy cowboys are definitely from "A Fistful of Doom!". You can see the sergeant replacement in the mine screenshot here.

Share this post


Link to post
kmxexii said:

Oh, hey! Those enemy cowboys are definitely from "A Fistful of Doom!". You can see the sergeant replacement in the mine screenshot here.


Looks like they ripped off the entire WAD :O Have you played it? Are the levels the same too?

Share this post


Link to post
GreebCables said:

Looks like they ripped off the entire WAD :O Have you played it? Are the levels the same too?


The levels don't look identical and by my estimation the sprites and textures are mostly different, but I'm going off the fact that Fistful only had 2 maps to begin with. In a quick replay, though, the horses can also be seen in Bastards's screenshots and I'm pretty sure I saw Doom candles in the gameplay trailer.

Share this post


Link to post

The sky in Bastards, also, appears to be an awkward vertically-stretched-out rip of Fistful of Doom's, based on the screenshots of them both.

Share this post


Link to post

I emailed BoxMedia, the "creators" of Bastards asking them to release the derivative sourcecode under the GPL, this is the response I received:

Hello,

My name is Diana Stirbei, marketing representative for BoxMedia.
Usually, I don't reply to people who don't introduce themselves, but given the accusation you've implied I will make an exception this time.
The Doom source code hasn't been modified, therefore no GPL terms have been broken. We have only integrated that source code into our iPhone application, but no modification has been made to it whatsoever. We have changed the graphics, sounds and level design, however these are not committed to the GNU General Public License.
Nonetheless, if you need support (questions, information), please say so and we would be glad to assist you.

Best regards,
Diana Stirbei
Marketing Representative
OnlyCoolApps & BoxMedia


I replied stating that the GPL was not open to interpretation, that when they compiled a new binary they produced a derivative work of which the source must be released and how it was not enough to take their word for it that "nothing had changed" and that, again, the derivative source for Bastards MUST be made public under the GPL.

I also mentioned the copyright infringements regarding stealing resources from the Doom and Fistfull WADS as mentioned by the users above... I don't expect I'll receive a reply ;)

Share this post


Link to post
GreebCables said:

how it was not enough to take their word for it that "nothing had changed" and that, again, the derivative source for Bastards MUST be made public under the GPL.

This is one of the things I have against the GPL personally. Why is hosting a mirror of source code more effective then "I didn't modify anything?" For example DRD Team hosts many SVN builds of GPL projects should we be required to upload the source for each one or is just saying "these are builds of the official SVN source" sufficient? (Note I'm talking about the GPL in general here not any particular violation.)

Share this post


Link to post

Blzut3 said:
Why is hosting a mirror of source code more effective then "I didn't modify anything?"

Cause if the original copy of the source disappears of the face of the 'net, you're suddenly in violation of the terms of the license by distributing binaries without source.

It seems the GPLv3 explicitly allows this sort of thing, but points out that it's your responsibility to ensure that the source remains available somewhere...

Share this post


Link to post

I'm really getting the feeling that those smartphone stores are a big warez depot, just looking how several companies use Doom related content for their games in questionable ways.

Share this post


Link to post
boris said:

I'm really getting the feeling that those smartphone stores are a big warez depot, just looking how several companies use Doom related content for their games in questionable ways.


I've sent Apple an email notifying them of the copyright infringement in Bastards, hopefully they'll investigate

Share this post


Link to post

There's now a post on the Bethesda blog with links to both of the new source releases, and a brief summary of the upgrades over 1.0.

Share this post


Link to post
Blzut3 said:

This is one of the things I have against the GPL personally. Why is hosting a mirror of source code more effective then "I didn't modify anything?" For example DRD Team hosts many SVN builds of GPL projects should we be required to upload the source for each one or is just saying "these are builds of the official SVN source" sufficient? (Note I'm talking about the GPL in general here not any particular violation.)


I think all they're required to do is make the code available upon request. Exactly how they do that is up to them. Effectively this means they can decide to only release code via postal mail (like on a CDROM), and in the process charge you a nomimal fee for shipping & handling. In a lot of cases they just have it on a website, but that's not strictly necessary.

In commercial projects, I've always tried to stick with BSD or similar license, since it avoids headaches for everybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Blzut3 said:

This is one of the things I have against the GPL personally. Why is hosting a mirror of source code more effective then "I didn't modify anything?"

The hosting often costs money, and by doing this, you're not paying for it. Also, the website originally hosting source code may go down.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×