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

gnudist

Members
  • Content count

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by gnudist


  1. 40oz said:

    Does using the hell theme, or the similar story elements of descending into hell have any legal ramifications to it?


    The concept of hell is public domain and God doesn't seem interested in lobbying for a retroactive copyright extension.


  2. Danfun64 said:

    didn't see that for some reason. The main reason I was asking is boom on dosbox. That is all.

    And by new standard i meant raised requirements, like using zdoom 1.23 features (which requires (g)zdoom, odamex, zandronum, or zdaemon). I'm glad your not doing that ;)


    Gzdoom requirement would be epic fail for a project that's a free as in freedom alternative to doom content. Unless gzdoom changed to gpl while I wasn't looking


  3. Fonts aren't covered by copyright here but that's not true everywhere. And scaleable computer fonts are considered software for the purposes of United States copyright law even though the design of the characters themselves is not copyrightable.

    you should not include unlicenced fonts if you want your source port in linux repos, mirrored by non US sites or care if your source port is 100% free as in freedom


  4. jval said:

    but since both the Doom source code and the Raven source code re-released under the GPL (http://doomwiki.org/wiki/Doom_Source_License , http://doomwiki.org/wiki/Raven_source_code_licensing) I thing that distributing DelphiDoom under GNU GPL is OK.


    provided you're not including additional code from third parties you're correct. There'd be trouble if you had contributers prior to the switch who did not agree to the licensing change or assigned copyright over their contributions to you.


  5. There's a bit of a contridiction in the license file.

    It claims delphi doom is GNU GPL(which allows for profit use), but it then goes on to say you can use it as lond as it's NOT for profit.

    A license that dissallows such use is not only not GPL'd but it also runs counter to the ideals of the free software movement the GPL was born out of, that the end user of the software has the FREEDOM to modify and run the software for any purpose.

    see: http://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
    see also http://gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html


  6. Stilgar said:

    For some time now I've been pretty much completely out of motivation for Blasphemer and I think it's best for all involved if I turn over maintainance to someone else. If the Freedoom folks would like to take the reins, I'll offer whatever help is needed to get it transferred over.


    Oh goody, then we can have yet another mismached set of artwork for yet another incomplete FPS.

    How many good mods are there for heretic anyway? The one really good thing about freedoom other than having a free as in freedom singleplayer retro FPS is the ability to play all the DOOM pwads without needing the DOOM iwads. I can't really see a reason for blasphemer's existance without the pwads if it isn't a game of much better quality then freedoom is.

    I hope that if the freedoom project takes over that it's handled much better then freedoom itself is. The fine hampsters at http://opengameart.org would likely be willing to help do art for this.


  7. Gez said:

    The overlord looks kinda too "busy" to be a common monster like the caco. It was designed to be a cacoboss after all.


    While I agree with this somewhat I still think it looks more like it belongs with the other sprites than the jellyfish cyclops does.


  8. Sodaholic said:

    Perhaps we could use the Overlord to replace the current Caco, I think it's pretty lackluster.


    Yeah, the overlord looks much nicer than the current jellyfish thing. To me the current one looks out of place even among the already eclectic mix of freedoom art.


  9. I wish people would stop saying things like "open to creative commons useage". Too vague.


    CC is a series of licenses that are not uniform in their restrictions. It covers both a mostly permissive license with attribution requirement all the way to one that only allows you to share unmodified works for non commercial purposes(with attribution requirement!).

    Even saying that freedoom can use them may be a misunderstanding of licneing and what we mean by Free so you can't assume CC0(a public domain dedication) or the mostly permissive one.

    Best to get a clarification to avoid a shitstorm.

    This commentlicensed under CC-BY-SA :P


  10. BloodyAcid said:

    adding Advance Wars to this. Graphics may be cartoony, but their latest installment (Days of Ruin) bring a dystopian setting and dark gameplay. You'll need prime strategy, and I like this over RTS


    Never really cared about the art style as long as they weren't too dull or inconsistant.

    The real problem was how fugged advance wars: dual strike was with the titular aspect of gameplay and OP commanding officers.

    Hatchi's cheap units and super power of being able to use cities under your control as factories + pretty much any partner going after in the DS or olaf + drake's switcharoo to leave the enemies out of fuel = rape.

×