Shouldn't this thread be renamed, "Old Games Source Code Suppository"? That's what ripped sources feel like, anyways...

I don't know. Truthfully if I have a question, I always feel comfortable asking it on the forums or asking the people whom I trust to steer me in the right direction. While I'm not asking simple questions like how to manage screen objects or verb lists, I still think it's very easy for new developers to ask questions on the forums. Yes, we've answered the same questions a hundred times, but really we should be promoting asking questions instead of instantly biting people's heads off for not looking up the answer first.

Yes, we should remind people to always look for the answer before asking the question, but we can do that while we answer their question as well. A lot of people, as helpful as they may be, can come across as condescending sometimes. New developers are going to get frustrated and they're going to be snappy, but I just feel like we do a poor job of calming down and talking through the problem.

But that's just my opinion.

Kats wrote:

Shouldn't this thread be renamed, "Old Games Source Code Suppository"? That's what ripped sources feel like, anyways...

If the sources are provided by the developers, they are not ripped. Wouldn't I be correct in suggesting this?
Perhaps they should be categorized in this manner.
"Provided" or "Unknown Origins" tags would be suitable.

Regardless of how the source was obtained, do you honestly think there's a real difference in how people use them? The problem isn't the code itself, it's how developers use it. If the GOA and Zeta source are copy-pasted constantly, what's to stop people from creating copy-paste games of the ones you've provided? That's not to say that they couldn't have obtained the source codes without you posting them here, but still.

My only argument is that it's a little backhanded to try saying that just because these source codes were freely distributed that it suddenly protects them from the same fate as any other game. Like I said, it's not the code that's the problem, it's the people trying to make a quick buck by ripping off someone else's hard work.

Kats wrote:

Regardless of how the source was obtained, do you honestly think there's a real difference in how people use them? The problem isn't the code itself, it's how developers use it. If the GOA and Zeta source are copy-pasted constantly, what's to stop people from creating copy-paste games of the ones you've provided? That's not to say that they couldn't have obtained the source codes without you posting them here, but still.

My only argument is that it's a little backhanded to try saying that just because these source codes were freely distributed that it suddenly protects them from the same fate as any other game. Like I said, it's not the code that's the problem, it's the people trying to make a quick buck by ripping off someone else's hard work.

You yourself should know, if you work on games, that it is incredibly difficult to plug and play Byond code without problems. Besides, if it is open source the code is freely available to be used. Sure, it isn't programming from scratch but not everyone can do that and Byond is about allowing ANYONE to make their own Dream Game!

(and yes, I agree with Gogeta; Most of the code in free sources are trash, including mine (I'll admit it, I don't care) which is exactly why they are free. The majority of freely available code is more often than not examples of bad programming than anything to be worried about. Gogeta mentioned another great point that it allows these dead games to be relived and in a new light! I am not going to lie, it is even on my games hub in the credits: I used Rise of Heroes source as a framework for Pondera but that doesn't mean it is Rise of Heroes because I broke the project down, cleaned it up, and have been replacing the majority of it over the past several years (I started in 2009). If you were to look at Pondera's Hub page you couldn't tell me that -- that it is Rise of Heroes and thus just a rip, because it isn't. The majority of the project is now my own and only minor functions were utilized as examples that were later replaced entirely or removed. Most of my game comes from Libraries that are also freely available. Why? Because I am one of those awful programmers that can't write it from scratch, I just stare at a blank dm file and don't know what to do and that is my own fault for learning this way but I am fine with that, as long as I am able to read, modify, and make it work the way I want I can still make progress and thus my own game. Graphics people aren't programmers and most programmers aren't graphics people! Probably has a lot to do with the two different sides of the brain...)

EDIT:*Clarification below it was a specifically prepared version of Rise of Heroes Advanced that Ripperman5 fixed up for me.

Excellent response. Learning is indeed the way for all and I completely agree with you, opportunists who abuse others for their own gain are generally not very well received.

This is why I still haven't setup a solid pricing or purchase model for Pondera (other than the fact that I don't really care about the money side of things, more of a creator). Even in the commentation of my project I have put "What was taken, shall be given too" which means that Pondera will one day be open-source, art and all.

I also should clarify* that the frameworks I utilized were a culmination of projects I have had over the years. RipperMan5 provided the Rise of Heroes Advanced source which was specially modified (fixed) for my purposes. This is the main reason his name appears in my credits list. This is not the only project that was used as a base though. I credit Hilel, a long lost friend who provided the first real source I ever worked with (He soon moved on to make better projects without my annoying child self) and that source was called Dragon Kings: Reign of Darkness. Surge was a really old friend who initially got me into game development with a strange program called H.A.M.S.T.E.R which was basically a dos version of Byond (sort of). The game we made in that was called VIKING(S?) and we got as far as land surrounded by ocean with a movable character (graphics by me! though my first attempts were incredibly poor) and he actually managed to make it produce footsteps in the sand that faded away (this was in the late 90's I believe?? Not quite sure that is a long time ago). It was pretty cool, that is what got me into game developing. He was clearly a decent programmer and so he eventually moved on to leave me to my child self, as well (kids can be really dumb and annoying, I can attest to this!).

Anyway, that is some background without listing every single library or project I looked into! :) The Fundamentals.

So just because someone runs their own server (or a friend does) and can host their own files, they are a "shady file host"?? Give me a break, man they've got you trained!

Some people don't want to create accounts on those pages just to upload someone elses source. I thought about using github for Pondera's open-source but I don't want to create an account (until it is actually open source, anyway).

Sure, maybe those centralized places might be able to keep the files longer but don't de-legitimize other peoples efforts. If all that matters is existing until the internet goes down from an E.M.P and russian/chinese assault, put it on the cloud! Whatever, I think you get my main point.

ErikHanson wrote:

Why would you upload all sourcecode mentioned in the first post on some shady(?) file hoster, and not onto github, bitbucket, gitlab or anything else that will stick around longer.

uhhhh... its dropbox. Wouldn't really call them shady or "Off-Brand"... Besides Ive never had an issue with them in the past and I use them for my other projects including game mods... only reason why its not a long regular Dropbox link is because I clicked the shorten link button they have...







I aint ever used Github even though ive been around that site quite a bit.. something about it disinterests me in using it

NNAAAAHH wrote:

I wasn't saying your links were, the guy was just defending using potentially malicious sites.

"The guy", who? Me? No, I was saying not to discredit people just because you're afraid of everything and don't know how to protect yourself.