Open Source TGE: Sooner rather than later
by Ian Omroth Hardingham · 09/30/2009 (8:52 am) · 58 comments
An open-sourced TGE would revitalise the community and provide a significantly larger possible client base for T3D. I think absolutely everyone wins. Please take this as a massive "Yes" vote from me.
I don't think TGE would be much of a competitor for T3D either. I suppose the only bad thing that could come about is if people who would otherwise drop $1000 straight away on T3D decide to try TGE out first and for some reason don't end up buying. But I think by positioning the two in the correct way this could really be minimised.
The idea of open-sourcing TGE is the most exciting thing I've heard from GG since T3D was announced.
I don't think TGE would be much of a competitor for T3D either. I suppose the only bad thing that could come about is if people who would otherwise drop $1000 straight away on T3D decide to try TGE out first and for some reason don't end up buying. But I think by positioning the two in the correct way this could really be minimised.
The idea of open-sourcing TGE is the most exciting thing I've heard from GG since T3D was announced.
About the author
Designer and lead programmer on Frozen Synapse, Frozen Endzone, and Determinance. Co-owner of Mode 7 Games.
#2
09/30/2009 (9:18 am)
There are much more capable engines available open source and TGE would look pretty sad next to them, making GG look bad. I also would not be to happy after paying for the product to see it given away, not to mention the GG forums and the community being comprimised by freeloading clowns. 
#3
Open source would be nice though.. But you also might loose sales..
09/30/2009 (9:36 am)
But when you buy T3D, your also getting the *free* purchase of TGE and TGEA, which is pretty much a 3 in one pack for $100.Open source would be nice though.. But you also might loose sales..
#4
Coming out with TGE too soon would be a very bad move financially for GG. There is a great value to Torque 3D being very very newsworthy right now, and any news that's not about Torque 3D would lessen the effect of Torque 3D's bang on the market. Not to mention that it gives way to speculations and misunderstandings, especially if the weight of press releases coming out in close succession are in the same league - which they are!
There are other issues to be solved before TGE could become open source in my opinion. The way the website functions right now is not prepared to provide sufficient information to beginner developers fast enough before they get frustrated. It's due to the enormous amount of uncategorized information.
It needs to be given a serious thought before jumping in, as it might take resources from GG which they are not prepared to offer for licensees of an open-source engine. It WILL cost GG money, and it needs to be evaluated how high these costs will go.
I agree with Ando, that the professional level of discussions will definitely decrease. That will make it even harder to find relevant information. There are going to be fresh geniuses joining, but that won't be the main stream.
I've read Jeff Tunnel's recent blog about TGE. It had a respectable history, and I agree that open-sourcing TGE would be an awesome way for the old engine to live on. But I believe that it must be well timed, so it can be used commercially to gain more publicity when the press begins to take less interest in Torque 3D. Even then, the amount of publicity should be well kept within constraints.
Indie does not mean negligent about business, hopefully. The very opposite, I'd like to believe.
09/30/2009 (9:53 am)
There are many aspects of making TGE open source. The question arises - under which open source license?Coming out with TGE too soon would be a very bad move financially for GG. There is a great value to Torque 3D being very very newsworthy right now, and any news that's not about Torque 3D would lessen the effect of Torque 3D's bang on the market. Not to mention that it gives way to speculations and misunderstandings, especially if the weight of press releases coming out in close succession are in the same league - which they are!
There are other issues to be solved before TGE could become open source in my opinion. The way the website functions right now is not prepared to provide sufficient information to beginner developers fast enough before they get frustrated. It's due to the enormous amount of uncategorized information.
It needs to be given a serious thought before jumping in, as it might take resources from GG which they are not prepared to offer for licensees of an open-source engine. It WILL cost GG money, and it needs to be evaluated how high these costs will go.
I agree with Ando, that the professional level of discussions will definitely decrease. That will make it even harder to find relevant information. There are going to be fresh geniuses joining, but that won't be the main stream.
I've read Jeff Tunnel's recent blog about TGE. It had a respectable history, and I agree that open-sourcing TGE would be an awesome way for the old engine to live on. But I believe that it must be well timed, so it can be used commercially to gain more publicity when the press begins to take less interest in Torque 3D. Even then, the amount of publicity should be well kept within constraints.
Indie does not mean negligent about business, hopefully. The very opposite, I'd like to believe.
#5
09/30/2009 (10:17 am)
Open source means pulling GG resources away from T3D for a product which would not make them any money. Our business votes no. We feel there are way to many GG engines already and this consolidation is long over due. 
#6
TGE and TGEA are already open source: open source don't means free as free don't means open source. So topic should be "Free TGE: Sooner rather than later"
With this in mind, it's still a revolution passing from $250 to $0. How much do this choice worth?
09/30/2009 (10:51 am)
I agree with almost all Konrad said but I'd like to add a point to this interesting discussion.TGE and TGEA are already open source: open source don't means free as free don't means open source. So topic should be "Free TGE: Sooner rather than later"
With this in mind, it's still a revolution passing from $250 to $0. How much do this choice worth?
#7
09/30/2009 (11:16 am)
umm TGE is only $150... and they would still have TGEA and T3d to fall back on. Opening TGE as a free download wouldnt take anything away from GG as they have already opened the resource and forum sections. i dont see how it would be any effort to create a shiny new button and page with the free download attachment.. i mean really. a hour.. 2 if they the really wanted to make the page fancy? It probably would take longer to write up the Blog with the License details. 
#8
By your definiton, Unreal Tech is also Open Source. And I think we both realize how stupid that sounds. If you have to pay for something, it's not (by the common definition) Open Sourced.
09/30/2009 (11:16 am)
Quote:
TGE and TGEA are already open source:
By your definiton, Unreal Tech is also Open Source. And I think we both realize how stupid that sounds. If you have to pay for something, it's not (by the common definition) Open Sourced.
#9
I disagree. I don't see anything stupid in defining Unreal Tech open source :-)
The common mistake considering open source always as free software should not be spread around the world, at least at professional forums like GG forums are.
If a software is not open source, it should be defined closed source. But if Torque is closed source, what will be the definition for other competitors engine, i.e. Unity, that do not release source code? Really closed source? :-)
09/30/2009 (11:58 am)
@StefanI disagree. I don't see anything stupid in defining Unreal Tech open source :-)
The common mistake considering open source always as free software should not be spread around the world, at least at professional forums like GG forums are.
If a software is not open source, it should be defined closed source. But if Torque is closed source, what will be the definition for other competitors engine, i.e. Unity, that do not release source code? Really closed source? :-)
#10
open source != free commercial sdk
License? Make this open source but only you can use the sdk for open source games.
Do you want make a commercial game? buy the tech.: T3D! ;D
or... if you have a big heart or social responsibility, like ID:
www.idsoftware.com/business/idtech3/
09/30/2009 (12:55 pm)
open source != make commercial gamesopen source != free commercial sdk
License? Make this open source but only you can use the sdk for open source games.
Do you want make a commercial game? buy the tech.: T3D! ;D
or... if you have a big heart or social responsibility, like ID:
www.idsoftware.com/business/idtech3/
#11
also both Giuseppe and Stefen are correct but using differing definitions for the same thing. from www.parliament.vic.gov.au/SARC/E-Democracy/Final_Report/Glossary.htm the definition of open source software is
which does not say anything about free and under this definition Giuseppe is correct in saying unreal is open source, as a licensing arrangement can be made that allows for users to share the source code.. however another common definition of open source is as defined in www.salon.com/tech/fsp/glossary/
which is the more common understanding of what is meant by "open source" though typically a licensing agreement must still be drawn up most fall under a standard General Public Agreement. Which is why to "Open Source" TGE would still create costs that GG may or may not want to pursue and does not permit the "easy button" fix.
09/30/2009 (1:09 pm)
I agree with everything Konrad said and not with the intention of derailing this discussion but also why I think discontinuing the sale of TGE is important as well. As Ando pointed out people who paid for the product will not be happy with their purchase becoming a free open item, discontinuing the purchase and maintaining the philosophy of allowing those who did make the purchase to apply that cost as a discount to the latest and greatest technology is a sound business decision. also both Giuseppe and Stefen are correct but using differing definitions for the same thing. from www.parliament.vic.gov.au/SARC/E-Democracy/Final_Report/Glossary.htm the definition of open source software is
Quote:
Computer software that is distributed under a licensing arrangement and which allows the computer code to be shared, viewed and modified by other users and organisations
which does not say anything about free and under this definition Giuseppe is correct in saying unreal is open source, as a licensing arrangement can be made that allows for users to share the source code.. however another common definition of open source is as defined in www.salon.com/tech/fsp/glossary/
Quote:
software in which the source code is by definition freely available to the general public for redistribution, modification, and examination
which is the more common understanding of what is meant by "open source" though typically a licensing agreement must still be drawn up most fall under a standard General Public Agreement. Which is why to "Open Source" TGE would still create costs that GG may or may not want to pursue and does not permit the "easy button" fix.
#12
The most important thing is that there is a commitment and a date attached. It is important that the commitment and date be made sooner rather than later. Though, the date should almost assuredly be in 2010.
If this doesn't happen, I think it is very likely TGE will become dust in the wind. That would be a real shame... and I think a very poor choice and missed opportunity.
I have been offering to help on an Open Source TGE for coming up on a decade. I am not going to revoke the offer now :) I am willing to do all the grunt work needed to see this happen.
09/30/2009 (2:23 pm)
There is some further discussion here: http://www.garagegames.com/community/forums/viewthread/102501The most important thing is that there is a commitment and a date attached. It is important that the commitment and date be made sooner rather than later. Though, the date should almost assuredly be in 2010.
If this doesn't happen, I think it is very likely TGE will become dust in the wind. That would be a real shame... and I think a very poor choice and missed opportunity.
I have been offering to help on an Open Source TGE for coming up on a decade. I am not going to revoke the offer now :) I am willing to do all the grunt work needed to see this happen.
#13
Completely agree, I myself have decided to make the best of a good tech, and I'm sticking with TGE until the end of my project... maybe further, who knows?
09/30/2009 (2:57 pm)
@Josh, I didnt get to respond to your original comment earlier, but I think that is an exremely awesome idea!Quote:
If this doesn't happen, I think it is very likely TGE will become dust in the wind. That would be a real shame... and I think a very poor choice and missed opportunity.
Completely agree, I myself have decided to make the best of a good tech, and I'm sticking with TGE until the end of my project... maybe further, who knows?
#14
09/30/2009 (3:03 pm)
I think a lot of :-( become :-) if they decide to open source things in 2010 and set a date and stick to it. While there is a cost at maintaining an open source solution, there are also other resources that could be used to offset those costs as well (alternative hosting for downloads, etc). It is just a matter I am sure those who are looking at the $$$ seeing this as green instead of red. Hopefully at least 1 of the engines makes it that route if not both. 
#15
Not really much resources drawn from GG, if well planed, other than the initial set, which means a few man-hours.
TNL was already open sourced with this approach, and the world didnt falled apart.
Off topic:
@Giuseppe, I agree with Stefan, calling Unreal open source is absolutely ridiculous.
Open Source is a concept, refering the fact of having public access to the source code of certain software, and involving a political statement of what freedoms that software give you to manipulate it.
You are trying to use a technicism, to force a new definition of a movement.
Is not funny, nor interesting. Leave it.
09/30/2009 (3:16 pm)
Open sourcing the legacy tech should imply a new community, SourceForge or Google Code based, and a new site, maintained by volunteers.Not really much resources drawn from GG, if well planed, other than the initial set, which means a few man-hours.
TNL was already open sourced with this approach, and the world didnt falled apart.
Off topic:
@Giuseppe, I agree with Stefan, calling Unreal open source is absolutely ridiculous.
Open Source is a concept, refering the fact of having public access to the source code of certain software, and involving a political statement of what freedoms that software give you to manipulate it.
You are trying to use a technicism, to force a new definition of a movement.
Is not funny, nor interesting. Leave it.
#17
Correct me if I am wrong but I don't remember if any products like 3ds max 2.5 or Photoshop 5.0 or... whatever had become free.
09/30/2009 (3:32 pm)
I don't think giving TGE free is good and fair to the ones who have counted $ for it.Correct me if I am wrong but I don't remember if any products like 3ds max 2.5 or Photoshop 5.0 or... whatever had become free.
#18
I say Just let it die.
I don't understand why people can just let things die peacefully.
Just let it go folks. And, for you people that can't afford Torque. You "are" just a hobbyist. Go play with Ogre3D.
I'm against anything that causes confusion in peoples impression of GG's product line.
09/30/2009 (3:38 pm)
Not to mention If I had to use TGE I think it would turn me off to the whole product line to be honest. I mean if I even used TGEA today I would be like "no thanks" I say Just let it die.
I don't understand why people can just let things die peacefully.
Just let it go folks. And, for you people that can't afford Torque. You "are" just a hobbyist. Go play with Ogre3D.
I'm against anything that causes confusion in peoples impression of GG's product line.
#19
09/30/2009 (3:38 pm)
Having bought multiple licenses (including commercial) of TGE, I simply do not understand how anyone, even having bought it today, would prefer to see TGE die rather than be leveraged in a different way.
#20
I think that would be the best/safest way to do that as well!
09/30/2009 (3:46 pm)
Quote:
Open sourcing the legacy tech should imply a new community, SourceForge or Google Code based, and a new site, maintained by volunteers.
I think that would be the best/safest way to do that as well!
Quote:I counted my money for TGE and the only thing I see coming from open-sourcing TGE is the continued life and support of TGE, if TGE is not open-sourced then as josh said:
I don't think giving TGE free is good and fair to the ones who have counted $ for it
Quote:
If this doesn't happen, I think it is very likely TGE will become dust in the wind
Quote:Cold words, just because you cant make something from TGE doesnt mean no-one else can.
I say Just let it die.
Torque 3D Owner Andrew Brady
I would agree with this totally. I think the sooner rather than later part could prove problematic, specifically for GG. Example/question.. what would happen if GG made TGE open source tommorrow? Would this be greeted with praise by all, or would a significant number of people who recently purchased TGE be up in arms about paying for a product that now is being given away.
Even so, there are other reasons I can see for holding off for a while on something as grand as releasing TGE for free, not the least of which would be potential gains in publicity. I do share your sentiments about the benefits of this taking place, but also can see reasons why this should be held off, for at least a while.
LK