×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Open Source Morrowind Version 0.16.0 Released

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the with-many-eyes-even-that-many-bugs-are-shallow dept.

Open Source 98

An anonymous reader writes "The OpenMW team recently released a new version of their open source engine. While the project is not fully playable yet, the goal is to preserve Morrowind, provide modders a better engine and tool kit for creating their works, and make it cross-platform. Like most open source projects, they are always seeking new contributors. So, what do you think; what's the state of FLOSS games that are not first-person shooters?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

98 comments

No. (5, Insightful)

masternerdguy (2468142) | about 2 years ago | (#40537559)

FOSS games tend to be coded very well but they lack polished art and game assets. It's like building V8 engine and putting it in an ugly car. It runs great but scares people away.

Re:No (2)

ZosX (517789) | about 2 years ago | (#40537605)

Best comment I've read in a while. I played a demo of arkham city the other day. I almost whipped out the credit card on the spot. Just the graphics alone made want to play it. Games like that cost 1000000x to produce versus what you can get out of some engine and a bunch of modders. It would take a dedicated small team years of hours putting together something on the level of what I played. Even linux owes a lot to significant corporate investment.

Re:No (3, Informative)

iosq (1084989) | about 2 years ago | (#40537893)

Graphics wise, I'd express my doubts that even with years, a small team would even be able to produce something that is considered graphically amazing for the time of release. This is simply due to the fact that new hardware renders old techniques obsolete (pun intended). For a great example of how protracted development time and constant upgrading can actually make a game look _worse_ at release, take a look at DNF or daikatana.

Re:No (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40537951)

My butthole was rendered obsolete. It was also a case of protraction and constant usage making it worse at primetime.

Re:No (1)

ZosX (517789) | about 2 years ago | (#40538171)

This is true, but the art requirements for a game like arkham city are insane. Sure there are some really awesome indy games, but nothing quite like that. Fallout 3 also comes to mind. No way could a small team accomplish that. I'm not trying to diminish what people do with less, but more is always better.

Re:No (4, Insightful)

kdemetter (965669) | about 2 years ago | (#40538297)

This is true, but the art requirements for a game like arkham city are insane. Sure there are some really awesome indy games, but nothing quite like that. Fallout 3 also comes to mind. No way could a small team accomplish that. I'm not trying to diminish what people do with less, but more is always better.

Depends on what you need. Neat graphics usually means heavy system requirements.
A lot of people may be fine with a game that isn't as beautiful, but can be run smoothly on their systems.

I think there's a market for both.

Re:No (1)

Rich0 (548339) | about 2 years ago | (#40546003)

True, but you still need content. I tend to play single-player games. What makes those interesting are mainly:

1. World content, story, complexity.
2. Half-decent engine including AI.
3. Graphics

If your world is interesting but you're the only thing moving in it, then that isn't useful. If the enemies are interesting but the extent of gameplay is to circle each other in the middle of a desert, that isn't interesting.

I want places to go, people to talk to, things to accomplish. All of that requires artwork, scripting, writing, and so on. Even if the graphics are simple you still need to create all the story and mechanics. That takes time/money.

Look at something like Wesnoth. It has great gameplay and decent graphics. However, it only has two campaigns which makes it of limited value - they aren't playable for that long. You don't need that as much for multiplayer, but I like complex games and complex multiplayer involves way to much commitment for somebody with a family...

Re:No (1)

westlake (615356) | about 2 years ago | (#40546897)

Neat graphics usually means heavy system requirements.
A lot of people may be fine with a game that isn't as beautiful, but can be run smoothly on their systems.

I am not sure I agree.

Think of the Flash based game Mechanarium.

The hardware requirements were trivial --- the art design and execution extraordinary:

It won the Excellence in Visual Art award at the 12th Annual Independent Games Festivaland the Best Soundtrack award from PC Gamer in 2009. It was nominated for an Outstanding Achievement in Art Direction award by the Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences and a Milthon award in the 'Best Indie Game' category at the Paris Game Festival.

[wikipedia]

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539935)

Bastion had a very small team and it is the most enjoyable game I have played for a long time.

(Super Meatboy is also great).

I am not really even bothered about 3D too much.

I like stuff like Chrono Trigger / Metal Slug as well games of my childhood.

There are mobile/tablet games that the graphics are at least as good or better but the gameplay / AI sucks.

(Both of the Batman games I haven't bothered playing for longer than 5 mins too easy.)

Input on a tablet (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 years ago | (#40540407)

There are mobile/tablet games that the graphics are at least as good or better but the gameplay / AI sucks.

How much of the gameplay sucking can be attributed to not having a gamepad or any other physical keys available?

Re:No (1)

BenoitRen (998927) | about 2 years ago | (#40541203)

I'm not trying to diminish what people do with less, but more is always better.

What happened to "Less is more."?

Re:No (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40538247)

see "wing commander saga: darkest dawn" and "freespace open". if no one makes the games you want the fans will ultimately find a way. FOSS's problem is they are saturated with projects for quake style scifi arena shoots if they tapped dead genres instead they would have polished games out the wazzoo

Re:No (1)

iosq (1084989) | about 2 years ago | (#40538483)

I definitely agree with you there. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't trying to imply that graphics should be the focal point of game creation. At the same time though, I'm not sure whether there would be "polished games out the wazoo". The thing is, the environment for fan made sequels/clones already exists. The tools already exist for FOSS game creation, and the communities/fanbases are there - apart from legal threats, there really isn't much stopping anyone skilled, with enough free time from making niche games that appeal to them.

Re:No (2)

DMJC (682799) | about 2 years ago | (#40539181)

I definately agree with this, just look at Mechwarrior: Living Legends. Noone was making a modern Mechwarrior game so the fans made it. FOSS really needs to start targetting tools and dead genres. Linux already runs about 90% of the flight games out there, they just need to really polish/support force feedback/input configuration. I've been trialing things like thurstmaster HOTAS Cougar gear, and Microsoft Sidewinder force feedback sticks for years now and it's definately close to being a superior experience to Windows in these genres.

Re:No (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539447)

Every time you make a spelling mistake, God kills a Jew.

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539501)

and every time you act like grammar nazi asshole god changes his mind. thanks for helping preserve the small Jewish population

Re:No (1)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | about 2 years ago | (#40538755)

Graphics wise, I'd express my doubts that even with years, a small team would even be able to produce something that is considered graphically amazing for the time of release.

Who said anything about a small team? And in what way is this [youtube.com] not already amazing?

Re:No (1)

iosq (1084989) | about 2 years ago | (#40538805)

It would take a dedicated small team years of hours putting together something on the level of what I played.

The parent of my post did.

Yes, what you posted does look amazing, but it is a pre-rendered movie, not a game. So it's really apples and oranges. I don't mean to demean anyone making FOSS games, I just meant to point out that making a game that looks as good as new AAA games generally takes a sizeable, professional team working full time to accomplish.

Re:No (1)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | about 2 years ago | (#40538933)

what you posted does look amazing, but it is a pre-rendered movie, not a game. So it's really apples and oranges.

No it isn't. One is the flip side of the other. The toolchains involved are nearly identical. So is the project organization, number and quality of artists involved, social structure, etc etc etc. It's actually easier to enumerate the differences. 1) A game needs a game engine. 2) eh... it's really hard to find a second difference.

Look, it is already proven that AAA content can be created by the open community. Delivered according to a plan and on a schedule even. You just saw it with your own eyes. The only remaining question is, to whom will go the glory of proving the point for an AAA first person sandbox game?

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539325)

No it isn't. One is the flip side of the other. The toolchains involved are nearly identical. So is the project organization, number and quality of artists involved, social structure, etc etc etc. It's actually easier to enumerate the differences.

From http://www.sintel.org/about/ [sintel.org]

“Sintel” is an independently produced short film, initiated by the Blender Foundation

In november, the Netherlands Film Fund approved on a substantial subsidy for Sintel, enough to extend the project to 10 months, with possible 1 or 2 extra artist seats in the final months.

With the highly anticipated extra funding from the Amsterdam Cinegrid – also funding a 4k resolution version – Ton finally could extend the team with 5 artists and a developer in March 2010.

I don't see how any of the Blender Foundation productions are comparable.

The only open source game I know of that have money to pay for artists is The Battle for Wesnoth [wesnoth.org] but even they are unlikely to get financial backing from several foundations/institutes.

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40540177)

A decent sandbox game needs much more assets than a movie like that. An order of magnitude more assets. The Sintel movie was ~5 artist-years, wasn't it? Modern AAA sandbox games (say, Skyrim) have 100-200 artist-years spent on the assets. That's a huge effort, similar on scale with the Linux kernel - and unlike game code, game assets cannot be made from small patches by thousands of contributors, there needs to be a specific visual style followed in every single art asset - even that short movie needed sponsorship to get where it is.

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40545727)

Well, one nice thing about OpenMW is that there are already a ton of high-quality assets out there that were released as Morrowind mods. In my experience, TES modders are usually happy to contribute their assets to other projects if you ask them nicely.

Re:No (1)

iosq (1084989) | about 2 years ago | (#40540463)

Look, as some of that ACs have already pointed out, you are wrong. However pretty it may look, a 5 minute video is not some kind of proof that a AAA game that is competitive with mainstream titles while being OSS is viable.

As for the toolchain? No - an interactive game requires far more tools, and more specialists to create. While animators and texture artists alone can create movies, you need high skill programmers in order to create a game. It is not as simple as just "putting an engine in". An engine is simply the backend classes, interfaces and methods to handle the resources, game logic and input in a structured way. You still need to craft the game itself around that, which requires, at the very least, competent programmers.

You also need competent designers. Not just for gameplay, but for stuff like HUDs, menus and other interfaces. Tool programmers, level designers, network specialists... You'll find that the amount of specialists required for interactive media is much greater then that of others.

Also, how are you going to convince a large enough group of people that your idea is the one? Unlike other projects, games don't serve a direct or obvious purpose apart from entertainment, so direction is something that is not as obvious. What sort of game would everyone want to see? Can the director get everyone to agree on an art/gameplay direction?

Sintel had paid artists, so in their case it was money. And don't expect a government grant enough to keep a much larger, more complex project going.

I don't even see why the open source community needs to compete with AAA games. More often then not, it is smaller budget games that actually innovate. Hell, most of the surprise hits of recent years have been from the indie community.

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539371)

You've obviously never worked on a game before. When you're creating art for a game, you are strictly bound by the performance of the engine. You can't just freely create stuff and expect it will work well. Also, if you'll note, the environments in Sintel are very small set pieces. In a game, you need a lot more areas in a map and you need to create many maps without making any of the areas look repetitious.

Sintel looks nice for an open source project, but it's still got nothing on the graphics in a full scale commercial film (ie. Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within from 2001). It's also fifteen minutes long.

Re:No (1)

lisaparratt (752068) | about 2 years ago | (#40539825)

http://dear-esther.com/ [dear-esther.com] ?

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539853)

That's about 2005 level. The Source engine really dates the look of it.

Re:No (1)

iosq (1084989) | about 2 years ago | (#40540771)

A nice looking game in its own right, and I love the fact that it's story driven - something very rare in modern gaming. It may be the way that I worded my post, but I was more talking about graphics technology then the art behind it. While yes - it is a good looking game, it won't be winning any awards for it's rendering. Again, I don't mean to imply that needing a industrial heater of a graphics card makes a game inherently better, was just pointing out to the parent that it's hard for small teams to hit the moving goalposts that are the latest and greatest rendering techniques.

Definitely an example of what a small team can do, and I personally think the graphics are more then enough to not detract from the experience - dare I say nice enough to enhance it - but it is no Arkham Asylum, Crysis 5 or Modern Warfare 10. Which in a way, isn't a bad thing at all.

Also, nitpicking, but not open source ;)

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40560225)

I must have missed something, but there has never been nothing, ever, graphically superior about Call of Duty that had not already been done before by other games that were already available. Not sure why that is even listed along side something like Crysis. I cannot speak on Arkham games; I have heard good things though.

Re:No (1)

morcego (260031) | about 2 years ago | (#40538459)

It is the old paradigm of time vs money. With enough money, it can be done in a reasonable time frame. Otherwise, you will get a great work that take years/decades to develop, like http://ifhgame.ru/main/ [ifhgame.ru].

So help out then, rather than whinge. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539677)

Or put some money to the group to pay for a professional digital artist.

Or, as you're currently doing, just whine about it and do nothing.

Re:No (1)

FlyveHest (105693) | about 2 years ago | (#40540051)

What about Hawken? (http://www.playhawken.com/)

Small team, indy game, graphics are mindblowingly fantastic, even for today, and its scheduled for release Q4 '12

Re:No. (2, Interesting)

bughunter (10093) | about 2 years ago | (#40537653)

While it is common to find unpolished (or more accurately, unfinished) games, there are a few that are up to par with commercial games, or nearly so.

Battle for Wesnoth especially. Also UFO: Alien Invasion, Freeciv... and I want to list Nethack and roguelikes, but that niche is intentionally unpolished.

Re:No. (5, Insightful)

polymeris (902231) | about 2 years ago | (#40537787)

Some games that have, IMO, succeeded in the polish department, have done so because they by design don't require many assets or they can "borrow" from another game (commercial or not), to get them started while new content is generated . If I was to start an amateur OSS game project, I'd try to keep that in mind. A good example of the former is naev [naev.org], and of the latter, openTTD [openttd.org].

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40538095)

On the other hand, there are plenty of commercial titles that can't even outshine nethack (graphics-wise) or for that matter comes close in game-play.

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539071)

Battle for Westnoth is a nice game, but it is not on par with commercial games for the PC. Try to compare with Starcraft II.

Re:No. (1)

Toonol (1057698) | about 2 years ago | (#40542803)

It's not on par graphically. I enjoy it more, simply because I enjoy turn-based tactical better than RTS*. It's more thoughtful. There are still rough edges on Wesnoth that would be smoothed out if it was a commercial release, true, but there are also features it has that would be eliminated.

*The game I've had the most enjoyment from in the last five years has probably been Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn... and that game could have been done on a super nintendo and not lost any entertainment value.

Re:No. (0)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 2 years ago | (#40539195)

Battle for Wesnoth is only polished if you are illiterate. Almost all of the text contains painful spelling mistakes. It's a shame, because it's otherwise a good game.

Re:No. (2)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about 2 years ago | (#40540279)

Well, if you can "see" spelling errors a mail to the developers with the error and the correction would be helpfull.

Calling people who can not see spelling errors illiterate is a bit exagerating, don't you think so?

I for my part have to type this on a system where you can not activate spelling correction (no idea why), so if there is nothing red underlined I don't see errors. (My brain assembles the meaning of a word or sentence without the need to parse every single letter and without the need to know how a word exactly is ment to be spelled)

Re:No. (0)

BenoitRen (998927) | about 2 years ago | (#40541223)

Calling people who can not see spelling errors illiterate is a bit exagerating, don't you think so?

One would hope that people don't turn off their brain while reading or typing a message. Unfortunately, this seems to be common.

I see two spelling errors in your message.

Re:No. (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | about 2 years ago | (#40541661)

As I tried to point out: it is a matter of seeing, not thinking.
I'm a whole word reader, I don't parse words letter by letter, and even if (while trying to spot typos) it simply does not work very good.

It is well known that "wrods lkie tihs" can easy be read by most people. I have to look really hard to notice those errors (in this case they are more easy to spot ofc).

OTOH lots of words are written completely illogical, why is it always instead of allways e.g.?

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40569849)

I see two spelling errors in your message.

You aren't the only one.

Re:No. (1)

juanfgs (922455) | about 2 years ago | (#40540423)

Many contributors of BfW are not native english speakers. Perhaps the project could use your help tracking and fixing all those errors?

Re:No. (5, Insightful)

Elbereth (58257) | about 2 years ago | (#40537719)

According to the project FAQ, Open Morrowind uses the original game assets. They have not created any of their own art. You need to have Morrowind installed on your computer, because this is just the engine. It will natively run on Windows, MacOS X, and Linux, and they're looking to fix longstanding bugs in the MW engine, as well as extend it. Some of the proposed extensions to the engine sound ridiculously complex and/or like they'd break the game, but it's definitely interesting. I'd be curious to see what it looks like in a few more revisions, when it's finally playable.

There are incredibly replacement textures for Morrowind and Oblivion that make even these older games look beautiful and semi-modern. I wouldn't put down the efforts of modders, though I agree that sometimes open source games have rather lackluster graphics. Part of the problem is that modders are more interested in playing polished, commercial games, which they can touch up, rather than contributing to an incomplete, open source game that has no assets at all. It's quite understandable, really, because one is a hobby, and the other is a full-time job.

Re:No. (1)

starworks5 (139327) | about 2 years ago | (#40537757)

you should be able to run tamriel rebuilt on the open morrowind. http://tamriel-rebuilt.org/?p=faq&section=0

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40537935)

What license is that tamriel shit under? Apparently those guys never heard the word license...

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40543887)

Mostly non-OS licenses with a few assets available for reuse. Besides that, a lot of their stuff is probably derivative of Bethesda models (almost every modding community is like this. I believe that TA remake ran into this issue with mods using copyrighted gamedata inside their own mods (in addition to referencing the original resources.)

Regardless I've been following openmw since the D days and having played with 0.15, while it's not to the point of being playable as a game, it's got the majority of the heavy lifting done gfx-engine wise, including interior to world trasitions, water, popping actors into the world, etc.

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40540753)

My bigger problem with open source games is that they tend to be clones of old commercial games. If you are going to go through all the effort, why not make something original?

Re:No. (1)

Meditato (1613545) | about 2 years ago | (#40537763)

Cutsy sardonic title with no correct assertions made. Please try to familiarize yourself with the project before being a useless contrarian.

This is not a "FOSS" game. It is a reimplementation of the game engine that does not change any of the original visual resources. And it already looks better than the original.

Your comment is therefore irrelevant.

Re:No. (4, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 2 years ago | (#40537821)

V8 engines belong in ugly cars. It's kind of the point. Nothing like blowing the doors off a brand new corvette with a rusty Oldsmobile.

Re:No. (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 2 years ago | (#40538329)

NO olds will beat the new 'vette in anything but a straight line, but one of the old olds with a big fat big block that has had almost the cost of a corvette spent on it can probably out-drag one of the lesser ones :)

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539373)

I think the point is that all versions of the Corvette DO have a V8 engine and to most peoples thinking aren't ugly. Well, at least not fugly.

Re:No. (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 2 years ago | (#40540823)

I think the point is that all versions of the Corvette DO have a V8 engine and to most peoples thinking aren't ugly. Well, at least not fugly.

Well, I get that point... I think we've lost our way when it comes to sports cars. People are always trying to get bigger faster stronger in their cars and it's ignorant. What I want is better cleaner tighter. That's why I am restoring a 1982 300SD. Weighs 1000 pounds less than the predecessor or successor S-Class, which pays off in handling and fuel economy, mileage is better by about a sixth. Plenty of power and will run on truly marginal diesel since it's an IDI. Over 400 miles to a tank, reliably. Has pretty much all the non-computerized features you'd expect from a modern car. Actually, my 1992 F250 is a "lightweight" vehicle by its standards, even at 6800lb wet. The newer trucks weigh way more for no discernible reason.

Uh, but anyway, back to the point, I used to have a 1993 Impreza. This is the most gutless wonder I have driven since my old tired 1978 Celica that died because I got it up to 100... on a downhill. It had 100 bhp and what, 150 ft-lb? And it was the LS model so it did it through a slush box. But on highway 175 hopland grade I was faster than anyone who would stay in their lane and many people that wouldn't, including some jerkoff in a spanking new 'vette who thought he was hot shit. Part of it is probably just that he was a crappy driver, it's not like they make you take a test before you buy a 'vette. Part of it, though, is that my tiny little car had a whole mess of rubber (I put WRX wheels on it and some nice Kumhos) and it only weighed 2750 wet. I had about 200 pounds of cargo in addition to my big ass, too, so I had the vehicle up around 3200 pounds.

Point is, the power of a corvette is wasted and you're just dragging it around most of the time. If it had a straight six with sequential turbos it would be a better vehicle for the majority of people who own it and most of them would never notice the difference. When you really try to get on it, the V8 and what it takes to hold it up just holds you back, unless you're going in a straight line, in which case you don't need a sports car...

It isn't really that way... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40542859)

And what of the Mazda RX-8, Lotus Elise, or any of the various hot hatches available right now? Yes, there is a trend of American cars toward beefy drag type cars - examples being the Dodge Challenger and souped Mustangs... but the Corvette falls more toward the racing end of things, even if it is insane on a track.

Tighter, sleeker, more controllable is just another form of race car. It's a mantra of the super car, which also does have power, but not at the expense of those other attributes. It sounds like you want a Lotus, though, or a Miata.

Re:It isn't really that way... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 2 years ago | (#40543605)

And what of the Mazda RX-8, Lotus Elise, or any of the various hot hatches available right now?

None of them are American, which is what I was talking about; I could have been more explicit about that.

It sounds like you want a Lotus, though, or a Miata.

I'm 6'7" so I cannot drive a Lotus or a Miata. I used to have a 1989 240SX with a 3" drop, which was an awesome car and I could run rings around motherfuckers on the twisties even though I had nothing in the engine, had done nothing for performance in fact but intake and exhaust. I got rid of it because I now live in Lake County, California, and the roads will not sustain driving a car like that. My 300SD has some of the same attributes; excellent weight distribution being a key one, gutlessness in comparison to other vehicles being another. However, it seats four adults in comfort (or two adults and three children) and has a massive trunk, and gets the same kind of mileage as the fetishistically-aerodynamic 240SX fastback since it's got a turbo diesel engine. It does have a slush box, but it's a pretty good one. You can push it sideways around corners if you like, and it behaves admirably. Indeed, it has vastly better handling than did my Camaro, or than does a Rustang, assuming stock suspension — which is reasonable, because my suspension is stock. Indeed, I kept it stock even though I had to replace the rear springs due to age, because I like being able to float over potholes.

If I had endless money for whatever and maintenance costs weren't an issue I would probably buy a Lincoln LS, which is really a Jag. What I really want is the turbo diesel model they got in the UK, though.

Re:No. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40538179)

It runs great but scares people away.

So what? It isn't a business. They do it because they like it. Some people spend their free time watching TV, others coding games.

And graphics aren't everything. There are some weirdos that have this ridiculous idea that a good game is a fun game, good looking or not. If all I cared for were graphics I'd see a movie or go outside.

Re:No. (4, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 2 years ago | (#40538291)

FOSS games tend to be coded very well but they lack polished art and game assets. It's like building V8 engine and putting it in an ugly car. It runs great but scares people away.

That's why no one plays Dwarf Fortress and the Roguelike games.

I'd rather have an interesting game with amateur assets than a dull game with slick presentation.

Re:No. (0)

flimflammer (956759) | about 2 years ago | (#40539211)

Dwarf Fortress isn't open source. Picking out a few extreme examples of graphically inferior games that have a great hook that doesn't need graphics doesn't really discredit the GPs statement. It is not an unfair generalization to make that FOSS games generally lack polish and suffer as a result, either graphically or technically. This is of course mostly because they are a labor of love and not profit, but that fact doesn't change anything in the end.

A Big Fat WHOOOSH for you here. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539737)

OP: Games need good graphics
RP: If that were true, then Dwarf Fortress shouldn't be played

What is it about being non-FOSS make the lack of graphical polish of Dwarf Fortress moot?

Re:A Big Fat WHOOOSH for you here. (0)

flimflammer (956759) | about 2 years ago | (#40540353)

I think the whoosh should go to you, good sir. First of all, we're talking about a FOSS generalization. Using non-FOSS games as an example to break that generalization is worthless to the discussion. Secondly, games do not need high graphical fidelity to look and feel polished. Creating a crappy presentation, throwing your arms up in the air and saying "graphics aren't important" is just a terrible excuse for being lazy. There are many things that can be done to make your presentation shine even if you can't muster better assets.

As for Dwarf Fortress -- Its presentation is very polished, despite the design choice not to use graphics. It was a bad example to make his point

Re:A Big Fat WHOOOSH for you here. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40544481)

As for Dwarf Fortress -- Its presentation is very polished, despite the design choice not to use graphics. It was a bad example to make his point

Man, you are hilarious! Dwarf Fortress's presentation is very polished. That's a good one! I'm dyin' here!

Oh .... wait, you were serious. Let me laugh even harder!

(Nothing is funnier to me on the internet than guys who refuse to acknowledge that they were wrong about some trivial bullshit point.)

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40540491)

Actually a Roguelike called Tales of Maj'Eyal: Age of Ascendancy (te4.org) has some of the best art I've seen in Free games. And it is also fantastic in the gameplay department.

Re:No. (1)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | about 2 years ago | (#40538717)

Is this [phunq.net] polished? Because it's coming to an open source game engine near you pretty soon. And its just part of a flood of amazing, free and open tools that are coming online right now. The time was never better to jump into Indie/open game development. If you want to help out. [phunq.net]

Re:No. (1)

b4dc0d3r (1268512) | about 2 years ago | (#40545971)

How can we tell if it's polished? What the hell is it even supposed to be? There's a mailing list subscription link - to what?

I went to the main page, or what I thought it might be, and got:

Welcome to phunq.net!

Please stay tuned for more exciting developments.

Google has no info on phunq that I could find before giving up, so I decided to ask you - WTF are you even talking about? Should I have modded you +1 ZOMBOCOM?

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40540111)

There are 'total conversions' of popular games from different genres where the fans have implemented a full set of art and assets - so it can be (and is) done by open source teams. So, if you make an engine compatible with a popular game; and take assets from a total conversion of that game, then you would have a full, free (as speech) game...

Re:No. (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#40542099)

That sort of describes the original retail release as well, lol. It had amazing storytelling and history and quests but the pathfinding abilities and maps and dungeon design were pretty awful. Also, the artwork was pretty bad. It was so-so for the era but by today's standards, it's terrible. Since the construction kit to mod the map that was included with the game itself originally is one of the best I've ever seen, it is definitely worth it to save. It's really efficient, fast, easy to navigate, etc. So if they can stuff better movement animations and better, higher res textures and other artwork into it, it'd be the best FOSS game ever.

My only concern is the engine is really glitchy in that you can fall through objects accidentally and get stuck constantly and that's not so easy to fix.

Re:No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40544727)

My only concern is the engine is really glitchy in that you can fall through objects accidentally and get stuck constantly and that's not so easy to fix.

Well, they're building a new engine, do you think they're going to intentionally recreate the old engine's physics bugs? It'd be pretty hard to do since they're using an off-the-shelf physics engine that doesn't do that.

FOSS and the game audience (1)

fikx (704101) | about 2 years ago | (#40542541)

One thing I've always wondered: FOSS games don't have to be community developed at least by the definition, but that seems to be the norm in discussion. Why is that?
seems like any game that was developed under normal time lines/conditions could be FOSS as long as the code came with it....in which case it could be community maintained at that point, but was developed behind closed doors.
Most games (and a lot of software, but not all) have to have a definite goal and have to come out under a specific time-frame to "catch" and become useful and/or popular. That's hard to do under a community model in a lot of cases. Pieces of games can work that way, like the framework, game engine, etc. but the final piece (artwork, plot, characters, etc.) seem to have trouble using a community model to hit the right target at the right time...

State (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40537563)

Looks like the state of FLOSS games is two games behind!

Re:State (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40537919)

Not by my estimation. I still play Morrowind. They did not incorporate some things I absolutely loved (levitation, etc.) about Morrowind in the newer games, so I refuse to purchase, or even play, them. Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather see Morrowind as FOSS then the newer two.

Freespace (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40537589)

Don't know if it 'counts', but the Freespace modding community has made some amazing improvements to the old engine and even released some great content (the recent Wing Commander conversion comes to mind).

Re:Freespace (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40538365)

legally it doesn't count (the freespace engine's source code was released on a FLOSS incompatible licence), but other than that there isn't much difference between a FLOSS game and a freespace campaign.

D to C++? (2)

LionKimbro (200000) | about 2 years ago | (#40537593)

I am very curious about the rational for why OpenMW switched from D to C++.
The FAQ [openmw.org] points to this page for an explanation, [google.com] which, at 2012-07-03 8:16 PM Pacific Time, I, an outsider to the effort, do not have access to.

Re:D to C++? (-1, Flamebait)

tiffany352 (2485630) | about 2 years ago | (#40537759)

Probably to appeal to C++ fanboys.

Re:D to C++? (4, Insightful)

polymeris (902231) | about 2 years ago | (#40537801)

Probably. Or to put it in kinder words: To appeal to a larger set of potential contributors.

Re:D to C++? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40538107)

Or to put it in the actual words from when I was helping with this... No one actually codes in D. The founder was the only person who even knew how, let alone having a setup and compiler and everything required because there wasn't anything usable for coders using Windows. After a deluge of people asking to help the switch was finally made, which is a fantastic thing as the founder disappeared and another coder took over, and now there's an entire team.

In other words, it saved the entire project.

Re:D to C++? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40543813)

For all I and others have said that a good programmer is language independent, and for all the evident need for a some better alternative to C/C++, when it arrives no-one wants it or can adapt to it. And so we go on, hobbling ourselves by choice. I'm really developing a very grim view of human intellect.

Re:D to C++? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40544811)

Don't flatter yourself, it's unseemly. The failure of D to catch on has nothing to do with intellect. The guy who created D was kind of an ass, and there was a split betwen the Phobos and Tango branches of the D language, and that kind of split harms a language's uptake. Nobody wants to invest time and effort learning a language that has a reputation for infighting and incompatibility wars.

Status? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40537671)

>So, what do you think; what's the state of FLOSS games that are not first-person shooters?

What, both of them? I looked them up; Frozen Bubble and Tux Racer are doing just fine.

www.airmaxskobillige.com,nike free run 2 bluemenn (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40538973)

http://www.airmaxskobillige.com/nike-shox-sko-menn-nike-shox-nz-sko-c-764_780.html
http://www.airmaxskobillige.com/nike-shox-sko-menn-nike-shox-nz-sko-c-764_780.html
sko for kvinner
nike free run nettbutikk
nike free 3.0 pink
nike barnesko
billige nike free fit 2
nike sko
bilige air max p? nett
nike sko billige
rimlig nike sko
free running sko billig
nike air max
ekte nike shox torch sko
nike shox r3 kvinner
nike free run dame gr? lilla
nike shox barnesko
nike 3.0 blue and yellow
nike free pink
nike sko lilla

Download (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539019)

While the server is down you can find the downloads at Google code page [google.com] and the Ubuntu PPA [launchpad.net]

Re:Download (1)

hattig (47930) | about 2 years ago | (#40539715)

This is great as I missed out on Morrowind the first time around, and recently bought it cheap - but I have a Mac and a Linux box. This solves trying to run the game in VirtualBox or on an underpowered netbook.

Shame the website is completely fuxxed up.

Re:Download (1)

Brandano (1192819) | about 2 years ago | (#40540597)

If all you are interested into is just running the game, it runs fine in Wine. On my machine even Skyrim runs fine in Wine, just marginally slower than when booting in Window XP, and my hardware isn't too recent either.

Re:Download (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40544763)

Shame the website is completely fuxxed up.

Slashdot effect, we didn't expect such high traffic volume.

Vivec and fast travel (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40539793)

I love the game, but travel is tedious and Vivec is horrible. Please fix them.

Good news - now we can fix the UI (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40540087)

I like Morrowind a lot, so this is incredibly good news. The engine of the game was a bit buggy (glitches & crashes) so it'd be wonderful to have something more stable, and one of the main drawbacks of the game was the clunky user interface which could be streamlined in the free version of the engine.

Maybe now they can fix all the bugs (1)

BrunBoot13 (787805) | about 2 years ago | (#40540451)

Like many RPGs, Morrowind was loaded with bugs, many of which were never fixed by the original developers.

Unfunctional (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40541561)

Let's talk about another un-released, un-functional titles.
Duke Nukem anyone?

Implementation for mods in development (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40546915)

One of the executive managers, 'Zini', is also our lead scripter for the Morrowind modification called Ultima Redemption. Part of the reason he and others founded OpenMW was to get around the scripting nightmare and other bugs in the developmental tools of the original product. Hopefully, in time, they'll have an OpenMW 1.0 and real progress on implementation can be made for the Redemption mod.

Not seeing it (1)

pugugly (152978) | about 2 years ago | (#40550869)

I love Morrowind, and am actually playing it now in a bid to put off buying Skyrim till it drops a bit (plus run quests I've never actually found before, because 'Why not'), but . . . I just don't see the need for this project.

The brilliance in Morrowind was in the writing and the plot. The engine is 'stable enough' and runs fine, they're neither improving nor planning to improve the graphics . . . I'm just not seeing the return on this.

Pug

Re:Not seeing it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40558063)

As a Morrowind fan but not really a modder, OpenMW will be a huge step forward for the community that plays and mods the game. My game now is running with a script extender and a graphics extender in the background. Eventually those will be rolled into the OpenMW client and eliminate the need for these other "supporting" programs.

A. Graphical and game improvements are planned, just not in 1.0. If you look at the videos you can see they've already started some improvements with the way water looks. Current implementations of graphics and script extenders are still limited by the engine, so a new engine really opens the doors for more modern graphic capabilities. From my understanding, Vanilla Morrowind has no support for Normal mapping; modders have to create "fake" Normal maps that have similar effects. Right now, implementing things like dynamic NPC schedules or even better animations are really limited by engine. NPCS can't cross through load doors in the original Morrowind. That's something that the engine rewrite can fix.

B. In terms of stability, Morrowind kinda blows, especially running graphics enhancers. It's not optimized well at all: I get better fps playing Skyrim than I do playing Morrowind. Additionally, the other big projects in the community, the Province mods, require stability in areas far from 0,0 (which get a shaky currently) and an extended map.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...