| How should the replacement look? |
| Let's make a complete new look |
|
3% |
[ 1 ] |
| Stay as near as possible to the original |
|
16% |
[ 5 ] |
| Stay original, but modernize the hospital to year 2009 |
|
70% |
[ 21 ] |
| Let the artist decide (mix it up!) |
|
6% |
[ 2 ] |
| No opinion. |
|
3% |
[ 1 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 30 |
|
| Author |
Message
|
| vommie |
 Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:59 am Post subject: OpenTHGFX: How should the replacement look? |
 |
|
Joined: 09 Mar 2009
Posts: 99
Location: Berlin
|
We have a chaos at this time.
Kamo's creating new items with a complete new look, while some others including me stay near the original, but with little changings like modernisation of hardware (f.e. CRT display to LCD).
Do we need a guideline? And if yes, which? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Kamo |
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
Posts: 66
Location: Poland
|
'Stay original, but modernize the hospital to year 2009' I agree  I'll try to stick to it more with next items, and I think ill remake the Psychiatrics chair to be more like old one (I dont like the one I did).
_________________
Visit Kamoland
Visit Kamoland/ind
Visit Kamoland/tra
+ the net is vast and infinite + |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vommie |
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 09 Mar 2009
Posts: 99
Location: Berlin
|
| Yeah, cool. But I think some little artistic licence like new details is always within the limits.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Jack |
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Administrator
Joined: 20 Feb 2009
Posts: 266
Location: Cambridge, UK
|
Modernise. Saying that I like Kamo's new things too and I think they are positive improvements.
_________________
- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Bami |
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 02 Apr 2009
Posts: 20
|
Stay with the original, but with 12 year older items.
Part of the charm of TH was it's graphics, and we're just upping the resolution  . And of course everything is ours so we can apply our own license to it.
What should we go with?
CC3-BY-NC-SA?
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Jack |
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Administrator
Joined: 20 Feb 2009
Posts: 266
Location: Cambridge, UK
|
The source code is under the GPL which is fine for commercial use but is 'share-and-share-alike' style. This creative commons licence is in the same spirit.
I can understand people who would be unhappy with their art being distributed and sold to people, however the game itself can anyway (since the GPL lets you) so maybe that would be okay.
Saying that there is nothing stopping us using the licence Bami suggested and it does not cause any compatibility problems with the GPL (as the art is not linked to the program).
Perhaps it could up to the artist to select a creative-commons licence as we can mix them too.
I find it unlikely that OpenTH will ever be a commercial opportunity to anybody, but limiting it feels like it makes OpenTH less 'open' to me. However, art is a lot more of a personal thing that programming code so you guys might feel quite differently.
In summary: Bami's licence is fine but if you don't feel against commercial use then I would urge you not to forbid it. Not everybody has to use the same licence.
_________________
- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vommie |
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 09 Mar 2009
Posts: 99
Location: Berlin
|
Yes! 
Of course everone has too look that used textures are also under CC, licence free or selfmade.
Edit:
| Jack wrote: | | I find it unlikely that OpenTH will ever be a commercial opportunity to anybody, but limiting it feels like it makes OpenTH less 'open' to me. However, art is a lot more of a personal thing that programming code so you guys might feel quite differently. |
That's right, but free means for me also: it has to stay free forever! It's paradox someone could take stuff out of a "free"-licenced project for commercial use. People who wants to make money have to employ own graphic artists 
Last edited by vommie on Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:39 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Kamo |
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
Posts: 66
Location: Poland
|
| vommie wrote: |
Yes!
Of course everone has too look that used textures are also under CC, licence free or selfmade. |
Agree ... but now I have to make textures myself ;D just didnt thought about license before.
_________________
Visit Kamoland
Visit Kamoland/ind
Visit Kamoland/tra
+ the net is vast and infinite + |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vommie |
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 09 Mar 2009
Posts: 99
Location: Berlin
|
| Kamo wrote: | | Agree ... but now I have to make textures myself ;D just didnt thought about license before. |
There are a lot of sources and portals with CC-licenced textures out in the web. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Kamo |
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 26 Mar 2009
Posts: 66
Location: Poland
|
| vommie wrote: | | There are a lot of sources and portals with CC-licenced textures out in the web. |
Yea, but I wanted to make them myself anyway, just didnt have time. Wanted to make photos but it looks like my digital cam is broken ;/ gonna look on web for something.
_________________
Visit Kamoland
Visit Kamoland/ind
Visit Kamoland/tra
+ the net is vast and infinite + |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Jack |
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Administrator
Joined: 20 Feb 2009
Posts: 266
Location: Cambridge, UK
|
Yes but if it is 'share-and-share-alike' then even if somebody does sell it, it is still free for redistribution. That is the important point.
_________________
- Jack |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Bami |
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 02 Apr 2009
Posts: 20
|
Yup, those are my intentions.
GPL and CC licenses are "less free", then for example, just dumping everything in the open domain. It restricts users one thing: using the items for their own personal gain over the expense of us.
I'm all for putting stuff in the open domain, but I've seen lots of examples where people's work got ripped off in a commerical thing, and nothing to do about it.
Releasing the code in GPL and the assets in CC assures that if this project would die, others CAN continue. This also means that if anybody just re-rendered those graphics for their own crap, that same crap is licensed under the CC, and still can't be used for commericial works. Of course, the author always has the last say in things (the artist still remains the owner of the works). So if you make an asset for the game, and you license it under the CC, everything can only be used if the other party does the same. Now say somebody approaches you with a million dollars. You can then license the works to them, but you can't take the license away from the already distributed stuff. Putting it in the public domain forfeits all your rights, and not putting it on a non-commericial line forfeits your rights to eventually cash in on it.
The No-Commercial line just prevents somebody from taking everything, packaging it up and selling it. I'm fine with selling software, but not just getting stuff from artists who do stuff like this in their free time because they love this thing, and then making money off their back.
In a later stage, somebody could pack up the game, and they would have to ask each individual author for a license to sell their art. That makes sure if this would go commercial, that everyone gets their cut . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| VinWij |
| Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 10
Location: Netherlands
|
| I'll always opt for retaining the look, simply because getting lots of graphics to look uniform is really hard, especially with so many different artists. Just update it (CRT to LCD is a good example). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Doctor McNinja |
| Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 04 Sep 2009
Posts: 1
|
| Hello, yes. I'm a great fan of the original game. I would seriously prefer the graphics be kept the same, or as similar in style as possible with new diseases or rooms. It seems like the only way to keep a consistent, professional look to it. Not to belittle what people have already done, but the 3D into a 2D game doesn't really work. I think it loses the charm of the original game. Now, I'm no programmer, but surely it would be possible to keep the original artwork with the option to use the updated work, should the player so wish? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
