What do you think would happen to the community if MS came along an wanted to make Allegiance II based on some of the cores and factions created here?
Of course people would get their royalties. /glare.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":glare:" border="0" alt="glare.gif" />
I'm also going to work under the assumption that they would
1) consult the developers currently working
2) put forth the necessary resources to make it playable.
3) produce a 'modern' allegiance game that takes advantage of modern hardware.
Thoughts?
EDIT - and include base turrets /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />
Allegiance II
I'm of the opionion that it would be very unlikley for Microsoft to even review the modifications made so far. Not in any legal capacity anyway. Simply because it opens them up to all kinds of legal issues should even one persons intellictual property rights get trodden on. I know that a lot of places don't take ideas from the general public for this very reason.
If Microsoft wanted to make another allegiance, they would probably start with thier last release, and work it up from there. I just don't see the exposure on thier part as being a smart move for them to make (as cool as it would be).
Microsoft is business that needs to make money, and make that money on schedule. Involvement of a volunteer community (even one as cool as this one) is probably not a calculatable risk they would be willing to accept.
If Microsoft wanted to make another allegiance, they would probably start with thier last release, and work it up from there. I just don't see the exposure on thier part as being a smart move for them to make (as cool as it would be).
Microsoft is business that needs to make money, and make that money on schedule. Involvement of a volunteer community (even one as cool as this one) is probably not a calculatable risk they would be willing to accept.
-
hockey1015
- Posts: 938
- Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 8:00 am
- Location: Tampa, FL
correct me if im wrong, those "in the know"... but since Microsoft freesourced the game... wouldn't they have to re-design a unique game? It seems to me that they can't go back and use code that has been freesourced for personal profit.
edit: im an idiot who uses wrong terminology... Belay my last.
edit: im an idiot who uses wrong terminology... Belay my last.
Last edited by hockey1015 on Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Your post went into the realm of ridiculous with this /doh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":doh:" border="0" alt="doh.gif" />Gstar wrote:QUOTE (Gstar @ Oct 25 2007, 02:46 PM) EDIT - and include base turrets /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />
Base turrets = uber nerf to bombers of all sorts.
TB
[18:48] <Imago> dont take me seriouslyspideycw wrote:QUOTE (spideycw @ Nov 28 2008, 02:50 PM) All the retards are contained in one squad mostly (System X)
What are you guys smoking??? MS has the rights to all modifications made to this game and clearly states this in one of the release files (I am at work so I do not have access to it at the moment). The devs are required to clearly indicate all changes made. Now there are some mods (like the cores and artwork) where some could try and make/enforce copyright claims (but good luck going against MS's lawyers). Please do NOT take this discussion further in this thread, it will just degenerate, you are welcome to talk about it but take it to the rants forum or just drop it.
But back on topic.
If either MS or even the current devs (or new devs), were to make an Alleg II it would likely not use a lick of the current code so the above is fairly moot.
They have no reason to consult the current devs or even the current community, lets face it, we are not large enough to make them any money. Like most game releases as of late, they are looking for a slam dunk, Allegiance is not a slam dunk big money maker, for an Alleg II to be a slam dunk would likely only resemble the current Allegiance in name only and perhaps a nod to its history, it would be an entirely different game. Just my humble opinion.
That is not to say an Alleg II, if built, would not be hugely popular here, and maybe a moderately large community, but a lot of us are here because we love the 'classic' nature of this game. Stars falls into that category as well, fantastic game. Its successor Stars Supernova, made it well past the concept art and storyline stage but failed to get the funding needed for development and more importantly release/distribution.
But back on topic.
If either MS or even the current devs (or new devs), were to make an Alleg II it would likely not use a lick of the current code so the above is fairly moot.
They have no reason to consult the current devs or even the current community, lets face it, we are not large enough to make them any money. Like most game releases as of late, they are looking for a slam dunk, Allegiance is not a slam dunk big money maker, for an Alleg II to be a slam dunk would likely only resemble the current Allegiance in name only and perhaps a nod to its history, it would be an entirely different game. Just my humble opinion.
That is not to say an Alleg II, if built, would not be hugely popular here, and maybe a moderately large community, but a lot of us are here because we love the 'classic' nature of this game. Stars falls into that category as well, fantastic game. Its successor Stars Supernova, made it well past the concept art and storyline stage but failed to get the funding needed for development and more importantly release/distribution.
Last edited by Dogbones on Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
DOG PROPERTY LAWS:
2. If it's in my mouth, it's mine.
[unless it tastes bad, then it is yours.]
Factoid gets a cookie, chocolate chip I think /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />factoid wrote:QUOTE (factoid @ Oct 25 2007, 03:21 PM) Well, you'd be wrong there. It was never free sourced. It's licensed under Microsoft's Shared Source Initiative. They already own everything we've done to the code.
DOG PROPERTY LAWS:
2. If it's in my mouth, it's mine.
[unless it tastes bad, then it is yours.]
Ok, only killing time at work here, and thinking out loud.
-- Completly ignoring the topics of profitibility of a new Allegiance, and all the rest of Dog's good points.
I wouldn't deny the Microsoft has the right to reuse any of the modifications, I'm only guessing that they would not want to take the risk:
For example,
Say that one dev used a bit of another open source project (Say, freeimage) inside the alleg code base, and that code was under a license like GPL is now goverened by that license as well. If the dev didn't comment the fragment appropriatly, and MS ended up releasing that and got caugt... well, I'm sure there are more than two lawyers out there more than happy to take that case up against MS's legal department.
I know that this is one of the prime reasons that we don't incorporate open source into client projects is the indemnification. Essentially, you have to say: "I will accept full responsibility for the code I am providing and work out legal issues from my check book in case of problems." when incorporating source into your products that you don't have owership of. Not just rights too, but ownership of. I don't think the community exists as a legal entity, so there's no community rep to say to Microsoft: "Sure billion dollar company, you can take your code back. We the community will gladly cover any lawsuit expenses from the code we wrote if its not 100% on the level."
While the risk is a drop in the bucket for MS, I don't see MS as a big company making that move. If I was the dept head with that project it wouldn't be the way I'd go about it anyway.
This doesn't have anything to do with the quality of work done to the code base (which is pretty stringent, and well maintained from what I have seen of the process so far), it's more of a general rule I follow when working with "code from the wild".
You can't be too careful once you are sitting on a pile of money, you never know when some Darl McBride is going to try to steal it away... /mad.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":mad:" border="0" alt="mad.gif" />
-- Completly ignoring the topics of profitibility of a new Allegiance, and all the rest of Dog's good points.
I wouldn't deny the Microsoft has the right to reuse any of the modifications, I'm only guessing that they would not want to take the risk:
For example,
Say that one dev used a bit of another open source project (Say, freeimage) inside the alleg code base, and that code was under a license like GPL is now goverened by that license as well. If the dev didn't comment the fragment appropriatly, and MS ended up releasing that and got caugt... well, I'm sure there are more than two lawyers out there more than happy to take that case up against MS's legal department.
I know that this is one of the prime reasons that we don't incorporate open source into client projects is the indemnification. Essentially, you have to say: "I will accept full responsibility for the code I am providing and work out legal issues from my check book in case of problems." when incorporating source into your products that you don't have owership of. Not just rights too, but ownership of. I don't think the community exists as a legal entity, so there's no community rep to say to Microsoft: "Sure billion dollar company, you can take your code back. We the community will gladly cover any lawsuit expenses from the code we wrote if its not 100% on the level."
While the risk is a drop in the bucket for MS, I don't see MS as a big company making that move. If I was the dept head with that project it wouldn't be the way I'd go about it anyway.
This doesn't have anything to do with the quality of work done to the code base (which is pretty stringent, and well maintained from what I have seen of the process so far), it's more of a general rule I follow when working with "code from the wild".
You can't be too careful once you are sitting on a pile of money, you never know when some Darl McBride is going to try to steal it away... /mad.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":mad:" border="0" alt="mad.gif" />