Questions like this aren't uncommon, but a lot of people find it very frustrating.
A fantastic small developer makes what looks like another amazing game, and as soon as it's out people are looking for open-source clones so they don't have to pay.
On a form full of professional developers, who usually get paid for making software.
That may not be what was meant, but the it has to be open source or I don't care posts are not constructive. Real developers like the guys who made Threes get screwed over by this kind of stuff.
Can't we just appreciate a cool game someone made?
>people are looking for open-source clones so they don't have to pay.
I can't speak for others, but you are wrong on this point when it comes to why I want free software (FLOSS) games or any software. I want it so that I can see what's going on underneath and to play with it myself. I would be happy to pay to get a copy of the source code (under a free software license).
This game ought to be quite intriguing internally for any programmer who's read about it. It's full of stuff that's simply not common in mainstream games.
Please don't try to say that the desire for FLOSS is just about getting free stuff. It's not, and it does a disservice to people who would be happy to pay for a FLOSS version, or just programmers wishing to learn more and build upon the work of others.
And yes, it can be appreciated. But there's no harm in saying I'd appreciate it a lot more if it came with the freedom I would like.
I can definitely understand wanting to see the guts, sadly I have no faith that's what the vast majority of people would do with it. I've met far too many people who just want free stuff and seem almost offended they have to pay for things. Those who were like that and ask for FOSS I think were just using it as a cover for their greed.
That's not a real FOSS believer. I know that.
I would completely understand releasing the source to a game after a few years when it's not making as much money. I don't see why any developer would do it as soon as the game comes out (ignoring the fact that this game is in early release and not finished).
Because it is a video game, which are usually not OS, and is available on all platforms. It it was OS, you would know, and the maker wouldn't be charging for it on Steam.
Thank you for your response. I know open source games aren't the norm, but they do exist and are something to be encouraged and discovered. For example, consider Quadrilateral Cowboy[0], which is a recent game made available on all platforms, for sale on Steam, and open source. In particular for SHENZHEN I/O, this is a game all about coding! It's seem reasonable to consider that it might be open source and if not, to want strongly for it as a natural extension of the game and so to wonder what similar games exist that are modifiable. Regardless, I do disagree with discouraging discussion around open source software, original or alternative, commercial or otherwise, and was a little saddened to be downvoted for it on Hacker News. I appreciate your civility and consideration.
I wouldn't read much into the downvote. People tend to get tired of what has been coloquially termed the "middlebrow dismissal" which plagues HN a bit. No doubt your comment was misinterpreted as such.
If we're lucky, we'll see some open source on this, but probably only in as far as it directly makes the game more fun. Or harder. You can likely mod the game quite a bit though, as the Content folder is full of plain text code. (I'm assuming .cso files are compiled glsl code?)
And thanks for the reminder for Quadrilateral Cowboy; I have no idea why I don't have this in my library yet. I don't think I've heard anything negative about it from anyone, and it looks like an absolute blast!
