Earlier quoted context omitted.
> classic Mac OS I’d be really surprised if Apple still had the source code and custom tools necessary to actually build the thing.
they released the Lisa OS code (from 1983) recently, I think they still have all the Mac OS code building it may be horrible, but the code would still be very interesting to hobbyists
Far Cry 1.34 source code (2006)
241–250 of 547 posts
Re: Far Cry 1.34 source code (2006)
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd guess something big as Windows 9x contains A LOT of licensed third party code which would be a nightmare to get permission for. Try finding five dozen rights holders after thirty years...
don't quote me on that but i read somewhere that microsoft has a strict policy of NIH in their codebase - everything gets reimplemented from scratch unless it's completely unfeasible. The only problem might be the software patents that their code leverages.
Re: Far Cry 1.34 source code (2006)
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd guess something big as Windows 9x contains A LOT of licensed third party code which would be a nightmare to get permission for. Try finding five dozen rights holders after thirty years...
don't quote me on that but i read somewhere that microsoft has a strict policy of NIH in their codebase - everything gets reimplemented from scratch unless it's completely unfeasible. The only problem might be the software patents that their code leverages.
Unless you mean that someone could see that you implemented their patent and retroactively go to sue them?
Re: Far Cry 1.34 source code (2006)
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd guess something big as Windows 9x contains A LOT of licensed third party code which would be a nightmare to get permission for. Try finding five dozen rights holders after thirty years...
don't quote me on that but i read somewhere that microsoft has a strict policy of NIH in their codebase - everything gets reimplemented from scratch unless it's completely unfeasible. The only problem might be the software patents that their code leverages.
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20180515-00/?p=98...
Re: Far Cry 1.34 source code (2006)
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
don't quote me on that but i read somewhere that microsoft has a strict policy of NIH in their codebase - everything gets reimplemented from scratch unless it's completely unfeasible. The only problem might be the software patents that their code leverages.
Why would parents prevent publishing of source code? Unless you mean that someone could see that you implemented their patent and retroactively go to sue them?
Re: Far Cry 1.34 source code (2006)
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
The PC gaming market is actually bigger now than it was back then. The difference is that consoles didn't really start to become viable for the FPS genre until the Xbox/PS2 generation (and even then it was really just Halo). So an FPS was PC exclusive by default with only the biggest games getting a clumsy console port or spinoff years later (like FarCry Instincts). Consoles became a first class citizen in the world…
Competitive FPS games did even exist on the N64 (James Bond Golden Eye, Perfect Dark), and in the next generation they were very common and mostly had the modern two stick controls which is still used today. So I don't think that had anything to do with it. > The PC gaming market is actually bigger now than it was back then. This might be true, but I'm fairly certain that the market share of the PC platform has stron…
Shooters didn't become a premiere genre for consoles until the 360/PS3 era. Like I said, as far as popularity went, there was Halo and MoH (to a way lesser degree) during the Xbox/PS2 days but not much else. And then all of a sudden, shooters became the hottest genre on consoles in the mid-late 00s. That's when CoD and Battlefield made the transition over to consoles in earnest. It's when Sony invested heavily (and ultimately failed) in creating a "Halo killer". It's when CoD went from a pretty successful PC franchise to consistently being the highest selling game year after year.
As far as the PC gaming market goes. There was a dark age starting in the mid-00s. But PC gaming is very popular right now (we'll have to see what impact high GPU prices has on its future) .
For instance, Activision makes more money from the PC platform than all consoles combined.
https://www.pcgamer.com/activision-is-making-more-money-on-p...
PC has been Ubisoft's second largest platform (ahead of Xbox but behind PlayStation) since 2018
https://www.statista.com/statistics/269679/breakdown-of-ubis...
No one in the industry ignores the PC market anymore. Everyone (except Nintendo) is releasing their games on PC now even companies that weren't traditionally in the PC gaming market like Japanese publishers. Genres that had a spotty history of PC support (Sports, JRPGs, Fighting games, etc) are seeing consistent PC releases. And even Sony conceded and started releasing their exclusives on PC (years later but it's still a dramatic shift from even a few years ago).
As someone who was primarily a PC gamer in the 90s, I can tell you anecdotally that I know several people who were console gamers only 20+ years ago who are now PC gamers.
Re: Far Cry 1.34 source code (2006)
#247I wish companies would just opensource really old engines for educational purposes. Maybe take game assets resize everything to 1/10th so that it looks like sht but can still be used as placeholder. Would boost the pipeline of talent for the entire industry
In general, open-source all abandonware. Here's a few examples of non-game old software that would benefit the society if open-sourced: Windows 9x and classic Mac OS. No one has sold these OSes for 20+ years and they turned out to be evolutionary dead ends. It would make sense to release their sources so people could learn from them and run them on new hardware more easily. Flash Player. Adobe has stated in no uncert…
Many reasons are there , it takes a lot of effort for a company to open source anything, to name a few
- Not get sued for IP infringement if your developer from 20 years back copied something or used GPL code etc
- Potentially expose active trade secrets , the program might not be sold , parts the code /algorithms whole modules might still be used in newer applications.
- Presence of PII or other sensitive/inflammatory content in comments and code, could be anything from funny(but inappropriate )method names to comments and documentation .
- poor boundaries, you could have dependencies which are used by the app which are not possible to also be open sourced.
- poor documentation, you simply no longer have all the code or is it time consuming to piece it all together
- expose vulnerabilities in your current offerings , code sometimes has way of being reused , you would be surprised how much “dead” code has a way of living on for decades later .
- third party agreements, not all your code is “your” code, you may have only licensed it from another vendor.
Re: Far Cry 1.34 source code (2006)
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd guess something big as Windows 9x contains A LOT of licensed third party code which would be a nightmare to get permission for. Try finding five dozen rights holders after thirty years...
don't quote me on that but i read somewhere that microsoft has a strict policy of NIH in their codebase - everything gets reimplemented from scratch unless it's completely unfeasible. The only problem might be the software patents that their code leverages.
Re: Far Cry 1.34 source code (2006)
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
What should really happen is a law that video games get declared public domain and have their source code released after 10 years. All assets and dependencies would get automatically released under a license allowing for their use in that game and derivatives of it. As it is, the source is mostly just lost to time, making humanity poorer.
There's a lot of games that have a shelf life of more than a decade. Maybe make that "10 years after the game is no longer sold".
Re: Far Cry 1.34 source code (2006)
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems dumb and it is dumb, but it’s also an important feature of Windows that your terrible app from the 90s can still run today with minor changes generally. Less so if it’s win16 but anything win32 is good to go. Also, Linux has a similar philosophy as Linus has eloquently described in the past. [1] [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/23/75
> It seems dumb and it is dumb, but it’s also an important feature of Windows that your terrible app from the 90s can still run today with minor changes generally. This is a myth which is mostly not true from some time.