Nexuiz Using CryENGINE 3 for Upcoming Console Port

[mh]

That is amazing news.

Any doubts about whether or not Zenimax ownership is going to affect GPL releases should now be totally out the window, where they belong. Sheesh, it's almost as if some people like being negative.

[Baker]

bah, more stuff I have to get FTE to support.

Hehe

[gnounc]

It was the very first worry on MY mind when I heard about the buyout. Kneejerk anxiety.

[dreadlorde]

Wrong question. You should first be pondering when the current licenses of the idtech5 will expire. And after that, you should ask yourself if Zenimax/Bethesda are commited to support the OSS community in the same way id used to do.

I don't think that we're talking about the same thing. I was originally talking about who ever is developing Nexuiz for the console licensing CryTech instead of id tech 5, not id tech 5 becoming OSS.

[frag.machine]

Wrong question. You should first be pondering when the current licenses of the idtech5 will expire. And after that, you should ask yourself if Zenimax/Bethesda are commited to support the OSS community in the same way id used to do.

I don't think that we're talking about the same thing. I was originally talking about who ever is developing Nexuiz for the console licensing CryTech instead of id tech 5, not id tech 5 becoming OSS.

Are you sure ?

Good a reason as any. idtech 5 remains as of yet unreleased also.

And don't hold your breath awaiting for this one.

Are you implying that id tech 5 will not be released?

As I said, don't hold your breath. It may even happen, but not in a foreseeable future.

2011 isn't the foreseeable future?

Wrong question. You should first be pondering when the current licenses of the idtech5 will expire. And after that, you should ask yourself if Zenimax/Bethesda are commited to support the OSS community in the same way id used to do.

EDIT: still in the idtech5 topic:

id: No Tech 5 Licensing
Eurogamer has word from id Software's Todd Hollenshead that they will not be licensing out the Tech 5 engine being used for RAGE to third parties. At one point the plan was to license the engine, but after id was acquired by Zenimax it was decided that the engine would be reserved for id's and Bethesda's internal development. "It's going to be used within ZeniMax, so we're not going to license it to external parties," Hollenshead told Eurogamer at QuakeCon today. "It's like, look, this is a competitive advantage and we want to keep it within games we publish - not necessarily exclusively to id or id titles, but if you're going to make a game with id Tech 5 then it needs to be published by Bethesda, which I think is a fair thing."

optmistic view:
In the past, third party licenses were the main factor to prevent source code releases, like in the case of idtech3 (Quake 3). Besides the mentioned reasons, this may be interpreted also as a movement to allow an easier GPL conversion process.

pessimistic view:
The phrase "if you're going to make a game with id Tech 5 then it needs to be published by Bethesda" may also be interpreted as "from now on, any engines developed by id are Bethesda property, so it's up to them to release it under the GPL or not".

Both views are conjectures only.

[dreadlorde]

That last quote by you doesn't make sense. There aren't (and won't be according to a story on blues news) any licenses to id tech 5. I was never arguing about id tech 5 becoming open source, but rather why the people developing the proprietary nexuiz for consoles didn't license it (which I now know they can't).

[frag.machine]

That last quote by you doesn't make sense. There aren't (and won't be according to a story on blues news) any licenses to id tech 5. I was never arguing about id tech 5 becoming open source, but rather why the people developing the proprietary nexuiz for consoles didn't license it (which I now know they can't).

Hmm... You know, english is not my primary language, so there's always the chance I am actually missing something here. But, on the other hand, I am pretty sure that I quoted exactly what you said, some messages ago. And I could swear that when you explicitly asked me "Are you implying that id tech 5 will not be released?" could be interpreted as "Are you implying that id tech 5 source code will not be released under an open source license ?". If not, then I apologize for the confusion.

[dreadlorde]

And I could swear that when you explicitly asked me "Are you implying that id tech 5 will not be released?" could be interpreted as "Are you implying that id tech 5 source code will not be released under an open source license ?". If not, then I apologize for the confusion.

That seems to be the problem. I meant proprietary id tech 5, not an open source release of it.

[gnounc]

Although so far your english is impeccable, because I speak english natively and thats how I interpreted it.