Battlefront... is it lonely at the TOP?

[Canada Guy]

I can understand you not wanting to give up what revenue you still generate for CMBB and CMAK.

That being said, what about rethinking your stance once Windows 7 arrives? If CMBB/CMAK will not work with that environment (and therefore a further reduction in revenue as time goes on and more people switch to W7), making CMBB/CMAK open source available might make sense in a strictly altruistic sense (and yes, I understand that you are not in the business to be altruistic - I see more of a masochistic streak for all the abuse you have suffered through these last few years).

It is possible that CMBB/CMAK may continue to work in W7 through the Windows 7 Virtual XP mode?

http://windows7news.com/2009/04/25/windows-xp-compatibility-mode/

If this is the case, why would you want to give away your code for free when you worked so hard on it and you could still generate sales into the future.

Altruistically though, if for no other reason, think of all the gamers that want to play Romanians vs Bulgarians and have no recourse other then CMBB. In a few years, it may be impossible to get our fix.

[[hirr]Leto]

This, my good friends, is a question you do not want us to sit down and seriously ask ourselves

Steve

So, are you saying that one of the key factors in your decision tree with respect to releasing the code is that a certain community that may benefit has complained or criticized your games/company?

Not trying to put words into your mouth, but just trying to properly infer what you have said. If that is what you meant, fair enough, I can see it from your perspective enough to understand. If not, I don't mind being set straight.

I think that regardless of the wargaming company, or gaming company for that matter, there are always going to be complaints and criticisms. As for the vast majority of these critical customers, I would argue, its nothing personal, its just how the market works. It is general human nature to complain, or ask for improvements in such a passionate environment.

Not having walked in your shoes for these 6-10 years, I cannot say with certainty that I might feel a bit jaded by constant criticism as well. But I can say that I would not ever let personal feelings get in the way of opportunities, especially with respect to advancing my career, making money or winning a nobel prize (which I certainly will never achieve). I think we all have to take your word for it that BFC's decisions are good ones, no matter what they may be, as long as BFC continues to be a sustainable gaming company and continues cranking out games that people buy... the only true litmus test.

Cheers!

Leto

[Redwolf]

The piracy argument against OpenSource doesn't hold water.

The BFC versions of CMx1 have a CD check but no copy protection, the disks are readily available on pirate sites and no-cd patches right next to them. The CDV anthology release of all three CMx1 games does not have a disk check in the first place. So you can easily pirate the whole game as you can pirate just the textures and soundfiles.

If there is an OpenSource project where the web homepage and the *.exe startup screen both remind people that you are encouraged to get a legal copy, preferably from the BFC website, wouldn't that improve the probability of people picking up the game? Compared to never seeing any communication except the bittorrent tracker's result screen?

Contrary to popular opinion, many people also understand the meaning of "the exe is free but you have to pay for the artwork, so go and reward the guys who started it all and enjoy the bugfixes".

Anyway...

It seems to have worked pretty well for both Doom and Quake. iD repeated their experience in OpenSourcing the initial Quake and Doom code, by now they have 5 games with complete sourcecode under the GPL out there. While we cannot say what their reasons were, exactly, the experience of their first OpenSource release(s) was such that they did it again and again.

Quake2 still holds a sales rank of #7500 on amazon.com and just one of the bazillion of DooM editions #7000. We do not know how many buy it to get a legal copy of the artwork for the OpenSource *.exe files and how many just want to blow up stuff.

But we do know that the OpenSource release didn't kill the market for these games. And that is although there are complete free sets of artwork for these games and you can play the OpenSource editions legally without buying anything.

%%

In my estimation you would get free marketing from a couple of obsessive programmers for the CMx1 games and not lose anything. It is unrealistic to assume that people who would not pirate the whole game suddenly go, download the OpenSource *.exe, read the instructions to get the artwork by buying CMx1 and magically turn into pirates stealing the artwork.

And if the theory isn't enough explain the iD results.

Or to make it very very short: a person is a pirate or not, you don't turn him into one by giving him a fixed game exe file.

[Kwazydog]

Leto;1134057']So, are you saying that one of the key factors in your decision tree with respect to releasing the code is that a certain community that may benefit has complained or criticized your games/company?

I suspect that what Steve is suggesting is that we could all be making a bunch more cash if we were making less detailed games for a wider market, lets say WW2 'RTS' style games. These would likely be quicker to produce, turn over more sales and would require a lot less after sales 'support' as all of the detailed modelling that people concern themselves with in the CM games would be rounded off to the point where they wouldn't be noticed either way

With regards to releasing the source code...although Ive never seen the CMx1 source code as a coder I can almost guarantee that release it would require a bunch of work from Charles to prepare and document the code for distribution (for it to be any use to anyone). Knowing how busy Charles is with CMx2 Id say that that would rule out the possibility right there!

Dan

[Redwolf]

With regards to releasing the source code...although Ive never seen the CMx1 source code as a coder I can almost guarantee that release it would require a bunch of work from Charles to prepare and document the code for distribution (for it to be any use to anyone). Knowing how busy Charles is with CMx2 Id say that that would rule out the possibility right there!

Nah. It is a working piece of software. The code is complete and functional as it is. You can dive in and follow the thing, chipping away with new comments as you find out how some aspect works. The key here is that it's not broken, requiring that you fix something before you can play. Everything is optional, nothing a perquisite before cherry-picking your pet project. Cleaning up some DX5 graphics calls or nuking the fortifications bug will be pretty straightforward (yes I know there was a 3D library of less than stellar hindsight evaluation in use, the 3D models have been dumped in with some crazyass thing from IIRC Nendo and OpenPlay sucks. Don't care).

There are quite a few programmer who are already used to work with the messiest, least documented piece of code you can imagine. I count myself among them and have the resume to prove. I might be an ass (or can emulate one very well), but I'm also pretty effective when I get compulsive about debugging something. I just don't have the free time to write a CM from scratch. All I want in the end is write an AI.

Don't get me wrong, you have an excellent point. Most people with just some school programming experience who think they would like to have this code would get very frustrated. But the situation is different after 20 years in the trenches.

[Kwazydog]

Don't get me wrong, you have an excellent point. Most people with just some school programming experience who think they would like to have this code would get very frustrated. But the situation is different after 20 years in the trenches.

Yup, true Redworlf, I am sure that some could eventually work through it much like people did with the Falcon 4 code some years back.

Dumping the code out there as is wouldnt be what Id personally consider your average open source project though as they are usually provided with some level of documentation. As such Im guessing it would be useless to most, though as in your case there may certainly be exceptions. You may very well be the only one with the level of interest and experience to work through it though, which is mainly what I was getting at (as initially I doubted there would be any) .

Dan

[Battlefront.com]

Leto,

So, are you saying that one of the key factors in your decision tree with respect to releasing the code is that a certain community that may benefit has complained or criticized your games/company?

Er... no. What I said is that the OpenSource thing is bad for us. Or, at the VERY best, a neutral with high risk of being bad. In the past some have said, directly and indirectly, that we basically are being dumb from a marketing standpoint and that we should reconsider. What I'm saying is that if we go on the assumption that our judgement is unsound then the first thing we'd ask ourselves is "why are we doing wargames at all" and *not* "why don't we release our source code for free". Fortunately, we're dumb enough to make games for a small and disproportionally whiney audience, but smart enough to not go out of business doing it. In other words, the status quo is pretty good and you guys should just let us do what we clearly are capable of doing (check the wargame company roster for a quick check of who has made it beyond 10 years compared to who hasn't).

I think that regardless of the wargaming company, or gaming company for that matter, there are always going to be complaints and criticisms. As for the vast majority of these critical customers, I would argue, its nothing personal, its just how the market works. It is general human nature to complain, or ask for improvements in such a passionate environment.

Well, except for some of some of the people you associate with, who do think it's personal, I totally agree.

Not having walked in your shoes for these 6-10 years, I cannot say with certainty that I might feel a bit jaded by constant criticism as well.

To some extent we must be. If we ran around trying to please the unpleasable (who often demand diametrically opposing things) we would be out of business long ago. So to the perpetual complainers who have no concern for facts or perspective, they have forced us to ignore them. Last time I saw (early Feb) you hang out with some of the poster children for that sort But for the rest, the overwhelming majority of customers, we really do like critical feedback. We also like competition as I've stated in this thread.

But I can say that I would not ever let personal feelings get in the way of opportunities, especially with respect to advancing my career, making money or winning a nobel prize (which I certainly will never achieve). I think we all have to take your word for it that BFC's decisions are good ones, no matter what they may be, as long as BFC continues to be a sustainable gaming company and continues cranking out games that people buy... the only true litmus test.

Thank you and yes. We can't stay in business in a tiny niche like this without doing most things right most of the time on a consistent basis. That doesn't mean we can make each and every potential customer equally happy equally well all the time. To think that would be to admit insanity. Therefore, since we can't please all the people all the time by definition all the time some people will be displeased. We accept that and are at peace with it. The problem is some of the people that aren't pleased think that means we're pleasing none of the people and should go out of business. The makes them rather bitter and nasty

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Redwolf,

The piracy argument against OpenSource doesn't hold water.

Sure it does because...

The BFC versions of CMx1 have a CD check but no copy protection, the disks are readily available on pirate sites and no-cd patches right next to them. The CDV anthology release of all three CMx1 games does not have a disk check in the first place. So you can easily pirate the whole game as you can pirate just the textures and soundfiles.

Right, but believe it or not MOST of our customers aren't out there on bittorrent. I personally have never, ever, EVER downloaded a piece of pirated software. Call it morales or what not, but I don't believe in stealing other people's work. Believe it or not a lot of other people feel the same way or, also believe it or not, aren't sophisticated enough to get onto bittorrent.

An OpenSource project is completely different... it's out in the open and it's endorsed "free" by the people that made it. People can openly make websites promoting their version of the game, openly offer downloads of the components, openly point people towards them, etc. Not the same by any stretch.

Once the genie is out of the bottle there is no putting it back in.

It seems to have worked pretty well for both Doom and Quake. iD repeated their experience in OpenSourcing the initial Quake and Doom code, by now they have 5 games with complete sourcecode under the GPL out there. While we cannot say what their reasons were, exactly, the experience of their first OpenSource release(s) was such that they did it again and again.

Oh good God... not this irrelevant argument again Look, those guys have MILLIONS of people playing their games. Their games have a typical shelf life measured in months, though for the big ones more like a year. Whatever revenue they do or do not get from residual sales after that is not even noticeable compared to their operational expenses. If it dried up completely they wouldn't miss it at all.

It's an apples to oranges comparison and we're not biting.

In my estimation you would get free marketing from a couple of obsessive programmers for the CMx1 games and not lose anything.

And you base this estimate on what, exactly? Close to 20 years of programming for someone else and playing games that other people make, or close to 20 years making, marketing, and selling games in an environment where the margins for error are razor thin? Because we have been doing the latter and by our estimation this sort of thing would, at best, do nothing good for us. At worse we'd lose some money which we could afford to lose but would certainly miss. Making wargames has never been a vocation which makes people rich.

And if the theory isn't enough explain the iD results.

I do each and every time we get into this discussion. It works for them just like having a $50,000,000 budget works for them. They're in an entirely different league with completely different rules.

Or to make it very very short: a person is a pirate or not, you don't turn him into one by giving him a fixed game exe file.

I'll make it very very short: a person who plays games doesn't usually know more about how to make, market, and sell them than the people who have a proven track record of doing just that.

I don't know why it is so hard for some of you to get it... we're not stupid, we're not risk adverse, we aren't in this for the money... yet we think going OpenSource is a bad idea for us. The question you never, ever appear to ask yourselves is the most simple one...

"Why do I think I know more than some of the few people who have proven savvy enough to have survived long after others have come and gone?"

It's very simple... we think it is a bad idea and therefore we're not going to do it. If you don't understand why we've come to that conclusion, quit your job and put your ass on the line. Come back in 17 years and tell me how well you did, then we can compare apples to apples

Steve

[Marshal Amherst]

Well I am playing only Battlefront wargames the last years. Waiting like a child of CM Normandy and it seems you guys (Battlefront) are at the TOP of wargaming. Only 1 other wargame I play (War in the Pacific (Expansion coming soon)). Am I the only one or are there good other wargames around I missed? Games like Empire Total War (nice game) is is not a wargame for me.

Congratulations with this achievement Battlefront.

Wow, were you being serious?

At the top of wargaming?

There is absolutely no buzz on any wargaming forum about this game. Well nothing positive.

Am I the only one or are there good other wargames around I missed?

You are missing a heck of a lot of great games. I don't want to post links but check Wargamer.com and Gamesquad.com for starters.

[MikeyD]

CM as open source code. What an odd argument to have. It rather reminds me of those people who are rabid on the topic of legalizing 'hemp fabric'. Its like the primary unspoken topic is just slightly offset from the lesser topic thats being openly debated. This unspoken topic is difficult to put into words, it seems to be something like "BFC disappointed me. I want someone else to be able to monkey with their code in the hope that I will eventually be satisfied."

...Well nothing positive.

All that means is Michael Dorosh frequents all the other wargame sites.

[[hirr]Leto]

Well, except for some of some of the people you associate with, who do think it's personal, I totally agree.

Didn't Jesus have some very questionable associations? Didn't sully his rep.

LOL!

Thank you and yes. We can't stay in business in a tiny niche like this without doing most things right most of the time on a consistent basis. That doesn't mean we can make each and every potential customer equally happy equally well all the time. To think that would be to admit insanity. Therefore, since we can't please all the people all the time by definition all the time some people will be displeased. We accept that and are at peace with it. The problem is some of the people that aren't pleased think that means we're pleasing none of the people and should go out of business. The makes them rather bitter and nasty.

Well if there is such peace in the valley, I would think people's associations would matter little to you. If I may be so bold, I think there has been more than enough bitterness and nastyness on both sides.

My main point from before though, is that I hope that personal feelings about certain groups of customers (such as grognards) doesn't enter into the equation when building your future games. You've stated it doesn't. I'm good with that, because I still hope you are attempting to make competitive and fun to play wargames for guys like me, whether I am associated with whiney grogs or not.

As to the code being free, I would never release a code unless I thought that there was some value to be accrued to me, my company brand or anything else that might benefit me. Thing is, value is often subjective and not always (at first anyways) monetized. I think the other thing people should maybe take into consideration, is that at the end of the day, CMx1 is BFC's baby, beautiful warts and all... I'm not too sure my artistic side would be able to cling to the "serenity now" zone if others began changing or reshaping whatever I had created... even if it made it better...

: )

Cheers!

Leto

[[hirr]Leto]

CM as open source code. What an odd argument to have. It rather reminds me of those people who are rabid on the topic of legalizing 'hemp fabric'. Its like the primary unspoken topic is just slightly offset from the lesser topic thats being openly debated. This unspoken topic is difficult to put into words, it seems to be something like "BFC disappointed me. I want someone else to be able to monkey with their code in the hope that I will eventually be satisfied."

Although not open code, one example I have that is near and dear to me is that Talonsoft's Campaign Series has been redone by Matrix games, and IMHO, they monkeyed with things and made it better.

: )

A lot of satisfied people out there who've had to satisfy themselves... but isn't that always the case??

ROFL!!

Cheers!

Leto

[Guest]

Nah. It is a working piece of software. The code is complete and functional as it is. You can dive in and follow the thing, chipping away with new comments as you find out how some aspect works. The key here is that it's not broken, requiring that you fix something before you can play. Everything is optional, nothing a perquisite before cherry-picking your pet project. Cleaning up some DX5 graphics calls or nuking the fortifications bug will be pretty straightforward (yes I know there was a 3D library of less than stellar hindsight evaluation in use, the 3D models have been dumped in with some crazyass thing from IIRC Nendo and OpenPlay sucks. Don't care).

There are quite a few programmer who are already used to work with the messiest, least documented piece of code you can imagine. I count myself among them and have the resume to prove. I might be an ass (or can emulate one very well), but I'm also pretty effective when I get compulsive about debugging something. I just don't have the free time to write a CM from scratch. All I want in the end is write an AI.

Don't get me wrong, you have an excellent point. Most people with just some school programming experience who think they would like to have this code would get very frustrated. But the situation is different after 20 years in the trenches.

I've been a maintenance programming lead (in addition to my AI work) for the last decade. I've worked with some incredibly nasty systems. I'm surprised that someone of your extensive experience would make sweeping generalizations about a piece of code he's never seen. I'm very, very good at what I do, and I would never look at a running application that could have hundreds of thousands of lines of code and think "that code could be dived into and followed."

I just wouldn't do it. You clearly are extremely confident.

@[hirr]Leto:

Matrix is a separate developer and publisher who bought the rights to the games from their original developer and publisher and then spent an actual budget and timeline making the games RUN, both in general and in modern OSes. In very few cases have there been real improvements beyond some minor aesthetic features or optimization. I own a fair number of Matrix games that have gone through that process. That's not saying that Open Source doesn't have some power, but it will likely not achieve what Matrix did in any reasonable amount of time, and that wasn't much.

[Battlefront.com]

Leto,

Didn't Jesus have some very questionable associations? Didn't sully his rep.

Not my intention to sully your rep, just point out some examples pertinent to your question

Well if there is such peace in the valley, I would think people's associations would matter little to you. If I may be so bold, I think there has been more than enough bitterness and nastyness on both sides.

Well, you may be bold but it's not really relevant. I am never nasty to anybody who doesn't come at me first. And even then I am FAR more restrained than most people in my shoes would be. In fact, that's part of the problem. They can dish it out but oh-my can they not take it, even in small doses. "The customer is always right, even if he is wrong or wants to be a rip roaring flaming orifice" motto is definitely not something we've ever agreed with.

My main point from before though, is that I hope that personal feelings about certain groups of customers (such as grognards) doesn't enter into the equation when building your future games. You've stated it doesn't. I'm good with that, because I still hope you are attempting to make competitive and fun to play wargames for guys like me, whether I am associated with whiney grogs or not.

As I said, the very small whiney, bitter, nasty, counter productive, self loathing types I speak of don't influence what we do. They are, by virtue of their own actions, irrelevant. If they purchase our games it's because coincidentally we've made something that appeals to them. Keep in mind, most grogs are rather nice and easy to get along with people. Opinionated as they might be, interaction between us is beneficial for the games we make. There's a difference between being opinionated and being an opinionated jerk

As to the code being free, I would never release a code unless I thought that there was some value to be accrued to me, my company brand or anything else that might benefit me. Thing is, value is often subjective and not always (at first anyways) monetized. I think the other thing people should maybe take into consideration, is that at the end of the day, CMx1 is BFC's baby, beautiful warts and all... I'm not too sure my artistic side would be able to cling to the "serenity now" zone if others began changing or reshaping whatever I had created... even if it made it better...

Correct about value being subjective. To us there isn't a value in releasing our code, but obviously to customers there is potential for value. It's simply not true that value has to overlap all the time, every time, no matter what the conditions are. As I said, at best we see releasing the code having a neutral effect for us, and from where we sit that's not enough of an incentive to open us up for the risk of having the release work against us.

Once the genie is let out of the bottle, there's no going back.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Philip,

Matrix is a separate developer and publisher who bought the rights to the games from their original developer and publisher and then spent an actual budget and timeline making the games RUN, both in general and in modern OSes. In very few cases have there been real improvements beyond some minor aesthetic features or optimization. I own a fair number of Matrix games that have gone through that process. That's not saying that Open Source doesn't have some power, but it will likely not achieve what Matrix did in any reasonable amount of time, and that wasn't much.

Yes, good point. What Leto described isn't comparable to OpenSource. Matrix made a commercial license for intellectual property from defunct companies (Talonsoft in this case, but SSI and Atomic are others), modified the code to run on current computers, and sold the resulting product for a profit.

That's a good arrangement for both developer and Matrix because otherwise neither would be making money on that code. Yet the people who hold the intellectual property rights don't have to make any new investments or incur risk since the product is dead. Matrix, on the other hand, has a known product with a pretty good idea how much it will cost to bring it to market and how many units it can sell. Adding a few things and fixing some others is part of the "hook" to get people to repurchase an old game at $30 a pop. For Matrix, even a tiny number of units (500-1000) sold yields some pretty significant money in relation to the investment. If you use the "shovelware" approach then it's even better because the fairly easy profit margin compounds over many titles. It's a different business model than Battlefront, but it seems to be working for them.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Marshal Amherst,

Wow, were you being serious?

Yes. I'm sure you're aware that opinions can differ and yet both be "serious".

At the top of wargaming?

Depends on your point of view. If you want the most cutting edge, realistic, 3D tactical wargaming experience out there for Modern combat... there isn't anything that comes close to being ahead of it. But if Modern isn't your cup of tea, then I'm sure that doesn't matter much. WW2 is just around the corner.

There is absolutely no buzz on any wargaming forum about this game. Well nothing positive.

Buzz apparently isn't a good indicator of popularity since sales continue to be steady and strong nearly 1.5 years after release. Personally, I'd rather have sales than buzz

Steve

[silverstars]

I find "Buzz" an amusing term used in context with PC Wargaming(or Board Game Wargames for that matter). When CM1 was "breaking new barriers" and so forth it garnered a whopping paragraph or two on the back page of Computer Gaming World and PC Gamer. Because one page was all Wargames received for the longest time. Now they have none, while other genres (primarily console-oriented ones,except MMORPGs) now advertise like films on various media outlets.

So when I have several coworkers running all across the cultural strata playing World of Warcraft, and when I mention this game or any other wargame, and ALL of them have no idea what I'm talking about( And this also includes several die-hard PC gamers mind you), there really isn't much Buzz to make reference to anyway.

But this is how it has been for the most part. The only time wargaming was pulling in comparable money to other genres was back when SSI released Kampfgruppe. The last wargame that could be considered a crossover hit was Panzer General(or possibly X-Com). So when someone suggests battlefront is at the top of the heap, irregardless of whether they are or not, they are on top of a heap about ankle-high. As far as I know, for PC Wargame Publishers you have Battlefront, or Matrix games. And at least half of Matrix's output is retreads. So if there is some other huge wargame company out there who is releasing the best there is at present, please clue me in on them so I can feel like my hobby has a glimmer of hope.

[Moon]

There is absolutely no buzz on any wargaming forum about this game.

You mean except this one which is hands down the biggest wargaming forum on the net these days?

[panzermartin]

Wow, were you being serious?

At the top of wargaming?

There is absolutely no buzz on any wargaming forum about this game. Well nothing positive

LOL..You mean there is a buzz for over a decade old wargames like top-down 2Dsprite Close combat or the copy of CMx1, panzer command? At least BFC dare to take their ideas further and not happily die slowly surrounded by ASL counters.

[TheVulture]

LOL..You mean there is a buzz for over a decade old wargames like top-down 2Dsprite Close combat or the copy of CMx1, panzer command? At least BFC dare to take their ideas further and not happily die slowly surrounded by ASL counters.

<Has sudden vision of happy wargamer being slowly surrounded by ASL counters>

Sinister...

[TheGreatRadish]

I first played CM in 2001, but back then I was 17 and shied away from the what I perceived as the complexity of it. I went back to Sudden Strike or whatever I was playing then.

Then, during Summer '05, I had a friend staying with me and we had got bored of Hearts of Iron 2 (great game, but we needed a break) so started to rummage through my old games and found CMBO and decided to give it a go. We've never looked back - we spend countless hours over LAN playing the CMx1 titles , growing to love the games more very time we play. We bore the rest of our friends to tears when we head off to the pub for a pint or two - we just can't stop talking about CM!

For us, Battlefront is the standard-bearer of wargaming, no question. Sure, we dip into other titles but always come back with great enthusiasm to CM (including SF). The only other games we play regularly are the Paradox offerings, but they are in a different catrgory.

It's very exciting reading about the development path planned for CMx2, I can't wait for the WW2 stuff - it looks like Battlefront will be staying on top for some time to come! I don't think my wife will particularly welcome that, though, lol!

[Redwolf]

All right, a few more points.

Matrix has several projects where new programmers pick up older games. I happen to know that TOAW, which really has been dragged out of the dirt doing this, is now being developed by a single person. By his own account rather low preexisting programming experience and the person held his daytime job, which isn't 9-5 either. Works fine.

(Insert obvious Stelle Panther reference here)

I have to remind people that (from what was posted) I am the only person who has actually worked in OpenSource projects (among other things one OS including kernel work) and one compiler for a complex programming language (a real compiler to machine code, not some to-C junk). I've been doing this since 1994 (starting with very minor contributions to very minor projects, of course). I have a pretty good idea how OpenSource projects work and what they can achieve.

%%

Anyway, so I get that you won't hear about Doom/Quake's source code and somehow it doesn't matter that the games still sell copies although everything, including plenty artwork, is openly for download all over the place, from dozens of sites.

Did you look at the Falcon 4 story?

These guys first hacked up the binary in a hex editor to fix bugs, then they started munching on a leaked source code. All the while the game got new life and sold real copies. To the point where the whole thing was commericially re-released. And successfully, they re-released F4 based on the hacked up code at a time where flightsims were in the gutter, and it did very well.

Today, F4 is not only sold as a new copy directly by Amazon (not even most BFC games manage to do that, and they are younger), for $23, it is there with a sales rank of freaggin 1554. That is an 11 year old 3D game.

The source code out there, the new exe files out there, didn't kill this thing. They were a windfall. Of course the re-release had some real cost associated to it but it seems to bay back a lot.

%%

Steve, your image of this is that once you let people re-publish the *.exe file that there must be a landslide of all the other content being illegally offered for download, too. It didn't happen that way with iD games and not with F4, and not with SP.

And the reason is simple: those people who can actually hack up the code and drive the project are usually very concious about licensing Most of them make a living at daytime from commercial software and the understand the legal issues. The website for an OpenSource project like this carries more "get a legal copy of the artwork, dangit" messages then you ever see today.

The losers who like to overlook licensing generally have no power whatsoever in these projects because they can't or won't contribute real code.

(there are the "copyleft" people who are real programmers and want every piece of software for free, but they don't touch re-engineered game code with a 10-freet pole, so they would leave this alone)

[Battlefront.com]

Redwolf,

I have to remind people that (from what was posted) I am the only person who has actually worked in OpenSource projects (among other things one OS including kernel work) and one compiler for a complex programming language (a real compiler to machine code, not some to-C junk). I've been doing this since 1994 (starting with very minor contributions to very minor projects, of course). I have a pretty good idea how OpenSource projects work and what they can achieve.

And I have to remind people that (from what was posted) I am the only person who has actually worked in the computer gaming business (among other things at the then largest game company on Earth) with a variety of complex projects (not some shareware junk). I've been doing this since 1992 (starting with very minor contributions to wargaming with my first self published title). I have a pretty good idea how wargame development and publishing works and what can be achieved.

There, now we've both made similar statements. What I haven't done is try to imply that I know how to do your job better than you. I could EASILY do that if you want me to

I can say this enough times. We're on the inside looking out, you are on the outside looking in. You see the world in a different way than we do and you have to understand that. From our point of view, we do not think going OpenSource is a good fit for us. Since we have a long standing track record of pushing envelopes, doing things people say are impossible/foolish, continuing to take risks that put most other software operations to shame, and staying in business long after other "greats" have gone under. That should be good enough, even if you don't like the decision we've made.

This really is a pointless debate to keep coming around to. Some people want our sourcecode for free and to do with it whatever they want. They think that will benefit us in the long run. We disagree and therefore we aren't going to give our sourcecode away for free. I doubt very much that will ever change.

Steve

[ASL Veteran]

All right, a few more points.

I have to remind people that (from what was posted) I am the only person who has actually worked in OpenSource projects (among other things one OS including kernel work) and one compiler for a complex programming language (a real compiler to machine code, not some to-C junk). I've been doing this since 1994 (starting with very minor contributions to very minor projects, of course). I have a pretty good idea how OpenSource projects work and what they can achieve.

You know that there is already a CMx1 related 'project' that is OpenSource right? I believe that it's called 'Combat Mission Campaigns' and if you mosey on over to the Combat Mission Campaigns forum the guy who was working on it has left a link to the code that you can download and play with all you want. It's pretty obvious that you can talk the talk. If you want to do great things that the Combat Mission community would greatly appreciate and sing your praises over then you can make the Combat Mission Campaigns work. Demanding / Requesting Steve to OpenSource the CMx1 code is a little like tilting at windmills or banging your head against the wall.

Why don't you download that source code for Combat Mission Campaigns and walk the walk buddy. With a man of your obvious talents I figure you should be able to crank out the Combat Mission Campaigns in about a month or two - what do you figure?

[Canada Guy]

We appreciate that you do not want to opensource your code. Understandable. You are still making money from your efforts and you do not want to dry up that revenue stream.

What about licensing your efforts to a game company that would take your previous code and revamp it for the next operating systems and fix some bugs along the way? Maybe even expand it in directions that you do not have the staff for (Can anyone say 1940 Winter War? or Manila 1944?)

I can say that I do not understand your company model but would this not give you access to immediate cash (and possibly future residuals) while also allowing people that may have some free time to work on the code?

Just curious.