Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
First Person Shooters (Games) Entertainment Games

ArenaLive, an Open Source MMOFPS 95

Posted by Soulskill
from the free-as-in-frag dept.
ZeXx86 writes "ArenaLive is a new open source game based on the well-known OpenArena. Its aim is to become an open-source alternative to id Software's QuakeLive. The main idea is to make a game available in your web browser. So far, the game is playable and provides player stats, straight-forward settings for your account in a web browser and, of course, loads of fun with your friends. At the moment, it is available only for 32/64bit Mozilla Firefox on GNU/Linux, however, support for other platforms and browsers is coming soon. The game is licensed under GNU/GPL2. It's still in an early development stage, so players and developers both are welcome to join."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ArenaLive, an Open Source MMOFPS

Comments Filter:
  • This is absurd (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Would someone like to explain why a game with a grand total of 5 Git commits (http://repo.or.cz/w/ArenaLive.git) and approximately 1 kloc is on the front page?

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      to increase that number?

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Panzor (1372841)

      Hey, I clicked the link and even started installing it. That's more than 95% of the articles on this site can say, for me. The reason I stopped installing it was because I already decided I didn't like playing quakelive, since I have Unreal on the windows side anyway, and because I genuinely suck compared to people that play that game. It is neat to see someone targetting the linux crowd before anyone else, but that feeling is overruled with the question "why?" I guess they're doing this just for the hell o

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by resfilter (960880)
        i wouldn't say they're targetting linux first it for the hell of it..

        many horrible "our first opengl software project" FPS games target linux initially, and for good reason

        people expect so much less out of linux games, as there simply isn't much good entertainment software available to them. linux gaming addicts end up appreciating any peice of shit game they can get their hands on

        windows users laugh at you when you release a work in progress, or something that is simply a peice of shit, as they'r
        • Re:This is absurd (Score:5, Insightful)

          by w0mprat (1317953) on Sunday July 05, 2009 @03:56AM (#28585217)

          windows users laugh at you when you release a work in progress, or something that is simply a peice of shit, as they're used to commercial grade game releases. that can be very hard to compete with, considering the development time that goes into even a passable 3d game.

          By your argument Linux should not exist since commercial OS's are so hard to compete with. Labor is not the issue with open software, it is more having a good idea that attracts people who want to work on it. So if a game sucks and stalls in alpha it is probably because it just outright isn't any good and nobody wants to fix it.

          There are so many gamers so pissed off with the commercial game world who would leap all over a by-the-gamer-for-the-gamer open source revolution. So what's pissing us gamers off? How about paying upwards of $50 for a game only to have seven hours of single player game play and mediocre multiplayer with hardly any servers. Or amazing graphics, sophisticated sandbox gaming (Cryengine) and it's all over in that 7 hours of cookie-cutter linear storyline with little replay value (Crysis). Throw some buggy code and DRM and you have all the reasons to be angry.

          • Re:This is absurd (Score:4, Insightful)

            by shutdown -p now (807394) on Sunday July 05, 2009 @05:32AM (#28585517) Journal

            By your argument Linux should not exist since commercial OS's are so hard to compete with. Labor is not the issue with open software ...

            Labor of skilled programmers is not an issue with open software. Labor of skilled graphics artists, UI designers, project managers, and various other professions vitally important to get a polished final product, is definitely an issue.

            • by upuv (1201447) on Sunday July 05, 2009 @07:07AM (#28585759) Journal

              ??? Project Managers ???

              Where do you live?
              Where do you work?
              How do I move there?
              Who do I have to bribe to get a job there?

              Clearly you have project managers of value for you to mention them as valuable assets! Actually contributers to the process and progression of a project?

              I need to know desperately where this nirvana is!

              What a second. Are you a project manager?

              • by Herkum01 (592704)

                Ah! Project Managers, the turd polishers of the IT world.

                Don't know enough to collect business requirements, and yet unable to write a "Hello world!" program. Yet they still manage to slip themselves into the middle and get paid more than their customers OR programmers!

                • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                  A good project manager is worth an order of magnitude more than a good programmer because they enable the good programmers to do good work without being hassled by things outside of their job of writing and documenting good code.

                  The fact that there are few good project managers doesn't make this any less true.

                  • I find it sad that the parent poster, who is spot on (and precisely mirrors my experience), is modded Troll. You mods are poor, sad people - if you have bad PMs, then blame them specifically, not the profession.

              • by Blakey Rat (99501)

                You're probably used to the business world. In the games world, the project manager is the creative vision of the game. Analogous to the director of a movie.

                In any case, if you have useless project managers that says a lot more about your company's hiring practice than the value of a project manager.

              • I'm just a developer. However, from my experience, I have concluded that a good project manager is absolutely crucial to get things done. And developers usually do not make good PMs (though a good PM must have some understanding of what he is managing).

                It is true that a good PM is a rarity in any case; before you ask, a good one is the one who listens to developers he manages, and doesn't try to second-guess them or override their time & comlexity estimations for individual tasks. I had a pleasure of wo

          • Re:This is absurd (Score:4, Insightful)

            by FishWithAHammer (957772) on Sunday July 05, 2009 @08:41AM (#28586073)

            There are so many gamers so pissed off with the commercial game world who would leap all over a by-the-gamer-for-the-gamer open source revolution.

            Horseshit.

            The plain fact of the matter is that you're not going to get the same kind of quality, by any stretch, out of an "open source revolution." I don't suppose you've noticed that virtually all of the open-source FPSes out there are based off very old (originally proprietary) code, do you? Code that has to be hacked at significantly to get much beyond the nVidia TNT2 target that it originally topped out at (oh boy, the GPL'd Quake 3 code has hardware T&L!)? Even the really good open-source FPSes (I'm talking Warsow here) are extremely limited games, and sure as hell don't address what you complain about ("linear storyline").

            Open source software is good in some cases. Games are clearly not really one of them. You aren't getting Half-Life 2 out of the open source world, I'm sorry to say. You don't have anything technically equivalent to even Source (and despite Valve making great, quality games, Source really sucks, it's one of the main reasons I'm glad my team is writing our own engine for our games). You don't have the kind of incentives to create a focused, quality project because you're not paying them to stay in line (people will just toddle off to play with your code--which is by no means a bad thing, but it kind of makes it hard to make a kickass game when everybody's off dicking around with their own thing).

            Sorry, but no, open source is not always the answer. Like right here.

            • Code that has to be hacked at significantly to get much beyond the nVidia TNT2 target that it originally topped out at (oh boy, the GPL'd Quake 3 code has hardware T&L!)?

              This kind of comment makes you appear to have no clue what you're talking about. Hardware T&L is an artefact of the drivers, not the engine. GLQuake makes use of hardware T&L if you run it on a card which supports it. Most modern open source FPS engines - including things like DarkPlaces which are based on updated versions of the original GLQuake engine - make heavy use of fragment and vertex shaders, rather than relying entirely on the fixed-function pipeline that older engines used. This puts

              • Tongue-in-cheek sarcasm, anyone? Of course hardware T&L is a driver thing, I was poking fun (you know, that thing normal people have) at the old Quake 3 requirements.

                Yes, DarkPlaces supports shaders. It also couldn't have been a particularly easy task to convert a largely fixed-function setup to a shader-based one, which is why I said "has to be hacked at significantly". And any of the GPL'd iD Tech engines suffer from fairly huge technical shortcomings (yes, BSP is a technical shortcoming--modern engin

              • by Blakey Rat (99501)

                Wow, you've completely missed the entire *point* of the grandparent's post to focus on a trivial technical error. Which was probably a joke you didn't get in the first place. You win Slashdot.

                You might want to check those trees again, I think there might be a forest hidden in there.

            • cube2 [wikipedia.org] shows that on the technical level opensource can compete.
              Nethack [wikipedia.org] shows that on the complex non-linear story level opensouce can compete

              You don't have the kind of incentives to create a focused, quality project because you're not paying them to stay in line (people will just toddle off to play with your code--which is by no means a bad thing, but it kind of makes it hard to make a kickass game when everybody's off dicking around with their own thing).

              The same could be said about linux. In addition closed source gaming is pretty complicated, so its safe to say that it's not as simple open source not being able to produce quality games. There are many problems but simply being open source isn't one, a free highly customizable engine would surely be a great base for many indie developers to work from.

              For example, if i

              • Yes, I know Sauerbraten. It doesn't compete. I'm sorry, because it's a really nifty concept for an engine, but it really doesn't.

                Compare Sauerbraten to UE3 and tell me how it goes.

                As for Nethack--frankly, and I say this as somebody who loves NetHack and has ascended four times, it doesn't stack up from a gameplay perspective except for the "god dammit I WILL BEAT THIS GAME" people. That's not at all the people who you'd be targeting for the person I replied to's "open source gaming revolution" because they'

                • I'm no expert on game engines, but comparing the current top of the line commercial engine to a previous gen engine, isn't really fair.

                  Compare Sauerbraten (a 2004 gamecube-era engine) to the modified goldsrc in CS:CZ/Unreal engine2/idtech4 and while it might not be as good, it surely does compete!

              • by jackbird (721605)
                IHAIN (I have Ascended in Nethack)

                Nethack shows nothing of the sort. It's the exact same fucking story (and not much of a story at that) every time, modulo the quest levels, which are all roughly the exact same fucking thing every time ("We have class-themed problems, please kill everything you see after descending this staircase to solve them") with different monster names and level layouts.

                Nethack offers a huge variety of possible strategies, items, and approaches to getting from the beginning to the
                • Ding ding ding. Sandboxes (which, in a lot of ways, Nethack is) are not non-linear stories.

                  It also isn't really an example of good game design, except when you want to explicitly target uber-grognard hardcore types. There aren't a lot of those.

          • by Blakey Rat (99501)

            By your argument Linux should not exist since commercial OS's are so hard to compete with. Labor is not the issue with open software,

            Yah it is.

            Where are the great open source artists, musicians, screenwriters, modelers, level designers? Those all count as "labor", buddy. And the open source community has few-to-none of them. (For good reason: those people like to be paid.)

            Having a good idea to attract people doesn't help make a finished game if you only attract programmers.

            There are so many gamers so pissed

            • by quadrox (1174915)

              Huh? The crysis menu system is a serious PITA. unnecessary nesting layers, unreadable fonts (using all caps IIRC), horrible delay when clicking on items etc... I have never seen a worse menu system than that of crysis.

              Bad example, seriously

              • by Blakey Rat (99501)

                You're right, it's a bad example. But, still, try Alien Arena or Blood Frontier-- trust me, it could be a thousand times worse.

                • by quadrox (1174915)

                  I have played alien arena, and while the UI is a bit quirky if I remember correctly, it never pissed me off as much as crysis' did.

                  I'm not really an FOSS fanatic who thinks that everything FOSS is better than anything purely commercial, but I have no illusions about commercial games either. Sure the games industry has a lot of technical expertise, but even they are only able to make a truly good game once in a while. And I have never been so frustrated with FOSS games as I ever have with commercial ones (bu

        • windows users laugh at you when you release a work in progress

          No they don't. We get plenty of half-assed, non-polished games for the windows platform. And for consoles too. Rushed deadlines and shitty code aren't just part of the GNU/Linux world.
      • by 7-Vodka (195504)

        The reason I stopped installing it was because I already decided I didn't like playing quakelive, since I have Unreal on the windows side anyway, and because I genuinely suck compared to people that play that game.

        The skill matching system didn't work for you or did they not have that in place before? It seemed to work quite well for me.

      • by sznupi (719324)

        First, as another poster said, Quake Live has a skillmatching component to it that is poised to work better than any OSS alternative even simply because of sheer number of players.

        Secondly - prepare for onslaught of aimbots in ArenaLive. It is, after all...open source.

    • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Uhhh.... OpenArena had 914 commits:
      http://openarena.ws/svn.html [openarena.ws]

  • I've been playing a lot of Quake Live lately and I have to say it is good fun. I can see an open source equivalent being better if the community is there for it to flourish. I would definitely play it. Otherwise, I don't see much of a reason for having an open source Quake Live clone especially when the service it seeks to clone is free as well.
    • by ardor (673957)

      Otherwise, I don't see much of a reason for having an open source Quake Live clone especially when the service it seeks to clone is free as well.

      The real reason for this is for the FSF to finally get a chance to call something "GNU Quake".

  • Installed and played a few games without a hitch. I'm sure it's not 100% but it seems pretty playable. I think it's nice being able to play in linux first for a change.

  • why not AGPL? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by influenza (138942)

    It's too bad this isn't under the AGPL. Maybe it has to be GPL2 because of what it's based on. But with the GPL2 source only has to be shared with people who receive binaries. This does not include visitors to a website, or an in-browser game in this case.

    The AGPL got me thinking about the relevance of FLOSS if everything moves to cloud computing. If this project takes off, it would be a "cloud" that is based on FLOSS. Meaning that others could take the code and run their own "clouds". It would be th

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Antidamage (1506489) *

      You receive a binary each time you load the game. Hosting it on a website and re-downloading it with java each time doesn't circumvent the license. If you want the source, perhaps you could approach them about rectifying their license obligations.

    • by KDR_11k (778916)

      The limit to a specific browser on a specific OS sounds like there's a lot of client-side code to this (and makes me wonder why the hell it's even browser based if all it's doing is display an installed game in a browser window).

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by johannesg (664142)

      It's too bad this isn't under the AGPL. Maybe it has to be GPL2 because of what it's based on. But with the GPL2 source only has to be shared with people who receive binaries.

      That's not true [gnu.org].

    • It's too bad this isn't under the AGPL.

      The AGPL is a complete waste of time - it is an EULA and thus suffers the exact same problems as every other EULA. Namely that it is pretty much unenforceable and thus its only use is to intimidate your own customers into doing things they have no legal obligation to do.

      I'm afraid the FSF has completely lost the plot these days - they are more interested in pushing their own agenda than supporting the Free software projects.

      • The AGPL is as much of a EULA as the regular GPL, be that version 2 or 3. It only really applies to developers, not end users. The ability to retrieve source code is not the same as forcing users to download source code.
        • The AGPL is as much of a EULA as the regular GPL, be that version 2 or 3.

          Wrong.

          The GPL is a *distribution licence*. If you don't distribute the software, you don't need to agree to it. If you do distribute the software then copyright law prevents you from doing so unless you have a licence to do so - i.e. if you're going to distribute the software, you *must* agree to the GPL because there is nothing else that allows you to do so.

          The AGPL is a *use licence*. If you use the software (i.e. you are a service provider, using it to provide a service to your users) then the FSF tel

          • Every lawyer I've ever talked to about the GPL and AGPL (some very invested in the open source community) agrees with this viewpoint.

            The GPL is a distribution license, and thus probably enforceable (has been, some places). The AGPL has poorly worded extensions to the GPL, and redefine "distribution" to essentially mean "use"--which they may find cute, but does turn it into a use license and an enforcement mess.

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by TheRaven64 (641858)

              I think you need to talk to better lawyers. The AGPL doesn't say anything about use, it says something about modification. If an AGPL program includes a download-the-source link, you are not allowed to remove it. If you do remove it, then you have created a new derived work, which is something restricted under copyright law and requiring explicit permission from the author. The AGPL provides you with explicit permission to create derived works as long as they do not remove the download-the-source link.

              • No, because in the course of using it you are subject to specific restrictions (the inability to modify it--just like a closed-source EULA).

              • IIRC, AGPL only additional clause over GPL is that, in addition to being obligated to provide the source code if you distribute the executable, you are also obligated to do it if you make it available to the public. There is nothing forbidding you to alter it in any way, as long as you make the source code available for anyone that either received a copy of the executable or received access to use the application.

                I don't know how did you came to that particular conclusion, but it is not right at all.
    • by drinkypoo (153816)

      But with the GPL2 source only has to be shared with people who receive binaries. This does not include visitors to a website, or an in-browser game in this case.

      In the case of a browser game, the game is sent to the client for play, and so it most certainly does apply. You receive the binary before execution. The site isn't sending geometry data to your browser in realtime.

  • Fair enough (Score:3, Insightful)

    by GF678 (1453005) on Sunday July 05, 2009 @01:44AM (#28584843)

    I guess it's better than the current option we have for running QuakeLive for Linux (i.e. nothing). Yes I know they're working on it, but it'd be nice if Linux wasn't treated second-class to Windows all the time.

    • Then have a community big enough to merit it.

      I like Linux in some capacities (I hate it as a desktop because it doesn't work particularly well for me and advocates try to foist it off on people who don't know better, but it's running on all but two of my server machines). But there's no market share worth noting for targeting for most consumer applications.

  • I understand the benefits of an open source version of Quake Live, but wont this just divide what is (in my experience) an already small community?
    • Last time I looked there were over half a million players. Small compared to WoW I agree, but 500K ain't that small, surely.
      • by Phayder (1019938)
        500 thousand? Wow, I had no idea. I just say small community because sometimes I have trouble finding a populated server.
    • Thats not an issue yet, atm you have
      QL = windows only (500k players)
      AL = linux only (a few players)
      Even when both spread to multiplatform QL is going to get the majority of players, and AL will be an interesting project but between hosting costs and lack of a recognized name will never be able to split the community

  • With all the work that Mr Carmack has done under linux, I was surprised when I loaded Ubuntu on my new laptop that Quakelive wasn't supported... its kinda sad actually

  • does it run linu.....er, windows?!?
  • This is the first time i've ever heard of it. FYI, I currently lead the OpenArena project. I don't think this will take off for two reasons: - OA is already a free game to begin with, browserfying it would be very pointless. - Coder-only lead, no artists/mappers. - "ArenaLive" is a trademark violation waiting to happen.

Are you having fun yet?

Working...