Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Jet3d Game Engine 79

Posted by emmett from the this-looks-really-cool dept.
Mark Komus writes: "A co-worker just pointed me to this great looking new game engine, called Jet3d. From what I gathered from the license it is available freely, source included, to anyone that wants it on the condition that you must release any source code changes you make along with any product you produce with it. You can also release a product with unmodified binaries they provide, or you can pay to license the engine and you get to keep your modified source to yourself." Wow! This looks sweet!
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Jet3d Game Engine More

Jet3d Game Engine

Comments Filter:

  • Re:What's the catch? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    That proverb is stupid. The world is chaotic; Others have to pay for lunches they never ordered, while others get theirs for free with a smile and a bottle of fine merlot.

  • it is (Score:1)

    by vipw ( 228 )
    it is quite a product and exactly the kind of system that can help bring games to linux, which is good for us all. Think about this, game developer Y uses an open source(and therefore portable) game engine such as this or crystal, this takes all the work out of porting to linux, bsd, etc. however, another reason game developers sometimes don't port is because they don't have the time, expertise, or properly trained support staff to constantly make sure that the game will work everywhere.

    I for one am perfectly happy buying a game if i can simply download the executable files for linux and play with the data files off the cd(ala Quake1 & Quake2).

    Unsupported binaries is where an open source game engine really shines. If the finds a bug he can report directly to the engine maintainer for fixing the bug. Then as the engine matures it becomes easier and easier to support even the more obscure OSes.

  • Re:Hrm... (Score:1)

    by pb ( 1020 )
    Credit is fine, but the first startup logo? That's what that "CREDITS" file is for. I'm sure the consumer doesn't know or care what "Jet3D" is, and if it was the first logo, *I'D* think I had bought a flight simulator by accident. Only the programmers would really care, so put it in something they'd read, don't force everyone else to see it (FIRST!)...

    They also aren't *just* asking for credit. They're asking for either source code (to all your stuff, like a GPL'ed library, not an LGPL'ed one) or barring that, a private commercial licensing agreement. Quite a bit more than credit, I'd say.

    I thought the old BSD license (advertising clause) was somewhat evil as well. If everyone did that, and was bound by it, we'd have all sorts of "sponsored by, blah blah blah" in every project. This license is worse because if another project did this, they'd be incompatible. (unless you displayed both logos simultaneously, so they could both be "FIRST"... In fact, XOR them together! ;)

    That clause in the BSDL was all that stopped it from being shareable with the GPL. (sharing the code back, though, is problematic, unless the author of said code simultaneously releases it under the BSDL, etc., etc., which makes the GPL somewhat evil, from the other perspective...)

    Maybe a lot of thought, time and effort went into their product, but it doesn't look like it went into their license. I'd much rather people used one of the pre-existing, boilerplate licenses with commonly known restrictions and effects. It makes these issues much easier.

    My other question was somewhat rhetorical, as in leading up to the next conclusion: no matter how great this library is, write your own so everyone can use it without these restrictions.
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].

  • Re:Hrm... (Score:1)

    by pb ( 1020 )
    Darn terms getting in the way. I tend to reserve "Pure Evil", or evil-with-a-capital-E (Evil) for that, but yeah, it's at least annoying, and at mose somewhat evil. :)

    I guess if someone included *ALL* of your code and nothing else in a package, and said "since this is under the BSDL and it is compatible with the GPL, I can release it as such", and changed the name, and listed you in the CREDITS and whatnot, then yes, they could. But that'd be a pissy thing to do. But if you had a clause forbidding it, it wouldn't be GPL-compatible anymore. :|

    I'm still waiting for Microsoft to quietly release the Wine project on top of BSD with proprietary modifications as the next version of Windows, and say "See? Look at the lower system requirements, smaller code base, and excellent native POSIX compatibility we have now! If you want to pay extra, we'll even throw in an X-Se^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Next Generation Terminal Server functionality! (xhost +)"... ;)
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
  • Jet's done by the same people that did Genesis- Eclipse Entertainment (Now, part of Wild Tangent, Alex St. John's little start up...)
  • What's CS's framerate? How well does it support really huge landscapes?
  • I was browsing the features list and notably, there is no OpenGL support. It says it supports Direct3D and Glide, but there's no mention of Linux.

    Glide exists on Linux. Go to http://linux.3dfx.com
  • How original! There seems to be no end to the different open source, kind of free, almost free trying to fool you to pay us money style game engines. The problem is that if I see one more engine without a game to show it off I will puke.

    Let's follow the trend shall we. A URL is posted on linuxgames or happy penguin boasting of a 3d, flight sim, role playing engine. Hapless web surfer goes strolling over to said site.

    First, there is no real game or even part of a game to download to get the feel of what the coders are trying to do. Even worse they taunt you saying they made the engine now you make the game. Fine, hapless web surfer knows a bit of c and even c++ so he downloads the code to try it out. Suddenly he realizes that the new engine does the exact same thing that every other OpenGL style 3d engine does only worse.

    Hapless surfer breaks out CodeCrusader and corrects their mistakes sends it back to them taunting them to make a better engine first before asking people to use it to make games. Hapless surfer is now engaged in endless flame war with 15 old coders from Alaska.

    Not that this has happened to me mind you. :->
  • Too bad they don't have more characters in the screens. They make or break a good 3d experience (unless what you're doing doesn't require them) .. the ones in there are pretty damn ugly and unrealistic looking.

    I'm working on a project that will be a big quake mod (if it works, we'll eventually license it) .. this one seems pretty good but ya can't tell without character models / faces and complex models. More screenshots!

    modern day geek. [dhs.org]
  • From the forum:
    Jet3d and Genesis 1.0

    There is a great deal that could be said about this but here is the short version...

    Genesis 1.0 is the first release of the code from Eclipse.

    The Eclipse assets were acquired by a company called Wild Tangent. They
    release an update called Genesis 1.1 - it is under the same licensing agreement as
    the original 1.0 code.

    Wild Tangent also took the next version of the Genesis code and rolled it into a
    new product that they are creating as part of an Internet connectivity package. It
    has new and different licensing.

    David Stafford retained some of the rights to the code and turned it into the Jet3D
    project. The Jet3D code also has some different licensing restrictions than the
    original Genesis code - so you need to check out the restricitons to make sure that
    you can live with them.

    Basically, none of the license agreements are that onerous, they do limit what you
    can and can't build with various versions, and they protect the rights of both
    companies to make money in their own ways.

    The biggest difference to you at a development level is the difference between
    Genesis 1.0 and 1.1 editor and the Jet3D and Wild Tangent editors. The former is
    similar to many other Doom and Quake editors. The latter is a real-time CSG
    (constructive solid geometry) editor which creates levels just as they appear in
    your game.
  • Just remember, all the shots on the crystalspace site are using the software renderer. All the shots on the jet3d and genesis3d sites are using hardware acceleration. The three look comparable in hardware acceleration, but only CrystalSpace supports Win32, Mac, Linux, BeOS, NeXT, Solaris, and more...So if you're looking for portability, aka code that will compile on any machine without changes, go with CrystalSpace.

  • the licence covers linux, even though there is no (yet?) code for it

    why not take the code and adapt it for linux using SDL (that should need a special licence distribution from sam lantiga since SDL is LGPL)
  • the licence of jet3D is really cool

    ok it's not totally free, but it's open source
    more : when a version is given, they cannot take it back, it's yours.

    In fact I do not see much difference between jet3D licence & GPL, because in these 2 :
    * you must give source
    * you may distribute freely
    * the code cannot be closed
    * the owner of the source remains the owner of the copyright

    There is one huge advantage that GPL can not give. It is the product is given by a professional game team (aka people who have plenty of time & resources & are paid for writing the open library). That means it will be performant & it will evolve rapidly. But since it's open souce, it will also be blessed by the community.

    There is another advantage : other companies can use that work but cannot close it, they are compelled to give anyone what they modified. That means that we may see a very effective library used by lots of professionals (each adding cute features) and *we* will be allowed to play with it.
    In other words it can become one of the very standard engines in the gaming world.

    Very exiting.

    :-D
  • Ho, no Linux/Mac support? I suspect that's something they'd like someone to add on - it's open source, after all.

    Some interesting restrictions in the license. Its tone seems to be a GPL mixed with the BSD advertising clause, except for their "No Browser 3D stuff" restriction.

    13. RESTRICTED USE
    This section applies only to Windows or Microsoft operating systems, Macintosh operating systems, Unix operating systems and Linux operating systems. Other operating systems are excluded from these restrictions.
    You are not permitted to use the Covered Code for or in connection with:
    (a) viewing 3D content in a browser;
    (b) streaming content via a browser;
    (c) streaming compressed 3D graphics and animation to Web-based or Internet-based viewers (by example, but not limited to, RealNetworks products, MacroMedia products, Microsoft streaming media applications.)
    Section (c) shall have the following exception:
    You are permitted to use the Covered Code in a stand-alone executable application (but not a platform) that involves or uses a network for downloading content provided that:
    (a) such content is not viewed or streamed via a browser;
    (b) only You will sell or profit from content viewed using the Covered Code;
    (c) You agree to not use the Covered Code in a manner such that any third party could lawfully sell or profit from any content that uses the Covered Code.
    The following will not constitute a Restricted Use:
    (a) use of a browser merely to download applications or data, without any display of interactive real-time rendered 3D graphics through the browser;
    (b) use of a browser for connecting stand-alone applications (provided that there is no display of interactive or real-time rendered 3D graphics through the browser);
    (c) use of a browser merely to report results of a tournament;
    (d) use of a browser merely to establish network communications.

    Heh, wonder why they limit this restriction to certain OSes. Banning "Unix operating systems" is somewhat broad and slippery. As for all this browser "Yes and No" stuff, What exactly are they trying to stop here?

    That aside, it's neat to see a company using open source in such a manner. It's not GPLed or BSDed, but it's a real attempt for a company to compromise between loosening up and loosing control and profits. I think we'll see more semi-free programs from companies in the future - Yes, I know, Netscape, but that release was freer and nobody expects Netscape to make money directly from the sale of Mozilla like this company is trying for. Unreal Tournament, perhaps? Their OpenUT project really impressed me when it instituted MesaGL through SDL in UT, which means that my TNT2 should be able to run it now, right? Expecting companies to go GPL/BSD in all cases is unrealistic, but this partial release of source should become far more normal in the future.

  • There are currently two small games released with Crystal Space. Both can be downloaded from the main Crystal Space site (http://crystal.linuxgames.com). One is Blocks which is a 3D game that resembles tetris a bit. The other is Tunnel Fighter which is a game to fight enemies in a tunnel.

    Those are small games though. Not really representative of a real RPG or FPS. But they do show that the Crystal Space framework is starting to get ready for creating games.

    Greetings,
  • I think Crystal Space fits your description. It is LGPL (so allows for commercial products). It is Open Source and cross-platform (runs on Linux, Windows, OS/2, BeOS, NextStep, DOS, ...).

    Check out http://crystal.linuxgames.com for more information, screenshots, and the source.

    Greetings,

  • So, I'm actually interested in trying to use this new 3D game engine, so I figure I'll read the comments for some insight. All I get are pages and pages of trash and cursing.

    Is Slashdot dieing a painful death under the weight of all these Anonymous Cowards?
  • >Resolves, but to a foriegn language site...

    Exactly. EXACTLY. Cyrix's domain registration has been done away with by someone who wants you to visit a resort in Argentina.

    I am NOT the only person to have noticed this!!!

    Dave :)

  • This is odd. Some of the Genesis 3d engine screenshots are on the Jet3d website. This is noted in the glowing particle sphere that is also on the genesis engine's webpage.
  • In fact Jet3d and genesis3d appear to be identical down to the features list. Is this a new name for the same engine?
  • So how is this related to Genesis3D [genesis3d.com]? The HTML pages seem awfully similar and it's from the same company (Eclipse).

    Also, is there a good comparison of the 3-D engines available?
    E.g., comparing Quake, Unreal, LithTech, Genesis/Jet3D, Crystal Space.

    I did find one article comparing the features of Quake II, Unreal and Genesis 3D at http://www.gameznet. com/genesis/articles/enginecomparison.html [gameznet.com].

    Y.

  • That's why I browse at 1, with highest scores first.... a lot easier on the eyes 8^)
  • I have to disagree. When I was working on my first OpenGL game, I was very tempted to try NURBS for modelling cars and maybe larger objects.

    Their web site seems to be down :-(
  • Hehe, I lurk around in CS alot, the landscape engine is still really slow, BUT its getting better all the time and shows all signs of being very fast when its finished. The engine itself is also faily slow at somethings still but it is fairly far along and doesn't seem to be losing any steam on the development front. Go and try it out!
  • Has anyone made a game that I can play - today - using one of these free 3D engines? There seems to be a lot of announcments, but very little actual product.

    Later...
  • I heard, but can't confirm anywhere on the pages, that it will compile in Linux as well as Windows.

    Also its not quite a traditional "open source" project, as it is possible to still pay for the source and not release your changes, but if you agree to release any source to a product you create with this, its free.

  • (here) [slashdot.org]

    ~/sajb
  • You, yes you, are a troll, however, you raise an interesting point. Lots of people think Linux sucks, but those of us in the real world have seen how Linux has progressed, it may not be the best for some situations (home gaming/computing), but its in the plan. This "free" 3d engine may be windows based, although the license is "lame", the point is, and the reason it was posted, is because it appeals to the /. community, there's alot of possibility in Linux and windows both, using them together is what's making quite a few companies large amounts of cash flow. You, Mr. Troll, are being naeive. You, fellow slashdotter, in some ways most likely are as well, in the respect that you all proably beleive 'windows sucks'. Both have uses, I run linux religiously in work enviroments and make every attempt to subsititue it for NT, however, I can't exactally play Final Fantasy VII in Linux, and I don't see the wine project making considerable efforts to make it happen (yet). The 3d engine was posted because it's interesting, to some people. Mabye not Mr. Troll, but, I'm sure at least a few (hundred) people found it interesting.
  • No, the Quake2 Engine is not GPL'd, the original Quake engine is. There are still Engine licenses that have not release their game yet using Q2 (most notiably Dakitiana)

  • Yeah, the point is that all three of the assumptions seem logically correct, but the conclusion is obviously wrong. So, one of the assumptions must logically be wrong. I knew this before I put up the sig in the first place. :)
    ------



  • Can you please give your opinion on this?

    (I'm leaning towards the opinion that it fails the GPL test, but let's hear it from the maker of the GPL..)

    P eace!

    ========================
    63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs,
    ya get 1 whacked with a service pack,
  • From what I've seen so far in these posts, I haven't noticed what I consider to be the Most Useful Link For Game Engines (tm). Try out the 3D Engines List [tu-berlin.de]. It's got information on 626 different engines (out of which 99 are commercial, and 264 are demo only). Granted, not all of these are game engines, but a lot of them are. Oh, and both Jet3D [jet3d.com] and Crystal Space [linuxgames.com] are listed there. Naturally! :-)

    Cheers!

    JimD

  • The license restrictions have some history behind them. First there was only Eclipse (headed by David Stafford) and they made Genesis 1. Genesis 1 was released with a similar license and is still available at www.genesis3d.com [genesis3d.com]. Eclipse started making Genesis 2 with the new features of real time everything (e.g. WYSIWYG map editing) and open terrain capability.

    Then Eclipse ran out of money.

    WildTangent [wildtangent.com] (Alex St. John (former Direct X guy)) swooped down and bought the rights to Genesis 1 and 2 as well as most of the Eclipse developers. His intent was and is to take Genesis 2 and merge it with his 'real-time-3D-image-transmission-over-http' technology to form what they are calling the "GameDriver". A preview is already available but it is strictly closed source. Nevertheless the license is generous and you might want to check it out.

    During the negotiations for the purchase, David Stafford won the right to take the Genesis 2 source, as it stood in its incomplete state, and release it under his particular variant of OpenSource. The catch was that the license had to be amended to prevent people from competeing in the 'presumeably-soon-to-emerge-web-game' arena that WildTangent was targeting. And so Jet3D [jet3d.com] was born.

    Hope this helps. And I hope you all can help too. Jet3D needs work.

    Royce

  • Real-time rendering of NURBS is fast and easy. Under OpenGL you have access to the GLU libraries and their support for NURBS. There are plenty of parameters to control the amount of geometry you generate for a given NURBS surface. I don't know about Direct3D tho... And you could always do neat things with Gaussian surfaces, they seem a bit better suited to parameterizing the amount of geometry you want to emit while maintaining good detail.

    I've built a couple of programs for doing NURBS rendering, and while they certainly FLY on an SGI Octane, they are slower on the PC, but I realize I'm generating literally millions of vertices... If I make the rational decision to relax the quality of the NURBS surface, speed greatly improves -> less geometry. Realize that I was using a grid of approximately 100*100 control points for my NURB...

  • "free" 3d engine may be windows based, although the license is "lame",

    From what I gathered in the article, the license sounds like the GNU Lesser GPL [gnu.org]. However, it seems to be under a Slash-DoS attack now. I'm checking Google's cache [google.com]. And if it is Lesser GPL-like, someone will probably port the engine to Mac OS, BeOS, and the various Unix-like systems.

  • For once, I completely agree with a /. posting. I have never played any video game more fun and addictive than the original Zelda... except maybe the original Rampage (hey, who doesn't want to become a giant monster and terrorize cities across the U.S.?). And while 3D games don't make me motion-sick, I know plenty of people who can't so much as watch someone's Playstation from across the room without fighting to suppress the urge to vomit. New technology may make games look better, but it's no substitute for a great idea well-executed!
  • He probably meant curved surfaces, a la Quake 3.
  • Well, I'd be a little suspicious of the quality of the product and the strings attached. Where's the fine print? "There's no such thing as a free lunch."
  • This is not open source. How did it get on Source Forge?

    Actually, I think it qualifies as Open Source. It is not, however, Free Software.

  • You do not have the freedom to modify the software in any way you like. From their license agreement, you may NOT use this software in a web browser. Also, they have an "obnoxious advertising clause" -- which must not be modified.
  • Genesis 3D has been around for a while (open sourced) and the team got bought/ became part of WildTangent and it became Jet3D. WildTangent is a co started by one of the original DirectX team members that is working on a 3D browser plug-in. That's why that usage is forbidden in the liscense.

    There's a commercial game using the engine comming out shortly called AI Wars.

    You people complaining about no linux support seem to miss the point of Open Source. Why would you need the source if it does everything you want already? Start coding.
  • If you want to know the whole story, read the old posts under the message board at http://www.genesis3d.com.

    The short version is -- Genesis 3D V1 came out.... It was a pretty good engine, about as good as Quake2, a little slower but more flexible. Eclipse Entertainment made the source available (whether or not their licence is or was 'Open Source' is debatable). Eclipse nearly went bankrupt, there was some sort of deal with Microsoft (who were going to publish some of their games) that fell through.

    Eclipse ended up selling off its technology, including Genesis 3D Version 2 to WildTangent (http://www.wildtangent.com). WildTangent was interested in taking the Genesis 3D V2 engine, then in heavy development, and making it run in a browser using an ActiveX interface. Most of the original Eclipse developers moved to WildTangent to continue working on the engine. David Stafford, the founder of Eclipse (who has been a fulltime employee of Microsoft for quite a while now, handling Eclipse stuff on the side in his spare time) was given the right to distribute the Genesis3D V2 technology at the time the deal was struck in any manner he saw fit. He decided to continue using a source-available Genesis 3D V1 type licence. So, there are essentially two forks of Genesis 3D V2 -- Jet3D and WildTangent's GameDriver. As a result of all this, the Jet3D fork has some strange licensing restrictions to avoid competing with GameDriver, such as the no-in-a-browser clause.

    Its kind of a shame the original Eclipse model wasn't profitable for them, as WildTangent's GameDriver has come along much further than Jet3D, as the original Genesis 3D V2 developers have made great progress on their source. The Jet3D source -- which was basically dumped onto the public with very little to no documentation or anyone who worked on it previously to give pointers -- hasn't progressed nearly as far, though there are some dedicated developers working on it.

  • THat's fine as long as what they get from you doesn't bother you. the best type of business is when BOTH parts think they done a brilliant deal.
    Also, not that I have read the whole licence yet, but from the looks of it in the text it looks like you gotta pay a licence fee if you wanna use the engine with your alterations to it hidden (ie. you keep the source to the alterations). Suppose many game companies wants that so they gonna get their dosh from there. Now, I'm not a game company, so I'm grateful for the opportunity to play around with a nice 3D engine for free!

    regards
  • My boss just went through contract negotations for the game that I am currently working on, and phrases such as "reasonable effort", "best effort" and " were one of the major sticky points. This could mean:

    you attempt to with best intentions, but if you can't, you say sorry.

    you make every effort to do the requested action up until you go out of business or run out of money

    you don't/can't do the requested action and they sue you, thus leading the previous result

    Of course, the last contract (which is what the current one is based on) contained the same statement but was totally missed by our company's previous lawyer. The meaning of such things all depends upon how sticky the granting company is, and the cost/skill of their lawyer.

    It's all just legalese anyways, so I don't try to think about it too hard. I'll just concentrate on the code...

  • When I tried writing my first game it was on a TRS-80 Model I with 16kb and a TAPE DRIVE.

    I was 14! I win!
  • I'd hazard a guess that it's on sourceforge because it is open source, according to the Open Source Definition [opensource.org] (That's a link, by the way, fuckers, so moderate this "Informative").

    "Must show logo" is a condition which was applied to Slash up until not so long ago, and is substantially no different from requiring credits to be included in the source

    3.2 a) is just the copyright owner's right to produce non-free versions, which exists in the GPL, unless you assign copyright to the FSF.

    3.2 b) is effectively a requirement that modifications be made under a less restrictive license than the Jet one, another characteristic of the GPL (this is non-obvious, but follows from the definition of a "Modification"; a Modification is of necessity a modification to their code)

    and "when we release new versions, you must update your clients" is specifically excepted as a permissible restriction, under clause 4 of the OSD -- "Integrity of the Author's Source Code".

    They're pushing the OSD pretty hard, it must be admitted, but not doing anything so restrictive as to merit being chucked off sourceforge. Look, you got the code, don't you? Stop whining already!

    montoya

  • http://gunk.net/ We need YOU!!!
  • I tried a pong game on a Timex Sinclair 1000 with 1KB of RAM, never got it to work though. No offline storage, so when the power went away, so did my game

    Had a drawing program on a 16KB Atari 800. Also, no offline storage, so when the news came on...

  • It won't compile in Linux at all, no matter what you change as far as optional compilation directives. It relies on Windows right now. if you download the 30mg install for Genesis3d11, everything is 100% Open Source and modifiable. If you release anything using these tools, you MUST present any modifications to anyone who asks. Unless..... There is a catch. All Genesis3d11 Apps display a 2 second splash screen promoting Genesis3d right after the Driver and Mode are established, usually the beginning of every game. This screen may not be modified in any way. You do have the option of disabling it for testing, but no one else may ever even see your application without the splash screen, or else you spontaneously combust (ok, I made that up). You do have the option of paying to have rights to use the Engine, at which point you can delete the splash code if desired and make any modifications without having to release them.

  • Book of Genesis (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Jet3D was first called "Genesis" but they sold that 3D engine to some company and then started anew under the name "Jet3D" It's not that bad of a graphics engine considering it's free. It could be better though... and hopefully it will be.

  • Hrm... (Score:2)

    by pb ( 1020 )

    The license looked like a standard NPL-ish thing until I got to this clause:


    You must display the original unmodified Jet3D logo as the first logo on startup of your product, demo or application. You must also prominently display the Jet3D logo on any marketing materials, advertising or packaging of your product.


    That's somewhat evil. Apparently you can change it and use it in your product as long as you give them back the changes, and keep your product open source. Otherwise, you must negotiate an agreement with them (if you want to keep it closed source)... So you could make a Linux version of this or whatnot, I'm guessing, but everyone would still be bound by the original license agreement? Might as well just write a 3D engine from scratch, or build off of whatever's out there. (id?)

    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
  • Well, the screenshots look pretty...

    Quake I is a GPL engine..

    --
  • part of it still works http://apps.cyrix.com/ [cyrix.com], course all the pics from the www. are broken.
  • Well, it was initially developed by a commercial development team, and later opened to the community. One of the original dev team guys is running the show now, and he doesn't have time to work on it full time. When WildTangent [wildtangent.com] bought them out, the project forked and Jet3D 2.0 is the open source side. The other side is WildTangent's Web Driver/Game Driver. (This is an interesting idea, BTW, if you're on Windows.)

    I think starting with the closed team worked well, because it got it off the ground and released in a very organized and clean fashion. Then when the source was opened, a huge number of requested features started getting put in there. There's a BeOS port (it's slow, though), and some people are supposedly working on a Linux port. There's also an OpenGL driver somewhere around there.

    The major caveat I found when working with it was that it's (IMO) poorly documented. Some people are working on docs, but I really haven't seen anything but stuff generated from symbols (which I could easily look in the headers for). I got too frustrated trying to figure out initialization order for the components. Like working with DirectX without the help reference. =p

    I love their editor, though. Very nice, and a huge improvement over the one they had for Genesis. I'm still figuring out Crystal Space [linuxgames.com]'s MazeD.

  • This engine doesn't impress me much at all. The Genesis 3D engine is like the Unreal engine with better shadowing and alpha stippling. To heck with flat structures, give me curved structures a la Q3A. Curved structures and mirroring are probably the two most important things (graphically) that most games today seriously lack. Curved character models is a bit out of the question (for now) but good curved structures add a good deal of realistic form to things. If you're running through a network of sewers or charging a castle wall it looks much better if the sides of the sewer or the wall has a real curve, it looks MUCH more realistic. Mirrors are also something you see in real life that would make games more visually appealing, jumping into a pool of water and have it reflect your character and anything else near it would be just awesome to see. Genesis 3D doesn't appear to provide these, at least not from all of the screenshots I've seen. Maybe someone can convince id to license the Q3A engine out so we can see some more good looking games. Maybe someone can talk to Bungie too...
  • Why not? Which of the following four definitions of Free Software taken from the FSF pages, does this license not meet?

    1) freedom to use the software for any purpose
    2) freedom to copy and redistribute the software
    3) freedom to modify the software
    4) freedom to distribute the modifications

    Any license that meets the OSD is also free software.
  • Can you please give your opinion on this?

    Why do you need someone else's opinion? Think for yourself. Read the license and read the OSS definition and the Free Software definition and make your own conclusion. You don't need someone else to tell you your opinion.

    I'm leaning towards the opinion that it fails the GPL test

    GPL test? What GPL test? Why should any other license be tested against another?

    I would hazard a guess that if such a test were found, every license except the GPL (and the LGPL which can convert into GPL) would fail.
  • Under the GPL, if you start a GPL'd product and someone else contributes to it, you no longer have the right to re-license it

    Sorry, bud. The copyright holder can relicense their stuff however they want. If you contribute code to gcc, it is no longer yours, it belongs to the FSF. You have no sayso over it anymore. If you submit a contribution with the proviso that you keep the copyright to it, they will reject it, and rightfully so. The law specifically states that any single holder of copyright can relicense the whole without permission from the others. So keep the copyright holders to one, or create a legal entity as an umbrella.
  • That's somewhat evil.

    Hardly! They spent a great deal of time creating this, and all they're asking for in return is credit. That's no different from the old BSD license.

    but everyone would still be bound by the original license agreement?

    Of course. It's the same with every free software license I have ever seen. Only the copyright holder can alter the license terms.
  • First off, the "obnoxious advertising clause", a phrase with originated with RMS also was included with BSD. And RMS called the BSDL a free license (he thought it was *too* free).

    Second, there's a lot of free software licenses that don't allow me the permission to modify any way I like. The GPL is one of these. There are numerous conditions within the GPL that I must follow before I can modify GPL code.

    The FSF definitions of Free Software no not include the terms "unconditional and absolute freedom". If you're bitching that the license in question does not give you unconditional permissions, why not bitch at other licenses that don't either, like the GPL, the LGPL, the AL, the QPL, the MPL, etc.

    Yes, it is problematic that you can't use the Jet3D engine in a web browser. But it's also problematic that you can't use the emacs editing engine within KDevelop. The Jet3d license is discriminatory towards the application it is used in while the GPL is discriminatory towards the library it is linked to. I don't see much difference between the two. When one favors the unrestricted licenses of MIT and BSD, all the restricted licenses start looking the same.

    "But you don't understand!" thou protesteth, "They baptize by sprinkling and not by immersion, and will surely go to hell!"
  • I thought the old BSD license...was somewhat evil as well.

    Well, if evil is defined as obnoxious or moderately onerous, then you may be right. But I prefer a bit more villiany and wickedness in my definition of "evil".

    That clause in the BSDL was all that stopped it from being shareable with the GPL.

    The GPL/BSD compatibility issue is still being argued over. I think the BSD is compatible, but some other respectable types don't. The argument has now shifted to the clause "license as a whole". I would have no problem at all if someone used my BSD code within their GPL package. But it would upset me greatly if they changed my license.
  • Jeez, people are tripping over themselves to give the things away. You wouldn't want be relying on this to pay the rent, would you?

    Obligatory Crystal Space [linuxgames.com] link.

    Commentary on all this vs LithTech (USD250,000 I understand), UnrealEngine (USD Loads), and Quake 3 engine (I dread to think how much) would be appreciated.

    Oh! And another [genesis3d.com]. So many engines, so little time.

    Dave :)

    BTW, this got rejected - is Cyrix's website [cyrix.com] still broken?

  • It doesn't support OpenGL as far as I see.
    Only Glide and Direct3d.
    This means that cross-plattform development
    is much more difficult.
    We have Glide on Linux, but then the game
    would only be able to run with Voodoo-cards.
    The Quake2 engine is GPL isn't it?
    And the Crystal Space engine, also looks good.
  • I have a feeling that they didn't port it to Linux in hopes that the Linux community would. The licnesing appears to be be extremely close to the GPL, based on this their thoughts are probably along the lines of...

    "Lets releas a 3D graphics engine for the more popular gaming platform, Windbloz, open up the source and reep the benifits of the open community"

    Oh, I wish more companies would adopt this mentality. I wouldn't mind doing the work my self!

  • Jet3D/Genesis3D is up there there with LithTech and the Unreal Engine. The difference is that no one has written a high profile game with Jet3D, so it seems more like a kiddie project. Okay, no one's written a high profile game with LithTech either. Well, Shogo...nah, I stand by my original comment.

    I suspect, too, that people are taking a close look at Jet3D and thinking "Man, the source to this is messy" or "Look at how they did [this] and [that]; that's soooo lame." If those same people could peek into Unreal or LithTech or any of the hundreds of other engines used in commercial products, then they'd say the same thing. Hype and features sell games and engines, not the guts. And in this case we get to see the guts.
  • There are many open source 3D game engines out there, why is this the only one which gets a headline? Mine is called World Foundry, and can be found at www.worldfoundry.org [worldfoundry.org]. The engine runs on windows and linux. We are looking for developers to help port the asset production pathway from windows to linux, email me if you are interested. Physics, scripting, dynamic asset loading, C++, very general design with few assumptions about type of game, blah, blah, blah. ;-)
  • I think it would be cool to have a 3D game engine that's open source, but allows people to use it for commercial products, provided they release any modified engine code. (not necessarily the whole game/whatever) That way, companies could cut out the engine dev time, and just start with the latest stable engine release. We'd probably all be better off, since we'd have a standard (probably cross-platform) engine, that hasn't been rushed to market full of bugs.

  • Umm... no... actually, when you contribute code to GCC, you keep the copyright on the code you wrote. You give the code to them copyrighted by yourself, but licensed under the GPL. This is VERY important for obvious reasons.

    If you don't believe me, check /usr/src/linux/drivers/net/3c501.c. Notice that it is copyright 1993 by none other than the NSA. Last I checked, Linus Torvalds was NOT the director of the NSA, and never was, but I could be wrong. If you look around, you'll notice many other copyright holders as well.

    ------

  • It would seem, and I'm completely guessing here, that if you modified the code heavily, then any updated code they released wouldn't integrate into your completed application. Thereby granting you release from said obligation. Honestly, they can't expect you to break your work just to keep up to date.

    Going with that thought, I can only hope that they don't ask that you make "reasonable efforts" to include the newest code in your next releases, and am terrified that they would request you make "reasonable efforts" to take the updated code, and create patches to work with your pre-existing application. Certainly, it's a nice thing to increase functionality and usability after the initial sale, but forcing you to do it doesn't seem right.

    Again, I don't know. IANAGL, and don't claim to be. I have no insight to this situation other than what my own sleep-addled brain has supplied.

    Anyone else have any thoughts?

  • Well... looking through the link, there doesn't appear to be a linux version of this, but since it's open source someone is bound to try to port it. Forgot to look closely though, is it "open source" or just "source available"? Is there a difference?
  • Aftershock is also open source and does quake3arena rendering. Ok, it's not totally finished but therefor the source is open in it's own CVS.

    http://www.planetquake.com/aftershock [planetquake.com]
    --
  • My company looked at using first the Genesis 3D engine (http://www.genesis3d.com) and then the Jet3D engine for the FPS we are working on. The engine has potential, but as others have commented, there is no linux support, and from the examination of the source tree I saw it does not look to be a quick and dirty port project. It may well be a detailed and well supported engine in a few years, but in the last 6 months that ive been watching it has changed from little to none at all. Of course Id have to agree with the previous comment, ID (http://www.idsoftware.com) has them beat by far, and you can work in linux on that one!

  • Re:Open Source game engines (Score:3)

    by Patrik Nordebo ( 170 ) on Wednesday April 05, 2000 @09:41PM (#1148739)
    Look at Crystal Space [linuxgames.com]. It's an LGPL'd 3D engine, which means you can use it in any software as long as you release all the changes you've made to Crystal Space under the LGPL. It's also very much cross platform, supporting Linux, general Unix, Windows, Windows NT, OS/2, BeOS, NextStep, OpenStep, MacOS/X Server, DOS, and Macintosh, using OpenGL, Direct3D, or software rendering.

  • License "gotcha" (Score:3)

    by akey ( 29718 ) on Wednesday April 05, 2000 @09:21PM (#1148740)
    After a quick read through the license, one thing jumped out at me. Section 4(d):
    (d) make reasonable efforts to discontinue distribution of the Covered Code upon Eclipse's release of an update, upgrade or new version of the Covered Code and to make reasonable efforts to distribute such updates, upgrades or new versions to your customers who have received the Covered Code herein;
    If you make significant modifications to the engine for use in your game, and they release a new version, then you're bound to distribute those changes. The question lies in what is considered "reasonable efforts". Considering the size of most 3-d games, this provision ranges from unenforcable to severely limiting open usage of the engine.
    If you use a highly modified version of their engine and distribute with source, you're covered until they release a new version. If your changes aren't compatible with theirs, it becomes a question of who defines what reasonable efforts are. Of course, one always has the option of actually buying a license to the code -- which, if you're selling a product that uses the library, makes sense and is even the right thing to do.
    This provision gives them a pretty big stick in getting commercial users of the engine to cough up some cash, but depending on their benevolence, may allow non-commercial developers some leeway.

  • Re:A classic application for the "Overrated" mod (Score:3)

    by Temporal ( 96070 ) on Thursday April 06, 2000 @06:31AM (#1148741) Journal

    Umm... No, it is not certifiable open source. The reason being that when you contribute to thier product, you give them special rights over you code that no one else gets, including yourself. Under the GPL, if you start a GPL'd product and someone else contributes to it, you no longer have the right to re-license it, unless you remove everything that they added. Very different. The NPL had this problem originally, and it didn't pass because of it. That is why they created the MPL.

    The must update clients thing effectively allows them to end the open source version at any time. They say that future versions may be under a different license. So, they decide they have taken advantage of the community enough, they release new version without source code, you can't use old version anymore. I doubt that could pass as OSI certified.

    I really hate it when people reply incorrectly to my posts and get moderated up.
    ------

  • Not open source (Score:3)

    by Temporal ( 96070 ) on Wednesday April 05, 2000 @09:38PM (#1148742) Journal

    From the license [jet3d.com]:

    3.2. Application of License to Eclipse.
    (a) Other Products.
    Eclipse may include Covered Code in products other than Jet3D without such additional products becoming subject to the terms of this License, and may license such additional products on different terms from those contained in this License.
    (b) Other Licenses.
    Eclipse may license the Source Code including Modifications incorporated therein, without such additional products becoming subject to the terms of this License, and may license such additional products on different terms from those contained in this License.
    (c) Other Releases.
    Eclipse may create new releases of Jet3D without such releases becoming subject to the terms of this License.

    So, they can take all your enhancements, relicense them, and sell them, but you can't. There are several other annoying conditions as well, like the "you must display our logo" condition and the "when we release new versions, you must update your clients" condition.

    This is not open source. How did it get on Source Forge?

    ------

  • Crystal Space: Open Source 3D Engine (Score:4)

    by Jorrit ( 19549 ) on Thursday April 06, 2000 @02:03AM (#1148743) Homepage
    Time for a shameless plug :-)

    Have a look at Crystal Space. This is an Open Source and portable 3D Engine that runs on Linux, Windows, BeOS, DOS, OS/2, FreeBSD, SGI, Solaris, Macintosh, OpenStep, NextStep, MacOS/X, ...

    It supports OpenGL, Direct3D, Glide, and software rendering. Some of the features are dynamic and static colored lights with soft shadows, curved surfaces, volumetric fog, halos, ROAM landscape engine, portals, octree/BSP-tree/c-buffer rendering, hardware accelerated transform support, triangle meshes with LOD and skeletal or frame based animation, ...

    It is written in C++. Is very modular and very Open Source. Up to 90 people have already contributed to it. You can too :-)

    By the way, we're also hosted at SourceForge and we're the second most active projec there. The main site for CS is http://crystal.linuxgames.com

    Greetings,

  • What I Really Want To Know - (Score:4)

    by Stickerboy ( 61554 ) on Wednesday April 05, 2000 @09:57PM (#1148744) Homepage

    - is a quantification of "Exceptionally fast rendering". Eye candy and advanced physics are all well and good, but if the engine pulls 20 fps with a 1000 poly scene on a decent system, forget about it.

    On a slightly different tack, I'm always mystified about how many people get their panties in a wad about this or that free 3D engine. People, if having a working 3D engine was even 25% of the work of game creation, Daikatana 2 would have hit the shelves yesterday. Getting a team of designers, writers, artists, architects (i.e. mappers), and programmers of the right talent, and keeping them focused on task and happy has always been a bigger burden by far. How Epic pulled it off for what, 3, 4 years for a single game has always impressed me a lot more than Unreal ever did. As a rule, creative vision is the single most precious commodity in the developer community currently, and it's likely to stay that way. There's a lot more chaff out there than wheat.

    Damn, those stills are pretty, though.

    telnet: bbs.ufies.org
    Trade Wars Lives


    telnet://bbs.ufies.org
    Trade Wars Lives

  • seems like it's missing a few things (Score:4)

    by SEAL ( 88488 ) on Wednesday April 05, 2000 @09:06PM (#1148745)
    I was browsing the features list and notably, there is no OpenGL support. It says it supports Direct3D and Glide, but there's no mention of Linux.

    Also, there doesn't appear to be any NURBS support in the renderer. 3D sound positioning is a nice touch but once again... probably Win32 / DirectSound. If it has a software 3D sound capability then that's probably better for Linux anyhow. I'll have to take a look at the CVS repository and get a better feel for it because the features list leaves me with more questions than answers :)

    On the bright side, considering their licensing policy, I would expect people to add in some of these features / portability sooner or later.

    Best regards,

    SEAL

Slashdot Top Deals

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.

Close