Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
PC Games (Games) Real Time Strategy (Games) Software Entertainment Games Linux

FreeCraft Forks Offer RTS Alternatives 43

Posted by simoniker from the good-free-titles-with-no-added-copyright-fun dept.
TekPolitik writes "Blizzard's attempt to shut down the multi-platform freeware RTS, FreeCraft appears to have backfired. There are now two replacement projects - Project Inferno and Stratagus. The new sites are making some effort to catalog all the games that use the new engine. Stratagus lists Wargus, Aleona's Tales and RoboVasion. Project Inferno lists ShadowConflict." The Stratagus FAQ page constructively explains: "Stratagus aims at being a generic realtime strategy engine, with no special focus on Warcraft2."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FreeCraft Forks Offer RTS Alternatives More

FreeCraft Forks Offer RTS Alternatives

Comments Filter:
  • Because their first illegal activity got sensibly shut down, instead of moving on to interesting and productive goals, they're just trying again?

    Ah well. At least they're not making yet another open source text editor...

    • Re:So, Wait... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Blackknight ( 25168 ) on Wednesday August 27, 2003 @01:02PM (#6806723) Homepage
      Emulation is not illegal, nor is reverse engineering a game engine. Freecraft required you to use the graphics from the Warcraft 2 cd, or the free graphics set. There was nothing illegal about it.

      Writing an emulator for any system is not illegal, no matter what the game companies want to make you think. Look at sites like Zophar's Domain [zophar.net] for a list of emulation projects out there.

    • Re:So, Wait... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by slug359 ( 533109 )
      It wasn't illegal, the project was a game that played like Warcraft 2, but was rewritten 100% from scratch, with new graphics (you could load the WC2 graphics from your WC2 CD if you bought it). There was no infringment then and there is not now (the C&D letter was about the name?!)

      • Re:So, Wait... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Snowspinner ( 627098 ) <philsand@3.14ufl.edu minus pi> on Wednesday August 27, 2003 @01:25PM (#6806887) Homepage
        Blizzard almost certainly has a trademark on RTS games with names in the format of "XCraft". So when people are making a game that "plays like WC2", and furthermore has a title in the same format as Blizzard's games, they are entirely within their rights to say "Stop that, or we'll sue your bitch ass."

        Are the new projects illegal? Probably not, though they want to be careful about trumpeting their connection to Freecraft. But the fact of the matter is that making new versions of WC2 is not exactly useful or productive...
        • But the fact of the matter is that making new versions of WC2 is not exactly useful or productive...


          It is considerably more productive than sitting on your ass and complaining about it on Slashdot.
          • When you figure the amount of time it takes me to make a post, and the amount of time spent on the project, I suspect that, proportionally, you'd be wrong. =)
        • Blizzard almost certainly has a trademark on RTS games with names in the format of "XCraft".

          I don't think there would be any marketplace confusion if someone were to write a parody by the name of, e.g.,
          It'llBeABlizzardInHellBeforeIBuyAnotherGame From *THOSE*LitigiousJerks-Craft... ;)

  • Reasons for shutting down FreeCraft (Score:5, Interesting)

    by neglige ( 641101 ) on Wednesday August 27, 2003 @01:07PM (#6806767)
    As I recall [happypenguin.org], the original reasons for shutting down FreeCraft were that the name was too similar to WarCraft and that the engine borrowed a few too many ideas from WC. With this in mind, the new games and the engine have a different names, thats good, but what about the engine functionality?

    From the Stratagus FAQ:
    [...] since the Warcraft2 support is already there we don't indent break it [...]

    Does this mean it's still close to the original? If so, is the new name enough to keep Blizzard at bay?

    • Re:Reasons for shutting down FreeCraft (Score:5, Informative)

      by mugnyte ( 203225 ) * on Wednesday August 27, 2003 @01:25PM (#6806899) Journal

      Why would the engine functionality mean anything? Games seem to repeat models quite often. Perhaps if there was an official list of the unique aspects of WC that people cannot copy without infringing on Blizzard's copyrighted/patented/trademarked IP (notice, IANAL). Without that, its kinda vaporous. Even if they could produce such a list, its questionable if those aspects alone make WC a unique game, and repeating them or any part of them "confuses" a game player into thinking they are playing a Blizzard game.

      MS has lost to "Lindows" and Fox just lost to "Fair and Balanced". I've never heard of any law that says you can't imitate an existing behavior by writing it yourself, unless there's a unique algorithm involved, the GIF compression. Did WC employ a unique algorithm that had a patent?

      mug

      • MS has lost to "Lindows" and Fox just lost to "Fair and Balanced".

        The Microsoft vs. Lindows.com jury trial doesn't even start until December 1st of this year. I fail to see how MS has lost if the trial hasn't even started yet.

        Then again, calling Fox' decision to stop the suit (including their wonderful quote: 'It's time to return Al Franken to the obscurity that he's normally accustomed to') a loss is rather interesting, as well.

        • The Lindows loss is that MS could not get the injuction stopped. They ship now under that name. The full trial will be another story.

          Having a book at the top of bestseller's list is hardly obscurity. Someone dropping their suit against you typically means they realize they have no case. Perhaps you should read the judge's remarks as well - and the book.

          • Someone dropping their suit against you typically means they realize they have no case.

            Or they decide that the benefits of winning aren't enough to offset the losses (legal fees and bad PR) that will result from continuing to fight. Actually having a case doesn't necessarily factor into the equation.

            Look the recent cases involving DirecTV lawsuits [slashdot.org]. Lots of people are settling out of court. Does this mean they all bthey are guilty? Or does it mean that they can't afford to fight the case, even if the

        • Yeah, Fox's decision to stop the suit, after a judge dismissed it as being legally ridiculous.

          Or were you just watching Fox News's "Fair and Balanced" coverage of the trial (sandwiched inbetween "Weapons of Mass Destruction discovery Any Day Now" and "All those who disagree with Us are Traitors")?

          • Or were you just watching Fox News's "Fair and Balanced" coverage of the trial

            No, I read the report on the Chicago Sun Times website (the first link that popped up when I searched for it), because I generally ignore all of this type of BS. Of course, somewhere along the lines I read enough to realize that the judge didn't dismiss the suit, just didn't allow them to stop the book from shipping with the saying on the cover. Similar to the way another judge didn't stop Lindows.com from shipping LindowsOS.

    • Re:Reasons for shutting down FreeCraft (Score:4, Informative)

      by NetDanzr ( 619387 ) on Wednesday August 27, 2003 @01:53PM (#6807168)
      Does this mean it's still close to the original? If so, is the new name enough to keep Blizzard at bay?

      I'm no legal expert, but I think Blizzard doesn't have a case here. Defining what's "too close to original" is very hard, and can easily backfire. For example, if I compare Diablo to Gauntlet (or Rogue for that matter), I see the same game only with different graphics. So as long as the new projects keep to their own graphics, they should be as safe as Blizzard was when it decided to release Diablo.

      However, that doesn't mean that Blizzard doesn't try to sue them, and you know how such lawsuits go: the big guy sues the small guy who doesn't have the money for a defense, and even though the small guy is wully within his rights, he rather settles.

      • Why is it so hard to understand?

        FreeCraft was a Warcraft2 clone. Blizzard owns Wacraft2, and makes money off of it.

        You own your computer because you make money from some company. If some other company offered your company's product for free and you lost your job, it would be *no different*.

        Blizzard keeps it's competitive edge by offering a gaming service that is unique to it's own compnay. People copying their work without their consent doesn't help Open Source, it makes us look like nothing more than th
  • This reminds me of McDowell's in "Coming To America"

    It was OK that he had the 2 all beef patties and special sauce, it was the name that raised eyebrows.
    • Hey, you forgot that McDowell's had two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, and onions, but they *didn't* have sesame seeds on their buns...
      • Wow, I missed that one at first.

        I thought you meant something about "special sauce" and "coming". A burger with the name of
        "coming to America" would raise eyebrows.

        Oh, well, reading slashdot too early in the morn

  • Why has it backfired? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    "Freecraft" got in trouble because of the similarity to the names "Warcraft" and "Starcraft" - and because they were offering compatibility with Warcraft 2.

    (Rant: What the hell were they thinking? That's like making a shooter called "Dooom" and not expecting to get sued - and were they that short on talent that they didn't have an original game idea?)

    It's not like Blizzard has a monopoly on strategy games and anyone can make them. Just not blatant clones of other people's ideas and content.

    So the headlin
    • were they that short on talent that they didn't have an original game idea?

      No shorter than the rest of the gaming industry. When's the last time you saw an original game out there? (See this article [slashdot.org] for example.)

      Just not blatant clones of other people's ideas and content.

      Blatant clones of other people's ideas and content are the meat and potatoes of the gaming industry. Furthermore, the right to create such clones was firmly established in the early eighties, when the owners of Pacman lost their sui
    • I've stopped playing Starcraft and Warcraft since I found out about these other games ... through their litigation.

  • Shadow Conflict (Score:3, Informative)

    by MichaelKVance ( 1663 ) on Wednesday August 27, 2003 @02:37PM (#6807519)
    Ah, poor Linux gaming. Since Loki shut down (I used to work there), things have really been grim. As it is, Shadow Conflict is a "game" written by a 19 year old kid in Maine who spends his day in #sdl--and isn't anything more than a collection of bad fiction. And this is what gets written about on /. now. Too sad.

    You guys should be sending money to Ryan Gordon of icculus.org instead of complaining about Blizzard shutting down reverse-engineering sites.

    m.

    • commandment (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Dude you broke the first commandment of /. "thou shalt not speak ill of linux or open source ever"

      You are going down as a troll, but you are dead right, too many people champion things just because they are Linux or open source without ever considering why.
    • Yeah, this isn't a troll -- this guy is from Loki. I should know. =)
  • I hardly even know 'er!
    ba-dump
  • I browsed around a little, and it seems Aleona's Tales is going to be including the funniest unit yet:

    Archer
    Description:
    Human distance unit. Attacks the enemy by throwing arrows.

    I can't imagine them inflicting much damage though, nor have great that great of a reach.

Slashdot Top Deals

Genius is ten percent inspiration and fifty percent capital gains.

Close