Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Doom Source Now Under GPL 142

Posted by Hemos from the anyone-can-have-it dept.
Scipius wrote to us with the news that Game OverLaird John Carmack has re-licensed the Doom source code under the GPL. Things like this make my heart beat with joy.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Doom Source Now Under GPL More

Doom Source Now Under GPL

Comments Filter:
  • #!/usr/bin/perl -w

    use Doom;

  • What you say is basically correct, the code is not amenable to being extended to 3D. It's a rewrite, as Carmack noticed when he wrote Quake.

    However some of the source mods already available have provided pretty good workarounds. Boom, for example allows you to create "fake" ceilings and floors so you can be underwater. More importantly there is a silent teleporter that preserves angle and momentum, so you can create some very good 3D effects by seamlessly joining two different sections of map as you walk up some stairs, or take an elevator (also supported.)

    Some source mods also allow real heights. You can walk across the heads of a line of imps, take a ride on a cyber, control vertical aiming, jump, use weaker gravity, and look up and down.

    It isn't perfect, but DOOM was always about doing as much as you can within the engine limits.
  • Frac is right, Carmack wanted to release the Q3 engine open source and has stated so deep down in his .plan file a
    while back. There was some conflict amongst the other members of ID that ended up with Carmack agreeing to keep
    it closed source. You can find it all in his .plan.

    I read every Carmack's .plan update for about 3 years and don't remember anything like that. Maybe you could show it to me on finger.planetquake.com?

    -jfedor
  • Hmm, yeah, now that I think of it, I was talking about the Doom binaries -- not the same thing as the source. Self, take a hundred lines: "I must not post without thinking"...
  • What?

    How does a game engine relate to a programming interface? And who cares that DirectX 7 provides you with the ability to do what DOOM did 7 years ago? The point of having the DOOM source code is to improve and enhance DOOM, not to make new and different engines based upon another engine (though that is a possibility.)

    Furthermore, DOOM is completely and utterly different from DirectX 7. DirectX 7 is a library; DOOM is an application. People don't link their program with libdoom.so; they do so with DirectX.so (or whatever it is in the Windows world). It's comparing apples and oranges.

  • ...a building which you can walk on one floor and also on the floor above it. No tunnels which go under a walkway, etc. We need to get this added. If this can be added...
    Consider the fact that DOOM did not have a third dimension when it was made. I've read Carmack's book, and DOOM is very two-dimensional. It would be quite a feat to add a third dimension, and even if one were to do so, it would be very suboptimal, given the 2D BSPs. However, Duke Nukem proved you could do quite a bit of magic with teleporters, making you think a third dimension is in play.
  • If Slackware used to include it, they did so illegally. That's probably why it's not in there anymore. Read DOOMLIC.TXT (available in, e.g., the xdoom source, or lxdoom, or any number of other doom derivitives) while you still can; it was a remarkably restrictive license, which pretty much everyone who hacked on it disregarded (and id didn't seem to care). Now that it's legal to redistribute/modify/etc, we don't have to worry anymore.

  • Those id guys swear a lot (Score:4)

    by Wee ( 17189 ) on Sunday October 03, 1999 @10:14AM (#1641832)
    So I got the source code and I'm looking through it. Then I get an idea...

    [wrhodes@dt032nc0 linuxdoom-1.10]$ cat ./*.c | grep fuck | wc -l; cat ./*.c | grep fuck
    19
    static fuck = 0;
    fprintf(stderr, "fuck %d \r", fuck++);
    "fuck you, pussy!\nget the fuck out!",
    "hey, ron! can we say\n'fuck' in the game?",
    "suck it down, asshole!\nyou're a fucking wimp!",
    boolean message_dontfuckwithme;
    static boolean message_nottobefuckedwith;
    message_dontfuckwithme = false;
    message_nottobefuckedwith = false;
    message_nottobefuckedwith = false;
    if (showMessages || message_dontfuckwithme)
    if ((plr->message && !message_nottobefuckedwith)
    || (plr->message && message_dontfuckwithme))
    message_nottobefuckedwith = message_dontfuckwithme;
    message_dontfuckwithme = 0;
    message_nottobefuckedwith = true;
    extern boolean message_dontfuckwithme;
    message_dontfuckwithme = true;
    // 'fa' cheat for killer fucking arsenal

    [wrhodes@dt032nc0 linuxdoom-1.10]$ cat ./*.c | grep shit | wc -l; cat ./*.c | grep shit
    5
    wipe_shittyColMajorXform
    wipe_shittyColMajorXform((short*)wipe_scr_start, width/2, height);
    wipe_shittyColMajorXform((short*)wipe_scr_end, width/2, height);
    // Really complex printing shit...
    // Massive bunches of cheat shit

    Of course, that doesn't compare too well with the Linux source, but pound for pound plenty of prurient pontification.

    (BTW, have any of you tried to enter source code in a /. post before? It's ironic that it can't really be done -- all the indentation gets stripped. Someone tell CmdrTaco that he needs to allow tags in HTML posts.)

    -B

  • I hope DOOM Legacy will open their sources, but they have been the least willing to do so to date. They will sometimes provide source to those who ask for the purpose of developing auxilliary programs, but they have expressed unwillingness to let "competing projects" use their code. Doom Legacy is a very impressive source mod, I just question their willingness to open their sources publically. If so, that's good.

    Nearly all the other projects except Bruce Lewis's GL Doom have offered sources with binaries, and I expect most will convert to GPL now. Bruce Lewis lost his sources in a flood, thereby killing an important project, and that's what Carmack is referring to in the linked article. He intended to release them, after beta, but it never made it there.

  • GEL (Score:2)

    by mattc ( 12417 )
    Speaking of 3d stuff, check out GEL [urstudios.com]. It is an open source effort (BSD-like license) to develop a cooperative 3d world using much more modern technologies than Doom. Imagine realtime world creation in a cross between virtual reality and IRC. It is being developed by Real Programmers (the guy who created Active Worlds [activeworlds.com] and a guy from the FreeBSD core team, plus some others with equally impressive resumes) so you know it is not just vaporware!

    I'm not involved with this project, I just found it a few days ago and it looks cool. It's about time we start using 3D for things besides shoot-em-up games!

  • Half-Life has been released; Daikatana hasn't.
  • I'm thinking... Doom 9mm... Yeah, has a nice ring to it. Give it here. Now...
  • Every bit of code that's GPL'd helps to advance OS a bit furthur. Even if it's somewhat outdated, it still is likely to contain useful ideas.
  • what can i say, i just love that game!
  • I've always wanted to fiddle with th doom code, what a chance!
    I've always loved Doom anyways.

  • A project idea forms ... (Score:3)

    by seth ( 984 ) on Sunday October 03, 1999 @09:05AM (#1641844)
    What about a GnomeDoom widget or a GtkDoom widget, based on this source code? I haven't looked at the code yet, so this might be impossible, but that could be kinda cool, or at least a worthy hack?

    Or how about an XML-based WAD file format? Might be worth hacking that up.

    Hmm, or a JNI-based Java bindings for Doom ... I could see that ... :)

    Oh well, back to work.
  • Well now that it is under the GPL they (distro's) could put it in their distro. That brings up another question. There are a number of games (not tetris) that are GPL'd and good, but they are not in any of the distro's (please correct me if I am wrong.) Hmmm... The LinuxGame distro. Nah I have homework to do.
  • This is great news as far as I am concerned. For every commercial project that get's open-sourced (even better, gpl'd) an angel get's it's wings :-) Carmack just got his 15'th pair I think.

    Patrick Barrett
    Yebyen@adelphia.net

  • As I say in the title, not GPL so I couldn't put any doom spin-offs on my site. Now I can. Get over it.

  • In the JC statement quoted, he says this should prevent 'another gldoom episode'. Any idea what this was?
  • Ah, but you're forgetting that the old Doom license didn't really allow proprietary changes either. Sure, some groups did something like this, but they couldn't sell the results, and Microsoft certainly couldn't.

    Although I agree with you in general about the retroactivity of changing a license, I'm not sure about this case, but it doesn't matter. Many groups will change to the GPL anyway because ``it's the right thing'', and those that don't will either eventually langush while the GPLed versions (version? they might all merge) flourish. The non GPLed versions might eventually be forced to turn GPL as features in the GPLed versions become popular and the non-gpled versions start to incorporate those changes. I expect all versions of doom will eventually merge back into one.

    In general, software (open or closed) seems to be much like Highlander: there can be only one.

  • I wouldn't call this a troll, I'd call it flaimbait, but whatever.

    Stop sniping from the sidelines.

    The open source community is just a gift culture that does this in their spare time. id software is composed of some of the most talented people in the industry, working hard full time. I don't think there's anyone working on Linux fulltime.

    Stop your childish bitching.

    Warren
  • Carmack has a rather interesting relationship with Free software - this is quoted from his .plan after he'd won a big pile of money playing blackjack in Vegas (Feb. 98):

    I won $20,000 at the tables, which I am donating to the Free Software Foundation. I have been meaning to do something for the FSF for a long time. Quake was deployed on a dos port of FSF software, and both DOOM and Quake were developed on NEXTSTEP, which uses many FSF based tools. I don't subscribe to all the FSF dogma, but I have clearly benefited from their efforts.

    So, while he perhaps isn't RMS's biggest fan (philosophically), you've got to admire a guy who gives back to the community like this.

  • This is very good for the Free Softwares. A lot of people have heard about Linux because of Id's games and because their were a lot of Linux Doom/Quake servers.

    When they released Doom source code, this was even cooler because you cold look at a good professional pseudo-3D engine.

    Now this is even cooler and will help Open source games (for this kind of game of course).

    Thanks John, thanks.
  • A guy wrote a version of glDoom, but he didn't open-source or distribute the source. His hard-drive failed and the project was over.(After Mr. Carmack spent a decent amount of time helping him with it.)

  • Ironic... (Score:2)

    by itp ( 6424 )
    My roommate and I were just talking about the source we'd /really/ like to see released... Commander Keen and Duke Nukem (the original). These games were the best. Brings back fond memories of the days of BBS's, when life was simple... :-)

    Back on topic, this is really cool news. Granted this isn't cutting edge technology by a long shot, but it should still be fun!

    --
    Ian Peters

  • glDoom was closed source. Naturally, the guy developing glDoom had no backups. And as history has show many times, if you don't do backups, your hard drive will fail. Pretty dumb mistake if you ask me (or anyone else).. The development died.

    If glDoom would have been GPL, the odds are that atleast a few people would have had relatively up to date sources, and development could have been continued.

    Not a big loss though, DooM Legacy [frag.com] is much better anyway.

  • Why can't he just dual-license it? Cygnus does this, I believe. Release a GPLed version, charge for a different license.
    (Note: I suspect there is a reason -- from what I understand of game companies, many would just steal the source and try to disguise the fact -- catching them would be a major pain. And of course Carmack probably doesn't want them to see how he does what he does..)

    Daniel
  • People don't link their program with libdoom.so
    Actually, this is an interesting idea. Why not, especially now that the source is available?

    Daniel

  • Come on! Doom is years behind the current software technology. What good does it do to put it under the GPL? Or even distribute the source? It's only a marketing ploy by id software to increase the worship of Carmack!

    Here's your REAL open source movement:

    1. Software houses develop fantastic new technology, and charges licensing fees so that they can stay in business.
    2. They distribute their out of date, low tech software solutions to the programming community, who have now been duped into thinking that these software houses are in support of open source development, so that all the comp sci majors at the universities can hack on software they thought was cool 10 years ago.
    3. Software houses then recruit these people who worship them to develop more new technology.

    I don't fall for it one bit!

    Release the code to Quake III

    :-)

    ----
    Lyell E. Haynes

  • Correct me if I'm mistaken, but wasn't the DOOM source already open? I know you've been able to download it, and look through it. there there have been very many projects based on doom out on the web, such as GL doom [frag.com] (although it appears that that project was lost in a hard drive crash *shudder*... maybe argument for having many copies of the source code around the world).

    How would changing the licsens to GPL effect people already working on projects based on doom? (or were these projects completly new implementations, not based on the DOOM code).

    I was under the impression that DOOM was under a BSD style licens now, did they do this to prevent propitary spinnoffs?
    "Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
  • I'm pretty sure that doom was under a BSD style licens, or not licensd at all. since there were many DOOM spinnofs on the web
    "Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
  • Slackware 3.5 has doom with it. However, it is the shareware version so there is no licence conflict there at all.
  • id didn't seem to be going after anybody, but my reading of the previous license seems to indicate that distributing modified versions of the DOOM source code was not permitted. The only thing permitted was "Educational Use," which included using parts of the code in your own programs (which you were allowed to distribute, even for money), but nowhere was permission given to distribute the entire original source code with modifications.
  • Actualy, this should be pretty posible, considering that DOOM worked on 20mhz 386s. Since you only have to worry about low rezes, and 4color grayscale graphics, I'm sure a palm could hack it.

    As for the display, Just make most of the levels 'bright' EI more light then dark, and you should be able to get a pretty playable game out of it...
    "Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"

  • previous license (Score:5)

    by Trepidity ( 597 ) <delirium-slashdotNO@SPAMhackish.org> on Sunday October 03, 1999 @12:10PM (#1641871)
    There seems to be some confusion about the previous license of the Doom source. Based on my reading of the license (IANAL, however), you were allowed to use portions of the source in your own programs (which you could do anything with, including sell, and were not required to make the source code to them available). This is referred to as "Educational Use" in the license. However, the license also specifically prohibited you from redistributing the original source code. It seems like somewhat of a judgement call how much source code constitutes using it in your own work (which you can do whatever you want with, BSD-style), and how much constitutes a derivative of the original Doom source (which is "all rights reserved").

    This presents an interesting situtation now. Although it has been re-licensed under the GPL, I have a copy of the source code under the old license, and they can't rescind this license. Therefore, I could take some functions from it, and use them in my own closed-source program (which the license allows), thereby effectively bypassing the requirements of the GPL.
  • The previous doom license allowed you to use portions of the source code in your own programs ("Educational Use"), but did *not* allow you to distribute your own modified versions of the source. Many people (such as GL Doom that you noted above) did anyway, and id didn't seem to care, but nonetheless, this wasn't permitted by the license. The shift to GPL allows you to do this legally now.

    What is more restrictive is that if you only want to use one function from the Doom code in your own program, you'd have to GPL the whole program. Under the old license this was not required.

  • Misconceptions.. (Score:3)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 03, 1999 @03:55PM (#1641873)
    There seem to be a lot of misconceptions here.

    The Doom source code was released roughly two to three years ago, using the Linux source port (But heavily cleaned up), because the DOS stuff still had lame-o sound code which they couldn't distribute. Descent had this problem too when it released soon thereafter. I just figure this is worth saying as most everyone has been stating 'Oh, cool! It's out now!'

    And.. Id has not been making this as a publicity stunt. Carmack has wanted to change the license for quite awhile but he needed signatures from everyone who worked on the original base, and it seems he finally managed to work that up. Not to mention that he has hardly even stated much at /all/ to anyone about this. A reupload, a blurb on Doomworld(marvelous, marvelous doom site, nothing comes close, although it looks like a few of the dynamic injokes got trashed earlier to make up for slashdotting), that's it.

    As far as the source ports themselves go... Yes, there is a GL port. Doom Legacy GL, Doom GL, etc.. Just poke around the Source Ports section of the aformentioned doomworld(.com) site. The currently 'accepted' uber-port, zdoom, does not support this, though. There is a port of *that* coming for Linux soon, however, along with Doom Legacy.

    The engine is a lot more flexible than many people give it credit as well. It's *not* totally outdated, it's merely a different method of handling things.

    Oh well.

    -- Patrick McCarthy, wondering where his login went off to, I didn't delete it but it's not here?
  • All hail the mighty MS for open-sourcing DirectX 7 (I CAN get the APIs, and I can use the technology in my own software, so it's open source right?

    So badly wrong. Direct X 7 is very cool but it is certainly not open source. If it was, any one would be free to pick it apart and put the best bits into another cool program.

    Direct X will never be adopted outside of the MS world (like Active X) precisely because it is not open source.

    A GPL graphics engine would allow games developers to use a set of tools to create their game (as Direct X does) and it would allow them to create whatever improvements they needed to the engine. The difference is that those improvements would then be shared under the GPL so that, where they were any good, we could all benefit.

  • In general, software (open or closed) seems to be much like Highlander: there can be only one.

    Interesting statement. In theory it might be reasonable, but in practice, it defies reason. Choice is a good thing, no matter if it's free or not, but in a free marketplace, you usually have more choice because different choices can peacefully coexist and evolve together. It's competition and symbiosis at the same time.

    Actually I think that's not a marketplace mechanism but related to the users and creators. The same force that drives people to engage in flame wars about their favorite products is the force that ensures variety and evolution within the free (software) world.

    As long as people engage in flame wars about Linux vs BSD, Gnome vs KDE, Emacs vs Vi, etc., the choices will keep evolving and getting better. Intuitively we would like to see a single perfect solution, but since everybody wants that and everyone is different, we'll inevitably have several choices. As long as taste varies and people choose, there will be different choices, and there can be a lot.
  • People don't link their program with libdoom.so; they do so with DirectX.so (or whatever it is in the Windows world). It's comparing apples and oranges.

    well, you can staticaly link with .lib s, or you can dynamicaly call functions from .dlls. I think, most programs link to a small .lib that has imports for a bunch of DLLs.
    "Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
  • Its just too easy these days :-)

    Lazy and bored at home.
  • > Hmm, or a JNI-based Java bindings for Doom ... could see that ... :)

    Actually there is a project that's done exactly this with Quake II. It's available at http://www.planetquake.com/q2java/ [planetquake.com]. They are also now including some interesting XML based game config stuff. Neat.
  • As it has been stated before, the DOOM engine is not groundbreaking or earthshattering by any stretch. But being open, for all to see is something of a learning experience for the budding programmers amongst us. Everyone has to start with their 'hello world.' program. Poking around and coding modifications for DOOM may be a 'hello world' for newbie game programmers, like myself. I've always been semi-mystified when I think about how I myself would go about coding a 3D game engine, even just a rudimentary one. To poke around with the DOOM souce would give me some general ideas on what facets I'd need to take into consideration. And hopefully I'd learn something and then go write the Quake2^1024 engine.

    No one learned anything from looking at code they don't understand. Even if id released the Quake3 source, I'm sure I'd be clueless. Something on the lines of DOOM or Wolf3D is more my level. id is doing a service to the budding programmers by releasing the source so they can stick their noses in it and see how it ticks. It doesn't benefit them to cling to it, no one is paying for a DOOM license last time I checked.

    Anyway. I think I shall take a look at it. Might learn something interesting or useful. What a novel concept.


    kaniff -- Ralph Hart Jr

  • flood (Score:2)

    by delmoi ( 26744 )
    The guy, Bruce Lewis was working on an Open GL port of DOOM for 15 months. although he had not reliced the code, he planned to after beta testing. Unfortunetly, he lost *all* his code and his backups in a flood. although other posters had said that it was a hard drive failure, it was not. there were backups made
    "Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
  • OK, this might be a little sour-grapes, since I also submitted this and was rejected, but if you look at the DoomWorld page, there's no actual citation for JC's words. I checked out his .plan, it hasn't been updated since the first. I don't know where else they would have gotten the info. Maybe John had mailed them, but why them particularly? Why not tell everyone else?

    I've mailed the guy who posted the news (Linguica) for clarification - I just hope it is true after all.
  • Why are there always psuedo "purists" out there who twist and churn the open source definition to suit their obligatory flame/whine against software companies that open up their sources? In fact, Carmack wanted to have the Quake3 engine developed open-source, but other founders won't let him (learned from the already-defunct planetcrap.com)
  • Yes, your right. Maybe I should have said that software wants to be that way. People with their desire for choices (or more changing requirements) pull software into multitudes, while the software itself (via other people) pulls itself back together by merging the good features and dumping the bad. I guess it's really a struggle between many and one. People like one stop shopping, but if it doesn't meet their needs, they will either look elsewhere or create that elsewhere.

    BTW, don't get me wrong, I like choice. However, if there's only one `choice' available, at least let it be good.

  • IANAL, but these companies that made proprietary add-ons based on the old license are not required in any way to comply with the new license (in this case, the GPL) Jeremy
  • Well, give us a model on how a software house can stay in business if, for example, Id releases the source to QuakeIII?

    Let's give your ideas another spin:

    1. Millions pay Id software to develop the technology to make QuakeIII possible, essentially by buying QuakeII. Id makes money and has incentive to make QuakeIII, as well as buy(and give away) Ferraris.

    2. Id releases QuakeIII, and in memory of all the people who made it possible, release QuakeII source. Competitors and fans alike now have access to the source.

    3. Id embarks on QuakeIV, subsidized by the people who demand it, by buying QuakeIII. Being marginally more challenging and difficult, they decide to hire some cool programmers, who coincindentally grew up around Quake1 and already grok the technology/culture.

    4. Repeat the cycle, and when QuakeIV ships, there is now a source for QuakeIII, and new programmers to hire for QuakeV, who happened to have grown around the QuakeII source.

    So Id makes money by providing technology and games that no one else can. Id has the incentive to do so because we pay them to.

    Id grows the market as well by increasing demand for 3d sound and video cards, SIMD CPUs, faster CPUS, larger/faster/bigger memory/busses/CD-ROMs, which also happens to reduce the price of second best systems, creating more market for their games, as well as other technologies, and increasing the talent pool of programmers.

    In the end everyone benefits, so no one loses. It's a Win for everyone, so there is no need to change the cycle.

    =)

    -AS
  • They can get just about anyone they want I'd be willing to bet. First of all, people already worship them. And secondly the company only has about 20 employees, and only two or three programmers.

    Of course they are not going to sell there latest and greatest engines and games, that's how they make money.

    Id supports Open source in the true sense of the word, not for commercial gain, but for experimenters to play with. They've also donated $20,000 to the FSF, (well Carmack did) and Carmack works on the GLX g200/400 drivers for linux

    What exactly would be the benefit for them to release quake 3? if they couldn't make any money from it, they probably would never have even written it. You'll get you're q3a code in 2005. If you don't like it, why don't you write you're own 3d game engine?
    "Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
  • IMHO, the important point about games is the artwork (level designs, 3D modeling), the sounds and the music - you'll need non-geek type of folks to do this kind of work, and those few people who are capable are making a living from it.

    From the coding point of view, you still need a good game engine, which must be adjusted often in relatively short periods of time as the modern graphics hardware changes quickly. The making of a good computer game is different from producing a compiler or shell utilities... And before Open GL there was hardly a way to make it platform-independent - can't estimate Carmack's work high enough in this respect, looking at those unsupported *ix ports being around for several earlier id games.
  • I was commenting that Team Fortress 2 is NOT out, and it uses the HL engine, which in turn uses Quake technology.

    Or does Valves license on the Quake code extend that far? I don't know.
  • Well, Linguica says he got an email direct from JC himself. It still seems odd that he'd email instead of .planning, but that's not really my buisness.
  • www.textfire.com -- 5th annual interactive fiction competition. 90% of teh games run on linux.
    Live coverage at www.pushove.com
  • ftp://ftp.idsoftware.com/idstuff/source/wolfsrc.zi p
  • Amazing that I can have both "Flaimbait" and "Insightful" posts in the same thread.

    What kind of ship do you guys run here? huh?

    ----
    Lyell E. Haynes

  • First was the initial release of the Doom source,


    he released the Doom source.... so we could just look at it and drool? Forgive me for my ignorance, please, but I'm not quite understanding the concept behind this. Reminds me of the whole Corel spill (ok, not really) and all these other times I've heard of source releases, only to hear whelps of joy when the stuff was GPL'ed...

    Thanks
  • They can then make money off the game by two ways: First of all, they can sell it to the general public, who just wants a game to play and doesn't care about the code, and secondly, they can license the code to other developers for a fee that includes support and development tools that id uses in-house for their own production.

    Well, the way things are now, Id provides almost no support whatsoever for there product. If Id opensourced there engen, people would get for free what now costs them $700,000. support would be a large burden on a company of less then 20. while I'm sure it would be posible for them to make some money with open source, I doubt it would be as much. remember, Id is basicaly selling source, not support (in addition to games). Going opensource would cause them to lose at least half there revinue stream. Other companys would also be able to sell support, why would they want to give themselves compition?

    While Id opening there source would be good for you it might not be the best thing for Id. and since there writing the code, they can do whatever they want to with it. If you have a problem with it, then don't buy the game
    "Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
  • A long while ago (either in a .plan update or in an interview, I can't rremember), Carmack had mentioned that he was waiting for the last Quake engine licensee to get their game out of the door so that he could release the Quake source code. That's good though the puzzling thing is that he refers to John Romero/Ion Storm's Daikatana as this last licensee. I thought that they were using the Quake ][ engine.
  • It's a pain in the ass, though, We *really* need a <PRE> tag.

    for (int i = 0; i < 9; i++) {
    printf("I %d the sandbox.\n", i);

    }

    Ooooh, what's that on the second line, you say?

    <BLOCKQUOTE>printf("I %d the sandbox.\n", i);</BLOCKQUOTE>

    Nesting them also works.

    Of course, we really do need <CODE> and <PRE> tags.
  • Hello all,

    from what I'll ask you will recon I am not a big gamer (I liked Wolfenstein3D, though).
    So, I understand there is a shareware and full version of doom. The code of which version is available?
    I have seen these Win32 ports, but all seem to require doom... I guess they require the original Doom written for DOS, but which one? The shareware or the full? Is there something that is understood by default and I don't get it?
    Has the code for the DOS port been available previously (but under a different license, non GPL), or only the Linux port was open?
    I would appreciate your inputs, I am looking forward on trying some Win32 ports.

  • Maybe Commander Keen code isn't id Software's property.

    At that time they sticked with Apogee and that could be a problem.

    -jfedor

  • You can play the shareware version (1st episode).

    To play the rest you have to pay.

    -jfedor

  • Re:Quake is GPL now too (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    No. Since Carmack is the copyright holder for both Doom and Quake, he can distribute either under whatever terms he wants. By distributing Doom under GPL, anyone who derives something from Doom must distribute the derived work under GPL, but there is no restriction on what Carmack can do with his own code.

  • Carmack and Open Source (Score:5)

    by Unknwn ( 646 ) on Sunday October 03, 1999 @09:11AM (#1641908) Homepage
    John Carmack seems to be doing a _lot_ for the open source community these days. First was the initial release of the Doom source, although it wasn't under an open license, it was still damned cool for the time. Now, he's helping with the GLX project for the Matrox cards (and supposedly doing what he does best, wild and crazy optimizations :) and today releases Doom under the GPL.

    Three cheers for Mr Carmack!

    --
    Jeremy Katz

  • Re:Quake is GPL now too (Score:3)

    by Hobbex ( 41473 ) on Sunday October 03, 1999 @09:13AM (#1641909)

    Noop, Carmack started Quake from a clean sheet when he was tired of all the corners he had coded himself into with the Doom code.

    AFAIK he has not done this since however, so Quake3 is a derivative work of the original Quake source.

    Though of course, what the other reply says (about holding the copyright) still holds.

    -
    /. is like a steer's horns, a point here, a point there and a lot of bull in between.
  • Ohhhh yes. If the service weren't so expensive, this would be a cool hack for the 7-series.

    Actually, it might almost be playable on the larger screen of the last-generation Newton (The 2000/2100 models). They already have Ethernet support. Hmmmmm....

    Anybody remember NewtonQuake?


  • Although having doom is the coolest thing since... having doom, doom is not written to well, in the sense that its gonna be a bitch to make it cool. Now quake on the other hand... That would really kick some ass. I'd be hacking on that till the day I die.
  • The quake source code is still sufffiently advanced enough that they probably won't put it under the GPL. The GNU GPL still permits the sale of programs... We might just end up with another license for it too.

    It would be a *real* long time before the quake source is that out of date.
  • #include "all the standard idealistic posts about how we should create a new open-source standard for X (where, in this case, X = games) ".h

  • This is indeed good news. :)

    I worked on the Doom code for about six months as part of TeamTNT's Boom engine effort, and I can definitely say it's both educational and fun. Many projects like mine will probably be converting to the GPL as well now too (we just passed on Carmack's educational license before.)

    There is a link to the Source Ports page from the page the story links to (sorry, slashdotted right now or I'd link) that will get you versions of source for a wide variety of operating systems, including Linux, and with widely varying feature sets. I expect most, and nearly all the Linux versions, will go open source now.
  • This is a very good idea, and an excellent opportunity for those beginning programming to get at least some idea of how a professional and fun game is done. Keep up the good work, id Software!
  • AFAIK, redhat has a lot of game packages shipped with the distro. i just dont bother installing em, but i assume large sections of the install (install X games, install bsd games etc etc) are devoted to games.
  • I'd rate this Flamebait or Troll, but better to actually say why (I really wish you could mod and post in the same discussion).

    You ask why all the most advanced games are closed-source. There are two reasons for this. First, you forget that the eventual goal of the Open-Source movement is to create an entire software platform which is Open-Source. This is a very big job, and it involves far more than just the OS. All sorts of other work has to be done, and a lot (such as office productivity software) isn't done at this point in time. When it comes to coding, games are a pretty low priority to Open-Source developers (playing is another matter entirely).

    Second, Open-Source does have one major disadvantage: initial development times are extremely slow. This is a tradeoff; you often get better code, but you pay for it in spades time-wise. I would point you to Golgotha's site of an example of a highly-advanced Open-Source game in development, but unfortunately I've forgotten where the site is (can someone help me out here?)

    I should also point out that the slowness of Open-Source development time is regained in bugfixing time later.
  • There are already several ports of Doom to Windows CE-based Palm-size PCs. Since these handhelds run at a resolution of 320x200 when turned sideways, and since the newer models have 256- or 65,535-color LCDs and decent sound, the platform is more than ideal.

    I think there's one variation of a port at http://www.jimmy.com/ [jimmy.com].

    -Sam
  • Sure, every GPL'd line of code helps the software industry, or whatever, but I think this is a cheap publicity stunt, even if a good one.
    The thing is that Doom is old, and any "interesting" ideas in it have already been outdated by much faster computers and things like DirectX/OpenGL. All Carmack gets out of this is some praise on slashdot, and a couple more ppl who buy quake 3. That's all he's out for, and that's all he's getting. I am not criticizing him, actually, I'm just saying that it sounds like a very good idea, but practically speaking, I don't think this amounts to much, and is mostly just to generate hype.
  • In fact, Carmack wanted to have the Quake3 engine developed open-source, but other founders won't let him (learned from the already-defunct planetcrap.com)

    I don't think so.

    Besides, other founders = Adrian Carmack (no relation) and he's an artist, not a programmer so I think he doesn't care whether it's open source or not.

    Other founders (Hall, Romero) have left id long time ago.

    -jfedor

  • I think most of the major distributions include several gpl'ed games. You can bet that they will also include DOOM, now - Afterall after so many years, it'll still have some marketing pull.

  • Exactly! So id software is not really in support of open source development. They are in support of the normal commercial model that everyone else outside the linux community uses.

    Therefore, we shouldn't praise them for their GPL move! It's just a marketing stunt.

    ----
    Lyell E. Haynes

  • Well he does have the spare cash to be generous.

  • Open Source in the true sense of the word means that all development, even current, is open to the software community.

    I don't need to write my own 3d engine, because there are open source engines already in development that I can use, such as the Genesis 3D engine.

    The benefit that id receives from putting their current projects under the GPL is that they get more programmers that can help in the development. The programmers can contribute to the code, find bugs, suggest additions and changes, etc. Carmack and his in-house team still have control as to what goes into their version of the game, but they get a free team of developers to help them.

    They can then make money off the game by two ways: First of all, they can sell it to the general public, who just wants a game to play and doesn't care about the code, and secondly, they can license the code to other developers for a fee that includes support and development tools that id uses in-house for their own production.

    There's your Win-Win scenario!

    ----
    Lyell E. Haynes

  • Strange that they didn't try to restore the data from the drive with, for example, Ontrack's service. The Ontrack guys will (try to) restore the data from a failed HD by opening it up and tweaking with some special HD heads. They're expensive, but maybe 15 months of work is worth it?
    Just my 2 pennies.
  • Can't help wondering how long it will take before we can mount a WAD file using the loop device :-)
  • This is too cool...I have a lame 100mhz which I've been too cheap to upgrade/replace for, uhh, 4 years now (I'm waiting for Athlon to go to .18, yeah), and I love playing old games. XCom, Wolf3d, DoomI/II, and recently Duke3d (640x480, oh yeah). Can't wait for the cool stuff to come out with this being open-sourced.
  • JC has said before that he wants to release the source code, but can't until all licenced games based on it are released. (*COUGH* DAIKTANA *COUGH*)
  • I may be wrong but if I remeber right, DOOM does not allow you to have a two story building. By this I mean a building which you can walk on one floor and also on the floor above it. No tunnels which go under a walkway, etc. We need to get this added. If this can be added, and if doom has openGL support (don't know, been since my dos days since I have played games), we can have quite a bitchin engine.... Does anyone want to work on this? I would like to. Jesse Andrews andrews@physics.berea.edu PS. Don't flame me if my info about the doom engine is incorrect please. Unfortunately I have to spend most of my time doing oracle forms development instead of games now!

  • Thank you John Carmack (Score:3)

    by HoserHead ( 599 ) on Sunday October 03, 1999 @09:32AM (#1641939)
    I e-mailed John not too long ago asking about this, as I wanted to package up lxdoom for Debian. The old Doom license expressly forbid redistribution of any kind, which meant that DOOM and its derivatives couldn't be redistributed, even in the non-free section of Debian.

    I'm greatly appreciative of this, John. I asked for a legally-able-to-redistribute license and you gave us more than we could have ever hoped. Way to go, id!

  • Unfortunately I don't think that would be possible without completely rewriting a great deal of the code. A lot of the maps' simplicities are derived from the fact that any given point will only have one floor and one ceiling.

    Cool idea though, and it should be possible, but it'd take an incredible amount of work.
  • Well...Doom never went away & there are about a million wads to prove it.This will be really interesting if a bunch of Doom fanatics plunge in and create a far better GPL version than ever was.I am not sure how far an older engine can be pushed but it would be very cool to see an old classic reborn in new clothes!
  • There is a link to the Source Ports page from the page the story links to
    http://www.doomworld.com/ports/index.sht ml [doomworld.com]

  • Doom Source Code (Score:5)

    by Lando ( 9348 ) <lando2+slash@nOSPaM.gmail.com> on Sunday October 03, 1999 @09:42AM (#1641943) Homepage Journal
    The Doom source code has been available for some time. Looking through the comments, I noticed a lot of people saying that "hey this is cool now I can see the code" The truth of the matter is that the code was released 3 years ago or so, can't remember off the top of my head. There was some work that had to be pulled from the original source because id licensed a third party for the sound engine, but the functionality was there.

    The part that is not generally available are the maps from the game itself. The engine is available, but you have to download and put together your own information. With the proliferation of doom and quake sites this is not a problem.

    John's original intent was to release the source code for each game engine a year after the game was released or when the next game engine was released. Doom and DoomII use the same engine, more or less and when quake was released John released the Doom code, actually a bit later since they had to have someone go in and clean out the third party software and clean up part of the code.

    And now for some URL's

    PlanetQuake [planetquake.com] probably the formost user site online for quake and doom related material. Any player of these games should not miss this site.

    Quake 2 coding list. [mailto]

    id Softare [idsoftware.com] id software's main website

    id's source code archive [idsoftware.com]

    planetquake's finger information [planetquake.com] Latest .plan files from the gaming industries top game designers.

    Where to find the Doom source [cdrom.com]

    Cdrom [cdrom.com] and more files, look for various id titles

    Lando

  • Here's a recent interview from FiringSquad with the great JC [firingsquad.com]. The guys a total stand-up, quake rocks, fast cars, open source, and he lives in Dallas, the center of all things cool and computery (wireless what?!).
  • I suppose now all the current projects out there that are derived from the original Doom source code, such as DOOM Legacy [frag.com], will change over to the GPL as well. This would be a good thing, as the Legacy engine is much improved over the original, and includes a number of Quake-like features as well. When I looked at it in comparison with the original engine, it blew me away (no pun intended).

    And, of course, I echo the kudos that John Carmack is getting for his decision to change the license of the Doom source code...he's one of the guys I think of first in the Pantheon of Programming Gods...

    Eric
    --
    "Free your code...and the rest will follow."

  • I think Carmack had the same idea a couple of years ago. Hence, Quake. If it really deserved a re-write before, I think it would still need one now. Not that it wouldn't be cool..
  • i think i read somewhere that the guy who wrote the code for that lost it in a hard drive crash


    but probably nobody will read this, and i might be wrong anyhow
  • Only in the sense that they are both FPSes, Quake used an entirely different engine from Doom.

    Kintanon
  • Like getting a decent html widget or internet transparency.

    Or a bonobo componet of the Gnome minesweeper game. Oh wait, they already did that.

    More worthwhile things to do indeed! :)

    --

  • Good, yes. A complete fix? No. (Score:3)

    by astyanax ( 8365 ) on Sunday October 03, 1999 @09:53AM (#1641959) Homepage
    They quote Carmack (or someone else at id) as saying "Now everyone has to open up their source." That's not necessarily true. If someone got the Doom source before this license change and made some proprietary changes to it, they are not required to comply with the GPL. They are completely entitled to use the software according to the original license if they choose.

    Imagine if Microsoft gave you a copy of MS Office with a site license, and then said "Ha! We just changed the license! Now you have to pay us One million dollars! They can do that, but only on new purchases/downloads of their software. They can not make you comply with a new license for software that you are already using according to another license.

    This is a very good thing. Unfortunately, if people were not contributing back changes and improvements before, simply changing the license to the GPL now wont necessarily fix that. It will stop it from happening in the future, though. I still applaud this decision in license change, good work id.

Slashdot Top Deals

I don't want to be young again, I just don't want to get any older.

Close