Programming - WAYWO - V.37 - Developers

[QUOTE=Kamshak;40036156]i'd only think it's problematic once someone starts selling your software, since gpl allows you to do that[/QUOTE] I've thought a while about this, and this isn't true either. Anybody who sells my software will run in to the same problems of me selling the software. So I'm kind of ignoring that for now. Besides, do I really want to ban people from reselling something they've bought? Garage sales are awesome! The other side is that people will give away my software for free. This *will* happen, I can't stop it. Whether this is at LAN parties (look at all the people playing Minecraft without buying it), or giving out binaries online, maybe even in the form of mods. The real problem is making an incentive that people should buy the software from me, and not gotten from someone else. There's several options that I'm looking at: - Make it illegal to share the software. This is my 'failsafe' plan if things don't work out, since I'm trying something new. - Have a big hyped up first day where people buy it before people put it up on TPB. This could work, but I'm not a famous developer so I'd only really have one person buy it. - Don't give a fuck about my program and charge for Windows binaries since it's so hard to compile. ntop use to do this. To my knowledge they now either hide the ability to buy it (maybe you need to download the demo to buy it), and offer a crippled demo for Windows users. Otherwise, have fun using Autotools on Windows. - Use a DRM service like Steam to make it easy to buy. I may go for this. But note how Steam is DRM. It actually makes it harder to share the application with people, and that doesn't sit well with me. - Sell a service. This is the main option I'm looking at. If I have an online service that's a forum, modding centre, links to beta binaries, user suggestions and for people to develop the application (me) so it has updates, I could charge people for access to this. I could have a 'blessed' version of a game that's on a retail CD sent to people (this seems to be popular with Kickstarters) for people who enjoy the project. The only downside of this is that if I'd need to make good games that people *want* to support and have a future.

[QUOTE=chimitos;40037920]I feel like we need a math thread. Good idea?[/QUOTE] [URL="http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1250874"]this?[/URL]

[QUOTE=danharibo;40037663]A clock face that just has N / S / E / W rather than the hours.[/QUOTE] [IMG_THUMB]http://puu.sh/2nWXA[/IMG_THUMB] I'm sorry for sucking at creating icons.

[QUOTE=Jookia;40038118]I've thought a while about this, and this isn't true either. Anybody who sells my software will run in to the same problems of me selling the software. So I'm kind of ignoring that for now. Besides, do I really want to ban people from reselling something they've bought? Garage sales are awesome! The other side is that people will give away my software for free. This *will* happen, I can't stop it. Whether this is at LAN parties (look at all the people playing Minecraft without buying it), or giving out binaries online, maybe even in the form of mods. The real problem is making an incentive that people should buy the software from me, and not gotten from someone else. There's several options that I'm looking at: - Make it illegal to share the software. This is my 'failsafe' plan if things don't work out, since I'm trying something new. - Have a big hyped up first day where people buy it before people put it up on TPB. This could work, but I'm not a famous developer so I'd only really have one person buy it. - Don't give a fuck about my program and charge for Windows binaries since it's so hard to compile. ntop use to do this. To my knowledge they now either hide the ability to buy it (maybe you need to download the demo to buy it), and offer a crippled demo for Windows users. Otherwise, have fun using Autotools on Windows. - Use a DRM service like Steam to make it easy to buy. I may go for this. But note how Steam is DRM. It actually makes it harder to share the application with people, and that doesn't sit well with me. - Sell a service. This is the main option I'm looking at. If I have an online service that's a forum, modding centre, links to beta binaries, user suggestions and for people to develop the application (me) so it has updates, I could charge people for access to this. I could have a 'blessed' version of a game that's on a retail CD sent to people (this seems to be popular with Kickstarters) for people who enjoy the project. The only downside of this is that if I'd need to make good games that people *want* to support and have a future.[/QUOTE] Product keys that are generated with each purchase from your site, and needed to a) Play online in the game b) Register an account on the service This is another way to go about it. Please note that the product key is not generated by the game, but by your site/service.

[QUOTE=T3hGamerDK;40038238]Product keys that are generated with each purchase from your site, and needed to a) Play online in the game b) Register an account on the service This is another way to go about it. Please note that the product key is not generated by the game, but by your site/service.[/QUOTE] People are free to edit the game, so that's out of the question.

[QUOTE=zero_slo;40038165][URL="http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1250874"]this?[/URL][/QUOTE] I figured that if there was one, it would be here. I never go to GD :v:

[QUOTE=Jookia;40038428]People are free to edit the game, so that's out of the question.[/QUOTE] How so? You could just make it have some sort of server-based authentication thing going on. It doesn't have to be closed source for that to work fine.

[QUOTE=T3hGamerDK;40038612]How so? You could just make it have some sort of server-based authentication thing going on. It doesn't have to be closed source for that to work fine.[/QUOTE] Well yeah, but you can always remove the server and client authentication, upload it to TPB and have a ton of users all being able to play with each other. That, and having an authentication server takes up time and effort and is a single point of failure that also prevents forks.

You could go with the old tried and tested shareware method? It's not going to stop anyone stealing your game but it's likely to make all but the most die hard of pirates think about not stealing it as much.

[QUOTE=Lexic;40039335]You could go with the old tried and tested shareware method? It's not going to stop anyone stealing your game but it's likely to make all but the most die hard of pirates think about not stealing it as much.[/QUOTE] Again, my base wants are that my software be owned by whoever bought it and under the GPL and CC-BY-SA. This is not negotiable. The question is how I'm going to make money from it.

I plan on putting all the commercial game I make on tpb with a special pirate mode like There's No Time to Explain

[QUOTE=Jookia;40038876]Well yeah, but you can always remove the server and client authentication, upload it to TPB and have a ton of users all being able to play with each other. That, and having an authentication server takes up time and effort and is a single point of failure that also prevents forks.[/QUOTE] Only if the multiplayer of your game is LAN-based or the main community runs servers without authentication. Pirated copies of Garry's mod are practically useless because virtually all the good servers have authentication with Steam. Minecraft is also relatively easy to pirate, but is completely useless if you want to play with others because the servers need the authentication server for user management and bans if they don't want to run a whitelist with modified clients only. (It makes Notch's piracy comment kind of funny in hindsight, because everyone who pirates the game [B]has[/B] to buy it if they want to play seriously.) The same goes for games that are very heavily score-based. Cracking Trackmania is possible but it removes all the online functionality and leaderboards that make the game so fun.

God knows in that case. Just put a note asking people to pay for it? :v: Anyway, in other news I've taken a break from making wildly inaccurate accusations about the GPL and actually done something vaguely interesting for once: [img]http://i.imgur.com/qTybOgs.png[/img] I've started remaking my AI coursework from uni using underscore.js! It's not a particularly useful thing to be doing, but it's better than all the PHP I've been doing at work. (I'm just pretending that C++ project doesn't exist right now)

[QUOTE=Tamschi;40039432]Only if the multiplayer of your game is LAN-based or the main community runs servers without authentication. Pirated copies of Garry's mod are practically useless because virtually all the good servers have authentication with Steam. Minecraft is also relatively easy to pirate, but is completely useless if you want to play with others because the servers need the authentication server for user management and bans if they don't want to run a whitelist with modified clients only. (It makes Notch's piracy comment kind of funny in hindsight, because everyone who pirates the game [B]has[/B] to buy it if they want to play seriously.) The same goes for games that are very heavily score-based. Cracking Trackmania is possible but it removes all the online functionality and leaderboards that make the game so fun.[/QUOTE] It's *easy* for a programmer to remove all authentication measures I put in to a GPLed game, then upload it so all the pirates can play on eachother's servers.

[QUOTE=Jookia;40039487]It's *easy* for a programmer to remove all authentication measures I put in to a GPLed game, then upload it so all the pirates can play on eachother's servers.[/QUOTE] Then don't bother, it's long been known that piracy is either a service issue or people who will just refuse to pay for the software in the first place. Make sure it's super easy to buy your game and you're in the clear.

There's no reason [i]not[/i] to put them in. Sure, someone might take them out - but then again they might not. Plus, if you keep putting out updates all the people who've pirated it will have to wait for someone to deauth and recompile it again.

[QUOTE=Jookia;40039487]It's *easy* for a programmer to remove all authentication measures I put in to a GPLed game, then upload it so all the pirates can play on eachother's servers.[/QUOTE] Make your game available on TPB yourself asking people to purchase the game if they liked it. You know what is going up on that page, and people that were going to buy your game is going to buy it, and the people that would pirate no matter what.. Well, there's no change there, but you might just get a few more purchases. [editline]26th March 2013[/editline] The thing is, if you're making your code available under the GPL and the assets in CC, then it's impossible to stop it from being pirated. Which it would've been regardless, but if you put out releases yourself, at least you can make sure it's a proper torrent. And you can give tiny amounts of support in the comments, get feedback, and maybe get a few more buyers.

[QUOTE=Jookia;40039487]It's *easy* for a programmer to remove all authentication measures I put in to a GPLed game, then upload it so all the pirates can play on eachother's servers.[/QUOTE] That's not the point at all. If you do that with Minecraft it makes the game useless, same with Trackmania or Garry's Mod. If a game has any kind of community or community features that somehow rely on the default payment method, modifying the game [B]massively degrades value[/B]. If you make your paid distribution channel the only way to get end-user-updates both quickly and completely automatic that is most likely enough to focus the main community and almost everyone else will gravitate towards that unless you ask for some ridiculous price. If you write a multiplayer game that provides server admins with ban features and account validation, with the default self-updating binary client and server fixed on your auth server, I can guarantee you that will be enough to create this effect. The product you're selling effectively becomes the fact that users can't create accounts for free, but that's the point of a ban system and effectively increases value of your accounts by making people behave better on the unmodified servers.

[QUOTE=Lexic;40039603]There's no reason [i]not[/i] to put them in. Sure, someone might take them out - but then again they might not.[/QUOTE] I'd have to have an authentication server, which costs money and uptime and eugh. It'd be interesting to follow this. [QUOTE=Lexic;40039603]Plus, if you keep putting out updates all the people who've pirated it will have to wait for someone to deauth and recompile it again.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=T3hGamerDK;40039614]Make your game available on TPB yourself asking people to purchase the game if they liked it. You know what is going up on that page, and people that were going to buy your game is going to buy it, and the people that would pirate no matter what.. Well, there's no change there, but you might just get a few more purchases.[/QUOTE] I don't want to encourage people to not buy it. I know some people would go 'oh look it's on TPB so it's free'. [QUOTE=T3hGamerDK;40039614]The thing is, if you're making your code available under the GPL and the assets in CC, then it's impossible to stop it from being pirated. Which it would've been regardless, but if you put out releases yourself, at least you can make sure it's a proper torrent. And you can give tiny amounts of support in the comments, get feedback, and maybe get a few more buyers.[/QUOTE] Of course. I'd probably do this even if my software was proprietary. [QUOTE=Tamschi;40039839]That's not the point at all. If you do that with Minecraft it makes the game useless, same with Trackmania or Garry's Mod. If a game has any kind of community or community features that somehow rely on the default payment method, modifying the game [B]massively degrades value[/B]. If you make your paid distribution channel the only way to get end-user-updates both quickly and completely automatic that is most likely enough to focus the main community and almost everyone else will gravitate towards that unless you ask for some ridiculous price. If you write a multiplayer game that provides server admins with ban features and account validation, with the default self-updating binary client and server fixed on your auth server, I can guarantee you that will be enough to create this effect. The product you're selling effectively becomes the fact that users can't create accounts for free, but that's the point of a ban system and effectively increases value of your accounts by making people behave better on the unmodified servers.[/QUOTE] Interesting. I suppose the 'service' would be the killer feature here.

i'd like for a magical world to exist where piracy isn't an issue, drm isnt needed, and source code is released more often [editline]25th March 2013[/editline] seriously, piracy doesn't fuck companies nearly as hard as the little guy

[QUOTE=James xX;40038222][IMG_THUMB]http://puu.sh/2nWXA[/IMG_THUMB] I'm sorry for sucking at creating icons.[/QUOTE] I wasn't sure about that top bar thing linking the bells so I image searched "alarm clock" to check if that was accurate (it is), but then I noticed one of the results looked a bit familiar. uhhhhhhhh [img_thumb]http://yes-files.com/_ld/23/2331.png[/img_thumb] [img_thumb]http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/53510/53510,1279789434,2/stock-vector-vector-illustration-of-a-compass-rose-57614371.jpg[/img_thumb]

Woooo lighting. [IMG]http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/1556/sascom2.png[/IMG] Still quite a ways to go with it, but this is my first time making lighting and I'm pretty happy.

[QUOTE=Rayboy1995;40040755]Woooo lighting. [IMG]http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/1556/sascom2.png[/IMG] Still quite a ways to go with it, but this is my first time making lighting and I'm pretty happy.[/QUOTE] I'm doing something similar right now. Are you casting rays all over to calculate where to light the scene or are you doing something smarter?

[QUOTE=Xeon06;40040827]I'm doing something similar right now. Are you casting rays all over to calculate where to light the scene or are you doing something smarter?[/QUOTE] Nope just something way simpler. I have a shader that makes a point light in the middle of the screen to do the fade effect, and all of the world geometry has a quad that it casts using the angle I get from the player to the geometry. I still need to make the shadows cast from the corners of the world geometry instead of from the middle, I was lazy when I started. :v: I also need to soften the edges of the shadows as well. Anyways I have a shitty computer and I'm trying to make the game as fast as possible, this seemed like a good solution.

[QUOTE=acpm;40040259]i'd like for a magical world to exist where piracy isn't an issue, drm isnt needed, and source code is released more often[/QUOTE] DRM [b]isn't[/b] needed, and only hurts the users.

[QUOTE=Jookia;40040164]I'd have to have an authentication server, which costs money and uptime and eugh. It'd be interesting to follow this.[/QUOTE] I just had an idea that could solve this nicely, if you were to go with the account provider approach: Instead of implementing a system where the community servers check the auth server somehow, you could have the server sign a client cert in a way that attaches it to a certain account and time span. The other servers then only need your public key to validate the client's accounts, so if your auth server goes down everyone can still play provided they've logged in at least once in the last month or so. (Make the client start requesting a new signature with a good amount of time left and put in a button to do it manually, like "Logged in until 2013-04-09 (2 weeks). Click here to refresh.") To detect "piracy", you could look for an excessive amount of valid signature requests and if your private key is ever compromised you can just have the servers update to your new public key. The only problem is that you can't efficiently invalidate logins before the time is up, so it wouldn't work with a VAC like feature (because the user would notice if the login can't be extended anymore) or remote logout unless you distribute a blacklist to the servers. Still not completely free, but you'd need a lot less bandwidth.

[QUOTE=Tamschi;40041201]I just had an idea that could solve this nicely, if you were to go with the account provider approach: Instead of implementing a system where the community servers check the auth server somehow, you could have the server sign a client cert in a way that attaches it to a certain account and time span. The other servers then only need your public key to validate the client's accounts, so if your auth server goes down everyone can still play provided they've logged in at least once in the last month or so. (Make the client start requesting a new signature with a good amount of time left and put in a button to do it manually, like "Logged in until 2013-04-09 (2 weeks). Click here to refresh.") To detect piracy, you could look for an excessive amount of valid signature requests and if your private key is ever compromised you can just have the servers update to your new public key. The only problem is that you can't efficiently invalidate logins before the time is up, so it wouldn't work with a VAC like feature (because the user would notice if the login can't be extended anymore) or remote logout unless you distribute a blacklist to the servers.[/QUOTE] The simplest system that I can think would work, would to have each user get a key that's signed by my servers when they buy the game, and have the client and server check to see if their public keys are signed by my servers. If they aren't, then the client or the server have an invalid key that aren't legit. It's impossible to implement DRM in software where the user has control over its workings, as pirates could easy fork and do their thing. The problem lies with motivation to buy the game rather than pirate it. Gabe Newell has noted that it's almost always a service problem, which I interpret along the lines that I need to provide a superior service to what pirates can offer.

[QUOTE=Jookia;40041294]The simplest system that I can think would work, would to have each user get a key that's signed by my servers when they buy the game, and have the client and server check to see if their public keys are signed by my servers. If they aren't, then the client or the server have an invalid key that aren't legit.[/QUOTE] I wanted to write a similar protocol at first (still with accounts on an auth server), but there are two problems with this: 1. The users don't expect to have to safely store a file somewhere. It's a huge usability problem. 2. Validation is permanent, if one key leaks you have an account that you can't blacklist which can be used by everyone who gets the file and creates load on your update server. Edited: The developers of Project Zomboid [URL="http://projectzomboid.com/blog/index.php/2011/06/sorry-weve-had-to-take-the-game-down/"]had to take down their download[/URL] because someone wrote an [del]auto-[/del]updating pirated copy of their game a while back. You really need controllable authentication for that. Don't require servers to have a certificate, that's almost as bad as not allowing dedicated servers in the first place and would drive admins away.

[QUOTE=Tamschi;40041419]An indie game developer had to close their update system because someone wrote an auto-updating pirated copy of their game a while back. You really need controllable authentication for that.[/QUOTE] That's pretty fucking rad though. I suppose I'd just merge in pirates forks.

[QUOTE=Jookia;40041510]That's pretty fucking rad though. I suppose I'd just merge in pirates forks.[/QUOTE] Not in this case, the thing just downloaded the full release from the servers every time someone clicks "update".