Just a brief idea for a mod

[gajop]

Just because something is Open Source, that does not make that project's files fair game.

Try making a project using Evo's art assets and watch the hallfire and brimstone raid down.

Open Source is NOT a license.

Sidenote, hey arch! Long time no see!

at least post a proper link to back that up... from evo:stable's licence pdf:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/
So one can't create derivative work from your models?
You really did pick the worst combination :)

@OP:
You should probably get models with real FOSS licenses. ZK seems better there, although they have some artistic ones which limit your ability to modify that...

[smoth]

people forget most people when they say open source it means open code not open art or IP. People are touchy about the art and concepts because it is important for a project to have a visual identity. Because a player doesn't care about the explanation when you are trying to draw them in. They look at the screenshot. It is important for spring to not have a bunch of visually samey projects because people WILL assume spring projects are the same because they all look the same.

so it is an important thing but you guys in generally don't really give a fuck but I wanted to write that out anyway.

[gajop]

People are touchy about the art and concepts because it is important for a project to have a visual identity.It is important for spring to not have a bunch of visually samey projects because people WILL assume spring projects are the same because they all look the same.

Mhmm, I've been thinking about that for a while, and while the assumption is solid I'm not sure I agree with the conclusion. I don't think models and their animations/textures are the only or even main things that define an engine (example). Q3-engine based games are also similar in that.
I feel a lot also comes from gameplay: most people will be able to draw short links between LoL, DoTA 1(Wc3), Dota 2 and HoN even though they are all from different engines and have relatively different models.

Btw, a bit of thinking had me going, and the non-derivative work thing may further complicate things (at least I don't get it) - I'd appreciate Forb explaining what he'd intend to do with this:
1. If I made a mission (plain text file, just mentions evo unit names), would that be considered derivative work and thus illegal? Or would it be illegal only if I included evo:stable as a dependency?
2. Would it be illegal if I made a skirmish RTS game (as a mutator) based on evo and included evo:stable as a dependency?

Both 1. and 2. are technically the same but with different intentions (1. creates a scenario/mission and the 2. creates a skirmish RTS game).

PS: I feel the community is a bit harsh towards people using existing public domain/free(as in liberty) art. It's really hard for non-artists to display their proof-of-concepts without existing art, and if you really want to prevent people from reusing your art then maybe you should have at least kept it under a CC BY-ND like forb did it

[smoth]

I am going to restate it then.

Player sees most of the games in spring look very similar visually

"ALL THE SPRING GAMES ARE THE SAME!"

I am not talking about developers looking for an ENGINE.

Players will play 1 spring game and because the rest are visually similar they will assume they play similar as well.

There are certain community members who got their panties in a wad when I touched their "art" and others who altered mine. Kdr doesn't care and neither do I. Both KDR and I are 2 of the more frequent public domain guys and give zero fucks what people do with our PD stuff. IF I public domain something it is free to use. ZK crapped up my morty texture and outside of this comment, I have never given 2 shits about it.

P.S. if you think this is an exageration. I saw it in the past with the all spring games are the same. Hell once someone thought gundam would look like AA.