Spring RTS Engine

I like the Spring - Epic engine.

SwiftSpear wrote:

Dragon45 wrote:How about - "OSpring - Epic Engine"


I actually think OSpring (OpenSource Spring) is a cool name meself.


More wacky suggestions! yay!

Epic is a trademarked game title, we can't use the term in anything official.

^

How ebout Spring Epileptic Engine. At least it's somewhat close.

Dragon45 wrote:Basically, I just noticed, and decided to point out, that pretty much every page on the site has TA Spring still attached to it. ...
Thought it was kinda funny considering the devs' decision to move towards non-TA stuff for copy copyright reasons.

I don't think you guys have realised yet... TA Spring is now Spring for some time now.

It's just that it has it's old name in many places yet. No one bothered yet (and i doubt someone will ever...) to change all the stuff and remove the "TA" from it. Some things would even require hard work of break backward compatibility (like the name of the folder of the game). It would be quite a bitch to have to bother with that.

I agree with Spring, RTSpring and Spring RTS.

Youve all come up with nothing but crappy names. But Spring RTS is the best.

That was an utterly unhelpful post. We need a name that is short, significant and free of legal overlap. We have some.

Spring - Open Source 3D Engine?

Perhaps a first step could be taken in grep'ing for all instances of TA Spring and TA:Spring and TA:S on the site proper and changing it to "Spring" ?

Muzic wrote:I like the Spring - Epic engine.

Its not epic.

the 'Open source' in 'Open Source Spring' is not needed, since there is only one Spring project going on and eveybody knows it's open source.

I find 'Epic' to suggestive, the Spring engine could be used with a minimum amound of units as well.

Just Spring is good. Eventually it could be used for other types of games then RTS too.

Epic is a next gen AI, not an engine name, Any attemp to call spring Epic Spring will simply confuse, and I'd appreciate it if people didnt start throwing the Epic Spring name around as it confuses userswhentheys ee projects with the same name.

That and there are numerous trademarkand copyright issues behind the word Epic, which is why i'm unsure of keeping that AI name myself.

why is nobody content with just saying "Spring?"

What about "Really Cool Wargame"

copyright infringement. We don't want Frozen Yak giving us a C&D.

FizWizz wrote:why is nobody content with just saying "Spring?"

Actually half the people who replied here are voting plain "Spring"
(as do I), this is the 3rd thread about this, tbh. The first was before the first beta release, and back then we concluded we like plain "Spring"

If your gonna trademark articles you might as well grab em all.. and the word you while your at it..

"Spring" is a terrible, awful name for a game.

If it's an engine that you're marketing to developers, that's one thing.

If you're aiming for the 15-30 hardcore gamer core market, it's a godawful name. In fact I'd say that the name is a big reason why there aren't more players.

Why? Because in no way does "Spring" say "Exploding robots." In no way does it say ANYTHING about the content of the game.

This is the most basic rule of marketing and it's something that should be taken into account now that the chance to change the name is here.

Spring is an open-source project, not any commercial product and as such does not need to cater to any 'market'.

It still should cater to a gaming market. That said, spring is a fricking engine. Spring 1944 doesn't feature exploding mechs, nanoblobz is on drugs, how would spring come up with a name that expresses these things?

I think "Spring RTS Engine" is what the screenshots taken by SYs during development say.