Re: OT: America's Army
On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 13:10:10 +0200, Aryan Ameri wrote:
> How is it different now? I don't know. Other than the fact that maybe in
> 70s, most software was published with source code, but it's the opposite
> now a days.
>
> The way I view the situation, DoD needed to to develop this game (for
> whatever the reason), so they paid someone (or some company) to develop
> it. Why didn't put the source into public domain?
They can't. The Unreal Engine is not their property but Epic's. And AFAIK
Epic hasn't released any source code to their engines yet. (At least
they're doing Linux ports of current games.)
> They certainly should have done it.
I'm not an American, but if I *was*, then I'd say they shouldn't have
developped the game at all. There are more important problems to throw
money at. For example, improving the secret service. That could have
prevented an entire war... :-)
> It is exactly like the TCP/IP situation.
No, not at all. The internet protocol suite was state-of-the-art
technology; it paved the way for the Internet. I'd think of it as an
infrastructure investment. America's Army is neither a new concept (3D
shooters are known at least since Wolf3D) nor does it help the country in
general. It's advertisement (or propaganda, as some call it) for the army.
> I mean, you guys have paid your hard earned cash to the government, and
> that money has been spent to develop this game. It is your right to see
> how it has been developed, and how it works. It is your right to modify
> it to suite your needs.
Maybe, but then DoD shouldn't have used Unreal as a starting point. Of
course this would have made the development costs _explode_, far too
expensive for an advertisement campaign. (And that's what AA is. Don't
tell me they wanted to create a free 3D shooter just for fun.)
--
Best Regards, | Hi! I'm a .signature virus. Copy me into
Sebastian | your ~/.signature to help me spread!
Reply to: