I think it's edits of the RPG Maker 2000 RTP, but I'm not sure. If so there's no legal way to use that in the US since it was never released here. I'm no expert though, if you want to be certain I'd go to the official RPG Maker forums and ask.
What you're looking for is the licence or EULA for the RTP, not RPG maker. The Run Time Package is the name for the art assets that come with RPG Maker. The one for Ace is under the second header at this link: http://www.rpgmakerweb.com/support/eula If you read "artwork" everywhere it says "software" it becomes pretty clear what they mean.
Some art is available on the website and sold as art or music packages, some of these can be bought as a "Non-RM Licence" which means they can be used in other things besides Enterbrain's products. That licence is more expensive. If you buy one of these resource packs they come with a very clear EULA. It's a more restrictive licence than the RTP, edits are allowed only for making your game and cannot be distributed anywhere but in the actual game.
You can also get artwork for RPG Maker at the forums. There's ReStaff releases where the staff and some generous forum members put together art for RPG Maker, and that is understood to be the same licence as the RTP with a non commercial limitation unless otherwise stated, and then there's Members+ where the staff releases artwork under the RTP licence with no commercial limitation.
Now, if I made a set of artwork for RPG Maker that was completely from scratch it would be bound only by whatever licence I decided it should be under. Just because it's made to work with RM does not make it bound by their licence. Unfortunately, most artwork you'll find that is made for RM is an edit in some way of the RTP.
Something you may not know is that there are different RTP's for different versions of RPG maker, which is why you may see something that seems like a different style but is still RTP.
I wouldn't say the comment is off topic. You're asking for people to help you in your projects and offering an alternative to traditional recruitment. Acorn is basically saying "Sure, but with 15 projects and none finished, it looks like this is all going to be vaporware". No matter how nice the setup, people don't like working on something that isn't going to make anything.
I think coming up with a clear task list is a good idea whether or not you're recruiting traditionally. I see a few problems with it as a replacement. 1: It's going to be harder to get anyone to stick around. There's no personal investment in the project, something that's vital if you want anyone to do something for free. (Protip: Possibly paid later still counts as free). 2: You still have to recruit, only now you have to do it for each piece of your project instead of a few times for specific rolls. 3: With so many different people working on the project, you're going to have a much harder time keeping it all looking cohesive. You'll need to be or get an art director as well.
Let me give you some advice. If someone is going to do work on someone else's project, they need to see a few things from that person. Things like focus, a personal investment beyond the idea phase, an ability to sell themselves and the product. People like to see someone who is flexible but driven and able to work well with others. If you show those things you'll have a much easier time getting help in whatever project you're doing.
It's incompatible with the *software* license, but you're not using it to license the software, just the artwork. My understanding is that the software can have a different license than the artwork as long as the rules for both are followed. This is why BY-SA is a problem because it's a bit fuzzy on whether or not the programming has to use the same license. General consensus is that it doesn't. Could someone who knows licensing correct me if I'm wrong on this? The real point is whether or not I'm okay with the way this is being used regardless of license. All I care about is that I get credit for my work. Edit, use it in a commercial game, I don't care. I won't sue you for using it in a GPL licensed game. If you need a special email or something giving you permission to use it that way, that's fine.
Anholt is wrong, this isn't SA, it's just CC-By. It shouldn't be causing you problems. I don't want to release my art in a way that credit is not required.
Yep, no problem!
I think it's edits of the RPG Maker 2000 RTP, but I'm not sure. If so there's no legal way to use that in the US since it was never released here. I'm no expert though, if you want to be certain I'd go to the official RPG Maker forums and ask.
You should re-order the previews so that one of those landscapes is first, the spacestation preview doesn't do it justice. This is beautiful work!
It's all stuff for RPG Maker anyway, nearly all RTP edits, so it's doubly not compatable.
What you're looking for is the licence or EULA for the RTP, not RPG maker. The Run Time Package is the name for the art assets that come with RPG Maker. The one for Ace is under the second header at this link: http://www.rpgmakerweb.com/support/eula If you read "artwork" everywhere it says "software" it becomes pretty clear what they mean.
Some art is available on the website and sold as art or music packages, some of these can be bought as a "Non-RM Licence" which means they can be used in other things besides Enterbrain's products. That licence is more expensive. If you buy one of these resource packs they come with a very clear EULA. It's a more restrictive licence than the RTP, edits are allowed only for making your game and cannot be distributed anywhere but in the actual game.
You can also get artwork for RPG Maker at the forums. There's ReStaff releases where the staff and some generous forum members put together art for RPG Maker, and that is understood to be the same licence as the RTP with a non commercial limitation unless otherwise stated, and then there's Members+ where the staff releases artwork under the RTP licence with no commercial limitation.
Now, if I made a set of artwork for RPG Maker that was completely from scratch it would be bound only by whatever licence I decided it should be under. Just because it's made to work with RM does not make it bound by their licence. Unfortunately, most artwork you'll find that is made for RM is an edit in some way of the RTP.
Something you may not know is that there are different RTP's for different versions of RPG maker, which is why you may see something that seems like a different style but is still RTP.
So, is that the information you needed?
I always thought those trees would look better with the middle hues swapped.
I wouldn't say the comment is off topic. You're asking for people to help you in your projects and offering an alternative to traditional recruitment. Acorn is basically saying "Sure, but with 15 projects and none finished, it looks like this is all going to be vaporware". No matter how nice the setup, people don't like working on something that isn't going to make anything.
I think coming up with a clear task list is a good idea whether or not you're recruiting traditionally. I see a few problems with it as a replacement. 1: It's going to be harder to get anyone to stick around. There's no personal investment in the project, something that's vital if you want anyone to do something for free. (Protip: Possibly paid later still counts as free). 2: You still have to recruit, only now you have to do it for each piece of your project instead of a few times for specific rolls. 3: With so many different people working on the project, you're going to have a much harder time keeping it all looking cohesive. You'll need to be or get an art director as well.
Let me give you some advice. If someone is going to do work on someone else's project, they need to see a few things from that person. Things like focus, a personal investment beyond the idea phase, an ability to sell themselves and the product. People like to see someone who is flexible but driven and able to work well with others. If you show those things you'll have a much easier time getting help in whatever project you're doing.
It's incompatible with the *software* license, but you're not using it to license the software, just the artwork. My understanding is that the software can have a different license than the artwork as long as the rules for both are followed. This is why BY-SA is a problem because it's a bit fuzzy on whether or not the programming has to use the same license. General consensus is that it doesn't. Could someone who knows licensing correct me if I'm wrong on this? The real point is whether or not I'm okay with the way this is being used regardless of license. All I care about is that I get credit for my work. Edit, use it in a commercial game, I don't care. I won't sue you for using it in a GPL licensed game. If you need a special email or something giving you permission to use it that way, that's fine.
Anholt is wrong, this isn't SA, it's just CC-By. It shouldn't be causing you problems. I don't want to release my art in a way that credit is not required.
Ah, I know what happened. I use the old method of double space after a sentance. Thanks, I edited the link and it works now.
Pages