Primary tabs

Comments by User

Tuesday, January 19, 2016 - 07:46

I would assume so, because the original is CC0, and they said they don't want credit.

Wednesday, July 15, 2015 - 21:23


Could you please make a version of the image that splits and names the animations?

(or, if you feel like it, split them up into a zip and name them?)

Saturday, June 27, 2015 - 18:53

I started the game and this is what I see, what am I doing wrong?

The ground doesn't collide with the rocks and player, which slowly fall. Player moves with WASD, and the screen doesn't move. I tried both Windows and Linux(Xubuntu).

Friday, June 26, 2015 - 22:12

I think you should have a primary preview, but something just large enough to indicate there's a spritesheet.

Edit: the gif appears to be static on my phone, so that's another reason.

Edit2:the gif is simply static, I assumed it was an animation.

Friday, June 26, 2015 - 21:10


Wednesday, June 24, 2015 - 03:46

While I myself don't have plans for making a commercial game(more of a hobby), I think those interested would like to know what animations exactly are available(description, since you probably don't want to display them). I just figure it would pique more interest if you did, just a suggestion.

Wednesday, June 24, 2015 - 01:42

Nice work. A question, though:  if attribution is optional, why not CC0?

Wednesday, June 24, 2015 - 01:23

Just to be clear, are ChrisOelmueller and stubb to be credited in addition to Unknown Horizons(they're in the collaborators list)? Of course, I'd still try and credit everyone who made it if I use this(possibly in a note file due to verbosity?).

Tuesday, June 23, 2015 - 18:51

I think it is, CC-BY 3.0 allows you to do so. You only need to use one license of the available.

OGA-BY is probably your best choice, followed by CC-BY. CC-BY isn't compatible with some platforms.

Tuesday, June 23, 2015 - 02:58

I had an idea(it's kinda crude, I admit), what if you distributed the game and the Stallmanized assets separately? Then make a system that implements the art assets(can be replaced with user-made ones too, think resource packs in Minecraft) and then you have not made the game a derivative, the end-user has made a derivative using the program. Any asset with the same name in the data structure or whatever can replace it. Could have an alternate or default one, too.


(I personally think all-or-nothing copyleft is good for large code projects like Linux, not art assets that a corporation can hire someone to make. This seems to only really be useful to make someone's art require it be bought and relicensed or the project to be GPL-ified. Art for a polished AAA game really has to be tailor-made, anyway. If they made it clearly a "LGPL" instead of "GPL" version, working with games, it would be better IMO. Then it would be re-used and re-contributed to, instead of being avoided like the plague. Maybe it's time for a OGA-BY-SA, though making the distinction of derivatives might be too much for the non-lawyer crew of OGA.)


(With really, really, good assets, this might change. Right now, it's just a lockout for small devs, that gets artists some money. Kinda useful, I guess. Not so where you have tons of people on the SA credits list, though. Another problem is that proprietary assets are one of the proposed open-source moneymaking strategies.)