Yes, both should perminantly refer to the same submission. URL aliases are also unique. If one is already in use, the site will append a number to the end like -0 and increment it based on the number of times that particular URL is in use. For example. ./content/torch was already in use, so ./content/torch-0 was used instead. Once that URL is assigned, the site directs it and all aliases to the submission they reference. This is true of forum posts, blog entries, and pretty much all other pages using the share button.
In other words: Feature successfully implemented. :)
Assuming you're looking for "free as in beer", I hear Unity is pretty great. It's free until your company starts earning $100,000.00+ anually. After that you have to pay for a higher-tier license, but I don't think I'd mind paying $35/month if I were making over $100k a year on my game. :)
Although CC-BY 4.0 is a selectable licensing option, it wasn't an option when this was submitted. However, marcelofg55 has indicated an agreement to license it under later versions of the licenses they selected above. I'm sure (s)he'll modify the license selected as soon as these comments are seen. Until then I think it's safe to assume both are valid.
Why not upload the packs here on OGA? You can link to your other works on the submission, too. You'll probably get more views that way since more people look at submissions.
These suggestions are ideal for a code repository. However, Bart and other admins have always felt OGA should not be a code repository (for example this discussion). Obviously, posting useful game-art related scripts as documents is fine, but OGA is not designed to host code and that is intentional.
These feature suggestions are not invalid; They may still be implemented, but they will likely get a lower priority.
Yes, both should perminantly refer to the same submission. URL aliases are also unique. If one is already in use, the site will append a number to the end like -0 and increment it based on the number of times that particular URL is in use. For example. ./content/torch was already in use, so ./content/torch-0 was used instead. Once that URL is assigned, the site directs it and all aliases to the submission they reference. This is true of forum posts, blog entries, and pretty much all other pages using the share button.
In other words: Feature successfully implemented. :)
Assuming you're looking for "free as in beer", I hear Unity is pretty great. It's free until your company starts earning $100,000.00+ anually. After that you have to pay for a higher-tier license, but I don't think I'd mind paying $35/month if I were making over $100k a year on my game. :)
yes!
Zabin, are you planning to submit this stuff formally?
Although CC-BY 4.0 is a selectable licensing option, it wasn't an option when this was submitted. However, marcelofg55 has indicated an agreement to license it under later versions of the licenses they selected above. I'm sure (s)he'll modify the license selected as soon as these comments are seen. Until then I think it's safe to assume both are valid.
Nice!
Why not upload the packs here on OGA? You can link to your other works on the submission, too. You'll probably get more views that way since more people look at submissions.
No need to remove. As i said, game art related scripts submitted as a document is fine. :)
Extensive code features may be better suited to sites like sourceforge, though.
These suggestions are ideal for a code repository. However, Bart and other admins have always felt OGA should not be a code repository (for example this discussion). Obviously, posting useful game-art related scripts as documents is fine, but OGA is not designed to host code and that is intentional.
These feature suggestions are not invalid; They may still be implemented, but they will likely get a lower priority.
Only with whitespace. Still working on the non-whitespace names.
done! :)
I love the old might and magic games. Looking forward to playing The Darkness Below. :)
Pages