I wonder if this is a case of "right about the problem, wrong about the solution".
The issue is that dying as much as you have is incredibly punishing due to the XP pentalty.
Is reducing the XP penalty the right solution, though? What is causing all the dying? I am guessing that simply excercising additional caution is not a viable solution, right? Are there any mechanics of the game that would allow you to survive those same circumstances better? healing? defensive play? If those are not viable because the game demands you defeat an unrealistically difficult set of enemies before gaining access to such features, then that is where the solution should be adjusted; make those features accesable at a lower initial threshold. If not, then the solution may be to enhance methods of staying alive instead of reducing the penalty for dying. Yes, no, yes?
EDIT: sorry, just noticed your follow-up response where you suggested many of the same alternatives.
It would be pretty funny to use thier content (sans the trademarked stuff). If people are going to twist WMC's open requirement so they can advertise their products, they deserve to have others twist their intent to use the product in competing projects.
However, the question I was answering was not if it would ok to use that stuff in our own projects. There is a difference between what we are all willing to use in our projects versus what is permitted on OGA. For instance, the new Pixabay license permits anyone to use any of the assets in their own projects, enthusiastically so, but it does not allow redistribution on asset sharing sites. We are legally and ethically allowed to use them in our projects, but OGA is not a game project, it is an asset redistribution site.
In the same way, I suppose you could use those assets from WB or BroForce legally, but OGA has always had a policy of not hosting art that the artist doesn't wish to be hosted here, even if it is legally permitted for us to do so. This isn't a case of a powerful corporation frightening OGA into obedience despite what the licensing says. This specific scenario has been brought up before (see my link in bullet point #3) and the conclusion was that, legal or not, if it isn't obvious the asset owner wants us to share it, we wont. BroForce was basically saying "well, that wasn't our intent, but I guess it's legal so what can we do?" and Clint Bellanger was very clear that was not sufficient to host it here and was not worth risking bad blood with artists.
Ultimately, it comes down to this: OGA values the good will of artists more than it values the ability to technically use the assets legally.
It's weird and kind of sketchy, and wikipedia does not verify licensing as thoroughly as you may think... or at least not as swiftly as you may think. That being said, yes you should be able to trust the license listed on Wikipedia.
The license pertains to copyright, but does grant usage over trademarks. Just because it's CC-BY doesn't mean you're allowed to use any rendition of a trademarked character or trademarked content. It's no different than fan art.
I would love to use them and I'm confident others would as well. Showing them off here in the forum is fine, but there is no formal license associated, it is not officially sharing the assets, so they would not get used like they would if you submitted them. Assets that are useful for making assets are just as useful as assets for making a game are; both will contribute to the creation of games. :)
OGA-BY is adaptable to CC-BY-SA, so a derivative of all of them could be in a single submission so long as the license was listed as CC-BY-SA and credit was given.
I wonder if this is a case of "right about the problem, wrong about the solution".
The issue is that dying as much as you have is incredibly punishing due to the XP pentalty.
Is reducing the XP penalty the right solution, though? What is causing all the dying? I am guessing that simply excercising additional caution is not a viable solution, right? Are there any mechanics of the game that would allow you to survive those same circumstances better? healing? defensive play? If those are not viable because the game demands you defeat an unrealistically difficult set of enemies before gaining access to such features, then that is where the solution should be adjusted; make those features accesable at a lower initial threshold. If not, then the solution may be to enhance methods of staying alive instead of reducing the penalty for dying. Yes, no, yes?
EDIT: sorry, just noticed your follow-up response where you suggested many of the same alternatives.
ooh, spooky!
are... are you not playing it in the video?
It would be pretty funny to use thier content (sans the trademarked stuff). If people are going to twist WMC's open requirement so they can advertise their products, they deserve to have others twist their intent to use the product in competing projects.
However, the question I was answering was not if it would ok to use that stuff in our own projects. There is a difference between what we are all willing to use in our projects versus what is permitted on OGA. For instance, the new Pixabay license permits anyone to use any of the assets in their own projects, enthusiastically so, but it does not allow redistribution on asset sharing sites. We are legally and ethically allowed to use them in our projects, but OGA is not a game project, it is an asset redistribution site.
In the same way, I suppose you could use those assets from WB or BroForce legally, but OGA has always had a policy of not hosting art that the artist doesn't wish to be hosted here, even if it is legally permitted for us to do so. This isn't a case of a powerful corporation frightening OGA into obedience despite what the licensing says. This specific scenario has been brought up before (see my link in bullet point #3) and the conclusion was that, legal or not, if it isn't obvious the asset owner wants us to share it, we wont. BroForce was basically saying "well, that wasn't our intent, but I guess it's legal so what can we do?" and Clint Bellanger was very clear that was not sufficient to host it here and was not worth risking bad blood with artists.
Ultimately, it comes down to this: OGA values the good will of artists more than it values the ability to technically use the assets legally.
Yeah, I guess that's true... but:
TL;DR: Best not post that kind of stuff to OGA. It could be legal, but still questionable, and hardly received well here.
Got it. What categories should we have for the curated collection of collections?
"hotpots"? explain this word!
I would love to use them and I'm confident others would as well. Showing them off here in the forum is fine, but there is no formal license associated, it is not officially sharing the assets, so they would not get used like they would if you submitted them. Assets that are useful for making assets are just as useful as assets for making a game are; both will contribute to the creation of games. :)
Sure. And thanks for your earlier responses.
OGA-BY is adaptable to CC-BY-SA, so a derivative of all of them could be in a single submission so long as the license was listed as CC-BY-SA and credit was given.
There are 6 Creative Commons licenses. (7 if you include CC0) None of them are abbreviated "CCA". Which license are you referring to?
Pages