@William: What you describe would be a perfectly fine strategy for a "roality free" (or CC0/public domain site) to maximize potential commissions; although one might as well argue that restricting certain commercial uses unless getting paid is an equally viable strategy.
But I feel OGA wasn't created solely for the purpose of maximizing the art commisions of its users!
Sure as you have pointed out it helps funding Free art also, but insisting on certain principles and trading off some (mostly theoretical) profit for it is what I believe one of the core ideas of OGA. At least that is what distinguishes it from other "free assets" sites.
@Others: Usage rights of stuff posted on OGA are already very welcoming of new users and commercial use (notice how NC isn't even an option; a good thing in my opinion). It is also not about trading off between the "perfect" and "still good enough" solutions.
I see it as a question of preserving the most minimal rights of the creators and users/customers.
It's amazing how even those basic right are slowly taken away from us by the likes of Apple and people still make excuses and justifing it. I guess I am an old fart, but as little as 20 years ago, people would have been in utter disbelief about the usage conditions people acept these days without question.
@William: If your goal is to get more art commissions, then not allowing iOS use unless you get paid for it can also be beneficial.
I do see your point, but I think it is short-sighted. Your game-theory argument can just as well be used to support my argument that by insisting on and enforcing minimum usage rights everyone is better off in the longer term.
@Curt: Not sure if that is really the case. I can easily imaging someone saying: here feel free to use it (if you attribute me) but not in a way that is morally objectionable. Not supporting Apple like DRM is quite close to the latter.
Well, I don't even want to emphasis the "others make profit" point too much; heck... good for them if they manage to make some money with the stuff I made.
But what is the point of "expanding the market" as you put it, when you neither make a profit nor advocate/promote certain basic usage rights?
It's not like people are not aware that there is such a thing as creative commons licensed artwork. They just choose for one reason or another not to use it (or the license). Also fine for them, but then they are on their own and can't expect *us* to provide them with nice and easy to use assets (for free).
In my opinion open-art isn't about allowing others to make a quick buck on totally closed systems (which then in turn makes the creators of those systems also a nice profit).
Sure, at first thought it sounds nice to promote OGA like that (and a little vanity that everyone has when "their art" shows up somewhere prominent), but what is your ultimate goal then? Just having a bunch of free (as in beer, but with attribution) stuff on a prominent website? That seems kind of pointless to me.
Open-art is like Free Software about Freedom to use and modify, and preserving that freedom. Having it *not* be compatible with iOS is actually a good thing that raises awareness of just how much Apple f**** you over with their closed systems.
*rant out*
Edit: I am totally fine with commercial use, as long as that commercial use respects my basic freedoms as a human being.
Edit2: I am also fine with *some* DRM as long as it isn't forced on me in a vendor-lockin like fashion. Steam or Android is a somewhat good example, iOS is a bad one. We also need to stand up for our rights as developers and customers.
Unrelated to that... why is tolerating DRM a good thing now? It can be and should be avoided on Steam. And iOS?... well lets just not support those control-freaks at all, MKEY?
@William: What you describe would be a perfectly fine strategy for a "roality free" (or CC0/public domain site) to maximize potential commissions; although one might as well argue that restricting certain commercial uses unless getting paid is an equally viable strategy.
But I feel OGA wasn't created solely for the purpose of maximizing the art commisions of its users!
Sure as you have pointed out it helps funding Free art also, but insisting on certain principles and trading off some (mostly theoretical) profit for it is what I believe one of the core ideas of OGA. At least that is what distinguishes it from other "free assets" sites.
@Others: Usage rights of stuff posted on OGA are already very welcoming of new users and commercial use (notice how NC isn't even an option; a good thing in my opinion). It is also not about trading off between the "perfect" and "still good enough" solutions.
I see it as a question of preserving the most minimal rights of the creators and users/customers.
It's amazing how even those basic right are slowly taken away from us by the likes of Apple and people still make excuses and justifing it. I guess I am an old fart, but as little as 20 years ago, people would have been in utter disbelief about the usage conditions people acept these days without question.
@William: If your goal is to get more art commissions, then not allowing iOS use unless you get paid for it can also be beneficial.
I do see your point, but I think it is short-sighted. Your game-theory argument can just as well be used to support my argument that by insisting on and enforcing minimum usage rights everyone is better off in the longer term.
@Curt: Not sure if that is really the case. I can easily imaging someone saying: here feel free to use it (if you attribute me) but not in a way that is morally objectionable. Not supporting Apple like DRM is quite close to the latter.
Well, I don't even want to emphasis the "others make profit" point too much; heck... good for them if they manage to make some money with the stuff I made.
But what is the point of "expanding the market" as you put it, when you neither make a profit nor advocate/promote certain basic usage rights?
It's not like people are not aware that there is such a thing as creative commons licensed artwork. They just choose for one reason or another not to use it (or the license). Also fine for them, but then they are on their own and can't expect *us* to provide them with nice and easy to use assets (for free).
In my opinion open-art isn't about allowing others to make a quick buck on totally closed systems (which then in turn makes the creators of those systems also a nice profit).
Sure, at first thought it sounds nice to promote OGA like that (and a little vanity that everyone has when "their art" shows up somewhere prominent), but what is your ultimate goal then? Just having a bunch of free (as in beer, but with attribution) stuff on a prominent website? That seems kind of pointless to me.
Open-art is like Free Software about Freedom to use and modify, and preserving that freedom. Having it *not* be compatible with iOS is actually a good thing that raises awareness of just how much Apple f**** you over with their closed systems.
*rant out*
Edit: I am totally fine with commercial use, as long as that commercial use respects my basic freedoms as a human being.
Edit2: I am also fine with *some* DRM as long as it isn't forced on me in a vendor-lockin like fashion. Steam or Android is a somewhat good example, iOS is a bad one. We also need to stand up for our rights as developers and customers.
I think what Bart meant is that vaiving the DRM clause is opening doors to stuff like Tivoization ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tivoization ) on -SA assets.
Unrelated to that... why is tolerating DRM a good thing now? It can be and should be avoided on Steam. And iOS?... well lets just not support those control-freaks at all, MKEY?
P.S.: Anyone up for converting this into a 3D tileset for the new Godot FOSS engine?
http://www.godotengine.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=227
Would be a perfect fit IMHO.
The weapons are in the weapons folder :p (low and high poly version included).
Also includes an animated player model btw (not pictured).
The same artist is also looking to release a FPS pack, see here:
http://forum.freegamedev.net/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=5324
(details still unclear)
All in .blend format btw, for those that wonder.
The wooden part could probably have a hint of yellow/brown to make it look more like wood; otherwise great work.
Pages