OpenSource CB?

[kelvin]

Lately I've been thinking of maybe [read: probably not] open sourcing CocoaBlitz. The main reason is that, in the current industry, I don't see it making any money (at least in the near term).

I've put in a lot of hours just getting it to where it is today and I don't see it being finished without many more hours of work. Hours which I don't think I can afford.

Even if I open source the project, I'd still have to maintain creative control and maintain some kind of source control. Again which takes time and resources I don't have.

My original intent was just to have an example of what I can bring to a development team. To show myself as an asset. So far this has landed me neither job nor income. I've gotten lots of feedback from all kinds of people, but nobody yet in a position to get me hired anywhere.

My question is, if I did open source the project, how would I get some sort of return on it? If I could be all altruistic about it I would, but I can't.

[Carlos Camacho]

As Mark P will tell you, Open-source does not mean not being able to make money. I strongly advise that you send him a note, or have him visit this thread.

I don't know how you were marketing CB before, but to me, there are perhaps three ways...

1. Dev can release open-source or freeware with it and pay no license fee. If they sell a shareware game, ask for a donation in order to use the license.

2. Make it strickly based on getting donations. Leave it up to the community to through some money your way. I feel that the mature, and respected devs who go shareware with a game, will consider giving you something for your work. (If not, they are pretty low - about the same as a snake.)

3. Make the 2d product completely free, however license a version which contains "just a tad more." I'm thinking, if the people didn't use your CB, what would they use? Make a list. Seems like most other options are free, but most deal with 2D. If you can add a little extra value in there, (which no doubt would be used by more serious people, who most likely would be near the shareware release level) it might intice devs to license it.

It is late, so maybe the above makes no sense. Good luck!

[skyhawk]

make it hostageware. Where you hold your sourcecode ransom till a certain monetary value is reached. Once it is reached, you release the source code to everyone.

[kelvin]

Originally posted by skyhawk
make it hostageware.
hahaha that's classic... so crazy it just might work!

[igame3d]

It worked for blender they open sourced at $50,000.
I sent them $50 and never used the product.
Damn.

[Jake]

Originally posted by igame3d
It worked for blender they open sourced at $50,000.
I sent them $50 and never used the product.
Damn.

Wow... thats a nice donation for something you didn't use!

[igame3d]

Well a year ago, when I made the donation I wasn't making iGame3D, so I had high hopes that open source Blender would become the incarnation of that.

But now a year later Blender's interface is still atrocious, and I'm too busy making iGame3D to learn Blender, or need it.

Anyone have 50 grand for open sourcing iGame3D?

[w_reade]

If you completely open-source the project, I'd agree that your chance of making any return is slim-to-none.

However, you could open-source some of it - enough for a decent-looking game with some visual flair - but offer the full product for closed-source sale... ie, hook people with the elegance and ease of use of your basic product, get them salivating with glee at the prospect of particle effects and other eye candy - just as simple to use, but even more gorgeous to look at - and then just pluck the huge bundles of cash from their outstretched hands.

...maybe.

Pro: Good publicity - open-source game stuff is good news, so people will probably show your press releases, which will give you an opportunity to promote CB to your target market, many of whom will surely see one of the press releases. Over time, you can exploit this by letting features trickle down into the free version as they become common elsewhere.

Con: This sort of half-open-sourcing may upset rabid everything-should-be-open-source types. Open-sourcing a lesser version leaves others free to build upon that and avoid paying you for the full library.

Just thoughts, not as edited as I would like. Bit busy at the moment though...

[Jake]

If I was you I would probably do the following. You can download and use it for free, but if anyone sells the game 10% has to go to you, and you can sell the source for 50 bucks to serious CB developers. How does that sound?

[hams]

if you're intention is to develop it hoping that in the future you could sell CB as a game or graphic engine, then i don't think you'll meet with much success. There are many free graphic libraries out there that have features similar to CB. To take it to the next level and add a lot more features, then you have a juge investment in time with still little guarrantee of return.

if you want to open source CB because you don't want to work on it anymore, then i say yes definitely because it is a good, solid framework. i would like to see a few more features added.

as for a demo, i think you need to make a game around it to show off the power of CB.

did that help?

kevin

[GoodDoug]

My 0b00000010 cents:

I think that you have already gotten quite a bit from CocoaBlitz as it is: 1) EVERYONE at iDG knows who you are and that you are a very capable coder 2) you have a framework you can use to make your own games 3) after all of these CB based uDG games are released, chances are good that much of the mac gaming community will know who you are

How does this translate into making a living? In a couple of ways: When you go looking for a job, you have a resume that speaks pretty loudly; you have a bunch of people that know who you are; and when you get that job, you have a lot of people that will be willing to give you a hand on something when you need it. Is that enough to "pay back" all of the work you've put into it? Not right now, but it will be soon.

Now, as to whether to Open Source it or not:
If you Open Source CB, here is what you gain - 1) More people working on it (as people fix some little thing, they can submit a diff to you) which makes your framework better 2) More free press - going Open Source will get your name on a bunch of sites 3) More people using your framework (legally) - this further spreads your notoriety and cuts the amount of "police work" you have to do.

What do you lose: 1) Some amount of control 2) the ability to make money directly from CB (but I would argue that you wouldn't make that much anyways) 3) Some sleep as hundreds of people find spelllling misteaks in your code and won't hesitate to tell you about it.

In the end, you'll find your own list of pros and cons and have to look at what is best for you. Your "name brand" is actually fairly good right now... anything you can do to increase that will definitely translate into better opportunities down the road. People in the industry do see you, and will know who you are... they may not come to you asking you to join them, but if they have an opening and you come to them...

Just food for thought

[FCCovett]

I've been uploading all my new code to my web-site, with no restrictions whatsoever, so other beginners can use it to learn and move past those difficult first steps.

At the same time, I realize that the source code, as it is, has little commercial potential, since most newbies are too green to go making purchasing decisions about stuff they don't understand well enough yet.

Also, most people who take development seriously will want to code their own engine and my stuff could be used merely as a quick reference to the inner workings of the APIs.

I believe it is easier to successfully market a finished game to a casual public than any API for fellow indie developers. Now, if you can get a large studio interested in your API, then you could consider making some real money out of it, what is unlikely unless you are offering a full-blown graphics or audio engine, or a very specialized tool.

( this is my 100th post :) )

[geezusfreeek]

*mind is flooded with thoughts*

Open sourcing CB would definitely be a great help to devs. An upside is that devs wanting a feature added to it can add it, but that also makes the downside that open sourcing can and probably will feature bloat or complicate the original vision for it. The mere fact that you were responsible for CB would be a HUGE asset in applying for jobs. If you decide to accept donations, I would gladly offer for the release/use of CB's source code.

OT: I don't like the new smilies that much.

[skyhawk]

I actually don't want CB to be open sourced. It works the way it does now. Incremental improvements would be nice, but other than that, I'd be glad to pay kelvin his little fee if I make shareware with it (which I hope to do).

[geezusfreeek]

I am fine with either way. I am a huge promoter of open source projects, but I don't like the current ways of project management in most. Things always become complicated and messy. I like the way CB "just works" at this point. On the upside, I assume that if CB does go open source that older versions will always be available. Devs would be able to simply pick their favorite and stick with what works for them.