FreeGameDev

Hi everyone

(This is mainly a summary of our discussion on the chan today)

Steam just published a press release today announcing a new way to get the games on steam it's called Steam Direct and basically after a little of paperwork and a fee the game can be on Steam. More informations here

Now we don't know exactly how much this fee will be. Steam is evaluating the price and they are considering from roughly 100$ to 5000$. While we can pay 100$ or even 200$, 5000$ will be definitly a no go.

Our initial plan was to release 0.9.3 and publish the Steam greenlight page at the same time. However, after a little disscusion on the chan we realized it won't be possible to do both, and rushing a release is never a good idea.

The contigency plan

Since we worked hard to go on Steam it would be sad to not try:

1) The steam greenlight page is ready. It only need a dedicated trailer.
2) The blog post is ready, however we need to polish it
3) I (samuncle) can do a greenlight gameplay trailer using Cornfield Crossing and Ravenbridge mansion. The soundtrack would be the Cornflied Crossing soundtrack
4) We make everything public next week and start to gather votes.
5) Once we have a public greenlight page, we can easily release the next version creating more publicity and gathering more votes.

Also something interesting when we opened the Steam Greenlight concept last year even without making the page public we got a lot of positive feedback.

Since I'm in charge of the GreenLight project (Hiker is busy with networking). I think we can go ahead and publish SuperTuxKart on Steam Greenlight.
In case of emergency we can even reuse one of our old trailer, however I think it's important to do one for greenlight (and we can show Cornfield Crossing).

Sam

Sounds like a good plan to me.

As a side note, maybe we should gather forces with other free software games already on Steam or interested in getting there (Godot, Wyrmus, SuperTuxKart, MegaGlest, and many others) and write an open letter to Valve regarding keeping a way in for libre games (especially those who intend to be distributed as Free to Play and would therefore never have the chance to recover a $5000 entry fee). I could try to draft something and have it "signed" by various projects.

That's a good plan Akien. I like that kind of activism.

Akien {l Wrote}:Sounds like a good plan to me.

As a side note, maybe we should gather forces with other free software games already on Steam or interested in getting there (Godot, Wyrmus, SuperTuxKart, MegaGlest, and many others) and write an open letter to Valve regarding keeping a way in for libre games (especially those who intend to be distributed as Free to Play and would therefore never have the chance to recover a $5000 entry fee). I could try to draft something and have it "signed" by various projects.

Seems like an interesting idea, especially considering Steam is now member of the Linux Foundation. We just need to find someone to write the open letter. I'm not sure however if we should wait and see what are the fee for Steam Direct or writing it now. I also read some suggestions to calculate the fee based on the price you want to sell your game. For instance:

free up to 5$ = 200$ fee
between 5$ and 10$ = 400$ fee
between 10$ and 20$ = 1000$ fee
etc

Which would works perfectly for open source games

Also regarding steam & supertuxkart, here is some news. I finished the greenlight page of SuperTuxKart. The only thing missing is the greenlight trailer.
The blog article is also more or less ready to be published. Some corrections and modifications might be needed but the main part is done.

The only remaining thing is the trailer. I will be able to work on a greenlight trailer at the end of this week. Hopefully we can have everything done for next week.

Sam

When the greenlight page of supertuxkart is pubish. I can help you for share your page, for vote ..... for a positive feedback

I thought steam was a lost cause, and I'm still not sure about it. AFAICT a lot could be done with 200 USD, steam is a major distributor, but STK is already on itchio & gamejolt.

I'd be happy to see STK on steam. Will it be free (as in free beer) or paid?

ata2001 {l Wrote}:I'd be happy to see STK on steam. Will it be free (as in free beer) or paid?

Most likely the former since we won't make it a Steam exclusive and it's free other places, but we may offer paid DLC in the future. Nothing is set in stone yet though.

I hope you don't have exclusive paid DLC...but if you must, please don't make it Steam Exclusive.

They already do: https://supertuxkart.net/Donate

It will be great if STK offer paid DLC in the Future ^^

QwertyChouskie {l Wrote}:They already do: https://supertuxkart.net/Donate

Ugh, proprietary DLC. And I thought this game was ethical. Why does it use this forum? This forum is not for proprietary games.

FaTony {l Wrote}:

QwertyChouskie {l Wrote}:They already do: https://supertuxkart.net/Donate

Ugh, proprietary DLC. And I thought this game was ethical. Why does it use this forum? This forum is not for proprietary games.

Nowhere have the forum owners ever said that optional content needs to be Free Culture. Also note that previous original donation package tracks have been included in the game a release later under the CC-BY-SA without any NC or ND clause. In other words, you don't own the forum and can take your self-righteous attitude somewhere else, and furthermore you didn't even check how we've done DLC up till now. That may change in the future but the core game will always be Free Software-compatible.

Arthur {l Wrote}:Nowhere have the forum owners ever said that optional content needs to be Free Culture. Also note that previous original donation package tracks have been included in the game a release later under the CC-BY-SA without any NC or ND clause. In other words, you don't own the forum and can take your self-righteous attitude somewhere else, and furthermore you didn't even check how we've done DLC up till now. That may change in the future but the core game will always be Free Software-compatible.

There isn't an official policy on it from the forum AFAIK (given I'm probably one of the 'elders' here that should be accurate).

Ideologically the preference would be for things to be completely Freely distributed all the time, but pragmatically projects need to sustain themselves. Volunteer contributions can't be expected to be the only source. Money makes the world go 'round. Personally I don't have a problem with soliciting donations in exchange for preview content which eventually gets bundled into the game and licensed appropriately. That does not, to me, seem to be a move towards proprietary content.

FaTony has a very puritanical approach to Free software. Whilst I don't seek to stifle or limit the sharing of opinion on the forums, I can see how it is abrasive to some.

charlie {l Wrote}:FaTony has a very puritanical approach to Free software. Whilst I don't seek to stifle or limit the sharing of opinion on the forums, I can see how it is abrasive to some.

I even don't agree with Stallman when it comes to non-software. Stallman approved GFDL which has proprietary "invariant sections". Some Stallman talks are released with ND which frustrates me. I think all software and non-software should be free.

"Oh you did this free, now you need to continue making things that are free because otherwise you are unethical." It's a very strange way to see things. Suppose a new track was made, and it stayed completely proprietary but the main game with all its tracks and other content was like it is now. Why would the existence of the former devalue the latter unless some sort of dependency was introduced in the game to the proprietary track? The only unethical thing here is trying to coerce people to provide something they themselves made under terms they don't want and is, to use a hyperbole, eerily similar to slavery. What's your next move FaTony, trying to get STK excluded from Debian, or get the Free Software Foundation to condemn us as heretics?

Would offering a free food sample and then taking money for the whole thing be unethical? STK is more like a whole free dinner where we also give you the recipe, but then you get angry because the optional dessert costs money and you don't get the recipe.

Arthur {l Wrote}:What's your next move FaTony, trying to get STK excluded from Debian, or get the Free Software Foundation to condemn us as heretics?

If the DLC is not included at all in Debian then everything is fine. If it is, then STK belongs to contrib.

Arthur {l Wrote}:Would offering a free food sample and then taking money for the whole thing be unethical? STK is more like a whole free dinner where we also give you the recipe, but then you get angry because the optional dessert costs money and you don't get the recipe.

Physical property works differently. If I and another person exchange physical goods, both of us will have 1 thing. If we exchange ideas, both of us will have will have both. When buying food, physical property is transferred. I have no problem with paying for physical property. However, the recipe most of the time is private, so I can't take it and make my own food with it. This is an injustice.

"Oh you did this free, now you need to continue making things that are free because otherwise you are unethical."

I think FaTony is prone to extremism and overreacting, and I don't particularly care about what you're doing, but you are misrepresenting his position. It's obvious to me, based on the context, that he means "free" as in libre, not gratis. As in, his problem with what you're doing is that it's under a proprietary license, not that you're charging for it.

Physical property works differently. If I and another person exchange physical goods, both of us will have 1 thing. If we exchange ideas, both of us will have will have both. When buying food, physical property is transferred. I have no problem with paying for physical property. However, the recipe most of the time is private, so I can't take it and make my own food with it. This is an injustice.

All well and good if you ignore the physical and mental labor that went into creating the work in question. Even if copies cost virtually nothing, there must be something to copy and by charging per copy the initial cost becomes much lower. So if I made a piece of music and wanted to spread the cost and at the same time know how it was being used, I'd choose the pay per copy option instead of needing someone to reimburse the entire cost of production plus living expenses at once. That could easily be several thousand dollars in the case of professional artists, of whom I'm not.

In any case, you seem very entitled for suggesting that any option other than your preferred one is automatically bad. You even pull the ethics card as if people that are end users of something should have more say than its creator(s), and there are no problems forgoing said work if the terms are not to their liking. As you noted previously, R. Stallman recognizes the difference between the need for free software on the OS level and entertainment you can do without. There may be benefits for the end user to having it completely free software/culture but they are not necessities and therefore ethics does not automatically come into play.

onpon4 {l Wrote}:I think FaTony is prone to extremism and overreacting, and I don't particularly care about what you're doing, but you are misrepresenting his position. It's obvious to me, based on the context, that he means "free" as in libre, not gratis. As in, his problem with what you're doing is that it's under a proprietary license, not that you're charging for it.

That's also what I'm talking about. He essentially wants to coerce people into continuing to release everything as free software/culture as if contributing for a while to such isn't enough. And it's hurting the free software community because if people always get forced to choose between all or nothing they will choose nothing in most cases. Why even bother if any nice sentiments for previous work immediately turns to condemnation the moment someone chooses not to go the same route with other work?

onpon4 {l Wrote}:As in, his problem with what you're doing is that it's under a proprietary license, not that you're charging for it.

Yes.

Arthur {l Wrote}:So if I made a piece of music and wanted to spread the cost and at the same time know how it was being used, I'd choose the pay per copy option instead of needing someone to reimburse the entire cost of production plus living expenses at once.

You simply use crowdfunding. Cost is spread among many people.

Also, I too create music. And I try to make sure that my music is ethical. First, I use free license - CC-BY-SA. Second, I give out the full source code of my music. Finally, I wanted to make sure I don't use proprietary stuff during creation of my music. I've failed this because my music uses LinuxSampler and Sonatina Symphonic Orchestra which are distributed free of charge but are proprietary. I didn't read the license closely when I first downloaded them. I'm developing free alternatives.

Arthur {l Wrote}:In any case, you seem very entitled for suggesting that any option other than your preferred one is automatically bad. You even pull the ethics card as if people that are end users of something should have more say than its creator(s), and there are no problems forgoing said work if the terms are not to their liking.

People should have 4 fundamental freedoms. Creators who do not provide such freedoms deserve no money and/or recognition.

Arthur {l Wrote}:As you noted previously, R. Stallman recognizes the difference between the need for free software on the OS level and entertainment you can do without.

I can't do without libre games. They are the only thing that keeps suicidal thoughts at bay.

Arthur {l Wrote}:And it's hurting the free software community because if people always get forced to choose between all or nothing they will choose nothing in most cases.

Freedom requires sacrifice. FSF developed GPL because they've chosen not to give anything to people who make proprietary software. With GPL you either make your work free or you are committing copyright infringement. There's OSI on the other hand which doesn't support the FSF's point of view. That's why I and Stallman distance ourselves from the term "open source".

@FaTony So let's do it yourself and don't try to force other people to change their mind. It's my decision what I'm doing with my work and I won't make it GPL just because of you.

FaTony {l Wrote}:

Arthur {l Wrote}:As you noted previously, R. Stallman recognizes the difference between the need for free software on the OS level and entertainment you can do without.

I can't do without libre games. They are the only thing that keeps suicidal thoughts at bay.

You should go and see a therapist/doctor/counseller straight away, for starters. That's not normal.

FaTony {l Wrote}:

Arthur {l Wrote}:And it's hurting the free software community because if people always get forced to choose between all or nothing they will choose nothing in most cases.

Freedom requires sacrifice. FSF developed GPL because they've chosen not to give anything to people who make proprietary software. With GPL you either make your work free or you are committing copyright infringement. There's OSI on the other hand which doesn't support the FSF's point of view. That's why I and Stallman distance ourselves from the term "open source".

Except sacrifice is a personal commitment. Stallman devoted years of his life to developing the GNU tools. In a way it is a shame that he does not get recognition given how crucial they were/are to the success of Linux and other POSIX-style OSes. Stallman made the world a better place.

It's not clear that badgering the STK team makes the world a better place. They are developing a good open source game that people can play for free and come together to improve. Having a constructive opinion or polite disagreement is one thing, but there's a line between constructive debate and offending and discouraging people and you are pushing that boundary.

Pick your battles wisely, then the odds of victory are greatest.

deve {l Wrote}:@FaTony So let's do it yourself and don't try to force other people to change their mind. It's my decision what I'm doing with my work and I won't make it GPL just because of you.

I don't think FaTony wants you to make your efforts GPL because of him; it seems he believes wholeheartedly in the cultural benefits of libre licensed games. He's just not doing that good a job of espousing those benefits, instead demanding adherance.

FaTony {l Wrote}:I can't do without libre games. They are the only thing that keeps suicidal thoughts at bay.

But you don't have to - all you have to do is wait a year or two for one or two among multiple new tracks, depending on how fast the release cycle goes. You can still play all other tracks in the meantime.

Of course, the STK team could also send t-shirts or mugs or whatever to the donators, but that would mean a lot more work, and the production/shipping costs would then take away from the amount donated. So, earlier access to a few tracks sounds like a much more sensible perk to me.

charlie {l Wrote}:You should go and see a therapist/doctor/counseller straight away, for starters. That's not normal.

Thanks. I'm already on tons of antipsychotics and antidepressants. They lower the rate of suicide attempts but they do not solve problems.

charlie {l Wrote}:Stallman devoted years of his life to developing the GNU tools. In a way it is a shame that he does not get recognition given how crucial they were/are to the success of Linux and other POSIX-style OSes. Stallman made the world a better place.

Yes. I really admire Stallman, he's guiding me through this life. Whenever I need to get guidance, I ask "What would Stallman do?" He's extremely smart. I suggest everyone to go to his site and read some of his thoughts. Also, there is an RSS feed which exposes tons of problems in society.

charlie {l Wrote}:Pick your battles wisely, then the odds of victory are greatest.

Every time I self-censor my opinion, I'm mentally beating myself furiously. "What's that? Are you scared of those people? You are weak. You don't deserve to live". I need to deal with that.

charlie {l Wrote}:it seems he believes wholeheartedly in the cultural benefits of libre licensed games.

It was in 2009 when I was preparing to kill myself a thousandth time, I asked myself: "What is the purpose of life? You are going to die anyway, all your relatives will die, all your friends will die, all people you've invested in will die?". There is no point in wealth, there is no point in personal gain. Everything is relative, everything is temporary. If I ever actually decide to live, I'd at least will need to make a compromise with myself and pick some meaning that I can pretend makes some sense. So I've started to search. Everything is temporary, but different things last different times. Maybe if I find something that will last for a long time. Myself? No. My family? No. My country? Hell no! The humanity?... Hmm, that doesn't look bad. I don't know if aliens exist, but if I will find them and find evidence that their civilization will last longer than humanity, I can always "betray" humanity. But before that, I don't have better option.

And so I decided that if I'm going to live, I'm going to dedicate my work to humanity and people who didn't make this choice just weren't thinking good enough. Every day I'm thinking about my death, I want to predict how I'm going to die. And every day I ask myself what did I do for humanity, was my time well spent?

It looks like most people don't have the my history of suicide attempts, so it looks like they were not asking fundamental questions. This is a shame.