Quoting: amataiThis is not, this is a violation of GPL license if the contributor did not explicitly give him permission to relicense their work.

And the main dev stenzek claims he has permission by everyone.

Quoting: amataiBtw, can CC-BY-ND even be compiled ?

CC doesn't make any distinction between source and binary, so compiling creates a derivative work you're not allowed to redistribute.

EDITED to merge a double-post after somebody deleted their own post:

You, on your own, can compile it. As long as it's just you and nobody knows about it, you can do anything. You can compile it, you can change it to say "stenzek is a doodoo head" at startup, knock yourself out.

Distributing such a changed version, including just a compiled binary of the unchanged sources (because for the CC, both are the same, a derivative work), that's what's not legal. No uploading it to the internet, no giving it to your friends, probably not even letting other people use it on your own system.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The Creative Commons licenses (except, arguably, CC0) are a terrible, terrible choice for software. They simple were not designed for software and they make no distinction between the source and binaries. One issue that results from that is the inability to package the software, and at least they acknowledge that that is a consequence.

That also means no inclusion in Linux distributions, and even *with* custom agreements that will be difficult, since this license is just completely incompatible with basically every distribution's terms.

In fact, this choice of license also means no further contributors unless every single one can get the approval of every single other contributor. This is a complete nightmare to walk into as a developer.

This is a completely baffling choice.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Ugh, that looks like an AI upscale of the original intro animation:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: motangI will wait for the Steam version, I bought the fist one Linux not on Steam and now I have no idea where the installer in

I just checked my email archive (which goes back to 2001). I bought the original game directly from them in February 2009, and the URL in the confirmation mail linking to the download page still works.

If you still have your original confirmation email, that's where you can still get it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The problem with Embracer is that they're not in the business of making games, making art. They're in the business of making money. They don't care how. They don't care the games apart from them being their current vehicle of making money.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Like I said, doesn't surprise me in the least. Typical Nightdive shit.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I wonder how they're going to square the diverging endings of the original game. I.e. how and where is Chloe

And they better make it gay af.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

...So, is nobody going to ask what mysterious "legal reasons" these are?

EDIT: Like, seriously, no one here, nor on the GOG forums, is asking for them to elaborate? Everybody is just eating it up, no questions asked? As if "legal reasons" is just a valid carte blanche, instead of barely even an explanation?

I guess that's what I'm going to use next time I'm late for a meeting at work. "Why weren't you at the sprint review and planning today?" - "Legal reasons." - "Okay, move along."

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I remember Tibia. Rats contain cheese and gold.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Hmm, since I already have a 7950X, upgrading to a 9950X doesn't sound worth it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments