Libregamewiki talk:Suggested games

Why is Trip on the Funny Boat on this list and not included? It was created for pyweek and is fully opensource... whether it is like another game irrelevant... --RB0 03:20, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Just add it then. The Bloboats mention was just a comment to have something else, not just the title and the URL. I include games here not necessarily because of any problems with the game. --AVRS 13:16, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright, I was just making sure :) --RB0 18:18, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Anyway, one minute I'm being told to add in any game no matter how notable. Next I see a page listing games that aren't notable enough to be include... Jo hn  J  18:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Who said not to include non-notable games? O.o And if someone wants to do the Trip on the FUnny Boat page, I won't be able to get to it until at least the weekend :S --RB0 03:43, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


 * If everyone makes a public domain Tic-tac-toe game while learning a language, differing only in colors and thickness of the figures, and then ceases programming completely, there is no point in having each and every of the games listed, with an article about every developer of such a game. And how many 2D implementations of Breakout and Tetris are there?
 * Me adding “notable” to a game wasn’t “it is unnotable otherwise”, but “it may be especially notable because”.
 * --AVRS 20:56, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

What is LGW's stance on "free" ScummVM games?
I'm talking about Beneath a Steel Sky, Dreamweb, Flight of the Amazon Queen, Lure of the Temptress, Drascula: The Vampire Strikes Back and Soltys. Their licenses could be considered a bit problematic, since as far as I understand, they forbids selling the games individually, although it allows commercial distribution of the games the games together with something else (doesn't matter what). Debian Free Software Guidelines considers the licenses free as in freedom, although I don't think Free Software Foundation or Open Source Initiative does.
 * This is my personal opinion. I took a look at Beneath a steel sky license. It seems harmless enough but the actual distributed files are 2 binary blobs so I doubt this satisfies freedom. Perhaps one could learn how to untangle the blobs by finding out what ScummVM does with them but that seems like a lot of work. (Here's one license that states that a font cannot be distributed alone but the FSF says this isn't a problem because it can be bundled with a hello world, so I think this clause seems analoguous to that.) GNUbie (talk) 18:00, 13 June 2013 (CEST)
 * Agreed, perhaps I'll try to take a stab at it later. At least I think Debian has an untangled version of Drascula: http://packages.debian.org/sid/all/drascula/filelist Cire, 90.225.93.214 21:31, 13 June 2013 (CEST)

.kkrieger?
A 96kb FPS game, released in 2004, liberated in 2012. C++/Assembler, 2-clause BSD. Source to it and more: https://github.com/farbrausch/fr_public What about adding this game?


 * "werkkzeug3_kkrieger is from a branch called "kkrieger" in our SVN repository. It's not the actual kkrieger code, and incorporates changes that were done more than one year after the original kkrieger release. It was, however, branched off before we started not caring about breaking kkrieger compatibility when making changes. You have a better chance of building the game from there than you do from the "regular" werkkzeug3 tree - though both are unlikely to work. If someone really wants a close-to-original werkkzeug3 kkrieger tree, it should be possible to dig up something from 2004 :)". Let's talk about kkrieger when that is done and working source code is available. --Hendrik Brummermann (talk) 10:14, 24 January 2014 (CET)


 * Sure thing. 90.225.93.214 22:17, 24 January 2014 (CET)

Suggestion
Take a look at this https://github.com/OpenRCT2/OpenRCT2 Necklace (talk) 01:55, 22 January 2017 (CET)


 * This is just the code and requires proprietary media, so not interesting here. --GNUbie (talk) 11:40, 22 January 2019 (CET)

Remove games that have an article
There are a lot of games listed that allready have an article. Can/should we remove them? -- Nudin (talk) 20:36, 19 January 2019 (CET)
 * It should be immediately clear whether a game has an article by the red or blue asterisk in the brackets in the suggestion entry. I think it's better not to delete the entries because it is a part of history of how a game has gotten here and the suggestion still contains a useful info, e.g. the accompanying comment. It also lets us see how many games come here thanks to this page. --Drummyfish (talk) 22:56, 19 January 2019 (CET)

Nox Imperii
Can someone please look at Nox Imperii (http://noximperii.com/) if it's OK? It's a fork from Naev, which is FOSS, but I feel someone should check Nox Imperii for any suspicious things, just in case ...

Thanks. --Wuzzy (talk) 18:49, 21 July 2020 (CEST)

Soldat
A major freeware game recently went FOSS (both code and media): Soldat. See the project page for details. It needs careful verification to make sure there's no “sneaky” proprietary stuff left. But based on my superficial review, it looks good so far. Can someone also please look at it? --Wuzzy (talk) 18:58, 21 July 2020 (CEST)

Pushover renamed to Domino-Chain
FYI: The game “Pushover” (a libre clone of the proprietary game with the same name) has been renamed to “Domino-Chain”. Here's the new homepage: https://domino-chain.gitlab.io/ --Wuzzy (talk) 19:01, 21 July 2020 (CEST)

Minetest games
Minetest is a game engine / “game launcher” for voxel games (world made out of cubes). Several games for Minetest have already been made, almost all of them are FOSS. https://content.minetest.net/packages/?type=game Currently, only one game for Minetest, Minetest Game has an article (it's the current "default" game). I have been very hesitant with adding the other games because most games are not that good, or they are experimental, in early alpha stage or have other problems. But in the long run, the better games need showcasing in this wiki as well, it's just that I'm waiting for games that are “worth” an article. But I like to hear your opinion on that as well.

There's also a special case I want to discuss: Inside The Box (https://minetest.foo-projects.org/). It's a puzzle game for Minetest, but you can currently only play it online by joining the “Inside The Box” server in Minetest. It's definitely one of the better Minetest games, but since it's online-only, it's kind of problematic. Technically, it's a SAASS game, the administrator controls everything, so I pretty much doubt it would qualify. The source code is in the open, and you can run your own server, media files are also libre. But the release has not a single level (you are supposed to build them yourselves ...). The server contains >100 community-created levels and the administrator hasn't released them. Another question which hasn't been asked publicly yet is the copyright status of those levels. Would be an interesting question. Although I highly doubt Inside The Box qualifies for LibreGameWiki right now, I thought I at least mention it to you for discussion, I am especially interested if you agree with my SAASS label. Forum topic: https://forum.minetest.net/viewtopic.php?t=18406

Note: I am a developer of some Minetest games and sometimes Minetest itself. --Wuzzy (talk) 19:37, 21 July 2020 (CEST)

Free Hero Mesh
I wrote Free Hero Mesh, which is a free-software/open-source puzzle game engine, for games such as sokoban and Hero Hearts. Does it fit in the Sokoban-style games section, or in a "game engines" section? It is probably now in a state that it can be used normally, even though there are still some things to add (and possibly things to fix). --24.207.14.22 06:35, 15 April 2021 (CEST)
 * I haven't tried it and only read your brief description, but I'd say "2D engines". FacelessLinuxUser (talk) 13:42, 29 May 2021 (CEST)

Meeting Time
(User:Kribbel asked in the article page under Meeting Time: "This was made for Adventuron Treasure Hunt Jam by »using Adventuron Classroom«. Which is »Licensed for personal non-commercial use only.« Isn't putting the game under GPL a violation of the license/EULA? Kribbel (talk) 13:43, 17 December 2022 (CET)")
 * TL;DR: I don't think it's a major problem. Lots of free games run in non-free environments. If Adventuron does compile parts of itself into the binaries&mdash;and I haven't even checked if it generates binaries&mdash;then you must only distribute in source code form.
 * First a tangent (with reason): GPL violation is only possible in the case where the game happens to reuse code from another GPL program and does not have an exception for it (a problem for a game jam anyway). In general the GPL system library exception will allow you to develop in non-free environments, but would not apply to this case since I don't think "Adventuron Classroom" counts in itself as any kind of operating system. (If it's a full-on virtual machine that changes things. E.g. Inform games run in a simulated "Z-machine" which counts as their operating environment even though you run the Z-code interpreter on your PC.) However, the GPL only applies to what is distributed with the program and the author of code can NOT violate the license thereof, though he may violate the license of whatever is distributed with it. Whoever holds the copyright can give you permission to use the code with anything at all, including linking it to other programs as a GPL exception. Distributing binaries even without a GPL exception is fine as well, provided those binaries do not include any of the Adventuron Classroom code but only run inside of it.
 * Back to the main point, notice how everything I said above applies to what you do with the GPL program. The author gives permission (which you would otherwise not have) to distribute the game under certain conditions. Those conditions do not say anything about what you are allowed to do or not do with the system libraries, virtual machine hosts, emulators, compilers, interpreters, etc. inside of which or in conjunction with which it is used. It cannot. If the conditions of the latter are sufficiently incompatible with the conditions of the former it might be impossible for you to run or copy the game without violating one or the other&mdash;but that would be your catch-22 and not the game author's. Now here the author(s) of that environment care that it cannot be used commercially, which you should not, but you can do even commercial work with the source code of the game itself (e.g. port it to raw C++ for selling copies) and with its binaries you can do the same IF they do not include any part of Adventuron (e.g. put them in a GPL-compatible wrapper/emulator to run without having Adventuron and sell copies, or distribute bare copies to users who must provide their own copy of Adventuron or write their own compatibility layers). GPL applies to distribution and not use, of course. FacelessLinuxUser (talk) 17:59, 17 December 2022 (CET)