FOSS gamedev and creative worlds

The Terror mod currently includes:

• C4 Explosive

TODO:

• Glock .18
• USP .45
• AK 47
• M4A1 Carbine
• Hand Grenade
• Molotov Coctail
  More to come!

License: Public domain

Dependencies: Default

[spoiler=Recipes]
C4

Strong Gunpowder

[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Screenshots]

[spoiler=C4]

[/spoiler]

[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Downloads]
[spoiler=0.0.1a]
Includes:
C4

Known issues:
C4 Doesn't harm players (yet)

Download:
Direct Download
Adfly Download (support me for free)
[/spoiler]
[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Skins]
[spoiler=Solder]

Public domain
Download
[/spoiler]
[/spoiler]

Added a screenshot of the C4

Released version 0.0.1a

I hope is good... i try it later... but you can add monsters can be destroyed with the weapons? Go and work now ahhahhh! :)

Ragnar wrote:[spoiler=Solder][/spoiler]

Soldier*

Concerning monsters, you can add the usual baddies, or you can add something quite rarely seen in a video game. The video below shows a non-stereotypical monster idea:
http://youtu.be/ros0TY393t0
I'm not kidding now; the video shows something worthy of a horror game. Now that is something worthy of the word "terror."

you all got it wrong, its not terror like horror, its terror as in terrorist... :D
you know, like in Counter-Strike (which inspired me to make this mod )

I'm not interested in it anyway, but I wouldn't play this unless you took that "NC" clause off of the code, at least (and frankly, software shouldn't be put under Creative Commons licenses in the first place; those licenses are meant for cultural works, not software).

[spoiler=NC]Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes.[/spoiler]
Why?

Ragnar wrote:[spoiler=NC]Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes.[/spoiler]
Why?

Because that makes the software proprietary. I only use free software.[1]

[1] https://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

onpon4 wrote:I'm not interested in it anyway, but I wouldn't play this unless you took that "NC" clause off of the code, at least (and frankly, software shouldn't be put under Creative Commons licenses in the first place; those licenses are meant for cultural works, not software).

please don't proselytize.

mauvebic wrote:

onpon4 wrote:I'm not interested in it anyway, but I wouldn't play this unless you took that "NC" clause off of the code, at least (and frankly, software shouldn't be put under Creative Commons licenses in the first place; those licenses are meant for cultural works, not software).

please don't proselytize.

Proselytizing is specifically about religion, but if that wasn't part of what proselytizing is, I would still need to be trying to make someone else agree with me. Nudging someone to use a free software license (circumstantially, an open source license; CC BY-NC isn't an open source license, either) wouldn't be proselytizing even if free software was a religion.

onpon4 wrote:

mauvebic wrote:

onpon4 wrote:I'm not interested in it anyway, but I wouldn't play this unless you took that "NC" clause off of the code, at least (and frankly, software shouldn't be put under Creative Commons licenses in the first place; those licenses are meant for cultural works, not software).

please don't proselytize.

Proselytizing is specifically about religion, but if that wasn't part of what proselytizing is, I would still need to be trying to make someone else agree with me. Nudging someone to use a free software license (circumstantially, an open source license; CC BY-NC isn't an open source license, either) wouldn't be proselytizing even if free software was a religion.

If you don't want to use the mod, just close the tab/window/equivalent device without commenting. There's no need to try to "nudge" an user to follow your beliefs.

onpon4 wrote:even if free software was a religion.

That's the impression I get dealing with your type. Shouldn't it be enough that he's sharing his mods? That kind of nudging is what pushed me to stop sharing.

mauvebic wrote:Shouldn't it be enough that he's sharing his mods?

No. Proprietary software isn't a contribution... as you should already know. Are you trying to make this into an argument about free software? I just brought it up because I figured Ragnar might be ignorant of noncommercial licenses being proprietary/non-free/closed-source (of course, I say "proprietary" because my position is free software). If you want to argue with me about free software, do it somewhere else. If you post in the Off-Topic forum or make a Diaspora post with the #freesoftware tag, for example, I'll notice.

onpon4 wrote:No. Proprietary software isn't a contribution... as you should already know. Are you trying to make this into an argument about free software? I just brought it up because I figured Ragnar might be ignorant of noncommercial licenses being proprietary/non-free/closed-source (of course, I say "proprietary" because my position is free software). If you want to argue with me about free software, do it somewhere else. If you post in the Off-Topic forum or make a Diaspora post with the #freesoftware tag, for example, I'll notice.

You must have a nice view from that high horse. Please don't proselytize.

thanks mauvebic for standing up for me :D
thanks a lot, biggums :D

mod has been retired, because i don't have time to improve it anymore. need to work on Wrath of Xeprione. The code is now public property, same for the textures.

"Public property" isn't a valid legal term pertaining to copyright. Works which aren't copyrighted are "public domain". Sorry if I sound nitpicky, but the term "public property" has no legal significance in copyright, so because you didn't explain what you meant, despite your intentions, the legal effect of the license change might be "all rights reserved" rather than "public domain".

So how's the updating?

So how's the updating?

Please update!