I actually have multiple pieces of software. The much simpler software I provide the source with the compiled binaries, they usually are too simple to really have bugs or problems.

The one I'm talking about is I'd rather not share the source because it's just god awful ugly; However to satisfy the GPL I will give the source to anyone who explicitly asks for it. Yes I wrote the entire thing from scratch, and I am sorta in the middle of re-writing it in a much cleaner format, but the language & compiler is sorta in the middle of changing, and certain features I'm not sure how to implement as I'm a little OCD and annoyed of how objects are handled (Creating and mapping 100,000 objects only to probably throw them right away annoys me, while creating them on the fly and saving none of them unless they change seems a much better route).



Reminds me, I have a BASIC detokenizer I need to clean up and submit for the Atari archives...

That's correct and is in accordance with my and Bradley's earlier point that the software layer is the biggest problem when doing emulation of a console (or any other device like even a sound card). Just took a quick look and the systems you mentioned apparently didn't even have any built-in ROM, my guess is that they were hardware only and any software, even the default splash screens before the games, came on the game cartridges.

Good luck convincing Square-Enix, who holds most of them, to do that DRM-Free without doing a shoddy port job many years later.

Again, if you wrote it, why put it under the GPL and then choose to hide the source? What's the point in that?

Meanwhile, if it incorporates elements that other people put under the GPL, you're opening them up to asking for it to be mailed to them. In fact everyone who can download the binary can write to you in snail mail and you're legally obligated to mail them the source on a disk or whatever.

Nintendo actually used that as a form of control on the Gameboy. If you turn a Gameboy on without a cartridge, the Nintendo logo is a black bar, and if the cartridge contacts are dirty then the logo is scrambled. The Gameboy was made to refuse to run a game unless it contained the copyrighted code that displayed the logo. Pretty clever way of forcing developers to be licenced (of course people found ways around it).

I liked when Nintendo required that NES developers put in a special chip from Nintendo in their cartridges so that they could have dictatorial control over who could ship games on their platform, as well as to execise a tax on them. Long story short, Nintendo had an unexpected shortfall in production of the copyright chips, which caused a stall in the whole game pipeline, seriously cutting into their bottom line for a quarter.

Oops.

That reminds me of reading how the first 4 characters of Genesis game says 'SEGA'; The hardware refuses to run if it doesn't say it. It was taken to court, and the court ruled that it wasn't breaking copyright or any infringement since it was required to make the game work. Basically allowing/permission to bypass hardware level DRM.
I'm really not sure what other licenses to consider, open or closed, or if I'd have the permission to use the license. And writing my own would be a big problem probably.

Besides, it's not like I want to hide the source, I just don't want to show the ugly current state of it. It's perhaps the only program I haven't included the source with the program (not to mention the sources are pretty big).

I don't know...

deleted

The 3D ones i agree with. As for non-3D, i just keep thinking to Symphony of the Night, which i'd happily play again. Then i think to Legend of Dragoon, (combat was in 3d) and a trend i remember is a number of them were grindy and slower than they needed to be.

Other than a select few games, PS2 is sorta my minimum... With the occasional exception (like Ultima 1 i'm going to be playing soon).

Well, this is nice. Wonder if GOG will get some contracts to see some of these games here, specially Silent Hill 1 and if Sony is cool, Gran Turismo.

Well if you want users to be able to access source, but to quid-pro-quo if they redistribute modified versions, then GPL is a decent option.

If you want to consider other licenses, the Createive Commons give you a lot of options.

If you don't really care what people do you with your source, then the MIT / BSD licenses are as simple as they come. There's a couple of paragraphs that say "do whatever you want, but you can't sue me" more or less.


If you don't want to make a project open source, you can just write some text that says they get a non-transferrable license to run the software for any purpose, but don't sue you.
Early 3d aged so incredibly badly.
Still, despite the awful look, some of them are fun (as you say!)

I remember glancing through a list of licenses to try and determine the best one for my uses... I got a book that's suppose to cover a lot of other open source options too, but it all just gives me a big headache. I just want to share my work. After a while i just gave up and selected GPL since i knew it would do what i wanted (basically).

Im in. Not for these games, but future title perhaps.

They sell some Sega Genesis titles too.

My guess is that Gran Turismo, like tons of other racing and sports games, has no chance for a re-release. I'm quite sure that both the music and car licenses have expired and Sony doesn't feel like renewing them.