About That Source Code ...

[Ozymandias]

Well, the Hydra of the specter of getting our hands on the source code/APIs/whatevers has raised its multifaceted head again.

It has come to a point where I no longer believe, even remotely, on our collectively improving the AI (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6679117&postcount=73).

However, I do believe that a number of modifications can be made to add geatly to the game (using either simple routines with a hopefully decent API) can be achieved (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6721066&postcount=92).

So, I am proposing another attempt to storm the walls of Take Two for API specifications (if it or its equivalent exists) and anything else in the way of "minor" information to help us make potentially significant changes.

So, vote away!

Best,

Oz

 

[Derf]

Personally, I wouldn't mind making the Idiot a little better, but sometimes it's something you can take advantage of nicely.
So I say go ahead.

 

[Aecon]

Has anyone approached Take Two or the other powers that may be with an approach to a limited license including the source code, APIs, etc. Maybe with some $ involved?

Some years back the disastrous release of MOO3 was made playable by a "patcher" created by "Bhuric" -- Yes - And it even became fun!!

 

[Stormrage]

Approached? We have them bloody surrounded! But they have some good bunkers it seems.. They burrowed deep, and now they hope we will leave if they ignore us.

 

[Aecon]

To Clarify: The Civ 3 Community seems to want open source code for this commercial product and it is reasonable that there may be resistance to that. A limited release requiring a group or small limited liability entity open source with some form of intellectual property security may be a compromise that owners of the source code may entertain.

 

[Ozymandias]

To Clarify: The Civ 3 Community seems to want open source code for this commercial product and it is reasonable that there may be resistance to that. A limited release requiring a group or small limited liability entity open source with some form of intellectual property security may be a compromise that owners of the source code may entertain.

It, and several variants, have been pursued by a number of us (my apartment is literally two blocks from their offices, and I have about 25 years experience with intellectual property issues) to no avail. I'm proposing to get everything but the source code in the hopes that the APIs are structured to let us make some improvements.

Best,

Oz

 

[Aecon]

Understood, has anyone made an offer to buy the source code.

 

[Derf]

Wasn't Steph in discussions with them about that?

 

[Virote_Considon]

I think the powers that be said that Steph had to set up a business (with $) before they would come to the tables to talk.

 

[Steph]

I'm still in contact (loose one )with take 2 for a solution where we could get some money.

And Ozymandias, before going any further, I believe that there is NO API.

I don't think there code is structure so it can upgraded that way, so the only solution to improve the game would be to have the full source code.

Upgrading the AI may be difficult, so I can agree that we should try to fix some parts and improve other without going to deep at the AI, at least for a start, but asking for a API with no AI change will probably lead nowhere.

 

[Zygmunt]

Sid isn't considering giving out the source code for any of his games, is he? I hope not! That's what those morons at Paradox Interactive did, basically because they're too lazy to make patches for exisiting games, but not quite lazy (but stupid enough) to put out a game/expansion every 4 months, at rediculous speed that they simply cannot support. That is why you now see me here. Firaxis and Sid know the meaning of the word, patch.

 

[Virote_Considon]

Sid isn't considering giving out the source code for any of his games, is he? I hope not! That's what those morons at Paradox Interactive did, basically because they're too lazy to make patches for exisiting games, but not quite lazy (but stupid enough) to put out a game/expansion every 4 months, at rediculous speed that they simply cannot support. That is why you now see me here. Firaxis and Sid know the meaning of the word, patch.

When was the last official Civ3 patch? All companies are in essence the same.

 

[Ozymandias]

And Ozymandias, before going any further, I believe that there is NO API.

A priori, there must be something approximating an API linking the editor to the mainline code, n'est-ce pas?

Best,

Oz

 

[Ozymandias]

Understood, has anyone made an offer to buy the source code.

Yes, I tried to open financial negotiations without effect (and the number I was floating as an opener was 100,000 USD).

-Oz

 

[Steph]

Sid isn't considering giving out the source code for any of his games, is he? I hope not! That's what those morons at Paradox Interactive did, basically because they're too lazy to make patches for exisiting games, but not quite lazy (but stupid enough) to put out a game/expansion every 4 months, at rediculous speed that they simply cannot support. That is why you now see me here. Firaxis and Sid know the meaning of the word, patch.

1) Sid doesn't own the source code of Civ3, and neither does Firaxis. Take2 does.
2) If they really knew the meaning of the "patch" word, they would have corrected the bugs long ago.
3) The game still has some room for improvment, which are not covered by patch.

It's not clear what you are suggesting they do. Just wait a few more years until CivIII cannot run on Windows 2037 anymore?

 

[Steph]

A priori, there must be something approximating an API linking the editor to the mainline code, n'est-ce pas?

A priori, no. To make an editor you just need to know in what order to read and save bytes in a file. The editor has virtually no game mechanism inside (except the graphical engien to show the map).

I suppose they use some share code for that. But it doesn't mean it's in an API form.

Look at Civ3 multi tool. With that, you can copy a unit. But I doubt Grampos had access to the source code or an API.

 

[Ozymandias]

A priori, no. To make an editor you just need to know in what order to read and save bytes in a file. The editor has virtually no game mechanism inside (except the graphical engien to show the map).

I suppose they use some share code for that. But it doesn't mean it's in an API form.

Look at Civ3 multi tool. With that, you can copy a unit. But I doubt Grampos had access to the source code or an API.

Quite right. I suppose I should have been saying, "API equivalent" all along as (as we've seen with the no-raze patch and the ocean tile adjacent to land patch) a robust bit/byte map could readily serve as well.

Best,

Oz

 

[Steph]

The problem with that is we can't do much with it.

We could for instance add a new "submarine" flag to the units but if we don't have the source code, the game will do nothing with this new flag...

 

[Ozymandias]

The problem with that is we can't do much with it.

We could for instance add a new "submarine" flag to the units but if we don't have the source code, the game will do nothing with this new flag...

True, I'm just looking for whatever we can get ... bits and bytes in external files probably control terrain and Heavens only knows what else, but I speculate.

My main question remains: do we take another stab at getting whatever we can from them under reasonable terms or not?

Best,

Oz

 

[Steph]

I would say no. I would not waste time trying to put some bandage on a wooden leg.

If we can have access to the source code, and so have all the elements to fix what needs to be fixed correctly, OK.

If we have only part of it, I'm afraid we'll just become frustrated when trying to fix something and discovering we can't make it work.

Either we have a real access to the source code, whatever the legal form it takes, either we stop there and move to something else.

A small hint to what the something else could be.