The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

What most people do atm is as you say, more like editing the client, instead of hacking
There are a few hacks that ive seen though, e.g. creating a campaign world, and I guess maybe fly / teleport hacks

Murph · 2017-04-03 01:44:22

Gosha wrote:

Latif wrote:
I don't even know what I would do if I get the source code of EE. The only thing I get in my mind is hacking.
this is what i did some days ago
http://i.imgur.com/fkWCOto.gif

This would be great for speedrunners and/or livestreamers. Open source the code?

den3107 · 2017-04-03 09:09:52

Murph wrote:

Gosha wrote:
Latif wrote:
I don't even know what I would do if I get the source code of EE. The only thing I get in my mind is hacking.
this is what i did some days ago
http://i.imgur.com/fkWCOto.gif
This would be great for speedrunners and/or livestreamers. Open source the code?

Or just share the client he made..?
EDIT: Besides, there's plenty of other software streamers can use to visualize button presses on the steam, without the buttons actually being in the way of his own gameplay.

Xfrogman43

Notcarksss · 2017-04-03 13:14:52

rdash wrote:

Just sayin'

What so you can troll that too

Notcarksss · 2017-04-03 13:16:23

Gosha wrote:

Latif wrote:
I don't even know what I would do if I get the source code of EE. The only thing I get in my mind is hacking.
this is what i did some days ago
http://i.imgur.com/fkWCOto.gif

Wait, you edited the swf with that keyboard thing or downloaded an external tool to show that?

Gosha · 2017-04-03 13:30:14

Notcarksss wrote:

Gosha wrote:
Latif wrote:
I don't even know what I would do if I get the source code of EE. The only thing I get in my mind is hacking.
this is what i did some days ago
http://i.imgur.com/fkWCOto.gif
Wait, you edited the swf with that keyboard thing or downloaded an external tool to show that?

edited swf

When player moves he sends "m" message about his movement
There are some arguments:
* Horizontal modifier (-1 means left, 0 means no movement, 1 means right)
* Vertical modifier (-1 means up, 0 means no movement, 1 means down)
* SpaceDown (is space hold)

created 5 buttons
each one is controlled by those argumens

Zumza · 2017-04-05 12:37:43

1448 wrote:

EE makes money even though it's a small amount, so no.
If they do open-source it, others can make similar games (with different graphics and slightly different mechanics) and EE will lose popularity.
Also, hackers, because EE's a poorly protected (or so I believe) flash game.

This is ??. I don't give a ? about if I play the original EE or not. I'll play the game which is better.
If another game make more money about EE and they're similar, then EE should just die. We live in capitalism after all.
Open source software projects are safer than the closed sourced ones, because anybody can fix an exploit when they see it. Closed projects are generally more likely to be exploited.
And I think that the staff should only make the client public, keeping the server code close if they like. Because right now we need only the Unity Client.

rdash · 2017-04-06 08:25:33

1448 wrote:

EE makes money even though it's a small amount, so no.

A lot of things that make money are open source. It just allows others to contribute.

1448 wrote:

If they do open-source it, others can make similar games (with different graphics and slightly different mechanics) and EE will lose popularity.

EE has like max 20 users on at a time. Not much popularity to lose.

1448 wrote:

Also, hackers, because EE's a poorly protected (or so I believe) flash game.

How much do you know about exploiting software? Open source also uncovers quite a few issues that can be quickly patched. And as others have said, everything that is needed to make a hacked client is already public-facing.

XxAtillaxX wrote:

Not going to happen. Just sayin'.

Why? Just wonderin'.

1448 wrote:

I added the "with different graphics and slightly different game mechanics" keeping copyrights in mind. If you modify the game enough (and this may not be hard), it might become legal.

That's not how copyright law works.

Notcarksss wrote:

What so you can troll that too

Obviously changes would be reviewed.

------------

Some of you are very confused about open source, which is fine as you likely wouldn't contribute anyways. All of the companies that use open source software in their products aren't somehow unaware of the points that you've brought up.

For some reason EE has an unusually large population of people interested in programming. Open sourcing it would let the experienced developers clean up the code / fix bugs / add features in their free time and help the inexperienced get better at programming.

Zumza, 1448

LukeM · 2017-04-06 10:41:31

Sorry, I'm not going to quote anything because I'm on my phone and it takes ages

Firstly, EE has min 20 players (at least when I'm on) and a max of 120+

I would personally like EE to be open source, but there are a few problems to overcome first:
The community doesn't have many experienced developers, as most of the programmers are under 20 (including me), so haven't been a part of a bigger team developing anything more than small projects, this means hardly anyone will understand the development processes needed for open source to work
There are a lot of people who are at the stage where they are just starting, and writing code that works, but is terribly inefficient, which means the devs will have to either revert the changes, or spend lots of time fixing them
Legal issues get complicated with open source code, especially when large portions of the users identify as 'hackers', this means that either the work contributed by others would become property of EE, or portions of the code could be taken, and used for EE copies
The last issue is that either they could have to keep the servers closed source, or have people not only copying the client, but also the servers, which would mean there could be exact copies of the game

kubapolish

Zumza · 2017-04-06 12:33:03

destroyer123 wrote:

The community doesn't have many experienced developers, as most of the programmers are under 20 (including me), so haven't been a part of a bigger team developing anything more than small projects, this means hardly anyone will understand the development processes needed for open source to work.
There are a lot of people who are at the stage where they are just starting, and writing code that works, but is terribly inefficient, which means the devs will have to either revert the changes, or spend lots of time fixing them.

Those few who understand the process and have experience should become collaborators and those who do not should relay on better suited programmers to accept their commits(pull requests).

destroyer123 wrote:

Legal issues get complicated with open source code, especially when large portions of the users identify as 'hackers', this means that either the work contributed by others would become property of EE, or portions of the code could be taken, and used for EE copies
The last issue is that either they could have to keep the servers closed source, or have people not only copying the client, but also the servers, which would mean there could be exact copies of the game

I doubt that any of this remakes would be big enough to compete with EE. And after all we don't speak about a million lines code project, EE is quite a small game, in my opinion. The fear of the code being stolen is irrational, people which can steal the code and build upon it already have the abilities to code EE from 0.

Edit: How many private servers are now? How many users they have? Why would these two grow if EE would become open-source?

Edit: And if they decide to open-source EE they should do it for the sake of game survival right? Haven't they told us they want to grow EE and profit isn't a thing they're interested in? I don't think there's any company in the world which has closed-source and they don't do it for profit. As a matter of fact, the companies which make open-source software sometimes seeks revenue as well, and they succeed by doing clever marketing, but the others rely on giving premium content to their donators(e.g. beta, builders club etc.).

N1KF · 2017-04-06 16:52:24

This short topic may be of interest since my merge request didn't work.

Zumza · 2017-04-06 18:37:56

N1KF wrote:

This short topic may be of interest since my merge request didn't work.

omg i requested a merge request and a move to game discussion too. with this topic tho http://forums.everybodyedits.com/viewtopic.php?id=38430. i wasn't aware of yours
<3

rdash · 2017-04-07 05:39:00

destroyer123 wrote:

Firstly, EE has min 20 players (at least when I'm on) and a max of 120+

Sure, the average is a tad higher but it's still a very small amount. Regardless, there have been one or two EE clones in the past and none have taken off. All open source will do is get more community engagement and quicker updates.

destroyer123 wrote:

The community doesn't have many experienced developers, as most of the programmers are under 20 (including me), so haven't been a part of a bigger team developing anything more than small projects, this means hardly anyone will understand the development processes needed for open source to work
There are a lot of people who are at the stage where they are just starting, and writing code that works, but is terribly inefficient, which means the devs will have to either revert the changes, or spend lots of time fixing them

Which was my point about helping inexperienced players improve their software development skills and get real experience working on a team (even if they're not contributing, they can still watch and learn the process). Obviously a core group would review changes before they would allow it to be submitted. It would essentially work like this:

Issue/feature request is written and approved
Someone claims it and starts doing the work
They submit a pull request
Project owner approves/comments/rejects the pull request
Their change is submitted (yay features!) or they rework it (yay learning!)

I highly doubt EE with receive more than 5 change requests a week. One person can easily handle reviewing that.

destroyer123 wrote:

Legal issues get complicated with open source code, especially when large portions of the users identify as 'hackers', this means that either the work contributed by others would become property of EE, or portions of the code could be taken, and used for EE copies

It really isn't that complicated. You maintain a copyright on your contributions. If you want to use the portion that you wrote in other projects, you're free to do so. Why is this a bad thing? You aren't allowed to use anything else without permission of the copyright holder, so essentially you can write whatever it is right now!

If they want to specifically strip your copyright in their license, that's fine too (though kinda a bummer). You don't have to contribute, just read the license beforehand.

------

@N1KF @Zumza - Oops, probably should have searched around for thirty seconds although the discussion that this post has brought is definitely a good one!

Many open source projects make money (some make A LOT of money). Since EE doesn't make money selling the game (rather it's all in-game purchases), I really see no reason why they wouldn't open source it at this point.

N1KF, Swarth100, Zumza, kubapolish

LukeM · 2017-04-07 09:27:31

(Still on my phone, so sorry, can't quote things)
I'm all for open sourcing the game, I'm just worried that a load of people will try to submit random changes that they think would be good but are not, I guess that 5 requests a week wouldn't be bad, but if there were more, it could waste a lot of the developers time
Also, it doesn't seem that the devs are that experienced in programming anymore, so might not be able to spot changes that massively decrease the performance of the game, which is already a problem
I guess there would be licences specifically made for open source though, that could be used fairly easily, so maybe that isn't as much of a problem as I thought it was

Zumza · 2017-04-07 10:33:20

destroyer123 wrote:

(Still on my phone, so sorry, can't quote things)
I'm all for open sourcing the game, I'm just worried that a load of people will try to submit random changes that they think would be good but are not, I guess that 5 requests a week wouldn't be bad, but if there were more, it could waste a lot of the developers time
Also, it doesn't seem that the devs are that experienced in programming anymore, so might not be able to spot changes that massively decrease the performance of the game, which is already a problem
I guess there would be licences specifically made for open source though, that could be used fairly easily, so maybe that isn't as much of a problem as I thought it was

But thats the beauty of working on an open-source platform(e.g. Github) not necessarily the mods have to check if an algorithm its performance killing anyone can check that and simply log a comment on the pull request: "this is not good, you should change it a bit on the ... part." etc.
Also I think you're suggesting that people would spam the pull requests. Thats not going to happen. Think to similar games to EE which are already open-source(e.g. minetest) nobody is spamming the pull requests, most of them are rejected indeed(because their not requested) but the good commits are speeding the productivity a lot! They also have a much bigger community than EE. Keeping EE closed-source is made out of an irrational fear imo. At his point I don't know if we can succeed to make the stuff join the Open-source Movement Church but hope always remains.

N1KF

LukeM · 2017-04-07 10:44:48

The main thing about efficiency that I'm worried about is that the number of people who want to just add things may vastly outnumber the number of people who want to worry about efficiency, so there may be too many changes for the few people who can be bothered to keep track of, I guess if there were only a small number of people contributing then this would be fine, but if there were a larger number of people (as pointed out before, the community seems to have an unusually large number of people interested in programming) then this may become a problem

Zumza · 2017-04-07 11:10:27

destroyer123 wrote:

The main thing about efficiency that I'm worried about is that the number of people who want to just add things may vastly outnumber the number of people who want to worry about efficiency, so there may be too many changes for the few people who can be bothered to keep track of, I guess if there were only a small number of people contributing then this would be fine, but if there were a larger number of people (as pointed out before, the community seems to have an unusually large number of people interested in programming) then this may become a problem

The core of the game must be supervised more dearly for efficiency than the rest of the game, thats its part of common logic.
The rest of the game code however, will not even require vast knowledges in term of performance in order for issues to be easily spotted, and even if they aren't its unlikely to cause hight impact on the rest of the game.
So people who aren't that sure on their programming aptitudes would start by doing small changes like refactoring a name of a variable to be more suggestive or to add a slight shadow on an item, while others can handle the logic behind how objects interact with each other.
EE is not special regards any other open-source game. Theres absolutely no reason behind this worries.
Things will take their natural course.

Also remember Donald Knuth's(one of the most respected figure in the world of computer science) words: "The real problem is that programmers have spent far too much time worrying about efficiency in the wrong places and at the wrong times; premature optimization is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming."
Lets have a working product before we get into high optimisations.

LukeM · 2017-04-07 11:48:15

I might just be worrying for no reason, I guess if there are problems then we could tackle them when we encounter them

About the quote though, EE is already a working product, so optimisation is something we should be thinking about. Especially because people are now having trouble actually running the game, which is driving away potential players, and even forcing some existing players to leave

Zumza, 1448

Zumza · 2017-04-07 11:54:34

destroyer123 wrote:

About the quote though, EE is already a working product, so optimisation is something we should be thinking about. Especially because people are now having trouble actually running the game, which is driving away potential players, and even forcing some existing players to leave

I think it's a waste to put effort into optimising something like a flash game, Unity should be a priority. I don't think that the unity client it's a fully working product at this moment.
And the fact that we're losing players now and the fact that we're wasting possible new players, should be our main motivation to do this change.

LukeM, MartenM

LukeM · 2017-04-07 12:05:38

Zumza wrote:

▼destroyer123 wrote
About the quote though, EE is already a working product, so optimisation is something we should be thinking about. Especially because people are now having trouble actually running the game, which is driving away potential players, and even forcing some existing players to leave
I think it's a waste to put effort into optimising something like a flash game, Unity should be a priority. I don't think that the unity client it's a fully working product at this moment.
And the fact that we're losing players now and the fact that we're wasting possible new players, should be our main motivation to do this change.

I guess, but isn't the whole the whole point of moving to Unity so that the game runs faster (and is supported on more browsers if WebGL works), wouldn't a messy, rushed port to unity be a bit of a waste of time

Edit: If you have something to work from (the flash game), it's sometimes easier to start from scratch with efficiency / simplicity in mind rather than porting over, then having to patch the efficiency on later

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#26 2017-04-02 00:25:32

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#27 2017-04-02 03:26:12, last edited by Xfrogman43 (2017-04-02 03:26:30)

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#28 2017-04-02 03:37:20

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#29 2017-04-02 05:07:40

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#30 2017-04-02 11:19:18

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#31 2017-04-02 11:49:24

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#32 2017-04-03 01:44:22

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#33 2017-04-03 09:09:52, last edited by den3107 (2017-04-03 09:10:51)

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#34 2017-04-03 13:14:52

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#35 2017-04-03 13:16:23

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#36 2017-04-03 13:30:14

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#37 2017-04-05 12:37:43

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#38 2017-04-06 08:25:33

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#39 2017-04-06 10:41:31

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#40 2017-04-06 12:33:03, last edited by Zumza (2017-04-06 12:44:28)

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#41 2017-04-06 16:52:24

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#42 2017-04-06 18:37:56

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#43 2017-04-07 05:39:00

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#44 2017-04-07 09:27:31

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#45 2017-04-07 10:33:20, last edited by Zumza (2017-04-07 10:36:38)

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#46 2017-04-07 10:44:48, last edited by LukeM (2017-04-07 10:45:11)

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#47 2017-04-07 11:10:27, last edited by Zumza (2017-04-07 11:17:31)

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#48 2017-04-07 11:48:15, last edited by LukeM (2017-04-07 11:48:38)

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#49 2017-04-07 11:54:34

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

#50 2017-04-07 12:05:38, last edited by LukeM (2017-04-07 12:10:14)

Re: The Next Step - Making Everybody Edits Open Source

Board footer