next »

[thunderhead.hierophant]

OK, here's a hypothetical:

Let's say you invent chess.  You have a central matchmaking server.  You make a very basic open-source client.  You allow players to build their own custom clients, which function so long as they communicate with the central server using correct protocol.

How do you make money?  Anyone can play a random match vs. another non-subscriber.  Subscribers are ranked on a ladder, and only ascend/descend playing ranked matches.

So, do you think it could work?

[zalzane]

You don't make money selling open source software. I cant think of a single company that makes serious profit and sells standalone open source software.

What they do do is sell services in conjunction with the software.

For your game, you would probably sell access keys to your central server and keep all your server-side code proprietary.

[Klaim]

OK, here's a hypothetical:

Let's say you invent chess.  You have a central matchmaking server.  You make a very basic open-source client.  You allow players to build their own custom clients, which function so long as they communicate with the central server using correct protocol.

How do you make money?  Anyone can play a random match vs. another non-subscriber.  Subscribers are ranked on a ladder, and only ascend/descend playing ranked matches.

So, do you think it could work?

You are basically in the same theorical situation than any MMO.
Look at the possible models there.

I have something similar, but I also provide a server implementation (a bit like MineCraft or NeverWinter Nights) but I can sell stories that exploit new features, so I don't know if you can do it in your case.

It depends if your game is extensible or not, if there are good services you can provide that are important for serious play etc.

[thunderhead.hierophant]

I was thinking one releases the game with a DF/roguelike interface, and if it takes off, the users generate pretty and/or more informative GUI's.

If you take chess as an example, maybe someone makes a civil war chess UI.  Another guy makes a client where mouse-hovering over a piece shows all possible moves.  These clients are freely distributed, and these two could play, each looking at their chosen UI, after being matched up by the central server (that also handles all game logic).

[Klaim]

If it's a turn by turn game, maybe hosting fees (like a few dollars, maybe one, to allow the user to keep his games online live for a month) would work. Not sure though.

It really depends on the game. Depending on if it's turn based, real time, can be persistant, or is short or long but not persistant, etc.

[PompiPompi]

As long as your server is not open source, it's just like any other online game. (As was mentioned earlier).
Also, why would people build their own client? Unless you are super popular like mount and blade... and even then it's easier to just mod your client.
I hope you don't rely on your users to build the client for you because you can't be arsed to build a proper client, because it is not likely to happen.

[Klaim]

Also, why would people build their own client?

Well in the end as soon as you have this setup you can assume that the client potentially can not be the one you provided. So you still have to assume it's possible, and don't bother but just concentrate on not trusting the client.
The response there explains it better: http://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/18431/best-way-to-verify-client-files-are-same-as-server also http://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/43430/techniques-to-prevent-non-official-clients-in-network-gaming

[PompiPompi]

That's another issue, from what he wrote I understood he WANTS people to build their own client.

[thunderhead.hierophant]

I hope you don't rely on your users to build the client for you because you can't be arsed to build a proper client, because it is not likely to happen.

I don't know what you mean by proper.  It'd be functional, but it wouldn't be gorgeous...I mean I was thinking ascii.  The early adopters would function as alpha testers.  

If it sucks, I didn't waste anyone's time getting art & music.  I'm pretty confident it wouldn't suck outright, but who knows if it would get players.  Either the raw mechanics get love, or people play something else.

Not worrying about art assets means one less roadblock to release, as well.

[Klaim]

That's another issue, from what he wrote I understood he WANTS people to build their own client.

Yes, I meant that anyway in this client/online-server context, he must not trust the client whatever the client is, his own or others.
I totally understand that he wants to make something where the core game is happening on the server and whatever the client representation he will focus on the server and just provide to people ways to exploit his service.
Still a nice selling model for this service totally depends on what is the game itself. The validity of this setup is dependant on the game too, but its intersting to me.
Like, I have my own game more or less like that, but in my case if people build their own clients, it will change a bit the experience and there are ways to avoid some "attacks" that are purely... "perceptive". Got me thinking about how to avoid that but I think I can't.