Ask HN: Why do games companies not release source code for old games?
Releasing a game's source code allows it to be read, forked, and modded. It increases enthusiasm for the game/franchise.
What do games studios gain by not making source code for old games (when available) public?
The example I had in mind was Westwood who haven't released Red Alert 2 source code. (but the same question applies to any game studio / game).
Doom's source code was released and it had an vast impact on modding and enthusiasm for the game and its creators.
Why isn't it more common for studios to release source code for old games?
85 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 167 ms ] threadSimilarly Doom 3's source code release had features ripped out: https://github.com/id-Software/DOOM-3-BFG/blob/master/README...
And that's a 20 year old game which id made the engine for. A 10 year old game that used Unreal Engine 3 would need permissions for Unreal Engine 3 for the source code to not be useless.
Now, granted, there is a huge online community that does ROM hacks and disassembly, but Nintendo has been known to aggressively defend its IP (see the shutdown of the Yuzu project, for example). As a big fan of classic Pokémon games it would be cool to see a sanctioned source code release of these games, but I just don’t see it happening; there is too much money to be made re-selling classic Pokémon games in a “Disney vault” or subscription (Disney+) fashion until the copyright expires.
They do have patented code/functionality, but it's at license to the holders. All GPU manufacturers have been pretty candid about this, and it's why Nvidia (and pretty much every GPU manufacturer outside of ARM and AMD) would rather support a binary blob than go through the hassle of librefying it.
I'm to understand that back in the day, the common practice of Japanese game developers using funny nicknames (like "S.Miyahon" for Shigeru Miyamoto) was implemented by the game companies themselves to dissuade rival developers from poaching their top talent. Perhaps they were concerned about intellectual property leaks.
In a lot of cases it would involve tossing an incomplete bunch of code over the wall with few instructions about actually using it. Which is probably not what the recipients had in mind.
Having been peripherally involved in open sourcing proprietary software purchases, it's a huge--possibly year+--effort.
Minecraft modders deobfuscate and decompile the game every time Mojang publishes a new release so that mods have the symbols to link against. There are way more people out there who want to play old games and have the skills necessary to modernize a game's codebase than there are making those engines, and they have more time and better-aligned incentives. Essentially every game I know of that's been open-sourced has had someone put in the time to get it building again, even things that barely anyone played. Heck, popular frequently have full-blown from-scratch remakes, c.f. the Spring Engine, OpenTTD, OpenRCT2, StepMania.
The "recipients" don't mind this at all. Many source ports built from gutted releases speak to that.
It would be pretty hard to drag code from other engineers with you, without outright bringing the source code along. If that happened, it would very much be illegal.
What's more likely to happen (and something I, and most other engineers, have done) is use their own solutions from previous work experience to develop new features. This has been tested (at least in Federal and California courts) and been found to be completely fine, as long as it's not in the end goal of infringing on protected property (e.g. developing an h264 codec/hardware blob to avoid the license).
Black and White. Creatures.
That's all thank you.
But I think the comment is about the game “Black and White,” which is, if I recall, one of the popular god-games of the era.
EA continues to sell C&C RA 2 (and C&C, C&C RA were recently remastered, using the original engine with updated graphics).
"Here's a thing you can have for free. Please, uh, buy my current wares instead of playing the old game for nothing."
Doom's code was released because Carmack had a materially different view of IP.
If you look at "open source/open core" threads for enterprise/non-game software, you can see the mindset.
The makers of the game might have creative sympathy or want to inspire future creators.
The owners of the game want to protect and defend their property.
TL;DR: it's a non profit endeavor, and most of these companies don't grok the concept.
1) they may not even have it. The source code for lots of classic games have been lost. By some estimates at much as 90% of pre-2000 source code is gone. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2021/01/saving-video-gamings-...
2) the game may use code from other companies or libraries or something that they don't own.
3) it might even be unclear who actually owns the source code now.
4) it isn't worth the time to get things straightened out. Nightdive studios tried to rerelease No One Lives Forever and the companies that might possibly own the game hadn't digitized the contracts and either weren't interested in the hassle or wanted Nightdive to pay them to take the time to look and promised to refund them if they didn't. https://kotaku.com/the-sad-story-behind-a-dead-pc-game-that-...
It took years and a ton of negotiation for the developers of conquest frontier wars to secure the rights to the game from Ubisoft so they could release their source code
I have a feeling that the most difficult barrier is getting past the publisher
So the original Command & Conquer, Red Alert and Tiberian Sun are free as in beer now.
OpenRA might be GPL, but that's a complete re-implementation and extension of the original engine.
It doesn't include the full engine, but as far as I'm aware this is the full source for parts specific to Red Alert and Tiberian Dawn, as the main motivation for releasing the source was to facilitate modding. I haven't looked very deep though, so do correct me if I'm wrong.
id open sourced the Doom3 engine, but didn't open the game assets. People ported it to linux. If you wanted to play doom3 on linux, you still legally needed to own the game to get the assets, you just had an open source way of running those assets on linux.
Open sourcing of the doom engine is basically why "this literal toaster runs doom" is a meme now.
Plenty of old enough games will just reverse engineer and rebuild the game engine open source from scratch. OpenMW comes to mind. And they even provide links on where to buy Morrowind in their FAQ, which even further helps drive sales.
> Do I need Morrowind to use OpenMW?
> Yes, if you wish to play Morrowind and its expansions. You must legally own Morrowind before you can use OpenMW to play Morrowind. OpenMW is a game engine recreation and only replaces the program. OpenMW does not come with any “content” or “asset” – namely the art, game data, and other copyrighted material that you need to play the game as designed by Bethesda Softworks. You have to provide this content yourself by installing Morrowind and then configuring OpenMW to use the existing installation.
Open sourcing a game engine does not mean that you have to make the game free.
I think that's the reason why they do not want to open source their old games.
In other words, either their finances are too tight to spare the effort, or they simply don't care about their games as works of artistic merit that might need to be preserved or even improved across generations of devices and operating systems, but rather just as products to earn money off of and then abandon.
And yes, the games are products: they cost money to make and they make money when they are sold.
Doesn't mean that you can't be charitable without being a charity.
> Why should they dedicate resources to making a very small group of people happy?
Because some might believe that the output of their work could be classified as a work of art in some ways and that it might be nice to preserve it.
> And yes, the games are products: they cost money to make and they make money when they are sold.
Sure! And if a game makes a sufficient amount of money, it wouldn't be a big deal to put some effort into doing nice things!
Of course, cynical attitudes and corporate behavior like what happened with a lot of Microsoft game studios suggest otherwise. The world quite sucks sometimes. Luckily, that's just due to the behavior of bad actors, not some inherent truth about the world being a profit-driven rat race, because that's of their making.
Simple 3 component apps don't even have CICD. Games? Mike built that binary and scp'd it on the box. I know we need it to build the map editor to build the next level, Don't ask him for a new build he's been in a bad mood his linux jamed, he may rebuild it, wait for Xmas.
The facts in my comment remain though. Can't raise ask for him for something that doesn't exist.
It's a relatively small portion of game studios that are welcoming of mods. Often that is a legacy of the company being small and developer led.
I was at a game company that got acquired, there were various game IPs that were part of that. The acquirer was interested in only a few of them, but they would get all as part of the deal. I inquired as to whether they would be interested in letting me buy one of the IPs that they didn't care about, and was told unless I made a 6 figure offer it wasn't even worth it for them to get the lawyers involved to consider it. Needless to say I didn't do that and the IP involved (and the related source code) is now locked away forever, not even sure who owns it now.