Open Source Projects

[Vinz]

　　Whether modders want to pass on the torch or take it up, there is a new home for maps for all. Projects in this section are unprotected and free to edit. If you've made sufficient, distinct changes to an open source map, feel free to upload your version.

　　If you're looking to take a break from modding, but don't want to see your ideas collect dust - or just want to let someone else take a shot at them - you are encouraged to make your works Open Source.

　　If you're interested in taking up a playable project and adding your own twist to it, this section is the place to be!

　　⮞　To mark your bundle as open source, simply add the tag when editing it
　　⮞　All modified uploads of open source maps must also use the tag and credit all authors

---

　　@MoCo is retiring, and is hoping to see others take on the mantle of his projects. His maps include the Stealth RPG Shadow Over Blackwood, the AoS Aeon of War, and the Arena BUGS!

BUGS!

Shadow Over Blackwood

Aeon of War

　　Also among the section's first offerings are the AoS Golden Lands by @-Manuel-, Warcraft Arena by @RAZORWc3Creator, and Impossible Siege by @GodLike.

Golden Lands

Warcraft Arena

Impossible Siege

Reminder: Maps that aren't meant to be playable belong in the Template section.

 

[OutsiderXE]

Cool. I also plan to make my campaigns open source some time in the future.

 

[deepstrasz]

To access Open Source tagged maps, follow these steps:

Spoiler

Don't forget that you can find such maps in Substandard as well:

Spoiler

Click images in the spoiler tag to make them bigger.

---

While there's benefit from this, it also means more cheap edited maps for reviewers to moderate.

 

[Kakerate]

Can we get some closed Source Support? Seeing as the new patches broke Vexorians, a heralded tool for the ages, it would only make sense that Blizzard would atleast try to fill the gap.

 

[Strydhaizer]

Hmm. It's hard to decide whether I should go selfish and let my old projects die, or make my maps open source and let other people learn but also steal my map, both has advantage and disadvantage and I've been asking myself this question for years. I have tons of unfinished maps under my sleeves that I should have released as open source long ago, but it's still hard to decide if I should release it open to everyone, I'm also not sure if someone's interested to continue my maps.

Seeing as the new patches broke Vexorians

Vexorian's tool still works for me you just have to configure the some settings/flags manually now; like importing the latest .j files and checking(avoiding) InitFunc Merge, GlobalInit Merge, Anti BJ and BJ optimize under Tweaks.

 

[deepstrasz]

Hmm. It's hard to decide whether I should go selfish and let my old projects die, or make my maps open source and let other people learn but also steal my map, both has advantage and disadvantage and I've been asking myself this question for years. I have tons of unfinished maps under my sleeves that I should have released as open source long ago, but it's still hard to decide if I should release it open to everyone, I'm also not sure if someone's interested to continue my maps.

There's more disadvantage socially, if you don't release them at all as no one will benefit from them, not even you.

 

[OutsiderXE]

Hmm. It's hard to decide whether I should go selfish and let my old projects die, or make my maps open source and let other people learn but also steal my map, both has advantage and disadvantage and I've been asking myself this question for years. I have tons of unfinished maps under my sleeves that I should have released as open source long ago, but it's still hard to decide if I should release it open to everyone, I'm also not sure if someone's interested to continue my maps.

They would be like maps in the spell section. People have to credit you if you want it. People who steal without crediting usually put very little effort into their maps. They would likely also be not allowed to be uploaded to sites like Hive, making them go unnoticed in the long run.

 

[deepstrasz]

They would likely also be not allowed to be uploaded to sites like Hive, making them go unnoticed in the long run.

That's not gonna stop them from uploading to B.net.

 

[OutsiderXE]

That's not gonna stop them from uploading to B.net.

True. I think it's really up to the original creator to determine how annoyed he would be about stolen credits. As far as I know my nickname usually gets associate with my projects, making stealing pretty useless. But I have also been on the other end: working in a team on a starcraft total conversion for WC3. An altered version of this map was promoted on a TV gaming channel in germany - credits changed.

 

[deepstrasz]

True. I think it's really up to the original creator to determine how annoyed he would be about stolen credits.

That won't matter if the original author retires. That's pretty much the point of open source.

But I have also been on the other end: working in a team on a starcraft total conversion for WC3. An altered version of this map was promoted on a TV gaming channel in germany - credits changed.

What the hell man... Have you called the TV station to warn they'd be sued?

 

[OutsiderXE]

That won't matter if the original author retires. That's pretty much the point of open source.

What the hell man... Have you called the TV station to warn they'd be sued?

Sued for showcasing a warcraft 3 mod?

This was over 15 years ago. As far as I remember our team leader got in contact with the TV channel to clear things up; but I don't remember there was ever a statement by the TV channel (on their website) of any sort. I don't even remember what our project name was to google it. I only remember it was like Project Revolution (

) but smaller in scope. We originally had less detailed models than PR, when a modeller from PR quit and decided to just give us all their models, which made the PR team extremely furious. I vaguely remember that development on our project stopped soon after, as the WC3 engine was not capable to re-create some SC mechanics (or we lacked knowledge). If you are curious: The only system I designed was the placement of Vespene Geysirs. I mostly focused on cleaning up the UI (unit names, descriptions, button placement, etc).

 

[deepstrasz]

Sued for showcasing a warcraft 3 mod?

For replacing the authors as someone else. Did I misunderstand?

 

[OutsiderXE]

For replacing the authors as someone else. Did I misunderstand?

That is correct. Wrong credits on a free mod for a video game - I dont think that is enough cause for sueing anyone. I dont blame the TV channel for not doublechecking.

 

[deepstrasz]

That is correct. Wrong credits on a free mod for a video game - I dont think that is enough cause for sueing anyone. I dont blame the TV channel for not doublechecking.

Of course. But a cheek slap would have been fair.

 

[disruptive_]

One have to remember that from a copyright standpoint the game itself is separated creation from the code, even if they are clearly related and are often the work of the same person (programmer != game developer != artist).
HIVE current open-source definition appears to mean that one gives free rein (in the form of a unrestrictive license or public domain resign) to both the code and the game.
I for example, plan on unprotecting my map, giving free rein regarding the code or assets i create, but reserving rights regarding the game itself as long as i'm developing it. If i ever halt the development, should i forgot to open-source the game itself, then making maps INSPIRED by those that i created (ie. they can get a gist of how to achieve a certain mechanic by looking at the code freely and potentially modify it to suit their needs).

 

[deepstrasz]

I for example, plan on unprotecting my map, giving free rein regarding the code or assets i create, but reserving rights regarding the game itself as long as i'm developing it. If i ever halt the development, should i forgot to open-source the game itself, then making maps INSPIRED by those that are mine will be easier.

Depends what game means. If it's ideas, they can't be copyrighted. Or is that different from intellectual property in this context?

 

[disruptive_]

If you take OverWatch and Valorant you see clear imitation on mechanics and concepts. But are these games the same at all? They have different pace, different lore, different characters, and even they differ on how the mechanics work on the big picture. These are not the same products. Overall, when copyright applies to games AS games, it applies to the audiovisual display (not the code). It applies very easily to games, because games are a creative use (read: not plainly mechanical, there is more than on way to do things, there is freedom) of mechanics, lore, idea, concepts. Compare that to potentially protecting the audiovisual display of a spreedsheet program (all is functional, there are very few ways to convey information).

EDIT: Also, just to base my point further, copyright protection on games is a thing as ancient as year 1982. This point also illustrates that custom games could be protected by copyright as long as they have creative elements. A custom WC3 campaign that uses the lore and characters of Warcraft III is arguably a derivative work and not an original work for example. A custom map that is an RPG with custom lore, pacing, setting, characters, could be easily an original work, completely distinct from Warcraft III.

 

[deepstrasz]

If you take OverWatch and Valorant you see clear imitation on mechanics and concepts. But are these games the same at all? They have different pace, different lore, different characters, and even they differ on how the mechanics work on the big picture.

Sure but what I'm saying is, that there can be numerous "clones"/ripoff games like your map, the way you mention it, without any legal solution.

 

[disruptive_]

"Ripoff" from a ordinary standpoint is very heterogenic. Some people consider Hots/Hon/Lol etc. a ripoff of Dota. Here there was clear imitation on mechanics and ideas, but they all were clearly different products and as such different creations.
But Ripoff in copyright (read: copyright infringinment) follows the analysis i did, but ultimately it is something that is decided by a judge using lots of other criteria on a case by case analysis (ie. the degree of the copying). On this trials, you bet that the judge will see the products ( ie. a screen running the games) and then proceed to compare them.
So we can just use common sense. Let's say i make a map an AOS genre map called Uncle Disruptor Lane Pusher that has a given setting, characters, heroes, names, items, etc. If somebody that is not me suddenly makes a map called Uncle Disruptor Lane Pusher that imitates everything else but add cheats what would you say here? What if he adds 1 new hero?. What if he imitates everything else but changes the name to Uncle Deeps Lane Pusher? What if somebody just make another AOS map?

 

[deepstrasz]

"Ripoff" from a ordinary standpoint is very heterogenic. Some people consider Hots/Hon/Lol etc. a ripoff of Dota.

It's what they are ultimately, imitations. Basically, like remaking compositions/songs, redoing something "in your vision".

 

[disruptive_]

Then copyright protects only against blatant imitations that free ride (simply to much) on other people's work. Determining this "simply too much" is the tricky thing.

 

[pick-a-chew]

Over the years I have distributed a number of unprotected versions of Orc Gladiators for people to learn from. Obviously I am still developing the map and only offer versions that are a few months behind (to protect my development on it). Is this suitable for projects that are still in active development? Would it be better if I uploaded it as a separate resource?

 

[deepstrasz]

Is this suitable for projects that are still in active development? Would it be better if I uploaded it as a separate resource?

I don't think it'd make sense to create competition against yourself. If you think someone else would/could do a better job, then you might as well leave them do it.

 

[pick-a-chew]

I don't think it'd make sense to create competition against yourself. If you think someone else would/could do a better job, then you might as well leave them do it.

That's kind of why I was gauging whether the intent behind this was purely so people can continue development, or if it's more for educational purposes. Realistically you're going to have a lot of people looking at these resources and not actually continuing them and instead learning/borrowing/taking from them instead (which is a good thing because it will likely result in the increase of quality of new and existing maps).

 

[deepstrasz]

That's kind of why I was gauging whether the intent behind this was purely so people can continue development, or if it's more for educational purposes. Realistically you're going to have a lot of people looking at these resources and not actually continuing them and instead learning/borrowing/taking from them instead (which is a good thing because it will likely result in the increase of quality of new and existing maps).

That's not really the point of open source though, at least here. I mean, unprotected would fit and I don't think this is what open source wants to stand for.
There are numerous unprotected maps out there.

 

[pick-a-chew]

Hmm yeah that's what my original post was asking . If the spirit of this resource classification is the continued development of a particular project in the absence of the original developer, I suppose it makes sense for me to hold off. Thanks for clarifying!

 

[Himperion]

My mentality is that once a creator is gone, the resource should go Open source, even if for simple patch manteniance. But that is me, and my once released, God helps us all, aproach to these issues.

 

[Chaosy]

I think this is great.

My next question would be:
How much of the map needs to be finished in order to submit it? I feel like this should be specified to prevent a complete flood of maps. If I have 10 minutes of gameplay is that sufficient? 20? 50%?

I am asking because I have quite a few things laying around which could potentially be added to the pool.

edit: also, couldn't you use it as a WIP thing? as in let's say I upload something in its current state, then I come back in 1 month or two and update it? I mean it does help everyone who wants to continue on that map after all.

 

[deepstrasz]

edit: also, couldn't you use it as a WIP thing? as in let's say I upload something in its current state, then I come back in 1 month or two and update it? I mean it does help everyone who wants to continue on that map after all.

So, yeah, WiP maps are still for Map Development regardless if they are to be given to someone else to finish or not.
Open Source is the map tag for maps that have been approved or are in Substandard, which means pretty much a finished product, except for those in Substandard which very many are not only performing badly but are also unfinished.

 

[Chaosy]

So I misunderstood the whole goal behind this then.

I thought this was about taking half finished maps that are collecting dust, then throwing them out there for someone else to finish or take in a new direction.

So this is only about maintaining then? kinda sad

 

[deepstrasz]

I thought this was about taking half finished maps that are collecting dust, then throwing them out there for someone else to finish or take in a new direction.

Well, that would contradict the rules for Maps and would rend Map Development less useful.

 

[Chaosy]

Well, that would contradict the rules for Maps and would rend Map Development less useful.

Well think of it this way.
What's the difference between a template and a WIP map. Not much honestly.
So at the very least I figure that as long as the terrain has come a long way you could upload it as WIP.

 

[deepstrasz]

What's the difference between a template and a WIP map. Not much honestly.
So at the very least I figure that as long as the terrain has come a long way you could upload it as WIP.

Well, generally Template maps are just terrain, rarely code too or just code.
But if you suggest open source maps be moved to Template instead, I'm not so sure.

 

[Chaosy]

I don't think it has to be merged.
But I fail to see why the following map would be accepted:
100% terrain
0% code/triggers

And the following would not:
80% terrain
50% code/triggers

In the end both are products someone can pick up and continue to work on.

 

[deepstrasz]

I don't think it has to be merged.
But I fail to see why the following map would be accepted:
100% terrain
0% code

And the following would not:
80% terrain
50% code/triggers

Because those with 100% terrain are specifically made to be templates unlike those others that are usually unfinished.

 

[Chaosy]

I don't see how that's important.

If I am making an AoS map you don't need the map to be specifically made as a template.
Although this is probably the exception rather than the norm as most map types do not have a map layout 'requirement' (yes it's not really forced but most AoS use the DotA style)

Quel'thalas Template is the second most downloaded template at the moment.
It is not even made for a single map type

A big terrain of Quel'thalas, it can be used in various types of gameplay.

So saying templates are tailor made to be templates does not hold much water to me when its not even specialized for a single map type.

 

[deepstrasz]

So saying templates are tailor made to be templates does not hold much water to me when its not even specialized for a single map type.

You misunderstand what template means in mapping context. It does not necessarily mean a map should have a terrain specifically for one kind of map genre. It means mappers can use such maps for whatever they think of creatively, be it a cinematic scene/map, an RPG, an altered melee map etc.

To me it's pretty clear:
Map Development->unfinished maps, regardless if they are abandoned to everyone or under development by the original author.
Template->maps made for mappers to use as part of their projects or new ones, usually full terrain (+decoration) and/or coding (usually for a specific type of game, e.g. Vampirism, Tower Defense etc.).
Maps->Full working and past beta phase maps (terrain/decoration+triggers) usually with a specific type of gameplay being under development or open source.

Now, the funny part is that in Maps there could be open source maps and then their reuploaded edits which would not be open source.

 

[Chaosy]

Yes but a template is literary an unfinished map. Because if it was finished it would not be useful as you cannot build upon it as much.
edit: in fact, it's exactly half a map.
So why would one type of unfinished map be allowed and another one isn't?

I could take a half finished RPG map, remove all the code and make a cinematic out of it. Or remove the code, throw it into a campaign as a chapter.
Or of course pick up development and merely continue with a similar intent to the original author, much like maintaining a map.

There is a possibility of this being too much and overloading the section which would be my main argument against this, but I fail to see how more options in my selection of WIP products would be bad if I choose that I want to take something existing and expand on that.

 

[Nudl9]

So is this open source in that the maps can be opened or that they're "lisenced" open that we can make edits and submit new/fixed entries?

 

[deepstrasz]

I could take a half finished RPG map, remove all the code and make a cinematic out of it. Or remove the code, throw it into a campaign as a chapter.
Or of course pick up development and merely continue with a similar intent to the original author, much like maintaining a map.

You could do all that but starting from Map Development. Template maps are specifically made this way to be templates unlike unfinished works which are not meant to be templates unless they ultimately become open source.
So, if you're question is more like why aren't open source maps moved/uploaded to Template then, maybe that would be a good idea.

So is this open source in that the maps can be opened or that they're "lisenced" open that we can make edits and submit new/fixed entries?

The answer is literally in the opening post:

Whether modders want to pass on the torch or take it up, there is a new home for maps for all. Projects in this section are unprotected and free to edit. If you've made sufficient, distinct changes to an open source map, feel free to upload your version.

There's no point of having open source maps = unprotected maps. There are tons of unprotected maps which authors don't allow editing of.

 

[Kyrbi0]

This is a fascinating new addition to the Hive, & I think I largely approve of it. I'm not sure how much I would personally benefit/submit to it, but still.

I do think we should be hearing from the Guys In Charge about some of the questions you guys are raising, though (as opposed to guessing).

 

[Nudl9]

So is this open source in that the maps can be opened or that they're "lisenced" open that we can make edits and submit new/fixed entries?

The answer is literally in the opening post:"

All my melee maps show up under open source and when i didn't tag them.
The original thread text says open source and free to edit.
It should be more clear cut and dry imo, separate the two.

There are some melee maps that i've invested a large amount of time into that i wouldn't want edits of because it undermines my work. But i wouldn't mind sharing work that i don't care about.

If we have this option it should be tagged by the creator, not by default.
A cutoff could be implemented where all maps that aren't updated after 5 years are open.
Sort of how ips become public property after 50 years.

 

[Himperion]

A cutoff could be implemented where all maps that aren't updated after 5 years are open.
Sort of how ips become public property after 50 years.

I could put it on 2 or 3 years of inactivity and being imposible to locate even with mediums or smoke signals, the inmediate future looks like we're going to live a second age of broken patches,so 24 months of a broken map in the archive is reasonable.

 

[BexoDust]

I think it's a cool addition, I've added my already open source version of Battle Tanks to this category.

I've made it open source because I knew I wouldn't have time and motivation to work on the map anymore. My hope was that someone make something useful out of it. Several people contacted me over the years, because they used the map and wanted to do something with it. One of them started releasing regular updates to his own version of the map ... he is now the offical mapper of BT.

Without the move to open source (at least that one version), the community and map would now be long dead. But right now we have a community that is still active after about 15 years, even with another iteration of a league. So I have no doubt that this was absolutely the right choice to make.

 

[IcemanBo]

Join us now and share the software

 

[Shar Dundred]

All my melee maps show up under open source and when i didn't tag them.

That sounds like a bug, we're going to look into that.

 

[Ralle]

Ah. Instructions might have been different from the intention of the tag then. I feel like this is on me.

I did order the staff to tag any open source map, but that definition is quite vague. Open source technically means that the source is accessible (i.e. can be opened in WE). But the tag is clearly targeted more at maps that are free to edit, etc. Open source in its purest sense doesn’t encompass that entitlement.

We really need a real licensing system. I am sorry if we messed up in some of the tags. I should have been more direct in what it means.

@Nudl9 can you edit your maps to not contain this tag?

 

[Nudl9]

I seem to have figured it out.
The search system uses tags additively, so if i check the tags open source + melee, all melee maps and open source maps show up as well.
The system seems to work out as intended then.
I didn't check how the search system worked the first time.

 

[deepstrasz]

All my melee maps show up under open source and when i didn't tag them.

It's a site error. Many maps when uploaded come with that tag on for some reason.

If we have this option it should be tagged by the creator, not by default.

Of course this is based on author decision. The opening post basically implies that. As I mentioned above, it's a site coding issue, I think.

I could put it on 2 or 3 years of inactivity and being imposible to locate even with mediums or smoke signals, the inmediate future looks like we're going to live a second age of broken patches,so 24 months of a broken map in the archive is reasonable.

You want something like losing intellectual property 70 years after death?
The problem with that is that no one can become an official editor of such maps because then everyone will have the right to edit. So, as with the 70 years stuff, no one could then say, but it's my map now.

 

[Himperion]

You want something like losing intellectual property 70 years after death?
The problem with that is that no one can become an official editor of such maps because then everyone will have the right to edit. So, as with the 70 years stuff, no one could then say, but it's my map now.

I was answering to a poster saying to open the maps after a 5 years delay. I'm talking about it in a "manteniance clause" way for those maps that get bugged when a new patch appears, and the Owner puffed out of existence and can't do the repairs. In that case, open, repair, upload and wait.

If the owner still don't give any lifesign after a while, send it to full blow open source and call it day.