Author Topic: Switch?  (Read 772 times)

JanetC

  • Mittens Serf
  • Posts: 117
Switch?
« on: 30 Sep 2018, 22:35 »
People keep asking us to port Unavowed to Switch. I currently have a day job so I can't do this myself. Does anyone know of any good porting guys who will port AGS with respect for its open source status so others can use the port and we can keep it updated?

eri0o

  • Posts: 415
    • eri0o worked on a game that was nominated for an AGS Award!
Re: Switch?
« Reply #1 on: 20 Nov 2018, 22:36 »
Nintendo Switch Porters I found looking around... Most of them works with percentage of the game revenues on the Switch. I know the amount asked by some, PM for details.

__

Ratalaika Games

@ratalaikagames | ratalaikagames.com | github.com/ratalaika

They work on many indie titles in different engines. Github participation is little, doesn't seem very open source friendly but I think it's negotiable. Appears to be fast.

__

Ethan Lee

@flibitijibibo | flibitijibibo.com | github.com/flibitijibibo

Very opensource friendly, maintains it's own engines. Huge list of ports.

__

Ryan C. Gordon

@icculus | icculus.org | github.com/rcgordon


Works on a huge amount of projects including SDL2 to Switch, ported many free games but I couldn't find anyone who he has worked with - that I know. Very open source friendly.

__

Hidden Trap

@Hidden_Trap | hiddentrap.com

Small publisher. Works by percentage of revenues, does console ports including Nintendo Switch - for some reason has none on the website but I've been told they do make Nintendo Switch ports by a developer. Totally not open source friendly.

__

Panic Button Game

@PanicButtonGame | panicbuttongames.com

Huge studio that ports games to Nintendo Switch. I have no idea how much it asks for, and if there are pre-front costs. Totally not open source friendly.

__

Nicalis

@nicalis | nicalis.com

Big publisher, but also does Nintendo Switch Ports. No idea on costs. Totally not open source friendly.
« Last Edit: 20 Nov 2018, 22:50 by eri0o »

JanetC

  • Mittens Serf
  • Posts: 117
Re: Switch?
« Reply #2 on: 13 Dec 2018, 20:14 »
I'm thinking that with a combo of Nick Sonneveld's implementation of AGS to SDL and Ryan C. Gordon's port of SDL to Switch, this would be highly feasible. Dave is trying to get in contact with Nintendo to see if they will let us buy a devkit.

ratalaika

  • Posts: 2
Re: Switch?
« Reply #3 on: 19 Dec 2018, 19:59 »
I'm thinking that with a combo of Nick Sonneveld's implementation of AGS to SDL and Ryan C. Gordon's port of SDL to Switch, this would be highly feasible. Dave is trying to get in contact with Nintendo to see if they will let us buy a devkit.
Sent you a private message regarding this >.<!

JanetC

  • Mittens Serf
  • Posts: 117
Re: Switch?
« Reply #4 on: 21 Dec 2018, 18:57 »
I'm really thinking seriously of doing this right now. Does anyone know if having a private fork of AGS would be OK, given the license? Nintendo code can't be put into open source projects or revealed on pain of pain, so we wouldn't be able to share it.

morganw

  • Posts: 374
Re: Switch?
« Reply #5 on: 21 Dec 2018, 21:54 »
Given that:
Quote from: License.txt
"Copyright Holder" means the copyright holders listed in the file Copyright.txt
and
Quote from: Copyright.txt
Copyright (c) 1999-2011 Chris Jones and 2011-2018 various contributors
...it doesn't seem entirely clear who be defined as 'Copyright Holder' in Artistic License 2.0. Just reading it from a layman's perspective I think you would be okay to distribute compiled versions based on the text in Distribution of Compiled Forms of the Standard Version or Modified Versions without the Source as long as you documented the differences (from an external perspective, so keep your code private) and renamed all references of AGS to something else (so you are complying with option b in section 4):
Quote
4(b) ensure that installation of your Modified Version does not prevent the user installing or running the Standard Version. In addition, the Modified Version must bear a name that is different from the name of the Standard Version.
That said, I imagine the preferable solution of the original project would probably be to take changes to make the engine backend agnostic, and just declare an interface that anyone could use to add additional platform support. 'Extending' AGS this way would likely fall under Items That are Not Considered Part of a Modified Version and so you wouldn't have to comply with any of the restrictions. How feasible this approach is would be questionable; I imagine it would be significantly more work, but potentially each side of the interface could be funded separately if there was someone else with a commercial interest.

Note: the above is just my personal opinion

ratalaika

  • Posts: 2
Re: Switch?
« Reply #6 on: 22 Dec 2018, 16:50 »
Yeah, we're also preparing things to do this, most probably starting ~Jan 2019, we're finishing getting some games licensed now to work with...
Also as @JanetC says anything console related would need to be either a private fork, or some sort of "open source" fork that only people with licenses have access to... The 2nd option is what Monogame does as far as I know.