This post isn’t about if a game is better, or higher quality through capitalism or open source it’s

It’s about which is more or less exploitative. When I briefly talked about Suptertux kart having modern ish feel, for an open source game that was impressive, while still retaining the benefits of being open source.

In my other post I actually did talk about open source games being decentralized (in this same community) and how it can actually make games better than capitalism games made under capitalism. https://lemmygrad.ml/post/5761876

This is because, on that post I mentioned how if one party makes a web comic series or similar, under a creative commons licensed, then other unrelated parties could then freely make a fan game and go all in on making the game and not have to focus as much on making new characters and plot.

Basing a game off of a media, gives your game that extra feeling that man open source games are missing compared to games like Naruto: Ultimate Ninja Storm, or Dragonball Xenoverse.

Personally, even though a library isn’t necessarily a means of production, I don’t think it would be not be welcomed under a communism environment. I feel the concept of a library and how they work overall is similar to what communist might be looking for in general from such a service.

Like I said depending on the environment, you can make small changes to how libraries work to fit it under communism. It doesn’t *have to be like that just because it is in certain locations with their own ways of doing things.

Given that the community has to do with the capitalism exploration of video games and its decline, I’m not necesarilly looking at the art aspect but that one is less exploitable and less degrading then another to the person playing the game.

Yes, there is more to free gaming that is open source.

if you can combine an open source game with a creative Commons license series, that’s the best case scenario.

For instance there is the creative commons licensed pepper&carrot which is just a web comic, and has spawn a bunch of small, yet open source games asked on it. (the creative commons allows for this without permision)

This combination (of open source and creative commons) can easily get you that… mainstream capitalism feel like you would on a PlayStation or Xbox in an open source environment. (mainly 3rd party licensing games.)

I understand communism to be a classless society, to have Collective (or common) ownership of the means of productions. Along with the absence of money eventually. Or at least it aims to for most of these things.

Libraries meet most of this, if not all of it.

Libraries could easily be adapted to fit Communism, most of the ground work is already set up, you might have to make some changes for it to work under communism as defined.

While they might not be communism they do share a lot of similar principles to communism. While their might not be a lot of specific production, collective ownership is also an important key to communism, which libraries share.

One person can borrow a copy of a book and then months later another person could get that same copy in their own household.

Yes. It is a problem. I agree with what you were going with there. If a game is released unfinished it’s not good compared to older video games.

Then there are games like Splatoon that would also use drip feed updates, with most of them being free such new maps for free introduced in updates. Although Splatoon has it’s other problems related to capitalism.

But by having copyrights, it makes a game less communist because you don’t know if your favorite dev might not start taking things down, or enforce their copyright.

And actually there is a way to do this, while not having restrictive copyrighted control, if you explicitly have an opensource license that prevents this applied to your project form the get go, you can almost always refer to that and usually win in court if you can prove yours was developed first and that the license was in place since day way.

Such licenses might allow people to mod said game, but then require them not to change the license terms. This in theory would protect your game even from patents made in the future by other devs because applying a newer patent would either directly or indirectly change the original license terms.

But if the patent was already in place before hand, then the license wouldn’t be able to protect the project for long.

What I meant by anywhere, I meant that you couldn’t take the game without permission if it’s still protected by copyright. If they allow anyone to just take and share it on their own app stores without asking that is neat.

I always thought of socialism as basically the gateway for Communism. A transitionary period. Even if a long transition.

It’s basically free, while still under copyright protection? This might be a complicated one because while such a game might be free to access it’s not free to do entirely whatever you want to it, such as modding it. While freely available you couldn’t just get this game from anywhere in most countires. (legally)

But idk, is this good enough for communists to enjoy, just as long that you can freely access it in it’s pure form? But since it’s still copyrighted your places of getting it legally are limited.

Drip feeding content is a thing alot of modern day games do, including indie tittles but generally that content gets added for no cost but not always.

Other times it gets added as dlc you have to pay for.

True, but my point was if a persons opensource library was limited to what was in a Linux repository, they were missing out on other great open source games. Just about everything thing in Linux repositories you would think would be open source, but there are some such as Ubuntu that have some repositories for nonopensouce content such as the Discord app.