Infidel!!! Good ol' Baghdad Bob is not dead!!! He has a new gig on Abu Dhabi TV.Pugwash wrote:He commited suicide as the US entered Baghdad. I thought that was a shame, he rocked. He had chat show host written all over him.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
Infidel!!! Good ol' Baghdad Bob is not dead!!! He has a new gig on Abu Dhabi TV.Pugwash wrote:He commited suicide as the US entered Baghdad. I thought that was a shame, he rocked. He had chat show host written all over him.
Top Gun wrote:Either that, or pass the code over to someone who could take the time to finally finish it. I know there are probably legal issues, but I highly doubt that anyone on the planet would care in the slightest if someone got their hands on D3's source code. I'm sure that there's at least one person in this community who would be able to finally finish the thing up.
GehRehmee wrote:If Descent 3 is really as dead as it sounds, how much longer will it be before we see an open source release a la Descent 1 and 2? If we're able to just do our own 1.5 patch soon, maybe Kevin's just figuring it's easier to wait?
I didn't originally say it, but given the current D3 source circumstances, it seems quite true:Ferno wrote:That's a pretty serious allegation dude..Skyalmian wrote:Kevin, I was told, has a bad habit of hogging source code. If I remember correctly, it was said that he was partially responsible for bringing down Kahn by hogging code necessary for it to run on certain operating systems.
The one who told me on March 02, 2005 wrote:I knew the guy back when he was with Stargate Networks (the folks behind Kahn) and he was the same way back then.
He's also partially responsible for the downfall of Kahn.
He hoarded the 32-bit code necessary to let kahn run on 2000/XP, and wouldn't release it, so Kahn eventually died.
That's a sweet dream indeed. With the source released, I'm sure the community could do a lot with the game (bug fixes and enhancements). However, at this stage of the game (oops -- made a pun) this is very much looking like a pipe dream. Itâ??s a shame too â?? D3 could really use a shot in the arm about now.Grendel wrote:Well, one can dream..
I'd have to respectfully disagree. While the D1/2 renaissance is great, D3 will always be my personal favorite. Just take a look at the FS2 SCP and imagine if those same type of improvements could be made to D3's source code...the possibilities are almost limitless.Kyouryuu wrote:Screw Descent 3. Between Diedel's D2X and DLE-XP and Pumo's Windows XP revision of DEVIL, we have a serious D1/D2 renaissance coming. Just as much fun as Descent 3 anyway.
Duper wrote:"legit" is loose phrasiology.... but yea.. it's out there..
Well, its always sort have been assumed that d3 players on all platforms would be able to play each other multiplayer. The existance of an official win32 1.5 patch without a corresponding update for mac and linux.. well... frankly it's sort of a slap in the face. "Thanks for paying for your game, sorry you can't play with 95% of the other players." My hope that I'm reading too much into this is dwindling.darwinsGate wrote:Kevin Bentley says "Ok, I do have permission to release patches now!" in this thread - phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=144&postdays=0&po ... t&start=40
Is there some other issue that calls the patch's legitimacy into question?
dG
Kevin wasn't the one who released it; a member of the community did. As such, it isn't an official release in any sense of the word. There are some of us who feel it never should have been released at all in this way.darwinsGate wrote:Is there some other issue that calls the patch's legitimacy into question?
If it's under a moderately open license?Topher67 wrote:Hypothetically speaking, letâ??s say someone released the source code (acquired by whatever means). What do you think would happen?