Technology

59284 readers

4531 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

329

Wizards of the Coast denies, then confirms, that Magic: The Gathering promo art features AI elements | When will companies learn? (www.techspot.com)

submitted 10 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

98 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Wizards of the Coast denies, then confirms, that Magic: The Gathering promo art features AI elements | When will companies learn?::undefined

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Whom@midwest.social 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Well, the point is that the advantages of centralized development don't have to be given up, because development can still be centralized. The advantages of FOSS development I'm building this point upon aren't like increased efficiency or something like that. It's an ethical thing, allowing the game to be the public good it ought to be (and functionally kind of is, looking at proxies and homebrew). If those original designers ruin the game in a way that upsets enough people, a new designer or group could fork it and become the new standard. This isn't really possible with a proprietary game without stepping incredibly carefully around the law. Homebrew and modified cards can exist, but if there was a modified version of Magic threatening to replace the original game, Wizards would be sending nukes your way real quick.

But I get that you seem to be coming at this from a different position, if you don't consider games being made as part of the commons as an inherently good thing then we have a philosophical disagreement that goes beyond the scope of this discussion. I believe that making stuff that belongs to everyone IS the value of free and open source development, not a means to an end.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

if you don't consider games being made as part of the commons as an inherently good thing then we have a philosophical disagreement that goes beyond the scope of this discussion.

I defined a type of game being made as part of the commons as being an inherently good thing.

You are still talking past my assertion that a deck building card game is defined by the card pool, which is usually designed by a singular group of people.

[–] Whom@midwest.social 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You are still talking past my assertion that a deck building card game is defined by the card pool, which is usually designed by a singular group of people.

I'm not talking past it, because as I've said over and over, I agree. That singular group of people can just release that card pool under a Creative Commons license and any associated software under a FOSS license and they have made a FOSS card game. What is the problem?

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 0 points 10 months ago

They can, but it doesn't provide any benefit to the game based on how card games like M:tG work.