[MOD] DEFCON: The WarGames mod

[Pox]

So, basically, if I wanted these changes, I'm better off making my own nuclear war simulation program.

Basically, yes. Defcon is pretty solidly-set in its functionality, and in my opinion it's already a great game and needs no changes. It's certainly not an accurate simulation, but in an accurate simulation there's no way AA defenses could reliably shoot down anywhere near the proportion defcon's do.

[Feud]

So, basically, if I wanted these changes, I'm better off making my own nuclear war simulation program.

Yes, but aside from being a cool looking screen saver an actual nuclear warfare simulator would be fairly boring unless it had the feature of projecting the long term consequences of the war (social upheaval, etc.).

[nukewarfare2]

What about the possibility of making the paths of each missile remain until the warhead hits, as in the movie?

-Dave

[zach]

What do you mean 'remain until the warhead hits'?
In the game, the warhead paths stay until impact or being shot down, as it is - so I'm assuming you mean something different from this, but what?

[ewanm]

Technically it is possible to patch the binary to add features, in practice, you wouldn't want to (unless you absolutely adore machine code).

[Pox]

Technically it is possible to patch the binary to add features, in practice, you wouldn't want to (unless you absolutely adore machine code).

There's also that whole EULA thing.

[ewanm]

Technically it is possible to patch the binary to add features, in practice, you wouldn't want to (unless you absolutely adore machine code).

There's also that whole EULA thing.

Yeah, I was going to have to check it, anyone know the private use terms?

[ewanm]

(c) Alter, decompile, modify reverse engineer or disassemble the Software, create derivative works based upon the Software, or make any attempt to bypass, unlock or disable any protective or initialization system on the Software;

Not at all then.

[Pox]

(c) Alter, decompile, modify reverse engineer or disassemble the Software, create derivative works based upon the Software, or make any attempt to bypass, unlock or disable any protective or initialization system on the Software;

Not at all then.

Yup, that's a stock-standard must-have in any commercial software license, really.

[ewanm]

I know... GPL FTW

[Pox]

I know... GPL FTW

Certainly, except for games of the quality coming out of IV. Wouldn't exist without the money.

[ewanm]

I can point out that it is possible to charge for GPLed software, but not easily in the game market.

I do like what introversion have produced, and am happy to pay for it I also like what they did with uplink devcd.

[Pox]

I can point out that it is possible to charge for GPLed software, but not easily in the game market.

I do like what introversion have produced, and am happy to pay for it I also like what they did with uplink devcd.

Problem with charging for GPL software is that you have to let the buyer know that the source code is available for free.. so yeah.

[ewanm]

No, you have to give source code when you sell it. (the problem is it's well within that consumers rights to copy the source code and give it to someone else)

[nukewarfare2]

What I meant about the paths of the warheads remaining until the warheads hit is this: in the movie, the entire path of each missile, which is represented by a dashed line, is present on the Big Board until impact. In the game, the missile paths are present, but part of the path fades sometime after the missile is launched. In the movie, the entire path of the missile is shown, from the origin of launch until just after impact, and it does not fade at all when the bird is flying.


-Dave