Amazon makes their game engine open source

Sorry man, but when it comes to Amazon there literally is no such thing as “positive”. The company is absolute poison, far too powerful, incredibly dangerous and was even branded “Obscene” recently.

The rather public “Obscene” tag they earned themselves recently could not have come soon enough, and it came about due to the ultimate demonstration of absolute contempt. Governments worldwide should put a blanket ban on allowing Amazon to operate in their respective countires. Doing so would restore the world economy pretty much overnight.

Click here to check-out Amazon Landfill

Your wish is my command, here you go:
Click here to learn about the dangerous monster that is Amazon!

Bear in mind that everything listed at that link is verified and true. They cannot stop him making you aware of this stuff, and that’s because it’s true. And that’s nothing, there’s much more besides that. For example it has become almost impossible these days to find a website or YouTube review of a product you might be considering buying, without it turning out to be someone with an Amazon affiliate link trying to sell you the stuff.

Meanwhile of course, he gets even richer through the plandemic, and the recent G7 they tell us was designed to start taxing the tech giants, unsurpprisingly leaves a loophole for Amazon!

Being open source means that it can be audited, and there will be people out there who can see right through Amazon who will be only too happy to audit it. This takes time though, so at the very least people should give it a very wide berth until it has been audited and completely De-Amzonized.

I’ve not visited the link since I’m not into mass-surveilance by Amazon, but I’m guessing that the reason they open sourced it is to infest open source with a semi-local/semi-cloud mentality that completely goes against the whole point of open source.

Regardless of the reason, I’ll stick to open source projects that are open source for the right reasons. Amazon didn’t pay a fortune for that thing in order to give it to the open source community without an agenda behind it. So, don’t forget to visit that link (and hopefully close any Amazon account you may have after doing so).

If there are any kids on here wondering what the Amazon Monster looks like, I suppose they could search for an image of Jeff Bezos, but I wouldn’t recommend it before bedtime or it could bring on nightmares, maybe even permanent mental scarring!

Everything I need to say about Amazon has been said in this post, so I’ll comment no further :innocent:

I get it, Amazon is evil, I don’t need any further info about THAT, I am in a good mood, so why spoil it.
What I am saying is how would this have any effect on an open-source product? The Apache license is pretty solid, so how can they damage anyone taking the product and doing something with it.
I don’t see the attack vector. If the engine is FOSS, its out in the open, they no longer have any real power over the users.
IMHO you are arguing that there is a possible maleficent connection with the actual product, but I don’t see one.
If I would take the engine and make a little FPS shooter with it, I can be totally independent from all possible connections with them - there is nothing they can do to me or my product.
So what is it besides guilty by association?

1 Like

By doing what Epic are doing with MetaHuman Creator.

All that semi-local semi-cloud BS that takes away your control of your “open source” product. Surely open source software needs to be installed locally for you to know what it is and what it’s doing, and to ensure that a third party cannot break it, or take it away from you. It’s basically SAS (software as a service), and that’s something else the guy at the link has warned people about time and time again, but most don’t listen.

I’m not saying that’s the case here, and I have no intention of finding out, but since it’s Amazon and all they are interested in is your data and your cash, I’m guessing that it is.

That makes sense and is a possible attack vector, but since it’s optional, I don’t really see a danger for people who are able to think clearly for themself.
Amazon sure had a lot of bad luck and mountains of incompetence when it comes to developing games, they spent (hundreds?) of millions for Stadia and on their own in house dev-teams to get a foot in the games market.
Thank god it blew in their face, they archived nothing at all. :laughing:
Did they even released ONE game, that anybody played or remembered?
Seems like they try a different tactic now, that seems to be more aligned with reality.
I think some (smaller) dev teams can actually profit from it, so I don’t see it as sinister as you do.
Time will tell.

Technically, if you are savvy with code, you can build such a product from source with any telemetry and cloud stuff either removed or disabled, you can even offer a build which is what a license like the Apache2 will allow. However, this does not stop a company like Amazon and Adobe from including it in official builds, which is what most people will use because it is guaranteed to have reliable updates and work.

As I mentioned before, even if there is no telemetry or required connections to the cloud, I do believe the license allows for things like the Gems to be closed-source (so I would not be surprised if incredibly useful and powerful features get locked behind a paywall, because developing such tech. does not come cheao),

Hey now, could be worse - could be oracle.

Jeff Bezos just stepped down from his position of CEO, so its likely the engine going open source is part of their reshuffling and priority changes.

Lots of conspiracy theories in here… Again, I guess it bears repeating, the engine is not owned by Amazon anymore. Amazon contributes, as do other companies, and individuals are invited to contribute as well. Of course Amazon’s contribution is massive at first since they have been developing the engine internally for years now and are basically handing the keys, but there is no need for an Amazon account or any obligation to Amazon to download, build and ship a game with the engine.

5 Likes

I will take this serious when they have a working Linux binary, I am sure they are planning it but it would be rather funny if Linux foundation supports a Windows only engine.

Stadia is Google not Amazon. Amazon is still working on their Luna service. However Amazon did spend quite a bit on studios, lumberyard etc and don’t really have nothing to show for it other than two cancelled games. Games can be great for profit, if executed properly. At the same time they can be incredibly expensive to develop, take multiple years before you even see a cent and are incredibly risky as gamers could completely ignore your game altogether. It’s Avery hard business to get into which is why EA, Activision and Ubisoft keep churning out stuff they know will make then money.

So Amazon probably wanted out of the games business and instead of just cutting their losses they at least decided to opensource the engine which is really cool of them. It’s not wholly altruistic though. They can spread the cost of development across different partners, they have the open source community to help as well potentially accelerating development and they can potentially sell cloud services or access to their Luna service and make revenue there. It’s all win. However they don’t currently have the same scope of development as Epic with UE, and don’t have the huge user base like Unity. However they can tackle the likes of Godot and other OSS engine quite easily.

Out of curiosity

For games like battle fields, world of Warcraft, call of duty

Who is providing the online game sever infrastructure ?

Do those companies have their own or do they rent space from providers like Google amazing Microsoft ?

Releasing as FOSS is a way to actually kill competitors on commercial game engines side, where every single contribution actually will make that worse, and best of all, for free from Amazon point of view.

The only positive is cross platform support out of the box.

I guess that when it comes to deploy such game, you’ll be “automagically” tied to AWS, so for them it’s all benefit, not even talking about “dark sides” like data collection, through massive privacy rights violations and dominant position abuse.

I don’t think so, really.
Godot has the advantage that is is very lightweight, Unity is multiplatform, established and proven. Both are ideal for smaller games (non AAA games), with stylized graphics or which are running on phones etc. For these markets Lumberyard is not really useful. The engine is 100+ GB big and it makes no sense at all to develop a stylized game with smaller scope with it. Both engines are much more useful when it comes to that. Lumberyard has not much to show for. While there are some games that have used it, there is really no game that acts as a great showcase that would entice developers to want to use it in favour of others. There is Star Citizen though, but you could make the argument that their work on the engine made it their own thing, nobody can really compete.
In the AA or AAA market there are other options available, which while not being FOSS have other advantages.
The only real advantage I can see are smaller to mid size teams that want to have access to an FOSS engine in order to branch it off and make it their own, and with that can tackle AAA visuals - a market segment in which neither Godot nor Unity can really shine.

What stops an developer to take the engine and develop it further, implement everything that is openly available while not releasing anything themself and make Amazon look stupid?
Also I don’t think the engine can actually compete with commercial engines, like UE5 or CE when it comes to pushing the limit, especially since they are not super expensive to license.
Lumberyard sits somewhere in the middle. Way to heavy and bulky to make smaller games, not good enough to compete with the other big guys.
I can see a lot of Chinese/Korean devs taking advantage of it, without giving Amazon something of value back.
It’s ideal to churn out FPS / action games with nice graphics but rather conventional game mechanics but not much else. I see it becoming the budget CryEngine, but not much more.

Like I said the engine is not going to unseat UE or Unity (hell even CryEngine proper hasn’t done that). However Godot has not been proven in the 3D space (it has no games in the space at the moment). Godot is OpenGL(until they release their Vulkan support) only, has no metal support or DX support and it doesn’t look the devs ever intend to add that. So yes this engine can handily “beat” Godot if the devs put the resources into it, because while it may not have any games released with it yet, it has the pedigree, and has powerful tools built into the system. Tools that Godot just isn’t tackling at this point and may never tackle (due to lack of resources). O3DE also has a quite a lot of corporate backing, resources/money that Godot just doesn’t have at the moment. That put the engine in a far better footing than Godot imo.

It doesn’t matter anyway. I don’t think Godot is trying to compete with the big boy engines. They built the engine to be easy to learn and pick up and that seems to be where their focus is.

3D games with Godot are out there, but all of the larger titles are still a work in progress.
Godot Engine - Indie DB

People might think it can’t do 3D as of now because there are no developers yet who hit “lightning in a bottle” and bring a mega-million dollar title (as seen with devs. using Unity and Unreal). Version 4 with Vulkan is also well on its way towards the official alpha release (as development has been switching toward fixing everything that is broken compared to the official builds). The dev. builds are already usable enough to get started in (at least they are far better than how they looked at this time last year).

That said, it is no Unreal, but it is said to be less daunting for developers who develop a game by themselves and not as part of a team. Then there’s the tiny build size and the ease of keeping multiple builds on your machine.

1 Like

Exactly :+1:

To what I read you are not automatically tight to AWS - you can use your own cloud system too.

1 Like

True, and once it has been De-Amazonised it would make no difference, because any Amazon-Infusion would be removed. The problem is, as Stephen pointed out, Amazon are in a position to abuse their dominant position and the power it gives them. Amazon have far too many people in their flock who will use the Amazon version in order to access stuff that Amazon will restrict only to Amazon customers, or people who use the Amazon version.

It’s shocking that, as of writing this, only two people bothered to visit that link detailing the sinister behaviour of Amazon. I can’t understand why anyone would support Amazon in any way, shape, or form, especially after visiting that link. Those issues listed at the link are not conspiracy theories, they’re proven facts, and they prove what an out-of-control monster Amazon is, and why you cannot trust them in any way, shape or form.

The best thing you or anyone else can do, is completely avoid anything that is even remotely related to Amazon, because whatever it is, you can guarantee it is every bit as sinister as everything else listed on that website. I can’t make people visit the link and read it all, but I recommend you do, and that you scroll down the page a little and start reading that ever-growing list he has on there.

Click here for a reality check!

What I read there about Amazon sounds to me like something that can be applied to many companies ans industries world wide actually.

Amazon is an interesting story

They tore down brick and mortar book stores who gauged customers only to later become the same

And when it comes to shopping I admit I go to Amazon but not because I love Amazon but because honestly in many aspects traditional brick n mortar stores failed to innovate.

Going to a mall here in the USA is nothing I miss - it is all the same store selection anyway - in a humorous way one can see the offering kinda like socialist capitalism where everybody has the same - often here same crappy product quality for a overpriced dollar amount.

Shopping experience being fully absent.

For cloud processing would Google or Microsoft however be that much better either ?

Amazon is not going away anyway which it now good that globally they think about a global tax now.

Amazon invested a significant amount of resources in their own game dev studio but failed

So I see it at least a nice gesture to donate the work into FOSS

Adobe bought macromedia and then killed freehand

Freehand in many aspects did what illustrator and InDesign do together.

My point is just there is no perfect thing here - sadly

1 Like