Logo Refinement, Addressing Technical Issues, Inspiring Others

This is a very established pose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US-Gre...bverse.svg

I don't know if it's of any use to you now, but unaware of the deal with Nexuiz, I made an icon for you all. Apart from the stereotypical pose - as highlighted by Raonoke - I like your current icon and logo of the phoenix a lot.

http://alienTRAP.org/forum/viewtopic.php...837#p77837

That said, perhaps you can use the cybernetic eye of my icon design as a background to your current logo? I can change the colour scheme of the eye, of course. I don't know, I'm just hoping the work I've done might be put to good use...

---

Got a sudden surge of inspiration. Here are a couple of ideas, and implementations:

Wow awesome, please also provide sources so they aren't lost!
You have to license them under GPL2 for them to be of any value I guess. (which means basically another person can take the work and do anything with it, as long as they also release their work under the GPL) That's the license used for all content in the game, so.

I like the first one very much! I'm already using it for my developer icon

My icon is licensed under a non-commercial CC license.

*scary music plays in the background*

My icon is licensed under a non-commercial CC license.

*scary music plays in the background*

LOL, I mean you can't use it in a product for profit* - only in one that's distributed freely to the community.

*That includes even a game that's created by the free community and then ultimately SOLD AS PROPRIETARY software!!! Na-ah! Try convincing me, lol! I'm not money-centric - I care about quality and people! The best things in life are free, and need to remain free.

If enough people like it, I'll upload the design file(s). Just gotta clean it/them up a bit. I'm glad you guys like them.

That looks very nice indeed! Would you mind releasing it under the GPL v2?

Would you mind releasing it under the GPL v2?

Gotta read it, lol... Never dealt with it before. I'm mostly a CC artist. I'll check it out. Anyone got a link?

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html

I like this one with the gradient better. Like z said, I'd only want no gradient on a B&W version.

I like these, but there's just something about them that isn't right. Can't quite put my finger on it...

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html

Thanks. From what I can see, there's not much difference between CC and GNU GPL - other than one's used for software, and the other one isn't. You can even have a combined license.

http://creativecommons.org/choose/cc-gpl

I think you can still use CC licensed work in a GNU GPL software package, as long as the terms don't clash. Are there any known legal conflicts?

I like these, but there's just something about them that isn't right. Can't quite put my finger on it...

Please do. What doesn't feel right?

---

I'm new to this community, and I hope I don't offend anyone with my enthusiasm, but I took the liberty of trying out the icon on the latest title graphic of Xonotic - and the result is... well, see for yourself...



I think it adds something to it... Can't put my finger on it...
How about it MC SE7EN?

Depending on which of my files you used for your icons with the pheonix, these icons are automatically licensed under the GPL, since the Pheonix was.

But let's face it: It's ridiculous to claim any personal rights for images that were made specifically for Xonotic and include parts of the official logo. Either these are donated to the open-source community with the same freedoms granted that the main project grants (including commercial uses). Or they are not at all.

Yes, personal rights unfortunately suffer in these cases. While the icon itself is good, it does not fit with the rest of the logo, I believe - it is stylistically unmatching (and why is a stereotypical pose bad? <_<). Also, I hope you have SVG sources, because if you don't that is almost certainly a no-go.

Doesn't really fits with the wings, but I like the idea. How about adding some of this "glow" to the wings?

My icon is licensed under a non-commercial CC license.

*scary music plays in the background*

LOL, I mean you can't use it in a product for profit* - only in one that's distributed freely to the community.

*That includes even a game that's created by the free community and then ultimately SOLD AS PROPRIETARY software!!! Na-ah! Try convincing me, lol! I'm not money-centric - I care about quality and people! The best things in life are free, and need to remain free.

If enough people like it, I'll upload the design file(s). Just gotta clean it/them up a bit. I'm glad you guys like them.

You may want to read this.

Still, there’s a qualitative difference between letting people download your own work from your own site, and watching other people try to profit from it. But it is precisely this difference that strikes at the heart of the Free Software/Free Culture ethos. Part of choosing a Free license for your own work is accepting that people may use it in ways you disapprove of. There are no “field of use” restrictions, and there are no “commercial use” restrictions either. In fact, those are two of the fundamental tenets of the “Free” in Free Software. If “others profiting from my work” is something you seek to avoid, then Free Software is not for you. Opt for a Creative Commons “Non-Commercial” license, or a “personal use only” freeware license, or a traditional End User License Agreement. Free Software doesn’t have “end users.” That’s kind of the point.

Woh woh woh, hang on?! Why am I being chased and hunted down?!

First of all, there's absolutely no reason why I wouldn't share this icon with everyone for free. After all it's Sev's initial concept what I've worked with, and furthered your ideas.

Secondly, there's nothing forcing me to accept a GNU GPL license specifically. If I don't trust it, that's my own problem. My only obligation is to distribute the work I give under the same conditions as what you guys are working with. If I won't allow commercial uses of my work - and won't choose to make it 'free' in the ultimate sense - that's my choice to make.

Also, I hope you have SVG sources, because if you don't that is almost certainly a no-go.

Why is non-SVG a no-go?! You know Photoshop files can also contain vectors. Also, will you ever use this icon as larger than a 512 px image?! You can't have this amount of goodness with just SVG vectors. You need filters to make it look good.

...and why is a stereotypical pose bad? <_<

Your game may be associated with the US, and subconsciously considered an American game by the world population. Ideally this is something I would avoid if I was making a game as a world developer team. My addition to the title graphic changes this resemblance.

Doesn't really fits with the wings, but I like the idea. How about adding some of this "glow" to the wings?

I think that would be a little too much of glowing. I don't see how the icon doesn't 'stylistically match' the rest of the graphic. You're all just not used to it, because you've been staring at the original design for too long. They're sharing the same design elements. All I did was add a render to the central image - the phoenix - therefore making it stand out.

Lastly, I'm a professional designer by day, so I know what I'm talking about. It's fine with me if you choose not to use the icon. That's your decision to make. I did my best, and I think it's showing. But if you think you can come up with something better, then go for it. I'd love to see the outcome.

*shakes head* You guys are forcing me to adapt an arrogant attitude. Why so much of the attack, for no reason? What you're offering is not constructive criticism. Maybe this is not a place for me after all. Can't you just forget your egos, and work for the quality of the project? I guess it's one of the hardest things about working creatively on a project, and not many people manage to master it. That's the whole reason I can't find a decent creative team to join. Looks like this team fails short of patience too.

I kinda like this one, but what's with getting upset over the fact that it has to be GPL licensed? The game is GPL and everything in it needs to comply with that. It's just how it is.

I kinda like this one, but what's with getting upset over the fact that it has to be GPL licensed? The game is GPL and everything in it needs to comply with that. It's just how it is.

I have no problem with GPL. I have a problem with people forcing me to accept something I'm not that familiar with, and don't yet trust. We're working with the same terms, so there is no 'big deal' really. This is a test of egos, and it's sounding pathetic. I'm glad you like it.

Secondly, there's nothing forcing me to accept a GNU GPL license specifically. If I don't trust it, that's my own problem. My only obligation is to distribute the work I give under the same conditions as what you guys are working with. If I won't allow commercial uses of my work - and won't choose to make it 'free' in the ultimate sense - that's my choice to make.

Your choice indeed, but note this: No gpl, no inclusion. That's how it is, it's how it must be.

Why is non-SVG a no-go?! You know Photoshop files can also contain vectors.

Not that they are easily editable with inkscape, which is what basically every vector artist here uses. It's a matter of compatibility.

And, will you ever use this icon as larger than a 512 px image?!

High resolution textures for maps.

You can't have this amount of goodness with just SVG vectors. You need filters to make it look good.

SVG has filters.

Your game may be associated with the US, and subconsciously considered an American game by the world population. Ideally this is something I would avoid if I was making a game as a world developer team. My addition to the title graphic changes this resemblance.

Do you really want me to show you the many, many uses and cases of a bird in this position? Thinking it's exclusively American is narrow-minded, I think, and not immediately apparent (not that it should be apparent).

I think that would be a little too much of glowing. I don't see how the icon doesn't 'stylistically match' the rest of the graphic. You're all just not used to it, because you've been staring at the original design for too long. They're sharing the same design elements. All I did was add a render to the central image - the phoenix - therefore making it stand out.[/qupte]
They are not sharing the same design elements, the circle is completely different from the rest of the image. The texturing and colors alone set it apart.

Yes, by setting it apart you demonstrate the stylistic differences.

Lastly, I'm a professional designer by day, so I know what I'm talking about. It's fine with me if you choose not to use the icon. That's your decision to make. I did my best, and I think it's showing. But if you think you can come up with something better, then go for it. I'd love to see the outcome.

We already made our best.

*shakes head* You guys are forcing me to adapt an arrogant attitude. Why so much of the attack, for no reason?

Nobody is attacking you, we are just telling you what it takes for it to be included in the project.

What you're offering is not constructive criticism.

Yes it is, we're not saying "LOL THIS SUX", we're saying "this is bad because X, Y, and Z".

Can't you just forget your egos, and work for the quality of the project?

Where do egos come in?

Looks like this team fails short of patience too.

Doesn't seem like you are budging to compromise either.

Your choice indeed, but note this: No gpl, no inclusion. That's how it is, it's how it must be... Nobody is attacking you, we are just telling you what it takes for it to be included in the project... Where do egos come in?

Do you hear yourself? Where do egos come in?! You've just singlehandedly decided that as long as I stick by a CC license, there's no place for me in this project! Who are you to decide that on your own? This is supposed to be a team effort. Who are you to force restrictions on my person, or my decisions?!

Yes it is, we're not saying "LOL THIS SUX", we're saying "this is bad because X, Y, and Z".

Yes, let's see... It's bad because... It's not GPL... It's not SVG... It's different from how the team has worked so far. That's why it's bad?! That's constructive creative criticism?!

I'm not willing to make a compromise?! How about you're not willing to accept the fact that I think differently from you. You're not ready to embrace quality when it comes from someone new, and value it un-biased for what it's worth. You're sitting on your hill, and acting like a rooster.

I can see that this is a waste of time. I'm leaving. It's your loss. Go and undermine the team's progress for your ego's satisfaction, see if I care. You've had your chance. I've heard enough.

All of you.
...
Are
...
Silly

bokiseles, it has to be GPL simply because the whole project is GPL. Dual licensing has been discussed many, many times, and we have always come to the conclusion it just isn't worth it. Dual licensing would mean that distributing the package legally would be ridiculous, as we'd have to ship the CC parts in a SEPARATE zip file. Now go imagine we have everything else in one release zip, but then the official Xonotic logo would display a "notexture" image in the game unless the player downloaded a separate zip file, containing only the logo and a clear statement that this zip is NOT under the GPL, but instead a CC license. And yes, all the other "free" games that have CC media, GPL code are technically not doing the right thing when distributing everything as one package, the case has just never been tried out in court.

Oh not to mention, you are probably violating the GPL already. If you used parts from sev's source files, which are GPL, you MUST also provide sources for any derivative work that you distribute (which you already did, in the images you posted), and release that derivative work under the GPL.

This is really silly. What's the fight about? I mean, look at it, you are fighting over nothing, really. You don't even have a proper reason to fight. What's the point?

* Halogene shakes head.

Also, you don't need to feel offended, bokiseles, no one is chasing you or hunting you down. It's just that this license topic has been discussed time and time again and the game is GPL v2, so everything else that is released for the game must be GPL v2 too. It's just how it is, no offense intended.

This is really ridiculous.

Do we really need to bring divVerrent in here to explain licensing?

You've just singlehandedly decided that as long as I stick by a CC license, there's no place for me in this project! Who are you to decide that on your own? This is supposed to be a team effort. Who are you to force restrictions on my person, or my decisions?!

The first introduction on the main page:

Welcome to Xonotic
Xonotic is a fast paced free, open-source first person shooter licensed under the GNU General Public License.

Some quotes from the Licensing / Legal section in the Wiki

Xonotic and everything that comes with our releases is licensed under the GNU General Public Licence v2.
[...]
We want to accept as many licenses as possible, we just require that they are GPL compatible.
[...]
(note that ShareAlike and NonCommercial are NOT compatible)