Warzone 2100 is fantastic. I never played it much, but in the early 2010s I had a weak system and got tired of playing red alert 2 and cnc generals so much, so I grabbed it and was satisfied with how great it is. Highly recommend it
Sick vid. I grew up playing Nexuiz and Pioneer. Pioneer is better than pretty much any currently available AAA space game, if you ask me. It is still seeing a lot of development work, interactive cockpits should be coming soon! A couple other recs, Urban Terror, great free FPS originally built off Quake III, but goes for a 'realistic' CS sort of feel not sci-fi. Still got a super active community. Also gotta rec Renegade X, not played this as much but it's super well regarded, remake of C&C Renegade (the one where you play as boots on the ground first person). Oh yeah and Battle for Wesnoth, TBS to rule all freeware TBS
hello, i appreciated the video. i do however just want to point out that even though you delved into some of the differences between "free software" and "open source software", this video is repeating a common misunderstanding or misrepresentation or misuse of the term "free" and "free software", which does not refer to price, it refers to liberty. it means that once a user receives a copy of a program, they are guaranteed the 4 essential freedoms as per the Free Software Foundation in being able to use and share the program. stallman doesn't reject capitalism, and he is in favor of business, and the GPL specifically allows you to sell copies of free software. you are not forbidden to sell free software, and stallman even encourages it if you can. according to him, all the more power to you. he only cares about whether or not you have freedom after you have obtained a copy of the software, for a fee or at no cost. with this in mind, "commercial" is not synonymous with "proprietary", nor is it mutually exclusive to "free software". there can be commercial free software. "open source" is a co-optation campaign that hit the Free Software movement in the early 90s. it describes almost the exact same range of software as Free Software, but it doesn't raise the issue of freedom, because "open source" people don't care about freedom, and some of them disagree with the principles of freedom that the FSF advocates for. they only believe that open source is a good development model that offers practical benefits to the program's development, but they don't object on principle to proprietary software, they only argue that if they made the code open source, it would be easier to fix bugs or add cool features to it, but they would otherwise have no issue with using proprietary software. "open source" cares solely about practical benefits, whereas "free software" is a political movement that concerns itself solely with the freedom of users of software. if you care about freedom, you really ought to say "free software" instead of "open source". generally speaking in most cases, saying "free and open source" is redundant, because every piece of free software that i can think of would also qualify as open source software, and the term only spreads confusion about the meaning of the word "free" in this case, and makes people think it's referring to a matter of price another misrepresentation is about the nature of linux. linux is just a kernel, as you said, but Linus Torvalds did not "take feedback and apply it into developing the kernel further, with applications, libraries, compilers, and a shell to develop it more into the OS that we know it as today". that implies that Torvalds created his own applications and programs for Linux to turn it into a full OS, which he didn't. he just made the kernel. it's no coincidence that Torvalds' kernel was able to be swiftly integrated into a complete Free operating system by the time of its release. it's not like once Torvalds made his kernel in 1991, that a bunch of Free software just conveniently and magically fell out of the sky that let him integrate his kernel into an operating system. quite the opposite in fact. the GNU project led by Richard Stallman in 1984 had been hard at work for 7 years with many contributors creating the hundreds of software programs that entail creating a full Free replacement for unix. they were only missing a kernel due to difficulties in developing their own kernel due to its ambitious microkernel design, so after Linux was created, the GNU project was able to adopt it as the kernel to the GNU system, however Linux was originally proprietary in 1991, so the GNU project couldn't use it right away, until Torvalds freed the code in 1992, after which it was able to be used, in what the FSF refers to as the GNU/Linux system
A great piece of explanation! I'm happy to know that there are more and more people realize and promote the idea of Freedom Software which is really not simply free as in gratis. But free as in freedom. When I talk to people, I do my best using the proper term: GNU/Linux. Sometimes they asked back and listen to my explanation. Sometimes not 🙂 Freedom comes with a price and it is not free ;-)
except that it's been stagnant for years and they refuse to do anything about it except being a clone of total annihilation. this makes it the fourth Total Annihiliation remake on the Spring Engine. at least zero-k became its own thing. plus having mods dictating how you should talk or which rule you should enforce in your own lobby isn't great. FAF is still the better game of the bunch.
Nothing new in this video. Seems linux is pushing steam though it upgrades evertime I start linux, tux games are boring, strategy games are bad, first person shooters are just the same. Give use real games, diablo like games and stuff like that OFFline, mmo is overrated. This was so much fluff added linux is history and stuff but it can't play games without gb's of extra software slowing it to a crawl even on modern systems, it's rediculous. Quit making 90's clone games should be the theme like it's from 1992 and I couldn't stand even windows games then. Linux has to get it's sh*t together it's downright boring when you include the games in the repositories with games with sourcecode that no one packages for so the newbs will not be able to use them and it's hit or miss if you're not terminal savy. It's rediculous. The gui's are also still 16 color, someone needs to get it so we have the terminals "forget emulating the old stuff just make the terminal like 32 bit or something then the gui can have millions of colors for themes. It's 2024 and it's like running win 98 for the gui which is not cutting edge in any way.
Recently i became a sucker for free and open source games, it's just great
All hail the open source paradigm! It's little pockets of awesome like this that give me faith in a troubled world
Warzone 2100 is fantastic. I never played it much, but in the early 2010s I had a weak system and got tired of playing red alert 2 and cnc generals so much, so I grabbed it and was satisfied with how great it is. Highly recommend it
Great video! Very informative, will try out these games, earned a sub.
Sick vid. I grew up playing Nexuiz and Pioneer. Pioneer is better than pretty much any currently available AAA space game, if you ask me. It is still seeing a lot of development work, interactive cockpits should be coming soon! A couple other recs, Urban Terror, great free FPS originally built off Quake III, but goes for a 'realistic' CS sort of feel not sci-fi. Still got a super active community. Also gotta rec Renegade X, not played this as much but it's super well regarded, remake of C&C Renegade (the one where you play as boots on the ground first person).
Oh yeah and Battle for Wesnoth, TBS to rule all freeware TBS
Renegade is very underrated. Not a lot of people know about it unless they're a C&C fan.
I didn't notice you had already done a whole vid on Urban Terror! You got a great channel here bud
hello, i appreciated the video. i do however just want to point out that even though you delved into some of the differences between "free software" and "open source software", this video is repeating a common misunderstanding or misrepresentation or misuse of the term "free" and "free software", which does not refer to price, it refers to liberty. it means that once a user receives a copy of a program, they are guaranteed the 4 essential freedoms as per the Free Software Foundation in being able to use and share the program. stallman doesn't reject capitalism, and he is in favor of business, and the GPL specifically allows you to sell copies of free software. you are not forbidden to sell free software, and stallman even encourages it if you can. according to him, all the more power to you. he only cares about whether or not you have freedom after you have obtained a copy of the software, for a fee or at no cost. with this in mind, "commercial" is not synonymous with "proprietary", nor is it mutually exclusive to "free software". there can be commercial free software. "open source" is a co-optation campaign that hit the Free Software movement in the early 90s. it describes almost the exact same range of software as Free Software, but it doesn't raise the issue of freedom, because "open source" people don't care about freedom, and some of them disagree with the principles of freedom that the FSF advocates for. they only believe that open source is a good development model that offers practical benefits to the program's development, but they don't object on principle to proprietary software, they only argue that if they made the code open source, it would be easier to fix bugs or add cool features to it, but they would otherwise have no issue with using proprietary software. "open source" cares solely about practical benefits, whereas "free software" is a political movement that concerns itself solely with the freedom of users of software. if you care about freedom, you really ought to say "free software" instead of "open source". generally speaking in most cases, saying "free and open source" is redundant, because every piece of free software that i can think of would also qualify as open source software, and the term only spreads confusion about the meaning of the word "free" in this case, and makes people think it's referring to a matter of price
another misrepresentation is about the nature of linux. linux is just a kernel, as you said, but Linus Torvalds did not "take feedback and apply it into developing the kernel further, with applications, libraries, compilers, and a shell to develop it more into the OS that we know it as today". that implies that Torvalds created his own applications and programs for Linux to turn it into a full OS, which he didn't. he just made the kernel. it's no coincidence that Torvalds' kernel was able to be swiftly integrated into a complete Free operating system by the time of its release. it's not like once Torvalds made his kernel in 1991, that a bunch of Free software just conveniently and magically fell out of the sky that let him integrate his kernel into an operating system. quite the opposite in fact. the GNU project led by Richard Stallman in 1984 had been hard at work for 7 years with many contributors creating the hundreds of software programs that entail creating a full Free replacement for unix. they were only missing a kernel due to difficulties in developing their own kernel due to its ambitious microkernel design, so after Linux was created, the GNU project was able to adopt it as the kernel to the GNU system, however Linux was originally proprietary in 1991, so the GNU project couldn't use it right away, until Torvalds freed the code in 1992, after which it was able to be used, in what the FSF refers to as the GNU/Linux system
A great piece of explanation!
I'm happy to know that there are more and more people realize and promote the idea of Freedom Software which is really not simply free as in gratis. But free as in freedom.
When I talk to people, I do my best using the proper term: GNU/Linux. Sometimes they asked back and listen to my explanation. Sometimes not 🙂
Freedom comes with a price and it is not free ;-)
Lol that intro, can't be real 😂
I just like these simple open source games that just make my mood😊
THE MOMENT i saw that cablr i knew exactly what was up.
What's the difference between open source video games and public domain video games?
Iirc, open source projects still work under a license, whereas public domain doesn't, since there's no restrictions at all.
best video on this topic .... i would like to another game called - PIONEERS (action rpg exploration with pixalated graphics )
Awesome intro
I recently discovered BAR and it's just amazing
except that it's been stagnant for years and they refuse to do anything about it except being a clone of total annihilation. this makes it the fourth Total Annihiliation remake on the Spring Engine. at least zero-k became its own thing. plus having mods dictating how you should talk or which rule you should enforce in your own lobby isn't great. FAF is still the better game of the bunch.
@@midorifox stagnant in what regard? their github seems to be pretty active from what I can see.
@@midorifox stagnant in what regard? their discord seems to be very active from what I can tell.
@@chefnerd yeah because discord is a great metrics to measure if a game is going strong or not.
@@midorifox apologies - I effed that up. i meant "github" not discord :)
what about openage
Haven't heard of that one. But I provided links to a large number of games I didn't mention in the description. Will look into that one though.
it is not on linux.
You sound a lot like Modern Vintage Gamer. 😂
Freespace 2 source coffee project doesn't use a FOSS license
oolite is meh, i prefer pionner
I use arch btw
Nothing new in this video. Seems linux is pushing steam though it upgrades evertime I start linux, tux games are boring, strategy games are bad, first person shooters are just the same. Give use real games, diablo like games and stuff like that OFFline, mmo is overrated. This was so much fluff added linux is history and stuff but it can't play games without gb's of extra software slowing it to a crawl even on modern systems, it's rediculous. Quit making 90's clone games should be the theme like it's from 1992 and I couldn't stand even windows games then. Linux has to get it's sh*t together it's downright boring when you include the games in the repositories with games with sourcecode that no one packages for so the newbs will not be able to use them and it's hit or miss if you're not terminal savy. It's rediculous. The gui's are also still 16 color, someone needs to get it so we have the terminals "forget emulating the old stuff just make the terminal like 32 bit or something then the gui can have millions of colors for themes.
It's 2024 and it's like running win 98 for the gui which is not cutting edge in any way.
Sorry, I like Linux but I don't like Bullshit. Linux Distros are nowhere near enough to be good for gaming.
So how are us Linux gamers playing all games we want then? You clearly have no idea.
@@AroPix Because the games you want to play are low budget trash trash no one cares about.
@@mintmag8748 This shows that you have no idea. Im playing League, Overwatch, Apex, CSGO and and and.
@@AroPix all steam games.
@@mintmag8748 Yes, thats why you have Proton. Do you live in the past? Stop spreading nonsense.