This is on the front page again. Please take some time to read this wonderful function: <a href="https://github.com/CRYTEK/CRYENGINE/blob/release/Code/CryEngine/CryPhysics/livingentity.cpp#L1300" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/CRYTEK/CRYENGINE/blob/release/Code/CryEng...</a><p>EDIT: That whole function is a minefield. Just taking a quick look:<p>* 814 lines of code<p>* goto inside 3 nested for-loops<p>* macros<p>* commented out code<p>* new/delete, with no RAII<p>* thread specific variables and locks (?)
Many of the filed issues are "X not work" and not very interesting, but this one...this one is a real gem. <a href="https://github.com/CRYTEK/CRYENGINE/issues/763" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/CRYTEK/CRYENGINE/issues/763</a>
Would it be an overreaction to not want to touch this licence with a barge pole?<p>Even ignoring the “We may change this licence at any time and it applies to you” parts, there seem to be serious restriction on usage and basically have to ask them to do _anything_ beforehand.<p>Maybe it makes sense if you are already in a project that is using this Licenced? Is this intended as a general engine licence rather than viewing the source code?
I considered using cryengine recently but there was an almost total lack of learning resources: I could barely find a tutorial that was newer than 5 years, especially one that involved it’s c++ APIs.<p>I suspect that lumberyards greatest advantage over cryengine in the future will simply be usable documentation provided by amazon. Cryengine is simply not usable without better docs or else an incredible amount of time. Crytek is having financial troubles but I bet their engine would have 10x adoption if they hired a team technical writers<p>Unreals docs are fairly bad also, but at least there are some third party resources to turn to
That license looks like a minefield. Any lawyers able to chime in on the reality of becoming tainted? Given their recent history, this is one codebase you really wouldn't want to risk becoming tainted by.
If curious see also from 2016: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11760298" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11760298</a><p>Related significant threads: <a href="https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=Cryengine%20comments%3E10&sort=byDate&type=story" rel="nofollow">https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...</a>
The real issue is clear from their announcement post.<p>master (now main) was not always stable (of course, stable code are in the stable and release branches) so silly people complained, and the silly PM reacted by closing down pushes to main, and hereby closing down issues and PR's. He clearly has no idea how open source code development works. Now they have to maintain two repos, the internal one and thd public one, and get no feedback from outside. Well, feedback on one year old code.