42 replies to this topic

[toastybuns]

I've just installed GameMaker8.1 Lite so I can play around with it, and in the installation terms and conditions it mentioned having to declare with your completed products that your product was made with game maker, and it even had a URL to an End User License Agreement:

Example EULA

Is it really the case that you have to include this with your completed products? Or have I misunderstood? Does this apply just to GM Lite, or does it also apply to the full GM for Windows, or GM Studio?

[TsukaYuriko]

in the installation terms and conditions it mentioned having to declare with your completed products that your product was made with game maker

Would you mind quoting that part? I've never read anything like that, and in my opinion, it would be nonsense. I haven't seen many games which include something like that, either. I don't slap "MADE WITH PHOTOSHOP" on graphics created with Photoshop, right? So why would I slap "MADE WITH GAMEMAKER" on my games? It's my work, made with the software I paid for. I really can't imagine this to be true... after all, YoYo's EULA is known to be written in a confusing way, anyway. I can't take an EULA which contradicts itself here and there seriously. Maybe they just meant "don't claim the game engine (which is GameMaker) as your own". They seriously should release a human-readable version of the EULA...

[Exkakx]

That's totally not true, you don't need to say you used it.

I always say I used C++ to make my games to impress everyone. (jk)

[dannyjenn]

Yeah, as far as I know you don't have to. I remember that back before YoYo Games took over then Mr. Overmars had in his agreement the exact opposite -- that you had no obligation to even mention it. Of course, this may have changed (I know some of the other parts of the agreement did) but I never read anything about it (at least not in Lite, anyway).

Also it makes absolutely no sense for that to be the case with Lite, since Lite puts a non-removable watermark over the game telling everyone what it was made in...

[JacksonYarr]

... the Applications and all materials accompanying the Stand-alone Applications shall include a notice and End User Licence Terms: (i) identifying the rights of YoYo Games and that they include, are based on and made using the Software; (ii) that such end user will have no right to modify, adapt, decompile or reverse engineer the Stand-alone Applications or make any use of the Software contained therein nor to permit anyone else to do so; and (iii) that such end user must not remove, disable, modify, add to or tamper with any program code or data, copyright, trademark or other proprietary notices and legends contained within the object (compiled) code of the Software;

It's a license condition that is rarely known, and often goes unnoticed.

I'd be surprised if YoYoGames actually did terminate someones license (without fair warning) because they failed to comply with this condition; Primarily because it's so frequently, and unknowingly violated. Unfortunately though, YoYoGames would have the legal right to do so if they pleased.

On the bright side, the fact it's so rarely known is just proof that barely anyone reads EULAs. This means you could bury the rights of YoYoGames deep within your own game's EULA, and the majority would never see it.

Do I support this license condition? No, in fact I loathe restrictive licenses. The reality is though that YoYoGames are a for profit company, and you can't be a successful for profit company without a legal team to make life annoying for everyone else.

[toastybuns]

... the Applications and all materials accompanying the Stand-alone Applications shall include a notice and End User Licence Terms: (i) identifying the rights of YoYo Games and that they include, are based on and made using the Software; (ii) that such end user will have no right to modify, adapt, decompile or reverse engineer the Stand-alone Applications or make any use of the Software contained therein nor to permit anyone else to do so; and (iii) that such end user must not remove, disable, modify, add to or tamper with any program code or data, copyright, trademark or other proprietary notices and legends contained within the object (compiled) code of the Software;

It's a license condition that is rarely known, and often goes unnoticed.

I'd be surprised if YoYoGames actually did terminate someones license (without fair warning) because they failed to comply with this condition; Primarily because it's so frequently, and unknowingly violated. Unfortunately though, YoYoGames would have the legal right to do so if they pleased.

On the bright side, the fact it's so rarely known is just proof that barely anyone reads EULAs. This means you could bury the rights of YoYoGames deep within your own game's EULA, and the majority would never see it.

Do I support this license condition? No, in fact I loathe restrictive licenses. The reality is though that YoYoGames are a for profit company, and you can't be a successful for profit company without a legal team to make life annoying for everyone else.

Thank you for posting that. Can anyone with an installer for GameMaker Studio confirm if the same (or similar clause) is in the EULA for Studio? Or perhaps if someone from YoYo is here can they confirm?

If you have to declare your output was created with GameMaker Studio, then I have been lost as a customer. I can understand having to declare it with the free version, but with the amount of money that Studio and the modules cost you shouldn't also have to give YoYo games free advertising.

YoYo - can you confirm please?

[JacksonYarr]

The quoted extract was taken from the GM:Studio license. I don't believe much (if anything?) has changed in Studio's EULA compared to the GM8.1 EULA.

I think you might have miss understood the condition though. There's no requirement to display within your game that it was made with GameMaker, and you certainly don't have to advertise anything even remotely associated with YoYoGames.

However, if you're distributing your creations - they need to be accompanied by an EULA that mentions the rights YoYoGames still retain over the application. This often takes the form of a License.txt file in your Game's install folder - or even just displayed during the installation process with an Agree/Disagree prompt.

Even for a professional game studio that might be developing with GameMaker, this really isn't too much of an ask.

Again, it's annoying that YoYoGames do insist on retaining some rights over the applications. However there are certainly more concerning implications of the EULA that I think professional studios would be much more concerned with & deterred by.

[Jobo]

When using a Windows installer from GM:Studio, it automatically installs the aforementioned license onto the player's computer.
It can be found in the install directory labeled "License.txt".

And this is applicable in the given situation:

This often takes the form of a License.txt file in your Game's install folder

And yes, YoYo Games are - and have always been - a little pushy about using their customers to promote themselves.
The fact that they removed the option to hide the YoYo Games logo in the GM:Studio IDE itself (where only I see it - I who purchased the software for $500) is annoying me greatly. I don't want to look at it. It's dark and it's disrupting my light design and focus.
I know from whom I bought the software, I don't have to be constantly reminded every time I open the IDE.

It says YoYo Games plenty of times in the launcher, give me back the darn option to remove the logo from within the IDE.
Jeeze.

Edited by Jobo, 30 June 2012 - 12:38 AM.

[Mr. RPG]

When using a Windows installer from GM:Studio, it automatically installs the aforementioned license onto the player's computer.
It can be found in the install directory labeled "License.txt".

And this is applicable in the given situation:

This often takes the form of a License.txt file in your Game's install folder

And yes, YoYo Games are - and have always been - a little pushy about using their customers to promote themselves.
The fact that they removed the option to hide the YoYo Games logo in the GM:Studio IDE itself (where only I see it - I who purchased the software for $500) is annoying me greatly. I don't want to look at it. It's dark and it's disrupting my light design and focus.
I know from whom I bought the software, I don't have to be constantly reminded every time I open the IDE.

It says YoYo Games plenty of times in the launcher, give me back the darn option to remove the logo from within the IDE.
Jeeze.

I agree with the bolded part, however they actually strive on our help. Their biggest form of marketing is most likely word-of-mouth.

..and you can remove the YoYoGames logo from the IDE in your Preferences. Honestly, why is it even there? You know EXACTLY who made the program and no one else will ever see it. It is a waste of space. I find no logical reason to keep it.

[chance]

Since it's so easy to remove, then who cares really? I don't blame YoYo for trying to squeeze in a bit more marketing.

Just remove it and forget about it. Hardly seem like something to get annoyed over.

[toastybuns]

But it's not a case of being able to remove it - it's in the terms and confitions that you agree to when you install the software that and games you make and distribute with GameMaker has to mention this stuff. I would'nt write a letter with Microsoft Word and be expected to put 'Letter written with Microsoft Word' at the foot of the page when I printed it, or on the back of the envelope that I send it in. I wouldn't paint a picture and write on the back 'Painted using Revell oil paints'

Unless I am misunderstanding something, this seems ridiculous that this is a legal requirement to publish software you have created with the Studio edition of GameMaker that you pay $600 for. It's one thing to have to do so with the free and cheap versions, but it's unreasonable to require this in a product clearly aimed at (and costed to suit) commercial game production. I'm going to contact YoYo for clarification, and if it's a requirement I'm going to ask for a waiver. If there's no way around this, they've lost a $600 sale and I'll continue working with Monkey instead of migrating to GameMaker Studio.

Edited by toastybuns, 30 June 2012 - 02:33 PM.

[GloopMaster]

Hm. I think that for GM8.0 Lite, that little popup thing in the corner is enough. I dont have GM:Studio to test that, but i suppose that they just want more advertising prowress. But really, is it that hard to put a small "Made with GameMaker Studio" in the corner? (Or, better yet, an object that links to that GameMaker download page)

[toastybuns]

My point is - for a product so expensive that is clearly aimed above hobbyists, why *should* you have to declae what tools you use in the production of your software?

[dannyjenn]

It's because games written in GameMaker are not completely written by the person making the game -- a lot of the code is written by GameMaker itself (which is owned by YoYo Games). They have the rights over whatever part of it they do own, including the right for their code not to be decompiled and the right to receive credit if they want (which they obviously do).

Think of it with this example:
You make a game but use someone else's graphics (with permission). When you distribute the game that person is probably going to want credit (not at all unreasonable). That person may also want to put the condition on their graphics that they are not allowed to be ripped / altered / used for any purpose other than that game. And the only way to put such a restriction on the graphics is to have the person distributing the game include the restriction in the game's license.

Also, price has nothing to do with it. I could choose to charge a million dollars for the software... I can still put whatever restrictions on it I want. Unless there was like, a cheap version with all sorts of restrictions, and an expensive one with no restrictions (where you are clearly paying extra in order to not have to follow the restrictive license) then price is irrelevant. Instead the cheap version is Lite, and the expensive one is Pro, but what you're paying for is not "to avoid all restrictions" but it to have access to more features.

Edited by dannyjenn, 30 June 2012 - 04:27 PM.

[toastybuns]

It's because games written in GameMaker are not completely written by the person making the game -- a lot of the code is written by GameMaker itself (which is owned by YoYo Games). They have the rights over whatever part of it they do own, including the right for their code not to be decompiled and the right to receive credit if they want (which they obviously do).

Think of it with this example:
You make a game but use someone else's graphics (with permission). When you distribute the game that person is probably going to want credit (not at all unreasonable). That person may also want to put the condition on their graphics that they are not allowed to be ripped / altered / used for any purpose other than that game. And the only way to put such a restriction on the graphics is to have the person distributing the game include the restriction in the game's license.

Your second paragraph/example is different, in that it clearly states in the GameMaker EULA that the included graphics can only be used in a non-commercial game, which is fair enough - by selling you GameMaker they are selling you a tool to make games, no selling you copyright-free artwork.

Referring to your first paragraph, I fully understand that - GameMaker was written by people, is owned by YoYo games, and they can license the software to you however they see fit. What I fail to see, is that with all the professional creativity software I have ever used, GameMaker is the only one I ever recall coming across that insists on its premium product including a 'credit' (as you put it) in any distributed output. It just seems unusual to me, and I fell it is unreasonable to have this clause apply to their premium version of the software. However, you are right - it's their software and they can license it however they see fit. I don't like it, but I guess I'm going to have to lump it

[Mr. RPG]

Since it's so easy to remove, then who cares really? I don't blame YoYo for trying to squeeze in a bit more marketing.

Just remove it and forget about it. Hardly seem like something to get annoyed over.

It is more of a inconvenience. It doesn't really affect me, but there's no reason to have it inside the IDE.

Like all of the posts say. You already know who made the product and no one else will already see it, so there's no point.

and@everyone else: Are you guys still talking about you have to "mention" GameMaker in your games? You don't have to at all.

[dannyjenn]

Your second paragraph/example is different, in that it clearly states in the GameMaker EULA that the included graphics can only be used in a non-commercial game, which is fair enough - by selling you GameMaker they are selling you a tool to make games, no selling you copyright-free artwork.

Yeah, but I meant graphics in general, not the ones that come with GameMaker. So like, artwork that is allowed to be used in a commercial game. My real point was my first paragraph.

[Nocturne]

It's because games written in GameMaker are not completely written by the person making the game -- a lot of the code is written by GameMaker itself (which is owned by YoYo Games). They have the rights over whatever part of it they do own, including the right for their code not to be decompiled and the right to receive credit if they want (which they obviously do).

Think of it with this example:
You make a game but use someone else's graphics (with permission). When you distribute the game that person is probably going to want credit (not at all unreasonable). That person may also want to put the condition on their graphics that they are not allowed to be ripped / altered / used for any purpose other than that game. And the only way to put such a restriction on the graphics is to have the person distributing the game include the restriction in the game's license.

Also, price has nothing to do with it. I could choose to charge a million dollars for the software... I can still put whatever restrictions on it I want. Unless there was like, a cheap version with all sorts of restrictions, and an expensive one with no restrictions (where you are clearly paying extra in order to not have to follow the restrictive license) then price is irrelevant. Instead the cheap version is Lite, and the expensive one is Pro, but what you're paying for is not "to avoid all restrictions" but it to have access to more features.

This is a spot on reply that explains exactly what the deal is here.. but allow me to expand on that with an example...

If you use the unreal engine to make a game, you must pay a large percentage of your earnings (and probably put a splash screen as well) to the guys that made it and include the licence with your game. Even if you use it to make free games you must put a copy of the license agreement in your game. I know GM is not as big nor as popular a product as Unreal, but it demonstrates my point perfectly...

You are licencing the GameMaker runner for the games you make and it is standard practice to request that you include the licence for that runner in your finished games, and in fact I think that their EULA is one of the least restrictive out there!!! Also, if you care to look at the GameMaker:Studio opening screen, there is a tab marked "Licenses" which lists all the licences that YoYoGames must include for the various technologies they have used to make GameMaker viable, proving that this is standard practice within the industry.

[Jobo]

I don't see what all the fuzz is about when it comes to the license GameMaker attaches to your Windows game.
It's not like it pops up when you open the game and forces you to read it. Only ~5% of players will notice (and read) the license.

If you use the unreal engine to make a game, you must pay a large percentage of your earnings (and probably put a splash screen as well)

Such a splash screen is also attached to all games compiled using the free version of Unity3D. It's one of the most normal (and annoying) features ever.

Ask yourselves this: If you spent years making a good program, would you not want people to know it exists?

[toastybuns]

As I previously said, I don't like it but it's their software to license how they see fit so I'm going to have to lump it. But to be fair, since the Unity example I've realised it's not the fact that you have to declare that you've used GameMaker in the production of your game, it's HOW you declare you've used GameMaker. In the EULA of your game's installer is fine as so many have described, and in the case of an iPhone game where there is no installer, a mention in an 'About' screen should be fine - at least it's not a splash screen