The Xenko Game Engine [Official Site, GitHub] recently released their 3.0 update which came with a surprise announcement of it now being free and open source.
Announced a few days on their official blog:
You read that right. Xenko 3.0 is out now, released under the permissive MIT license.
From now on, you can use and modify Xenko completely free — whether you’re a professional, a student, or just looking for a new hobby. This includes both the runtime and editor.
Main focus for this release was on the open-source transition, but Xenko 3.0 also includes some new features, such as a switch to the new C# project system, video, hair and skin rendering.
What's interesting, is that Silicon Studio are no longer going to be supporting it. This means that it's now down to the Xenko team to work on it independently along with the community. To be clear though, if you do plan to contribute they have a Contribution License Agreement they require you to sign.
As I understand it, they previously had a dual-license with the code under the GPL, but for those who that caused issues they also had a paid-for version. With it now being under the MIT license, it should remove any barrier for people to use it. Linux support, from what I've read is currently experimental. They also said on Twitter that the Linux build is currently disabled, but it should be enabled again soon.
It seems like a pretty advanced game engine, with support for both OpenGL and Vulkan. Nice to see it so open now, will be interesting to follow it along.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
15 comments
Linux support, from what I've read is currently experimental.That's interesting. My understanding was that it's nonexistent. But hey, once it's open source it can always be ported. If anyone can be bothered to. (I'm trying really hard not to sound critical here. :) Honestly, it looks like a good engine.)
1 Likes, Who?
No Linux installer/version. Can you even build on *nix without dumping time into the source? Kinda seems a pointless news article other than you can port creations to Linux..."experimentally." -lame.There's nothing pointless or lame about reporting on a game engine now being fully open source. Just because it doesn't have totally tip-top Linux support in shape right now, doesn't mean it can't in future.
11 Likes, Who?
From their Twitter a few days ago:Linux support, from what I've read is currently experimental.That's interesting. My understanding was that it's nonexistent. But hey, once it's open source it can always be ported. If anyone can be bothered to. (I'm trying really hard not to sound critical here. :) Honestly, it looks like a good engine.)
Yes, it builds on windows run on linux.https://twitter.com/xenko3d/status/1025049008689954816
Note that Linux build is currently disabled in current release but should be enabled again soon (focus was getting MIT release out ASAP)
So they're working on it and with the bonus of the licensing changes, hopefully more people will come forward to help.
5 Likes, Who?
Hmm... each time I see a new game engine I'm basically interested in two things: what games were made on it and how good the graphics are. Xenko is lacking in both departments, unfortunately. I'd expect a showcase on the front page but there's none. And in that demo reel what they call "next level" looks pretty bland. Nothing I haven't seen in 2008 or so. Photorealistic skin rendering? It resembles cheap plastic at best. And, ahem, saying "photorealistic hair and cloth" while showing a completely bald and naked dude... Add C# to that, which, though being used in Unity3D, is still a weird choice as a game development language (for me, of course; I don't trust MS and their products). Maybe it will attract Unity3D switchers though, who knows. Other features are nothing outstanding as well.
I'm not trying to diminish their achievements and I fully understand how complex the modern game engines are and how much time one needs to make something like that from scratch. It's just that the competition in this particular IT field is quite strong and UE4 made it really uneven after going opensource (though not free) and forcing some of the other major engines to do the same. Now it's almost pointless to make a completely new AAA-quality engine if you can take UE4 or Unity and do whatever you want with it. Except you're a huge company making the next huge game with 9-digits budget, maybe then an in-house engine would be worth it (because of no royalties and license limitations).
I can only guess but probably they freed (read: abandoned) Xenko because they didn't have enough resources to compete with the leaders. And if you want an MIT engine with all the modern features, you might want to check out Godot.
Last edited by rkfg on 6 August 2018 at 4:07 pm UTC
I'm not trying to diminish their achievements and I fully understand how complex the modern game engines are and how much time one needs to make something like that from scratch. It's just that the competition in this particular IT field is quite strong and UE4 made it really uneven after going opensource (though not free) and forcing some of the other major engines to do the same. Now it's almost pointless to make a completely new AAA-quality engine if you can take UE4 or Unity and do whatever you want with it. Except you're a huge company making the next huge game with 9-digits budget, maybe then an in-house engine would be worth it (because of no royalties and license limitations).
I can only guess but probably they freed (read: abandoned) Xenko because they didn't have enough resources to compete with the leaders. And if you want an MIT engine with all the modern features, you might want to check out Godot.
Last edited by rkfg on 6 August 2018 at 4:07 pm UTC
4 Likes, Who?
Sounds like it could become abandon-ware in a year's time, at least to my cynical ear. But if you feel like supporting it, they do have a Patreon; currently sitting at $281 a month. It was only set up a few days ago, so who knows? Either way, I don't see anything wrong with giving some attention to a budding open-source community. Though it wouldn't hurt to add information about the current state of their Linux support to the article to avoid confusion :)
2 Likes, Who?
I'm also skeptical about C# usage for VR. Realtime requirements and garbage collector don't mix well.
Last edited by Shmerl on 6 August 2018 at 5:20 pm UTC
Last edited by Shmerl on 6 August 2018 at 5:20 pm UTC
1 Likes, Who?
Though it wouldn't hurt to add information about the current state of their Linux support to the article to avoid confusion :)I did mention in the article text that it's experimental. I've added their tweet to it now too, but the information on their actual Linux support isn't overly clear, if it was I would have mentioned it directly of course.
Edit: Hopefully with it fully open, stuff like this can be properly cleaned up ;)
Last edited by Liam Dawe on 6 August 2018 at 5:30 pm UTC
2 Likes, Who?
I have heard of C# used for gameplay code/scripting but this is an actual engine written in C#? I don't think I have heard of that before.
0 Likes
This is just a personal opinion but I installed this on a spare windows laptop to see what it was all about.
It wants (requires?) visual studio integration and even with that running a sample game took a very long time to even get up and going.
I didn't spend enough time with it to try and even pump out a linux version of the sample game and really wasn't impressed with it so far.
I do wish it a ton of success though as time goes on. It is great to see another tool for aspiring/established developers, but Ill be sticking with Godot, love, and gdevelop.
It wants (requires?) visual studio integration and even with that running a sample game took a very long time to even get up and going.
I didn't spend enough time with it to try and even pump out a linux version of the sample game and really wasn't impressed with it so far.
I do wish it a ton of success though as time goes on. It is great to see another tool for aspiring/established developers, but Ill be sticking with Godot, love, and gdevelop.
2 Likes, Who?
contrary to popular belief, i dont think more competition is always good.
the issue is, one of the key advantages of open source is not reinventing the whell, and we will be doing just that if we contribute to that engine instead of, i dont know, godot.
competition means reinventing the whell instead of cooperating to build an better one, fragmenting the comunity and the efforts, sure, some times its nescessary because the maintainers of an whell arent competent enough or are doing some mistakes that no one knows yet that those things are mistakes, but later on in the future when we do realize that design mistakes, we would have another code base to work with if we have competition.
but still, i dont think they are doing it for noble/altruistic reasons, instead they saw they couldnt compete and instead of admiting to their users that they are wasting their time and they could have better sucess using other engines, they want to keep then on their softwares but self supporting instead of supporting then.
sure, that is an better ending for an engine than being left as an abandonware, at least people can self mantaing or migrate to another engine more easily, but if that engine proves to be useless, they will just waste more time.
in any case i wish then (and their users) lucky, i will not take a look at it because i'm fine with godot and unity, i was an engine hopper for to long and finally found an home with engines powerfull enough to make my game instead of having to migrate all over again due to engine limitations, i will not take a look at this engine because i'm already satisfied with what i have, but i wish then look and i hope they can cooperate with an better gaming world instead of fragment efforts for it.
the issue is, one of the key advantages of open source is not reinventing the whell, and we will be doing just that if we contribute to that engine instead of, i dont know, godot.
competition means reinventing the whell instead of cooperating to build an better one, fragmenting the comunity and the efforts, sure, some times its nescessary because the maintainers of an whell arent competent enough or are doing some mistakes that no one knows yet that those things are mistakes, but later on in the future when we do realize that design mistakes, we would have another code base to work with if we have competition.
but still, i dont think they are doing it for noble/altruistic reasons, instead they saw they couldnt compete and instead of admiting to their users that they are wasting their time and they could have better sucess using other engines, they want to keep then on their softwares but self supporting instead of supporting then.
sure, that is an better ending for an engine than being left as an abandonware, at least people can self mantaing or migrate to another engine more easily, but if that engine proves to be useless, they will just waste more time.
in any case i wish then (and their users) lucky, i will not take a look at it because i'm fine with godot and unity, i was an engine hopper for to long and finally found an home with engines powerfull enough to make my game instead of having to migrate all over again due to engine limitations, i will not take a look at this engine because i'm already satisfied with what i have, but i wish then look and i hope they can cooperate with an better gaming world instead of fragment efforts for it.
2 Likes, Who?
Amazing how people like to drag down other people's work. I think the Linux gaming community has become somewhat spoiled, and don't even appreciate fully free software anymore. It's pretty much all about proprietary engines and games now.
But I guess that's to be expected because the subset of people who both care about open source and games is incredibly small.
I do play proprietary games myself, but the mainly negative reaction here for this news is disheartening.
But I guess that's to be expected because the subset of people who both care about open source and games is incredibly small.
I do play proprietary games myself, but the mainly negative reaction here for this news is disheartening.
2 Likes, Who?
Amazing how people like to drag down other people's work. I think the Linux gaming community has become somewhat spoiled, and don't even appreciate fully free software anymore. It's pretty much all about proprietary engines and games now.
But I guess that's to be expected because the subset of people who both care about open source and games is incredibly small.
I do play proprietary games myself, but the mainly negative reaction here for this news is disheartening.
Nobody said anything about the engine getting more open being a bad thing, many rants there were aimed at game engines or FLOSS in general.
I personally think it's a good thing, and wish them best! :)
However, I would like to state that as a user, I prefer the GPL anyway, and it was already available under that license.
0 Likes
Amazing how people like to drag down other people's work. I think the Linux gaming community has become somewhat spoiled, and don't even appreciate fully free software anymore. It's pretty much all about proprietary engines and games now.Not exactly that. When people talk about modern/nextgen game engines, they usually put graphics first. Other areas don't improve as fast so it's hard to impress people with audio, input or physics. And I feel that graphics fidelity is improving much slower recently than it was, say, 10 years ago. It's probably in line with the Moore's law so it's not surprising. But these days it's not that uncommon to find an indie game with really good looking graphics, not much worse than that of AAA titles. And FOSS engines are also catching up, they might not be that advanced but they're certainly capable of producing good visuals and have handy editors. I believe it happened exactly because the graphics race slowed down. Good looking games and engines don't belong to AAA monopolies anymore so more criticism is expected. No one says something like "shit, not another FOSS engine, we have enough already!" but it's hard to expect people giving a standing ovation to that in 2018.
0 Likes
natewardawg Aug 7, 2018
Actually, Xenko wasn't entirely open source before. Here's from their answers site when it was still GPL...
XYC:
- If this project is dead,maybe someone will create a new project called Xenko2 (based on Xenko src).
Virgile (Xenko programmer):
- Unfortunately current Xenko license (GPL+custom) doesn't allow that. Also the editor is not opensource.
- We are trying to change all of that (cf blog post): "Meanwhile, we’re exploring the idea of a version of Xenko run entirely by the community."
Personally, I think it's great news for this project particularly to be released as MIT! It was previously dual licensed as Commercial/GPL, but in a way that made it very difficult to contribute in a way that made it safe for the community. It was only safe for the engine developers.
For instance, if you wanted to make a game in Xenko, you could do it for free and release your game under whatever license you wanted if you user *their* Commercially licensed build. Great!
To the best of my understanding, the problem was that if you used your own build of the engine your *entire game's code* had to be released as GPL. So, if you needed to modify the source for the engine in such a way that it wouldn't make it back into an official build, which is pretty easy to do if you need something specifically for your game, and even though you made the engine source available, you had to release your entire game under the GPL!!!
Now that it's all MIT licensed this is no longer an issue.
Also, it looks like Virgile plans to continue development on it :)
https://www.patreon.com/xenko/overview
XYC:
- If this project is dead,maybe someone will create a new project called Xenko2 (based on Xenko src).
Virgile (Xenko programmer):
- Unfortunately current Xenko license (GPL+custom) doesn't allow that. Also the editor is not opensource.
- We are trying to change all of that (cf blog post): "Meanwhile, we’re exploring the idea of a version of Xenko run entirely by the community."
Personally, I think it's great news for this project particularly to be released as MIT! It was previously dual licensed as Commercial/GPL, but in a way that made it very difficult to contribute in a way that made it safe for the community. It was only safe for the engine developers.
For instance, if you wanted to make a game in Xenko, you could do it for free and release your game under whatever license you wanted if you user *their* Commercially licensed build. Great!
To the best of my understanding, the problem was that if you used your own build of the engine your *entire game's code* had to be released as GPL. So, if you needed to modify the source for the engine in such a way that it wouldn't make it back into an official build, which is pretty easy to do if you need something specifically for your game, and even though you made the engine source available, you had to release your entire game under the GPL!!!
Now that it's all MIT licensed this is no longer an issue.
Also, it looks like Virgile plans to continue development on it :)
https://www.patreon.com/xenko/overview
0 Likes
Hello, regarding concerns of community in this thread:
Preformance: Pardox project (Xenko Engine) was optimized to achieve great, natively multi threaded DirectX 12 and Vulkan performance. The engine is written in C#, but compiles to native assembly so you shouldnt worry about .Net overhead.
Graphics: Xenko has real world based PBR pipeline, which is capable of achieving great visuals. Further, there is a node based visual system to tune the rende pipeline to your project's needs. All needed stacks (e.g. PPFX, AA, etc.) are also included.
[I dont remember any skin rendering demo of xenko, maybe you saw a demo of Paradox when it was WIP, before the name changed?]
Linux support is still kind of WIP, but since xenko is fully open source now, with some community help, it'll get better over time.
Things like Visual Studio integration need to get more multi platform, for example.
Xenko was opensource. Xenko 2.x was when the dual license crap was added.
Last edited by Sudo_halt on 9 August 2018 at 9:58 am UTC
Preformance: Pardox project (Xenko Engine) was optimized to achieve great, natively multi threaded DirectX 12 and Vulkan performance. The engine is written in C#, but compiles to native assembly so you shouldnt worry about .Net overhead.
Graphics: Xenko has real world based PBR pipeline, which is capable of achieving great visuals. Further, there is a node based visual system to tune the rende pipeline to your project's needs. All needed stacks (e.g. PPFX, AA, etc.) are also included.
[I dont remember any skin rendering demo of xenko, maybe you saw a demo of Paradox when it was WIP, before the name changed?]
Linux support is still kind of WIP, but since xenko is fully open source now, with some community help, it'll get better over time.
Things like Visual Studio integration need to get more multi platform, for example.
Xenko was opensource. Xenko 2.x was when the dual license crap was added.
Last edited by Sudo_halt on 9 August 2018 at 9:58 am UTC
1 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me