Hi, just wanted to ask a question. Considering the fact that id Tech 1 is open source, and that people have successfully created "standalone games" with it, how far does the definition of "mod" really stretch? For example, if I create a "standalone game" that is dependent on ZDOOM to run, but isn't dependent on DOOM's assets to run, does that make it a mod or a game created in an engine based on the open-sourced code from id Software?

The same technically also applies to HL2. While you can create a HL2 mod, it is also possible to create something that can technically be considered as a standalone "game" using Source Engine 2013 Singleplayer. The only limit is the fact that said "game" would be dependent on another application to run (in this case, Steam.) But if I decide to use zero assets, textures, or models from any commercial or non commercial Source Engine game, does that make my game "standalone" despite the fact that it still requires Steam to run correctly?

Paradoxically, games created in game engines (or frameworks) are technically mods of game engines. Games created in Godot are typically dependent on the Godot engine, since all the data and code created by the developer is contained inside a .PCK file (assuming all data is not embedded within the executable). Without the .PCK file, there is no game. The same goes for (not only Godot, but also) GameMaker, which relies on a data.win file to run a game in the first place. This is pretty similar to how id Tech 1 (the "DOOM engine") handles IWADs. No IWAD, no game.

So this all begs the question: how far are you willing to stretch the definition of "mod"?

*This is part shitpost and part genuine. Please judge me harshly.
**I'm still unsure if I should join the FrenJam 2, considering the limited time I have nowadays, so this question is kind of unnecessary. Feel free to ignore it or delete it.