itch.io Community » Game Development » Get Feedback

Game Asset Licensing for Pixel Art

A topic by lunarsignals created Dec 29, 2018 Views: 969 Replies: 5

Viewing posts 1 to 2

Hi All!

I just released my first asset pack called #NotZelda Overhead Adventure with a CC-BY-SA 4.0 International license. My goal is for people to be able to buy the asset pack to do something small like a game jam or build an entire Zelda-style adventure game --- and sell the finalized project commercially. A few people have told me that may not be the best license to use for my purposes.

While I am interested in feedback on the asset pack itself, I am very interested in hearing about licensing from people who buy and sell asset packs. Thanks much!

Like Reply

No Time To PlayModerator5 years ago(+1)

Why would it not be a good license? It allows for the complete game to be sold. Anyone who buys it simply has the right to reuse the CC-BY-SA assets (and only those) under the same terms. I've published several games like that, even with a price label attached. If anything, you'd expect people to be even more interested, knowing they'll really own what they buy.

Like Reply

lunarsignals5 years ago (1 edit)

My initial choice for CCBYSA is that people can buy the assets, make their own works, and sell them just by crediting me and sharing any derivative art in the same way they got it.

People seem to be confused by what that means, if they have to share their code, package all my art assets, etc. Of course, this isn't stipulated in the license, but -- there's confusion even amongst the folks who go to the CCBYSA site.

I'm glad I'm hearing more support for CCBYSA, and I'd really like to dig deeper into this rabbit hole. Here's a more clear critique that makes me maybe want to do CCBY:

"By-SA faces some real difficulties in interpretation. A reasonable interpretation is that only direct derivatives of the assets themselves have to be released under the same license, but there is some fear that it might work out to requiring the entire project or any touching assets to be released under the same license, which would be a huge mess. When I was making openly licensed game art I gave up and licensed it CC-By (and OGA-By to avoid concerns about the anti-DRM clause in CC-By)."

I interpret it the first way, but I worry that the confusion will push people away.

Of course, other critiques are that CCBYSA is too free and people will just outright reupload the asset pack in it's entirety which would also be bad :(

Like Reply

No Time To PlayModerator5 years ago(+1)

Ah, so you hang around Open Game Art too. In that case you've probably noticed how pretty much everyone there agrees that CC-BY-SA is not viral, unlike other copyleft licenses. To be sure, the ambiguity will still discourage some buyers. Namely, big commercial interests who would otherwise be all too happy to exploit your work. Those won't touch CC-BY-SA content with a ten-foot pole... which is probably what you want.

As for the risk of people reselling free culture works... how often have you heard of it happening? People are more likely to try and resell games that aren't under an open license. In fact it was a series of such cases that forced us to introduce controls. Seriously, reality proves again and again that it's people who believe copyright equals property who will, you know, steal creative works.

Like Reply

lunarsignals5 years ago (1 edit)

I don't hang out in OGA much, but your conclusions match up with my assumptions. I also think it's rad to know folks want to see more commercial art assets available. I don't know how to verify my assumptions, tho. The only data I have available to me is my sales (<$300 after a week). I know I'm going to update the asset pack and release a second pack (Castlevania inspired full game art assets seem to be next on the docket), and I think those are good opportunities to sort the licensing issue and/or be confident I picked the right one.

On another note, I am curious what you think about CCBYSA vs CCBY? Edit: I just realized Kenny sells their art assets as CC0 as well, but I'm not sure I wouldn't want to be credited?

Like Reply

No Time To PlayModerator5 years ago (1 edit) (+1)

Ah... I don't exactly have a strategy. I've licensed art (and writing) under CC0, CC-BY and CC-BY-SA alike, based on a rough feeling of how much effort went into it and how much potential for reuse it seems to have. Many people are happy to provide attribution if they can, even if it's not required. And releasing lots and lots of stuff under a very liberal license can make one very popular if word gets around. ;)

Like Reply