Discover and share high-quality assets for your games in our Godot Asset Store. Explore 2D sprites, 3D models, tools, addons, templates, plug-ins, animations, and more!
Monetization Strategies: If Godot’s asset store adopts aggressive monetization strategies similar to those seen in other platforms, it could alienate developers and users. This includes high fees for asset sales or restrictive policies that limit creators’ earnings.
Quality Control: A decline in the quality of assets available, either through a lack of curation or an influx of low-quality submissions, can diminish the value of the asset store. This could lead to frustration among users seeking reliable resources.
Community Trust: The perception of a platform’s integrity is crucial. If developers feel that the asset store prioritizes profit over community support, it could lead to a loss of trust and engagement.
Comparison with Other Platforms: Observing the trajectory of other game engines, like Unity, can provide insights. If Godot’s asset store begins to mirror the negative aspects of those platforms, it could signal a shift in its community dynamics.
Feedback and Adaptation: The response of the Godot community to the new asset store will be critical. If the developers are responsive to feedback and prioritize the needs of their users, it may mitigate concerns about enshittification.
I would assume that the actual infrastructure of the asset store is also open source. But even if not, forking Godot is very possible. It’s not like there is a megacorp making most PRs. It really is a community project.
I would assume that the actual infrastructure of the asset store is also open source
The only repo I’ve found about the godot store is a sad readme.md used for issues, like many proprietary projects do when they want to make use of github as issue tracker without actually releasing code.
Also it’s a web service that’s privately hosted, so they can use that as a loophole to not release any changes in the code. The only way to ensure freedom there would be with AGPL license (lemmy for example is AGPL).
Since when has an asset store been detrimental?
Monetization Strategies: If Godot’s asset store adopts aggressive monetization strategies similar to those seen in other platforms, it could alienate developers and users. This includes high fees for asset sales or restrictive policies that limit creators’ earnings.
Quality Control: A decline in the quality of assets available, either through a lack of curation or an influx of low-quality submissions, can diminish the value of the asset store. This could lead to frustration among users seeking reliable resources.
Community Trust: The perception of a platform’s integrity is crucial. If developers feel that the asset store prioritizes profit over community support, it could lead to a loss of trust and engagement.
Comparison with Other Platforms: Observing the trajectory of other game engines, like Unity, can provide insights. If Godot’s asset store begins to mirror the negative aspects of those platforms, it could signal a shift in its community dynamics.
Feedback and Adaptation: The response of the Godot community to the new asset store will be critical. If the developers are responsive to feedback and prioritize the needs of their users, it may mitigate concerns about enshittification.
You know Godot is an open source community developed game engine right?
The asset store obviously isn’t, so I feel these concerns are valid. I don’t want Godot to end up like Unity 5-10+ years out.
I would assume that the actual infrastructure of the asset store is also open source. But even if not, forking Godot is very possible. It’s not like there is a megacorp making most PRs. It really is a community project.
The only repo I’ve found about the godot store is a sad
readme.mdused for issues, like many proprietary projects do when they want to make use of github as issue tracker without actually releasing code.Also it’s a web service that’s privately hosted, so they can use that as a loophole to not release any changes in the code. The only way to ensure freedom there would be with AGPL license (lemmy for example is AGPL).
For their website homepage they do release the code as MIT, but not the store.
I’m sure your whining and moaning are certainly helping enormously.