Ideology fits pretty well, as the term is used in modern times.
In case of Linux, GPL is regarded as a good fit.
In case of games, it'd be surprising now, to see GPL as a good fit. Open source and GPL are not used predominantly, thus never disrupted much in that space. However, this is based on a kind of hindsight bias as well.
In many ways, Free Software is regarded a means by itself: To keep software Free. So the goals of the ideology might not ressonate with the goals of every game developer.
Right. Carmack's goals are clearly not aligned with those of the FSF. The FSF is perfectly happy for Free software to be of no value to those who develop non-Free Software, indeed they actively prefer it that way, viewing all non-Free software as unethical.
Evidently Carmack would rather the Id source releases be of use to as many developers as possible. As he says though, My partners would never have gone for it, precisely because it would have been valuable to developers of non-Free games, who compete with Id.
In case of Linux, GPL is regarded as a good fit.
In case of games, it'd be surprising now, to see GPL as a good fit. Open source and GPL are not used predominantly, thus never disrupted much in that space. However, this is based on a kind of hindsight bias as well.
In many ways, Free Software is regarded a means by itself: To keep software Free. So the goals of the ideology might not ressonate with the goals of every game developer.