rFactor tracks

"Steve Whitty" > wrote
>. if the track maker has got written
> permission from the track owners to do the track. has written permission
> from the photographer of the intro screen, to use that copywrited photo,
> he literally owns every part of that track. if he has put in a read me
> that it is not to be altered or converted without his permission, you have
> to abide by his decisions.



That never happens. Perhaps 1 track out of 100.






--
-- François Ménard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...

"Byron Forbes" > wrote in

..au:

>
> My personal view is that if you ask a track creator if they mind
> you
> upgrading/converting and they say no for no reason, you simply ignore
> them and go ahead anyway. In this case I'd say don't bother giving
> them any credit either.

and sooner or later, each and every guy who creates content for us will
quit and take up Flight Sims. And we will see less and less material. In
fact, one might say the Iracing types might pay folks to do this so as to
drive off competition.
My PERSONAL view is this:
I cannot build or edit or texturize a track or a car. I am 100% dependant
upon others. The more their work is hacked, the more their work is
exploited, then in the long run, the less will be available to ME.
So go use the track...enjoy...have fun...just don't expect to see me
there.
It's not like this is a theoretical discussion, the net is littered
with broken links and whole teams that have left the field and taken their
toys. ****-off RH and we lose someone who has put MASSIVE efforts into the
mod community. Who do we ****-off next?
dave henrie

"ymenard" > wrote in message
...
> "Steve Whitty" > wrote
>>. if the track maker has got written
>> permission from the track owners to do the track. has written permission
>> from the photographer of the intro screen, to use that copywrited photo,
>> he literally owns every part of that track. if he has put in a read me
>> that it is not to be altered or converted without his permission, you
>> have to abide by his decisions.
>
>
>
> That never happens. Perhaps 1 track out of 100.
>
>
>
still doesn't change anything. if someone has said that his work is not to
be converted, you RESPECT that decision.

If people don't respect the track editors decisions, do you expect them to
respect the community, and to continue to make tracks. I don't think so.

so in the end, you get very few new tracks, making use of the new graphical
technologies and processes. you get ugly looking track conversion from
games years old. just rehashed over and over. now thats something to
really look forward to. original gpl graphics in a new sim in 3 or 4 years.
aren't the masses going to happy about that.

cheers

steve

>"Steve Whitty" > wrote
>> That never happens. Perhaps 1 track out of 100.
>>
> still doesn't change anything. if someone has said that his work is not
> to be converted, you RESPECT that decision.




But it's illegal work to start with, that invalidates everything that person
has to say about his own creation.






--
-- François Ménard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...

"ymenard" > wrote in
:

> But it's illegal work to start with, that invalidates everything that
> person has to say about his own creation.
>

We are not talking legalities, but respect of effort. Nothing in a mod
community is technically legal. We shouldn't even be able to have the
shape of a track let alone the name or billboards, etc. But here are
people who have put long hours in giving us somehting. And you all want to
spout about the 'legalities'? Respect. Courtesy.
Since we cannot pay them, we can show them the consideration due their
efforts. Not scavenge their work and pawn it off as our own. Or accept
another's blatant illuse and justify it by saying "EVERYONE DOES IT."

I'm here to say: I'd love to have every track for every sim all in top
notch splendor, but I realize the limitations of our world and will accept
that work which is not justified. Those that pillage others work will not
gain my respect or trust or use.

The creators of tracks do not legally own their work, if it's a
commercial track being built or converted. But they do own their time and
money and effort. And we should PAY them for that expenditure by standing
by their wishes. If a track creator has a readme that says no other use
but this mod, the by golly, we should respect his wishes. Otherwise go out
and begin where the other builder did and produce your own.

What about Tantra who works now for a developer? Do we, against his
wishes, import his tracks into the sim that is a direct competitor with his
current company?

Didn't your MAMA's teach you all about sharing when you were a toddler?

Dave Henrie

"Steve Whitty" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Byron Forbes" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> What might be good in future also is a website for the good and bad of
>> the modding community. Have a "Nay Sayers to be ignored" category and a
>> "I
>> put up my hand to do it but never did or took an eternity" category also.
>>
>>
>
> well stuff you mate. with your reasoning, why bother asking if you can
> convert it. arrogant (insert expletive of choice here)
>
> some track maker makes every texture map. every 3d object in the track.
> if the track maker has got written permission from the track owners to do
> the track. has written permission from the photographer of the intro
> screen, to use that copywrited photo, he literally owns every part of that
> track. if he has put in a read me that it is not to be altered or
> converted without his permission, you have to abide by his decisions.
> if he doesn't give you a
> reason why you can't convert it , you're saying you'll go and convert it
> anyway. If you are going to bother asking some one, expect one of two
> possible answers. yes or no. If the answer is in the negative, there
> doesn't need to be a reason, and none has to be given. and you have to
> respect that. important word there. Respect. do you know the meaning of
> that word. find an online dictionary if you don't own one.
>
> you expect track editors and mod editors to give you everything for
> nothing, and then don't respect their wishes in regards to conversions.
> grow up. stop acting like a spoilt kid that wants everything his way.
>
> its this attitude in the community that drives a lot of editors out of the
> community.
>
> when some one spends many many many hours doing a mod or a track.
> spending their own money in some cases to obtain the correct info,
> elevation maps, vehicle info. talking to race teams, etc. they get no
> finacial reward for it. it is given to the community to use. the one
> thing that the community can do in return is respect their wishes in what
> can and can't be done with track or mod.
>
>
> Steve
>

Steve, you rave on about respect but then imply that if someone asks to
take your work to a new level that you have the option to just flat out say
no - where is the respect in that from you? I assure you that in the
dictionary under respect it does not say "something that only Steve Whitty
gets the benefit of".

arrogant whitty!

"Byron Forbes" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Steve Whitty" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Byron Forbes" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> What might be good in future also is a website for the good and bad
>>> of
>>> the modding community. Have a "Nay Sayers to be ignored" category and a
>>> "I
>>> put up my hand to do it but never did or took an eternity" category
>>> also.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> well stuff you mate. with your reasoning, why bother asking if you can
>> convert it. arrogant (insert expletive of choice here)
>>
>> some track maker makes every texture map. every 3d object in the track.
>> if the track maker has got written permission from the track owners to do
>> the track. has written permission from the photographer of the intro
>> screen, to use that copywrited photo, he literally owns every part of
>> that
>> track. if he has put in a read me that it is not to be altered or
>> converted without his permission, you have to abide by his decisions.
>> if he doesn't give you a
>> reason why you can't convert it , you're saying you'll go and convert it
>> anyway. If you are going to bother asking some one, expect one of two
>> possible answers. yes or no. If the answer is in the negative, there
>> doesn't need to be a reason, and none has to be given. and you have to
>> respect that. important word there. Respect. do you know the meaning
>> of
>> that word. find an online dictionary if you don't own one.
>>
>> you expect track editors and mod editors to give you everything for
>> nothing, and then don't respect their wishes in regards to conversions.
>> grow up. stop acting like a spoilt kid that wants everything his way.
>>
>> its this attitude in the community that drives a lot of editors out of
>> the
>> community.
>>
>> when some one spends many many many hours doing a mod or a track.
>> spending their own money in some cases to obtain the correct info,
>> elevation maps, vehicle info. talking to race teams, etc. they get no
>> finacial reward for it. it is given to the community to use. the one
>> thing that the community can do in return is respect their wishes in what
>> can and can't be done with track or mod.
>>
>>
>> Steve
>>
>
> Steve, you rave on about respect but then imply that if someone asks to
> take your work to a new level that you have the option to just flat out
> say
> no - where is the respect in that from you? I assure you that in the
> dictionary under respect it does not say "something that only Steve Whitty
> gets the benefit of".
>
> arrogant whitty!
>

were is the disrespect of saying no to someone converting someones work.
the disrespect is in not abiding by the persons decision. do you know how
much work is involved in converting a track. Put it this way, to convert
one of my tracks from n2k3 to rFactor, even with noonans tools. To bring in
all three levels of dx shaders in to the track,(n2k3 only operates on 1
level of materials mostly) each material can have up to 6 individual
colour, spec, bump, and additive tga or dds files. optimising the polys.
editing and adding polys. making the track look like it was made for
rfactor, not simply converted. to make the track look good, it would be
quicker to start from scratch than to convert, and the converted track will
never look as good as an original built. now if someone does a conversion
of one of my tracks into rfactor, and does a **** job of it. it will
reflect back onto me, even though I didn't do the conversion, as people
would know the original as being made by me. then to complete the track you
still need the aiw files. the other ea/isi tracks are getting converted
quite easily. very similar file structure. going from papy to isi way is
much harder and takes a lot of modifying to do it. unless you know what
you're doing, a converted track will look like ****.

back onto the subject of respect:

put it this way, if you ask to drive my real car, and I say no. what are
you going to do. steal it and drive it anyway, because I didn't respect
your wishes of you wanting to drive it. same thing, man.

I'd really like to see you do some conversion work in the sim community.
converting people work with out permission. you would have very few friends
in the sim editing community. trying to get your converted tracks (without
permission) onto the mainstream sites would be hard. you see, the track
editors respect each others decisions. its some of the track convertors
who think they can do what they want. mind you, most are decent people.
but it only takes a few bad apples to give them all a bad name.

I really can't see why I'm arguing this with you. whats that saying, never
argue with an idiot..........

respectfully

steve

"Steve Whitty" > wrote in message
...
>
> were is the disrespect of saying no to someone converting someones work.
> the disrespect is in not abiding by the persons decision. do you know how
> much work is involved in converting a track. Put it this way, to convert
> one of my tracks from n2k3 to rFactor, even with noonans tools. To bring
> in all three levels of dx shaders in to the track,(n2k3 only operates on 1
> level of materials mostly) each material can have up to 6 individual
> colour, spec, bump, and additive tga or dds files. optimising the polys.
> editing and adding polys. making the track look like it was made for
> rfactor, not simply converted. to make the track look good, it would be
> quicker to start from scratch than to convert, and the converted track
> will never look as good as an original built. now if someone does a
> conversion of one of my tracks into rfactor, and does a **** job of it.
> it will reflect back onto me, even though I didn't do the conversion, as
> people would know the original as being made by me. then to complete the
> track you still need the aiw files. the other ea/isi tracks are getting
> converted quite easily. very similar file structure. going from papy to
> isi way is much harder and takes a lot of modifying to do it. unless you
> know what you're doing, a converted track will look like ****.
>
> back onto the subject of respect:
>

Thank XXXX for that!


> put it this way, if you ask to drive my real car, and I say no. what are
> you going to do. steal it and drive it anyway, because I didn't respect
> your wishes of you wanting to drive it. same thing, man.
>

What a garbage analogy! Did you abandon the car? Did you plan to drive
it again. Same thing? - one's illegal theft, the other is not?


> I'd really like to see you do some conversion work in the sim community.
> converting people work with out permission. you would have very few
> friends in the sim editing community. trying to get your converted tracks
> (without permission) onto the mainstream sites would be hard. you see,
> the track editors respect each others decisions. its some of the track
> convertors who think they can do what they want. mind you, most are
> decent people. but it only takes a few bad apples to give them all a bad
> name.
>

This is very simple.

Let's say I did a track but then decided I didn't want to do any more
modding. Someone emails me asking if they could convert/upgrade my work. I
have 2 options -

a) Not a problem - just give me my due credit as track creator - they're
still my pixels afterall. This way my work lives on rather than just dying
on the scrap heap.

b) I can be a complete arsehole and just say "No" - no reason supplied.


> I really can't see why I'm arguing this with you. whats that saying,
> never argue with an idiot..........
>

For someone who is, by their own confessions, without "reason", that's
pretty funny. Though looking at the first paragraph there does seem to be
reasons????

Simple question Steve - is it respectful to say no without reason or
isn't it? Just to be clear on this, that's a simple, unqualified "No" - as
opposed to that 1st paragraph of yours. Looks like you've shot yourself in
the foot!

Byron,
as I said, I'm not going to continue to debate this. we have differing
views on the situation. lets just agree to disagree. and no, I'm not
conceding your points. just useless to take it any further.


cheers

steve

>"Steve Whitty" > wrote
> were is the disrespect of saying no to someone converting someones work.
> the disrespect is in not abiding by the persons decision. do you know how
> much work is involved in converting a track. Put it this way, to convert
> one of my tracks from n2k3 to rFactor, even with noonans tools. To bring
> in all three levels of dx shaders in to the track,(n2k3 only operates on 1
> level of materials mostly) each material can have up to 6 individual
> colour, spec, bump, and additive tga or dds files. optimising the polys.
> editing and adding polys. making the track look like it was made for
> rfactor, not simply converted.



But in the end a track is a track. The layout makes or kill 90% of all
tracks released. The rest 10% are "beautiful but useless" tracks that
happen here and there for various sims.


It'll be enjoyable whatever graphics there is. Shaders, colour palette,
textures, it's all icing on the cake. If the 3d modeling is advanced (and
rFactor/advances in computing gives us the possibilities to increase the
poly count), it's all that is necessary.

I mean people still racing original GPL tracks, even unmodified. They don't
seem crude to me at all, Watkins Glen is excellent per example and is well
enough for the needs of the people.

That's why I dislike the "its cruder therefore worse" whole thingy going on
with rFactor. I'm not saying it's a bad thing to add all these things, but
is all the meticulous effort trully necessary when the basis is already well
enough?

But hey rFactor WEEKS after its release, has a very few tracks and mods, and
very few people racing it online. The clock is ticking.






--
-- François Ménard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...