Random WIP 2006-2011
Moderators: MR.D, Moderators
-
Pressure Line
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09
I think a big problem is that nobody has successfully got any TA-like non-TA mod off the ground. Various from-scratch projects and conversion projects for open TA content have floundered, and most of the successful from-scratch mods are still considered their creator's private property. As such, nobody can make a "plays like BA but doesn't use OTA units" project anywhere.smoth wrote:before pl claims that spring is all copyright infringement: EE, NANOBLOBS, 1944, KP, lolimod etc, all their own concepts.
There there is the: epic 40k, starwars both made and permited by their respective companies.
My content that I have released for mappers and moders is all mine, the same can be said of noize, lathan and anyone else who releases features or assets to the community.
Gundam, while using bandai's ip is still my work entirely, I have say over those files, I cannot sell them but the models art and sounds are mine. Further more it is counted as fan art and also MINE.
almost all of the maps are ip free, in fact many of them share creative commons assets and one is gpl.
Now the ta stuff, yeah, we have been bitching for some time that it is not really right and that we want more independent projects. However, as argh said, when someone started exporting CNC models we jumped down their throat. This is to be expected in an open source community. It is a matter not only of legal consideration but the fact that someone somewhere did work hard for that model and content. Many of the content developers(aka spring moders) create all of their own work and frown upon this sort of thing.
While TA may be ignored, we need no further agitation in the way of copyright law. Frankly, I want to see ta gone from spring but I own ta so I can have ba etc, because I do own all of it and with a few days work convert any of them from spring to ta or vice versa. Now, that merely means that spring runs TA mod or TC, I do feel that players should NOT get the TA content with spring and they should be required to include the hpi files from their ta cd. I have no idea why this was not done. Anyway, the point is that spring doesn't need more legal concern. It has gotten to the point that soon spring will have many legit projects near completion, at that time I HOPE spring can dump ta and make the TA guys do the TA content crap.
Most of us are just throwing up a warning but this sort of reaction happens. I myself do this to the ta based mods from time to time. This is also part of the reason I fight to distiguish game projects from TA mods.
This is important because people enjoy, and are used to the TA/BA gameplay. They also like having a common pile of units they can tweak themselves. BA is based on stealing AA's work, AA is based on stealing TAUIP/Uberhack work, etc. Of course they add things at each level (Caydr poured his heart into AA), but still they base on the old Cavedog stuff. There is no non-Cavedog mod that could be used for the same work - XvM still needs a lot of love to be playable, and other mods are either closed, not TA-like, or both.
If an OTA-based mod is used, then you're tied to the S3O format, and likely over half your scripts have ripped OTA code in them. If it's a from-scratch mod, then it will still be ignored by the BA players even if it's totally BA-like, and you'll have to pour buckets of work into it anyways.
-
LathanStanley
- Posts: 1429
- Joined: 20 Jun 2005, 05:16
No, its very basic, but it makes a statement. While you probably did copy a good bit of stuff, over and over, it still looks great because of the detail put into the first window, and all the other good stuff.
The only thing I don't like is the unnatural shading. The semi circular cylinder should not be that bright, but, it doesn't matter, cuz its still a good building
The only thing I don't like is the unnatural shading. The semi circular cylinder should not be that bright, but, it doesn't matter, cuz its still a good building
-
LathanStanley
- Posts: 1429
- Joined: 20 Jun 2005, 05:16
its under a "non-realistic" lighting with 3dsmax... within Spring, it will be darker, and have generated shadows....Snipawolf wrote:No, its very basic, but it makes a statement. While you probably did copy a good bit of stuff, over and over, it still looks great because of the detail put into the first window, and all the other good stuff.
The only thing I don't like is the unnatural shading. The semi circular cylinder should not be that bright, but, it doesn't matter, cuz its still a good building
I can render a few examples with 3dsmax with raytraced shadows and more "controlled" light sources, etc.., but for now, meh, this works,....
trust me... just, just, you wait...
-
Pressure Line
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09
50% of the original was hidden faces, all of these have been removed, barring the faces on the back of the barrel, bottom of the turret, and sides of the hull.rattle wrote:Where's the improvement?Pressure Line wrote:was modeled on the original, so i did it on the rebuild.
also, conversion to s3o texturing (when coupled with someone who can texture) will allow for a much higher quality model. furthermore, theres some extras to go on this unit as a further test of my deployment script using the Starcraft Siege Tank as a gameplay concept base.
50%ish textured-
Pressure Line
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09
-
Pressure Line
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09
http://tinmanfunkymonkey.orcon.net.nz/s ... ormart.3dsArgh wrote:Well, it's a skin... send me the model, I'll give it a quick makeover. It'd look 10X better, with a decent skin (and, uh, no, it won't have a female face anywhere, promise, heh).
you can probably do a better uvmap than i can :/