Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 58

Thread: The file library

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Chalmette, Louisiana
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trainman_47 View Post
    I hate to bring this subject up because no doubt I'll get cut to pieces for it but I'm to the point to where I really don't care. Like the post or not, I'm sure many will agree the Indian content in the file library has just gotten a little out of hand......especially when it seems to be the SAME thing over and over again! I've been around this hobby long enough to know that MANY people have been burned and ripped off! Sadly, many were so upset with it that they simply walked away. Needless to say we've lost A LOT of good talent over some bad issues. With that said, is it REALLY too much to ask for a little more AMERICAN content? I don't think most would care if it's straight MSTS or Open Rails supported at this point. I've also noticed a fair number of INTERESTING projects in the works ( I suppose ) being done but yet I come home everyday from work and this is usually the 3rd site I check. Every day it's the same old Indian content that I'm sure tickles them to death but since this IS ( or was ) mainly an American site, How about a little more content?

    P.S Now I'll sit back, get the popcorn and wait for the hate mail to flood it!
    Watch your words folks. I griped about too much Indian stuff this time last year and was called a "racist" iin a private message. Needless to say I enjoy both DW and Toronto Mainline trains for my needs.

    AJ

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Carolina's
    Posts
    2,511

    Default

    I don't give a dinosaur poop what they say. Unless they are paying Nels to keep the lights on?

    Some of the ORTS users have expressed hiring them to write code to keep things moving forward. I suspect the quality of ORTS would suffer greatly though.

    Robert

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norwich, Norfolk, United Kingdom.
    Posts
    943

    Default

    Speaking for myself, i have done just about everything i can do that is within my interest on the existing shapes, as the recent release by SLI/TS of the BNSF 2 bay hopper shape showed if i get the right shape there is a lot i can do, but no longer having a shape Animator i can call on to help me alter things there is nothing i can do unless TS comes out with more varied shapes for me to use, having the same shapes coming out time after time means i have already done what i can on those shapes so no more is possible, if someone created a FA that added the bump out on the side of the 2 bay hopper for instance



    then there are a lot more roads i could do like CR, CBQ, (CNW had this style as well as the ones i did) and so on, a lot of the freeware shapes use aces that have small squares of colour that are stretched out over large areas which i do not like working with and the reason i work with TS a lot because that is rare on their aces

    having said that even if someone sent me an FA tommorrow to help on the 2Bay i would still not be able to start immediately as life is in the way at the moment, my wife was diagnosed with a brain tumour a few weeks ago and is due for an operation to remove it at the end of the month, luckily they believe it is benign but it will still be a tricky op due to where it is, so obviously she is my main priority at this moment in time and will be for some time until the op is successful and she has recovered.

    so the above are the reasons that i do not have the same sort of output as i once did, plus i do burn out easier than i did before, after completing the 2 Bays i pretty much did very little for a few months until i got over them.

    Intel i5 2400, Mobo ASUS P8H67, Win 7 Prof 64bit, 32GB Ram, Nvidia GTX960 4GB, SB Audigy, 6.25TB HDD's.

  4. #24

    Default

    A whole lot of the reason more NA content, especially routes, is not out there is the whole copyright/EULA issue. Now, I fully respect the idea of copyrights/EULA's--their purpose is to prevent people from acquiring intellectual property without either the permission of its creator or without paying the creator for it.

    That said, it would seem to me that there is a straight-forward solution to that problem that would protect copyright holders and allow people to make content available that uses proprietary objects. Let me illustrate by example: Johnny creates a really neat freeware route, but it does use proprietary objects from payware routes. When Johnny is preparing his route for distribution, he simply omits all of the proprietary objects and their associated files from his route download. In the documentation for his route download, he clearly states that route uses objects from the X, Y, and Z payware routes and those files are not included in the download and the person downloading must have those routes on his hard drive. Johnny can then instruct the person downloading--we'll call him George--that he must either run Route-Riter to copy the missing files to Johnny's route from the payware routes that George owns, or Johnny could set up his route installer to look for those missing files on George's hard drive during the installation routine. Now, I don't see that Johnny has violated any copyrights or EULA's because he has not provided ANY of the proprietary files that are under copyright. Similarly, if George has purchased the routes from which the missing files from Johnny's route will be copied, he has not violated a copyright or EULA because he is only copying/using those files for himself. As for the payware provider, this all should work to his benefit, as well. People who might not otherwise purchase the payware provider's route would likely purchase the route just so Johnny's installer would then have those files to copy.

    All of this has sort of been done for a lot of locomotive/car repaints, etc., but why wouldn't it work for routes, too?

    Thoughts, please.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,206

    Default

    It could work, but I look at it this way: A repaint would probably require just one set to have been purchased. Now, if a route builder only uses objects from one or two payware routes, it wouldn't be too unreasonable, but any more than that, and one would have to spend a fair bit of money just so a free route would work (if they don't have them already). And odds are, if someone hasn't bought that route already, it's probably because they didn't have any interest in it. As someone who does build routes (which I shoiluld probably finish sometime), I don't know that I want to throw a bunch of payware dependencies on routes people may or may not have even wanted into the mix just so my totally free route would work from the start. If someone wants to tweak my route later with some payware shapes, go for it, but I'll avoid it at all cost (heh heh heh) for an initial release.
    Isn't that what TS20xx route builders did? It seems to have driven some people mad if I remember

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    .
    Posts
    2,280

    Default

    There have been 2 payware routes released in the last 12 calendar months, plus a third route (MLT) came out with a $10 upgrade. I am curious if the people griping about frequency (including the OP) owns any of them? I personally haven't seen any proof in the form of screens. It is a bit disingenuous to bypass offerings because they feature some other type of equipment different than what someone happens to be specifically craving for at the moment. Any person who opts out of what has been made available under those circumstances is artificially torturing themselves. So I don't want to hear about their issues.

    There are 3 more payware routes in the works, with screens available for preview on facebook.

    5 out of the 6 payware routes are Open Rails only, meaning they do not come with MSTS physics or ace textures. How is that going to work with any grand scheme to mine payware assets and shove them into a free route potentially usable by MSTS? We have vendors building things to the new ORTS standards, making things lean and mean, and others are over here dealing with some campaign to clutter things up with elements of the past that bog our systems down.

    Just what kind of schedule for new routes are we looking for anyway? 5 routes a year? 10 a year? A certain quantity of routes that must be free? Or is it a "we wont rest until we can hoard 99 new routes" moment. Forget that. How many new routes do most people need to be happy? I have about 30, and that's all I can comfortably run on a revolving schedule while still maintaining an appreciation of the products. Hoarders need not apply.

    There were plenty of aspects of the 'good old library sharing days' that were very bad for the franchise in reality, and we do ourselves no favors to want to venture back to those days. I was watching some open rails videos on youtube and came across a couple videos that were basically published by idiots who didn't know what they were doing and who produced something that put a stain on the open rails franchise. One of them involved a replacement horn that someone added to a push-pull trainset that totally wrecked the doppler effect. It really made the open rails product seem weak and silly to anyone who had never given the platform a spin. No doubt that nonsense was enabled by a file library somewhere. For those vendors out there developing Open Rails Only content, they are specifically embracing the new formats to shed any connection to the past nonsense that file libraries, including those run by 'fake CEOs', were responsible for.

    As for the indian content, I don't have a problem, but I do wonder about the lawlessness of the environment and duplication of efforts that probably does plug this library with damn-near redundant products. If you reduced the 'digital blizzard' caused by the lawlessness, just what churn would the indian content side look like? Probably a lot slower.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    .Texas
    Posts
    1,164

    Default

    There were plenty of aspects of the 'good old library sharing days' that were very bad for the franchise in reality, and we do ourselves no favors to want to venture back to those days.

    Then WHATS the point of even having the library? And just WHAT do you mean by the franchise? The payware vendors? They sure haven't done us many favors in the past two years!

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    51

    Default

    No one wants to call it out. Open Rails have had the greatest influence the demise of train simulator.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Spurgeon,TN
    Posts
    645

    Default

    Too many cross-currents here, involving too many buzzwords.

    Apparently the issue really lays in the perceptions, misconceptions, and other detritus surrounding the use of textures.

    So one of you Flight Sim types try to explain where the textures on your models come from. Certainly not Textures.com. Paragraph 6.3 (h) of the Terms of Use at Textures.com specifically prohibits the release of their content under any Open Source license.

    Reading for Comprehension, the disappearing human ability.

    Doug Relyea
    Making stuff that works, using outdated Software on outdated Hardware.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Günzburg, Bayern, Germany
    Posts
    556

    Default

    It has always seemed to me that the trainsim community is a bit restrictive. As people have noticed here, there seems to be too many "do not use without my permission" or "don't use at all or you are going to burn in hell and courtroom" types of releases.

    That, in my opinion, is a huge stone on the back of our small giant here. I, for once, had to abandon several repaint projects simply because I had not been able to find the authors of some FA files that I needed; and they allowed the usage only with their written permission. Good luck with finding someone who abandoned the hobby 10 or more years ago. I have no 3d modelling skills, so that's a dead-end to me.

    I've been a member of several flight simulator communities, a truck sim community, a submarine simulator community and a couple of more. Things there work a bit differently. The members are more than happy to have their work shared among other members in all possible ways. Hell, people felt pride when their mod would become a part of a mega mod (like GWX for Silent Hunter III, for example). They, at least to me, never seemed so restrictive as guys around here.

    Perhaps I am wrong. After all, I have not contributed much to the community. I did, however, see my work being used in other projects without mentioning my name. While I always asked just for the credit, I certainly don't feel any grudge against anyone. I rather have it this way, than not contributing at all and just keeping the stuff I make to myself.

    Different people, different opinions. As for Indian content at this site - I don't like it, but I won't say anything against it.
    Borislav
    https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/signaturepics/sigpic100353_2.gif

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •