Hi Piboso.
This is something I'm sure no modder would like to ask for, but there is evidence of flagrant abuse of modders work without asking for permissions first. Therefore unfortunately I'd like to request a modders file encryption tool(for vital physics and texture files) to avoid any of this very annoying practice happening in future.
Let me make it clear that I personally and I'm sure all decent modders are very willing to help and advise others who wish to make mod bikes and tracks or whatever it is that they are having problems with, but when some just take without at least having the decency to ask first then it is very annoying and well out of order. A tool like this would stop that practice.
If you are willing to consider this request, then if you could make it so that the modder who encrypts the file/s can assign a password to those encrypted files so that at any later date they can use that password to decrypt the files too. This would be very handy in circumstances were the modder has lost his original files and can gain access to them again by having the option to decrypt any files already released.
Note to all modders: Please ask the original authors before you just take and use their work. Most decent modders are very willing to help when asked to do so, but when you just take others hard work without any appreciation of the work that has gone into it then it is very annoying indeed.
Again, I'm sorry I've had to ask for this tool Piboso but I think it is now needed. :(
Hawk.
+1 Hawk
I am no modder but do tinker and have been a bad boy by doing things like the wet tyres for the NSR500 from Manu but I always post it and make sure I have made it clear whos bike it was. This was kinda an exception as it was to do a quick fix to try and keep you guys happy, but otherwise I would always ask permission first it is pure respect to do so.
Modders seem to get walked over and taken for granted these days and it is sooo wrong. I take my hat to each and every one of you guys. You make GPB what it is. Thank you
DD
Request nonsense, 99% of the gp bikes mods come from other games ....
including sbk, motogp, moto2, moto3, 500's, wss, nr750, etc...
Quote from: Blackheart on August 03, 2016, 02:38:58 PM
Request nonsense, 99% of the gp bikes mods come from other games ....
including sbk, moto2, moto3, wss, nr750, etc...
Have you had your work taken without concent? I've had quite a few skins appeare that are exactly the same as some of mine with colour changes and i know it's only a skin but you know how long it takes to do only for somone to edit and call it their own.
Credit where credit is due and only after permision has been given. Quite simple.
I do not see what the problem is, the only way to learn is looking at the work of others. ::)
I think including paints is a bit much. I use the pnt files of bikes as I am shit at Photoshop and use the tga in Corel instead. I often like just now use an original paint and wipe most of it out so I have a basic template as there is not always one. I only use the pnt from the maker of the bike who I always thank and respect.
Paints are not like a 3D model, I do know what you mean Matty but even if I do a paint and someone uses it as a base it is fine as it helps them.
I hope I dont get my bottom smacked by Manu now lol
DD
For what is worth, I'm utterly against the idea.
I prefer a place where modders do what they do knowing that people (and other modders) will benefit of their work and knowing that, inevitably, some will "steal" somebody else's work.
Open modding benefits to everybody: you make a bike, someone else tweaks it and eventually make it better. It would be nice if he asked for permission first and gave credit to you after, but if we go down the road of crypted modding, cooperation is dead. Period.
Quote from: matty0l215 on August 03, 2016, 02:43:33 PM
Have you had your work taken without concent? I've had quite a few skins appeare that are exactly the same as some of mine with colour changes and i know it's only a skin but you know how long it takes to do only for somone to edit and call it their own.
And what have you actually lost if somebody is ripping one of your skins and calling it "his one" ?
Quote from: matty0l215 on August 03, 2016, 02:43:33 PM
Credit where credit is due and only after permision has been given. Quite simple.
That I agree. But crypting will go beyond that.
Quote from: doubledragoncc on August 03, 2016, 02:51:37 PM
if I do a paint and someone uses it as a base it is fine as it helps them.
+1. And I'd happily extend that to physics files and the rest. 3d models are not even worth mentioning as they can be ripped anyway (most of the time at least).
There are other games with crypted mods: the end result is paid-for mods, modders working only to make money out of it. No thanks.
Making encrypted mods is also the first step towards closed communities. And us, we're already small enough.
Apart from that people like Max believes that just extract a 3D model and is ready for GP Bikes (blissful ignorance ;D)
Encrypt the rest of the files makes even less sense, since they are based on the Piboso's default bikes. ::)
Quote from: Blackheart on August 03, 2016, 04:15:01 PM
Apart from that people like Max believes that just extract a 3D model and is ready for GP Bikes (blissful ignorance ;D)
I think you're un-blissfully ignoring the fact that I never said that.
Helps proving, one more time, who's ignorant around here ...
(http://winningelevenblog.com/files/2009/04/image3971-580x295.jpg)
Quote from: Blackheart on August 03, 2016, 02:38:58 PM
Request nonsense, 99% of the gp bikes mods come from other games ....
including sbk, motogp, moto2, moto3, 500's, wss, nr750, etc...
....we are too small of a community to start doing shit like mod encryption.
max said everything that needs to be said.
The next step will be mod for money ;D
I add that people should be happy if someone tries to create new contents.
I just want Credit where it's due and at least an attempt to get permission (if someone says no, then no is the answer), that would make me happy.
I'm not bothered that people use my skins, just ask me first. It's not hard.
Encryption is a little higher than I'd like. It's not something i've ever thought about and If it was used, i wouldn't want it for non critical files (Paints, .ini files etc) things like the model files are already encrypted (technically :P) and i would want for it to be optional.
Once proper tutorials and documentation are about then there shouldn't be any need for using others work. And if you are happy to encrypt your files then should at least be willing to help out when people want to learn.
And no, asking for money for Mod's is stupid. If you want money for your work, go do it for a job and sell it properly. Or ask for a donation, I'm fine with that.
U are right Matty, ask permission and credits is right. I have often found skins based on my work (or another version of the NR750) but the only thing that bothered me is that they were ugly! ;D
I think we all agree with you Matty: people should ask permission and the creator should have the final answer.
Problem is, we already know 100% sure that some people won't ask for permission. It's a fact.
So what do we want to do ? Bother with encryption and its drawbacks just to avoid that some silly 13yrs old "steals" stuff and brands it as his own ?
I have a better solution: public tarring when the silly boy is caught with the jam on the hands. Who cares ...
NICE!!! I'm really pleased this post has got such a variety of reactions...... It really does shows up those who are willing to plagiarise others work and those who are decent people with reasonable arguments against encryption...... But more than anything I hope now those who've been using others work without asking first will now consider contacting the original authors instead of just assuming that, "everyone is plagiarising others work so what does it matter". ::)
But I'd be happy to put this request to rest by just saying, "We're all part of the same community here, and it doesn't take a lot of effort to consider others before yourself.... So let's all do the right thing by each other here before we start working on any mods and just ask before you use anyone else's work, eh?". Keeps everyone happy. ;D
Hawk.
Quote from: Hawk on August 03, 2016, 07:46:04 PM
It really does shows up those who are willing to plagiarise others work and those who are decent people with reasonable arguments against encryption......
Uh, not sure of the intended meaning of that ... it sounds strange.
Anyway, the same discussion already took place also on the MXB forum, for the very same reasons.
MXS (the rival of MXB) has the encryption feature and many in that community hate the fact you have plenty of paid-for modding content: you have to buy bikes and track to join online championships (for which you have to pay too). I'd hate that. You pay more for the modded bikes than for the game itself.
Not because I don't want to pay, but because I'll have the feeling that some "pro" modders will only work for the money.
If CAWS say "We will make an endurance bike set, you can donate a few quids for that", I'll chip in no hesitation.
If a random guy comes here and say "I have a pro-grade KTM 1290 model for GPB, 5$ per player" I'd say no thanks.
Similarly for KRP: there are online competitions with mod karts that are not given to the ones not in the competition (no money involved though as far as I know).
What happened: some smart ass managed to get the "private content" (mod kart) and then shitstorm came on the forum.
Side note: from the MXB discussion, if I recall correctly PiBoSo was not completely against paid-for modding (which may imply he may not be completely against encryption).
Quote from: matty0l215 on August 03, 2016, 04:53:10 PM
And no, asking for money for Mod's is stupid. If you want money for your work, go do it for a job and sell it properly. Or ask for a donation, I'm fine with that.
I had the same opinion I have on all game modding. No Mod should be locked by a pay wall unless it is endorsed by the original game dev (at which point it might as well be DLC for the game)
Would an encryption tool increase the number of modders and the quality of mods?
If the answer is yes to both questions, then it can be done.
Quote from: PiBoSo on August 03, 2016, 09:07:30 PM
Would an encryption tool increase the number of modders and the quality of mods?
sarcasm? ???
Quote from: Blackheart on August 03, 2016, 09:09:49 PM
Quote from: PiBoSo on August 03, 2016, 09:07:30 PM
Would an encryption tool increase the number of modders and the quality of mods?
sarcasm? ???
No.
If encryption can bring to the community talented modders that are concerned about stealing, then it could be worth it.
What's your opinion?
Ah ok. :P
I am of the opinion that we need "official" mods definitely the sim creators are able to create higher quality mods. For example an SBK official mod with 3d models Temporary (for licensing problems) and these could be made encrypted on the physics but with the possibility for the modders to change the 3D model with the real one.
But for the modders stuff it is useless a Encryption Tool, none of our bike is perfect, leave the freedom for anyone to be able to improve them, it is only an advantage for this community.
I have respect for who make bikes (for fun or a real replica), but I think the realism is going down, because it is very difficult to create a good bikes set for gpb now :P
IMO ;D
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 03, 2016, 08:18:39 PM
Similarly for KRP: there are online competitions with mod karts that are not given to the ones not in the competition (no money involved though as far as I know).
What happened: some smart ass managed to get the "private content" (mod kart) and then shitstorm came on the forum.
I'd just like to clarify what happened. Those specific members who had gotten "private content" were removed from the series because they couldn't handle racing maturely. That is why the league went to an invite-only state. Unfortunately, that same group of people took .edf files (engine models made by me) and reposted them on the same forum as their own creation. That is why there was a shitstorm. People weren't being held accountable for not giving credit.
Encryption will not solve it - people will use model extraction software if they want it bad enough, but if anything, we should be giving unlimited access to the 3d files, not limiting access. With such small audiences, the communities would benefit (on the modding side) by having files completely open so examples are easier to show. For example, the GPB community makes their 3ds models available. That is FANTASTIC, and I wish that KRP's modders would do the same. On the same side of it, there has never once been a new kart mod for KRP. The reason for it is because very few people understand all the aspects of linking parts in 3ds max - as in, naming conventions and such were and still are very vague. If we had access to a base model (@PiBoSo) more people would be inclined to put their completely finished models into the sim.
A bit of a rant, but I think that the short solution is to become more strict on enforcing content theft... not encrypting files. But in the long term, ease of accessibility will build communities that learn from each other, not hiding 3d models from curious eyes.
Quote from: PiBoSo on August 03, 2016, 09:07:30 PM
Would an encryption tool increase the number of modders and the quality of mods?
If the answer is yes to both questions, then it can be done.
I think you have two very valid points there Piboso.
1: The work required to create high quality MODS would certainly be very much more encouraged if the files could be encrypted for sure, because I don't care what anyone says, work that constitutes a MOD doesn't entitle the community to use and abuse the contents of the work put into creating that MOD no more than the community is entitled to use and abuse content supplied direct from an official software developer. So I'd say "YES" it would encourage modders to put in the work required into creating high quality mods knowing that their work is protected. Definitely.
That's not to say that the same modders wouldn't continue to help those in the community that needed help and advice to create their own mods, because the more genuine modders out there producing good quality mods for your software the better. :)
2: A file encryption tool would I'm sure increase the number of very capable modders(some we already have within our midst in the community), but good quality modders also need the tools to export the graphics and modelling work they are capable of doing in the app they work with. Quite a few great modders have come our way here only to disappear because the tools to export their work are not there. FBX converter is a great start but needs to be capable of exporting the shaders and maps direct from the FBX file and not have to create the .shd file which in effect means creating and applying the shaders/maps twice over(once in the 3D app and then again in the text.shd file to get the same effects), that is a big turn-off for sure.
So again I'd say "YES". A file encryption tool for modders would definitely encourage the numbers of high quality modders to work on MODS for your software, but I'd qualify that by adding that they would also need the tools too to export the work they are capable of doing direct from the FBX file without messing about having to create an additional .shd text file.
I'd just like to end this post by saying to one or two people here who seem to have the wrong impression or definition of a MOD:
Modding is all about creating your own original content and not using or altering anyone else's work to achieve your goal, especially without permissions to do so.
Hawk.
Which "high quality modders" do you have in mind, Hawk?
You seem very sure that there are plenty of modders that will suddenly flock to GPB once it has encryption.
Also, if we start with this encryption non-sense we also have to start banning every mod that takes stuff from other games.
And then say hello to paid mods, less communication between modders and players, less mods in general etc.
We should listen to the ones who already know the results instead of speculating...
Quote from: Corrie on August 03, 2016, 11:25:50 PMEncryption will not solve it - people will use model extraction software if they want it bad enough, but if anything, we should be giving unlimited access to the 3d files, not limiting access. With such small audiences, the communities would benefit (on the modding side) by having files completely open so examples are easier to show. For example, the GPB community makes their 3ds models available. That is FANTASTIC, and I wish that KRP's modders would do the same. On the same side of it, there has never once been a new kart mod for KRP. The reason for it is because very few people understand all the aspects of linking parts in 3ds max - as in, naming conventions and such were and still are very vague. If we had access to a base model (@PiBoSo) more people would be inclined to put their completely finished models into the sim.
A bit of a rant, but I think that the short solution is to become more strict on enforcing content theft... not encrypting files. But in the long term, ease of accessibility will build communities that learn from each other, not hiding 3d models from curious eyes.
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 03, 2016, 08:18:39 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 03, 2016, 07:46:04 PM
It really does show up those who are willing to plagiarise others work and those who are decent people with reasonable arguments against encryption......
Uh, not sure of the intended meaning of that ... it sounds strange.
That's okay Max, rest assured it wasn't aimed at you mate. ;)
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 03, 2016, 08:18:39 PM
Anyway, the same discussion already took place also on the MXB forum, for the very same reasons.
MXS (the rival of MXB) has the encryption feature and many in that community hate the fact you have plenty of paid-for modding content: you have to buy bikes and track to join online championships (for which you have to pay too). I'd hate that. You pay more for the modded bikes than for the game itself.
Not because I don't want to pay, but because I'll have the feeling that some "pro" modders will only work for the money.
If CAWS say "We will make an endurance bike set, you can donate a few quids for that", I'll chip in no hesitation.
If a random guy comes here and say "I have a pro-grade KTM 1290 model for GPB, 5$ per player" I'd say no thanks.
Similarly for KRP: there are online competitions with mod karts that are not given to the ones not in the competition (no money involved though as far as I know).
What happened: some smart ass managed to get the "private content" (mod kart) and then shitstorm came on the forum.
Side note: from the MXB discussion, if I recall correctly PiBoSo was not completely against paid-for modding (which may imply he may not be completely against encryption).
I think there are enough passionate people here in the community, some well capable of creating high quality mods, that we won't see paid for mods here. ;)
Hawk.
Quote from: Hawk on August 03, 2016, 07:46:04 PMBut more than anything I hope now those who've been using others work without asking first will now consider contacting the original authors instead of just assuming that, "everyone is plagiarising others work so what does it matter". ::)
Maybe just say who you are talking about if you want them to feel any consequences...
Quote from: vin97 on August 04, 2016, 12:18:53 AM
Which "high quality modders" do you have in mind, Hawk?
You seem very sure that there are plenty of modders that will suddenly flock to GPB once it has encryption.
I qualified it. I suggest you read my post again Vin. ;)
Quote from: vin97 on August 04, 2016, 12:18:53 AM
Also, if we start with this encryption non-sense we also have to start banning every mod that takes stuff from other games.
That would be very hard to police, but it is a laudable goal to aim for. ;D
Quote from: vin97 on August 04, 2016, 12:18:53 AM
And then say hello to paid mods, less communication between modders and modder etc.
Only the selfish people we can do without here would ignore requests for help and advise, and yes we may get the odd unheard of modder try and publish a pay-for MOD, but I doubt they would get very far with it, and besides, if we can encourage high quality genuine mods then we wouldn't need to pay for any mods. But why you associate all this doom and gloom on the release of an encryption tool I cannot imagine.... I suspect that you just prefer access to the bike files so you can play about with them, yes? :)
Hawk.
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 12:41:52 AM
Quote from: vin97 on August 04, 2016, 12:18:53 AM
Which "high quality modders" do you have in mind, Hawk?
You seem very sure that there are plenty of modders that will suddenly flock to GPB once it has encryption.
I qualified it. I suggest you read my post again Vin. ;)
I don't see it.
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 12:41:52 AM
Quote from: vin97 on August 04, 2016, 12:18:53 AM
Also, if we start with this encryption non-sense we also have to start banning every mod that takes stuff from other games.
That would be very hard to police, but it is a laudable goal to aim for. ;D
So before thinking of introducing encryption you should think about how to make sure that nobody is stealing from other games.
If there is no way to police that, then how do you want to argue against people "abusing"/"stealing" (more suitable words would be "developing" or "improving") stuff from other modders?
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 12:41:52 AM
Quote from: vin97 on August 04, 2016, 12:18:53 AM
And then say hello to paid mods, less communication between modders and modder etc.
Only the selfish people we can do without here would ignore requests for help and advise, and yes we may get the odd unheard of modder try and publish a pay-for MOD, but I doubt they would get very far with it, and besides, if we can encourage high quality genuine mods then we wouldn't need to pay for any mods. But why you associate all this doom and gloom on the release of an encryption tool I cannot imagine.... I suspect that you just prefer access to the bike files so you can play about with them, yes? :)
Obviously, because it's the most efficient way for this community as a whole to get new and/or improved mods, as Corrie has outlined. As long as credit is given, the original author doesn't lose anything.
That said, Manu has not given me permission to publish a modified version of his Moto2 bike so my experiments will remain private.
Quote from: vin97 on August 04, 2016, 12:29:12 AM
Quote from: Hawk on August 03, 2016, 07:46:04 PMBut more than anything I hope now those who've been using others work without asking first will now consider contacting the original authors instead of just assuming that, "everyone is plagiarising others work so what does it matter". ::)
Maybe just say who you are talking about if you want them to feel any consequences...
Do I look like a banana Vin or what. Lol! ;D ::)
Hawk.
Am I missing something here?
Summary of this discussion:
Vin has modified for curiosity and fun a bike (project X ? ::) )
Hawk says "this is bad! I want a new tool because It is not his bike!!"
Seriously ... but what you're talking :o
Let me give an example, long ago Allen had created its own version of the old NR750 0.4 with different sounds/engine/phisics
This: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJ0kG6DQFAc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJ0kG6DQFAc)
He had published and I made him remove it, because the author was me. When I had time I tested his version, I used some of his changes to create the v.1.0, its a mix of the work of 3 people.
And he is in the credits as co-author of the mod like me and Matty. This for me is a community victory. I can understand
may annoy that others are working on their own project, but if there are good results ... why not? ::)
What happens if encryption kicks in: a few "pro" modders come and good paid-for mods may appear. One day one of them makes a truly exceptional bike, perfect handling and all, really the showcase bike for GPB, and he sells it for whichever price.
Of course, all the other modders are very interested in the details of how he achieved this and go asking to him.
Now the chap has a choice: openly explain to essentially everybody what he did or keep the secret sauce for himself, bake a few other bikes and keep on making money.
I don't give many chances for option 1 here. Same applies for tracks.
Moddig (to me) should be like open software: you do stuff for the community, for free (or for an upfront funding of your work, that's not the same as selling).
You are the author but when you put your software out, you ship the source too and others are free to modify it provided that they credit you (and they make their source available too).
Since GPB has been moddable we've seen plenty of modders say things like "I'm angry because Mr.X stole/used/modified my stuff, he should have asked me".
And that's true, but are we really sure that if Mr.X had asked permission, the answer would have been positive ? I'm not.
As Blackheart has just shown with the 750/Allen story, modders become instantly jealous of what they do. The guy (Allen) modified the sound of the bike (the sound !) and Blackheart asked him to remove the mod ... what's the point ?!?!? The bike was out, he changed the sounds, where's the crime ? The sound ended up in the bike anyway (which is good I guess) and Allen is now credited (which is good) and everybody is happy, but why the need to ask him to remove his changes ? Where was the harm in having a forum post saying "Modded sound for Blackheart's 750" ?
+1 to that MaX..
Would it instead possible to attach a hard coded name to a bike which can't be changed? This way there could be iterations after, titled differently, but it will always come up with the original author name..
+1 Fats
Encryption and paid mods will kill GPB............plain and simple.
FFS its hard enough to get new customers as it is with free mods now tell potential new customers they have to pay for mods!!!
At the end of the day it is about respect and that is all that is needed but if modders turn out to be cry babies wanting fame glory and money then they are not for GPB. Sorry but this is a COMMUNITY for fun is it not? At the end of the day, do modders put Honda or Yamaha's name in the credits? No, but where did the modder get the design for the bike in the first place? Where did the original paint liveries come from? Ok they are not the personal work the modder has done to MAKE the bike and paints,BUT they are another persons hard work to make in the first place!!!
We have some of the best modders in the bike sim world and it has been basically trouble free. Why over complicate everything FFS.
No matter what happens SOMEONE will rip off work even if it is encrypted so why bother in the first place.
DD
Quote from: Blackheart on August 04, 2016, 02:55:16 AM
Summary of this discussion:
Vin has modified for curiosity and fun a bike (project X ? ::) )
Hawk says "this is bad! I want a new tool because It is not his bike!!"
Seriously ... but what you're talking :o
Let me give an example, long ago Allen had created its own version of the old NR750 0.4 with different sounds/engine/phisics
This: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJ0kG6DQFAc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJ0kG6DQFAc)
He had published and I made him remove it, because the author was me. When I had time I tested his version, I used some of his changes to create the v.1.0, its a mix of the work of 3 people.
And he is in the credits as co-author of the mod like me and Matty. This for me is a community victory. I can understand
may annoy that others are working on their own project, but if there are good results ... why not? ::)
I've never said that at all....... You've totally misunderstood me Blacky. Lol ;D
I'm not against anyone working on someone else's work to improve work already done or to get another alternative version from an already released bike. I'm all for it! But what I have continually stressed is the need to obtain permissions from the author of that work
before you release that work into the community. That is not being done in most cases. Work is being released as if it is totally their own work without credits being given at all.
Also releasing someone else's work and giving credits but without first gaining those permissions of the original authors does not give you the right to publish that work either. Permissions need to be gained first.
Also, I'm not talking about encrypting anything else but the
physics and sound files and I'd personally like to see the texture files encrypted too.
BTW, the sound files are already encrypted in the default bikes, I haven't heard any big protests about that, I haven't seen anyone trying to sell good sound files either. :)
You've got to realise that this issue only arises when there is major abuse of someone else's work, and I define that major abuse as,
using someone else's work without first asking for permissions and giving credit to the original authors for their work.
If Piboso does introduce an encryption tool for modders then those concerned have only themselves to blame..... If they'd have done the right thing in the first place then this issue wouldn't have been suggested in the first place.
File encryption doesn't automatically mean everything is going to become a paid-for MODS community... That is just total gross scare-mongering. Those that believe that need to open their eyes instead of just taking one example and saying this is how all will turn out if file encryption is implemented..... Ever heard of "
Tarring everyone with the same brush". ::)
I'll give you an alternative example for you guys who believe that to be true: Take a look at X-Plane 10 Flight Simulator.
Absolutely no file encryption at all and yet a lot of people create MODS that the community buys. Nothing to do with file encryption at all... It's simply because the high quality planes are put up for sale by the modders and the low quality planes are free.
So by that example the conclusion is : Paid MODS are only accepted in a community that is happy to buy MODS,
it has nothing to do with file encryption at all. :)
But no-one here is talking about creating paid-for MODS are they, and I'm sure having been a member of this community for a good number of years, that won't happen. And if anyone came along trying to sell a mod then I think they'd soon be chased off with their tail between their legs. Lol! ;D
But seriously, no. There is enough talent and passion already here in this community for that not to happen in my opinion. :)
DD hit the nail on the head when he said, "
At the end of the day it is about respect and that is all that is needed". How true is that! Well said DD! ;D ;)
Hawk.
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
BTW, the sound files are already encrypted in the default bikes, I haven't heard any big protests about that, I haven't seen anyone trying to sell good sound files either. :)
I protested and PiBoSo explained why they are encrypted: it sucks but that's it, no other way around that.
Side note: circumventing the protection on GPB default sounds is fairly easy.
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
I haven't seen anyone trying to sell good sound files either. :)
Maybe because mod sounds do not have encryption ...
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
You've got to realise that this issue only arises when there is major abuse of someone else's work, and I define that major abuse as, using someone else's work without first asking for permissions and giving credit to the original authors for their work.
If Piboso does introduce an encryption tool for modders then those concerned have only themselves to blame..... If they'd have done the right thing in the first place then this issue wouldn't have been suggested in the first place.
Yes but then the whole community has to bear the side effects of encryption: to punish some you've punished all.
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
File encryption doesn't automatically mean everything is going to become a paid-for MODS community... That is just total gross scare-mongering. Those that believe that need to open their eyes instead of just taking one example and saying this is how all will turn out if file encryption is implemented..... Ever heard of "Tarring everyone with the same brush". ::)
I'll give you an alternative example for you guys who believe that to be true: Take a look at X-Plane 10 Flight Simulator. Absolutely no file encryption at all and yet a lot of people create MODS that the community buys. Nothing to do with file encryption at all... It's simply because the high quality planes are put up for sale by the modders and the low quality planes are free.
So by that example the conclusion is : Paid MODS are only accepted in a community that is happy to buy MODS, it has nothing to do with file encryption at all. :)
Hawk you didn't understand the reasoning I made (which is more or less the reasoning Piboso suggested too): if we have encryption you will not start selling mods, maybe. But others will: modders that today do not bother to work on GBP will come because of the encryption. And most likely, they will come with a price tag one their creations.
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
DD hit the nail on the head when he said, "At the end of the day it is about respect and that is all that is needed". How true is that! Well said DD! ;D ;)
So let's ask for respect instead of encryption.
Stupid question but : what's the link between paid mods and encryption?
We could already have douchebag selling his mods with readable data and if the file encryption is implemented, someone having paid for a mod could still give it to someone else who hasn't.
Quote from: RiccoChicco on August 04, 2016, 01:49:10 PM
Stupid question but : what's the link between paid mods and encryption?
Modders that mod for money are reluctant to work for games that do not provide encryption.
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 12:24:43 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
BTW, the sound files are already encrypted in the default bikes, I haven't heard any big protests about that, I haven't seen anyone trying to sell good sound files either. :)
I protested and PiBoSo explained why they are encrypted: it sucks but that's it, no other way around that.
Side note: circumventing the protection on GPB default sounds is fairly easy.
Then Piboso needs to know how that is achieved so that he can stop it happening, yes? ;)
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 12:24:43 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
I haven't seen anyone trying to sell good sound files either. :)
Maybe because mod sounds do not have encryption ...
Very true....
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 12:24:43 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
You've got to realise that this issue only arises when there is major abuse of someone else's work, and I define that major abuse as, using someone else's work without first asking for permissions and giving credit to the original authors for their work.
If Piboso does introduce an encryption tool for modders then those concerned have only themselves to blame..... If they'd have done the right thing in the first place then this issue wouldn't have been suggested in the first place.
Yes but then the whole community has to bear the side effects of encryption: to punish some you've punished all.
Why see encryption as a punishment.... It will only stop those that wantonly abuse others work without asking permissions first, yes? If people want help and advice they only need to ask. I mean if someone walked into your house and helped themselves to your food without permission I'm sure you'd be the first to complain.... so why do you consider mod work any different? It's a strange attitude to consider any work you do free for all to do as they please with without asking permissions first, surely?
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 12:24:43 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
File encryption doesn't automatically mean everything is going to become a paid-for MODS community... That is just total gross scare-mongering. Those that believe that need to open their eyes instead of just taking one example and saying this is how all will turn out if file encryption is implemented..... Ever heard of "Tarring everyone with the same brush". ::)
I'll give you an alternative example for you guys who believe that to be true: Take a look at X-Plane 10 Flight Simulator. Absolutely no file encryption at all and yet a lot of people create MODS that the community buys. Nothing to do with file encryption at all... It's simply because the high quality planes are put up for sale by the modders and the low quality planes are free.
So by that example the conclusion is : Paid MODS are only accepted in a community that is happy to buy MODS, it has nothing to do with file encryption at all. :)
Hawk you didn't understand the reasoning I made (which is more or less the reasoning Piboso suggested too): if we have encryption you will not start selling mods, maybe. But others will: modders that today do not bother to work on GBP will come because of the encryption. And most likely, they will come with a price tag one their creations.
You've misunderstood what I was trying to point out Max; that encryption doesn't bring paid-for MODS at all, it's the community itself that decides to accept modders who produce those paid for mods. Nothing to do with file encryption at all.
Put it this way - There is nothing at all stopping a modder producing a mod and asking money for it now. File encryption isn't needed to make someone pay for a mod before they can use it, there are plenty of software packaging utilities that won't allow installation until you enter a serial key or a password, etc. Again, not having file encryption doesn't stop modders asking for money it's more to do with the size of the market and how much money they feel they can make from it. Simple as that.....
So no..... You've got it all wrong mate.... File encryption has nothing to do with modders asking for money for their mods, not at all. :)
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 12:24:43 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
DD hit the nail on the head when he said, "At the end of the day it is about respect and that is all that is needed". How true is that! Well said DD! ;D ;)
So let's ask for respect instead of encryption.
I'd totally agree with you on that Max(did I just agree with you? Hehe! :o ;D ), but from some of the attitudes expressed here in this post, do you really think that is going to work? I mean seriously? Lol! :o
But.... Let's see if that works, eh. 8)
Hawk.
i'm confused now, is this (in part) about the projectx bike or not?
if so, i did not even upload the bike, i just showed that a 300hp moto2 is theoretically possible by putting a different engine in the bike. that is all i wanted to do (and all i can do anyway since i have no clue how 3d modelling works).
As a point about paints being used, IF the maker of a bike model offered it with a blank white TGA livery/fairing or whatever name they use, it would mean guys like me dont HAVE to extract a pnt file to be able to make our own paints. Templates are fine BUT not always offered and I cant use PhotoShop like most of you as I really dont have time to learn it and od all I have to.
Sometimes it is due to lack of a plain bike paint that one has to butcher and existing one!!! Or we would have a lot less personal paints. It is important to make it EASY for guys to have personal paints and not frickin harder!!!
DD
Quote from: doubledragoncc on August 04, 2016, 04:36:06 PM
As a point about paints being used, IF the maker of a bike model offered it with a blank white TGA livery/fairing or whatever name they use, it would mean guys like me dont HAVE to extract a pnt file to be able to make our own paints. Templates are fine BUT not always offered and I cant use PhotoShop like most of you as I really dont have time to learn it and od all I have to.
Sometimes it is due to lack of a plain bike paint that one has to butcher and existing one!!! Or we would have a lot less personal paints. It is important to make it EASY for guys to have personal paints and not frickin harder!!!
DD
A Paint-Kit is what I think your asking for DD? A .psd file with all the parts already set in layers ready for painting? ;)
Hawk.
NO NO NO FFS..............................Just kidding but NO Hawky
A TGA not PSD as it has to be converted for me to use as I DONT use PHOTOSHOP I am a Corel boy baby. ;D And I am sure it would help others too as it is far easier to edit a tga than a psd if you dont have the right software. I am talking about making it REAL simple for everyone to do.
Thats why I made a Ducati Parts Pack so you did not even have to paint much just use the parts you want to change. THANKS BIG TIME to H for making the Ducati's like that. It makes it easy and fun to be able to paint nearly everything.
The LESS guys have to do to make personal paints WITHOUT using some dudes custom paint and getting their nuts bit off, the more personal it gets and the more personal paints will be used in GPB.
Naturally this is just the bikes paint I am talking about, but the more we are allowed to do in GPB without agro, the more fun it will be and a lot less battles of the bitches on the forums!!! Keep the fights for the racetrack lol
DD
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 07:31:30 AM
As Blackheart has just shown with the 750/Allen story, modders become instantly jealous of what they do. The guy (Allen) modified the sound of the bike (the sound !) and Blackheart asked him to remove the mod ... what's the point ?!?!? The bike was out, he changed the sounds, where's the crime ? The sound ended up in the bike anyway (which is good I guess) and Allen is now credited (which is good) and everybody is happy, but why the need to ask him to remove his changes ? Where was the harm in having a forum post saying "Modded sound for Blackheart's 750" ?
This comment is false and too stupid for an answer ::)
@Hawk
I was ironic, I have not really understood the real reason of this discussion, what made you take the idea? ???
Quote from: doubledragoncc on August 04, 2016, 04:55:15 PM
NO NO NO FFS..............................Just kidding but NO Hawky
A TGA not PSD as it has to be converted for me to use as I DONT use PHOTOSHOP I am a Corel boy baby. ;D And I am sure it would help others too as it is far easier to edit a tga than a psd if you dont have the right software. I am talking about making it REAL simple for everyone to do.
Thats why I made a Ducati Parts Pack so you did not even have to paint much just use the parts you want to change. THANKS BIG TIME to H for making the Ducati's like that. It makes it easy and fun to be able to paint nearly everything.
The LESS guys have to do to make personal paints WITHOUT using some dudes custom paint and getting their nuts bit off, the more personal it gets and the more personal paints will be used in GPB.
Naturally this is just the bikes paint I am talking about, but the more we are allowed to do in GPB without agro, the more fun it will be and a lot less battles of the bitches on the forums!!! Keep the fights for the racetrack lol
DD
Debate DD.... This is what a forum is all about, right? ;D
Luckily this thread has not degraded into a cat fight(Yet). Lol. There are some interesting points of view being posted for sure. ;D 8)
A TGA you say? Well that's easier to do than creating a .psd paint kit. Just convert whatever the template image format is into a TGA format and bobs your uncle(or rather not. Lol). ;D
Hawk.
UM...............did you not read the part about THERE ARE NO FUCKING TEMPLATES AVAILABLE!!! ;D
Manu has made some for MotoGP but not Moto2 so I butchered an original as had nothing else...........sorry Manu I had to sacrifice one bro for the greater god of painting. I will be posting it today so that nobody has to kill anymore innocent bike paints...........it will be a plain white paint and yes I will say it was an original from Manu before he bites, beats and whips me.
As bike makers normally make paint liveries why not just have a blank one like the default bike but white? Problem solved and no extra work for the modder.
DD
Quote from: Blackheart on August 04, 2016, 04:56:12 PM
@Hawk
I was ironic, I have not really understood the real reason of this discussion, what made you take the idea? ???
The reason this was suggested was because of work being used without asking permission to use it, as I indicated in the initial opening post in this thread..... I'm not going to name people as it's up to them to do the right thing, but just to say, it doesn't hurt to just ask, and between fellow GPB community members that's all that would be needed. It's about just having respect for other fellow modders before just plagiarising their work without a thought for the hard work put into it by another author..... A simple PM to ask permission from the author is all that's needed and would've been, and still would be received positively and also greatly appreciated.
It's also about putting this issue to the fore so it's in peoples minds and that we're not all the sort of people who blatantly accept using others work for their own ends without asking permission to use that work first. It's just about trying to get people to be decent about this whole thing instead of just taking what they want without conscience or question. :)
If an encryption tool is needed to stop that sort of behaviour then I'm all for it, but honestly it's really not something that I would've wanted to happen. But Piboso did point out and suggest some other fringe benefits I hadn't thought about of introducing an encryption tool that I do agree with too, so we all realised something new about this too, though I know we don't all agree on it. :)
We're not here to start wars in the community, but sometimes people need reminding to respect each other and shown the possible consequences of their actions. :)
Hawk.
I agree ask permission before, but i think that GP bikes is based on a database, with only the right mods, the servers should use just bikes from the original authors, I think this is enough. :P
Quote from: doubledragoncc on August 04, 2016, 05:15:21 PM
UM...............did you not read the part about THERE ARE NO FUCKING TEMPLATES AVAILABLE!!! ;D
Manu has made some for MotoGP but not Moto2 so I butchered an original as had nothing else...........sorry Manu I had to sacrifice one bro for the greater god of painting. I will be posting it today so that nobody has to kill anymore innocent bike paints...........it will be a plain white paint and yes I will say it was an original from Manu before he bites, beats and whips me.
As bike makers normally make paint liveries why not just have a blank one like the default bike but white? Problem solved and no extra work for the modder.
DD
Well F*ck me! I wonder who has the gaul to release a bike without a paint template DD!? I know... I'm just joking! Hehe! ;D
But no, I don't do much template painting so really didn't take in that part of what you said as it just wouldn't occur to me that a bike wouldn't have a paint template. :P ;D
Hawk.
LOL Hawky
I am sure all bikes first livery is plain white base so why not save one copy before its used? Common sense I'd say lol................................ oh I forgot this is GPB we are talking about hehe
DD
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 12:24:43 PM
Side note: circumventing the protection on GPB default sounds is fairly easy.
Then Piboso needs to know how that is achieved so that he can stop it happening, yes? ;)
I think he's smart enough to figure out that by himself. Problem is, even knowing that, there's not a lot he could do to prevent it.
Note: I really don't see a good reason why one would "crack" the default sounds, so per se this is not an issue.
It was just to tell you that encrypting the samples can be circumvented, which makes encrypting them not as useful as some imagine.
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
Why see encryption as a punishment.... It will only stop those that wantonly abuse others work without asking permissions first, yes? If people want help and advice they only need to ask.
As I said: people learn looking at other mods. If you prevent that, you prevent them from learning.
Yes, they could come to you with a very specific question and you may be willing to answer but sometimes one just needs to play with the stuff to understand and, anyway, at the 10th question you'd be pissed off and you'll stop answering (which is normal).
But mostly this: another modder could improve somebody's else mod, how would he do that if you encrypt ?!
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
I mean if someone walked into your house and helped themselves to your food without permission I'm sure you'd be the first to complain.... so why do you consider mod work any different? It's a strange attitude to consider any work you do free for all to do as they please with without asking permissions first, surely?
I consider it different because it is different.
Here's a better analogy: if I invite somebody to my house and I serve him my super special foie-gras and lobster pizza, and then the guy goes home and does the same pizza for himself, I would not complain. Of course, if he calls this his own pizza then I may be marginally pissed off (just marginally), but for sure I will not require any other person to whom I'll serve my special pizza to eat it blindfolded to "protect" my creation.
If you don't plan to sell your mods, there's no need for encryption. Simply because there's little reason to steal free stuff and there's little to lose for the creator if the free stuff gets "stolen' anyway.
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
Put it this way - There is nothing at all stopping a modder producing a mod and asking money for it now.
Yes there is: it's the fact that as soon as they sell once, the un-encrypted mod is available to all (at least potentially).
And that's good, because it means that a modder that wants to make some money out of his mods will have to ask for a one-off payment: once paid, the mod will be available to all.
I'm OK with that. I'm not OK with each user individually paying for a license for the mod.
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 12:24:43 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
DD hit the nail on the head when he said, "At the end of the day it is about respect and that is all that is needed". How true is that! Well said DD! ;D ;)
So let's ask for respect instead of encryption.
I'd totally agree with you on that Max(did I just agree with you? Hehe! :o ;D ), but from some of the attitudes expressed here in this post, do you really think that is going to work? I mean seriously? Lol! :o
I don't see which attitudes you're referring to, I haven't seen anything shocking posted here (apart from Blackheart usual compliments directed to me, no big news here).
Anyway, no it won't work, there will always be annoying ones that won't listen. But preventing them from being annoying is not worth the price.
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 06:42:52 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 12:24:43 PM
Side note: circumventing the protection on GPB default sounds is fairly easy.
Then Piboso needs to know how that is achieved so that he can stop it happening, yes? ;)
I think he's smart enough to figure out that by himself. Problem is, even knowing that, there's not a lot he could do to prevent it.
Note: I really don't see a good reason why one would "crack" the default sounds, so per se this is not an issue.
It was just to tell you that encrypting the samples can be circumvented, which makes encrypting them not as useful as some imagine.
I would say it would still stop the majority from cracking into the files as most wouldn't know were to begin cracking an encrypted file.
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 06:42:52 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
Why see encryption as a punishment.... It will only stop those that wantonly abuse others work without asking permissions first, yes? If people want help and advice they only need to ask.
As I said: people learn looking at other mods. If you prevent that, you prevent them from learning.
Yes, they could come to you with a very specific question and you may be willing to answer but sometimes one just needs to play with the stuff to understand and, anyway, at the 10th question you'd be pissed off and you'll stop answering (which is normal).
But mostly this: another modder could improve somebody's else mod, how would he do that if you encrypt ?!
He'd improve the mod by first asking for permissions to do it. Then the author could send him the open files to work on. That's doing the decent thing. Just taking your work, altering it and then publishing it is very bad and disrespectful to the original author and his work. After all, the author may not want his work altering, right? In which case if the modder wanted to improve on the mod then the modder should look to create the same mod again from scratch or find another author of the same type of mod whole let him alter it.
It's swings and roundabouts, it's not all as straight forward as it seems.
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 06:42:52 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
I mean if someone walked into your house and helped themselves to your food without permission I'm sure you'd be the first to complain.... so why do you consider mod work any different? It's a strange attitude to consider any work you do free for all to do as they please with without asking permissions first, surely?
I consider it different because it is different.
Here's a better analogy: if I invite somebody to my house and I serve him my super special foie-gras and lobster pizza, and then the guy goes home and does the same pizza for himself, I would not complain. Of course, if he calls this his own pizza then I may be marginally pissed off (just marginally), but for sure I will not require any other person to whom I'll serve my special pizza to eat it blindfolded to "protect" my creation.
If you don't plan to sell your mods, there's no need for encryption. Simply because there's little reason to steal free stuff and there's little to lose for the creator if the free stuff gets "stolen' anyway.
You have a unique way of looking at things Max. Lol ;D
The need is to protect an authors work from unscrupulous modders and not for the aim of selling the mod. If another modder wishes to improve on it then they only have to ask and the author can decide if he wishes for his mod to be worked on by someone else for improvements. Sounds very reasonable to me.
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 06:42:52 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
Put it this way - There is nothing at all stopping a modder producing a mod and asking money for it now.
Yes there is: it's the fact that as soon as they sell once, the un-encrypted mod is available to all (at least potentially).
And that's good, because it means that a modder that wants to make some money out of his mods will have to ask for a one-off payment: once paid, the mod will be available to all.
I'm OK with that. I'm not OK with each user individually paying for a license for the mod.
Works out well for the X-Plane community, so obviously not a problem if selling is the aim(which I doubt it ever will be for modders of GPB).
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 06:42:52 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 03:57:45 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 12:24:43 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 11:31:57 AM
DD hit the nail on the head when he said, "At the end of the day it is about respect and that is all that is needed". How true is that! Well said DD! ;D ;)
So let's ask for respect instead of encryption.
I'd totally agree with you on that Max(did I just agree with you? Hehe! :o ;D ), but from some of the attitudes expressed here in this post, do you really think that is going to work? I mean seriously? Lol! :o
I don't see which attitudes you're referring to, I haven't seen anything shocking posted here (apart from Blackheart usual compliments directed to me, no big news here).
Anyway, no it won't work, there will always be annoying ones that won't listen. But preventing them from being annoying is not worth the price.
Well we'll just have to wait and see what happens, but I think peoples fears of file encryption are baseless if they are willing to contact authors for permissions in the first place, which is the decent thing to do surely?
But again I'll say that I personally wouldn't want to encrypt any work unless people were badly abusing it, but I really do think an encryption tool should be available as an option for those that may want it, and for as Piboso suggested; the fact that it could well encourage more modders in too as I'm sure many serious modders would only mod for software were encryption is available.
So let's think about providing it as an option for those that want it, and those that don't want to use it then fair enough, their files will be there to satisfy all the people that want to have a look at how things are done. So there you go, best of both worlds... Sorted Max! ;D ;D
Hawk
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 08:17:17 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 06:42:52 PM
But mostly this: another modder could improve somebody's else mod, how would he do that if you encrypt ?!
He'd improve the mod by first asking for permissions to do it.
But how would you differentiate somebody that really wants to do that from somebody that will ask you, take the sources and then throw them around saying it's his own work ?!
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 09:12:27 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 08:17:17 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 06:42:52 PM
But mostly this: another modder could improve somebody's else mod, how would he do that if you encrypt ?!
He'd improve the mod by first asking for permissions to do it.
But how would you differentiate somebody that really wants to do that from somebody that will ask you, take the sources and then throw them around saying it's his own work ?!
This is why I thought my idea was a good one..
But damn you guys seem to love going at it over here lol ;D
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 09:12:27 PM
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 08:17:17 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 06:42:52 PM
But mostly this: another modder could improve somebody's else mod, how would he do that if you encrypt ?!
He'd improve the mod by first asking for permissions to do it.
But how would you differentiate somebody that really wants to do that from somebody that will ask you, take the sources and then throw them around saying it's his own work ?!
Well we'd just have to go with experience. In that if you trusted someone not to do that and then they went and abused your work then I'm afraid that's when that person would get publicly renounced and basically sent to Coventry with no further contact or help, and I'd hope that with everyone else in the community knowing what they'd done after the trust you'd gave would support that action and none of their mods would not get supported on servers or databases.... They'd soon disappear, as would their bogus mod work. With support from the community you can solve many problems. ;)
Hawk.
Quote from: TheFatController on August 04, 2016, 10:15:05 PM
Quote from: HornetMaX on August 04, 2016, 09:12:27 PM
But how would you differentiate somebody that really wants to do that from somebody that will ask you, take the sources and then throw them around saying it's his own work ?!
This is why I thought my idea was a good one..
This one ?
Quote from: TheFatController on August 04, 2016, 07:38:09 AM
Would it instead possible to attach a hard coded name to a bike which can't be changed? This way there could be iterations after, titled differently, but it will always come up with the original author name..
Don't know ... I don't see how this could work: even if we engrave the original modder name somehow, what prevents the malicious modder from taking all the data and creating a new bike wiuth his own name engraved ?
Quote from: Hawk on August 04, 2016, 10:38:13 PM
They'd soon disappear, as would their bogus mod work. With support from the community you can solve many problems. ;)
Can't agree more. But can't see the need for encryption for doing that, we can do the same without.
Quote from: TheFatController on August 04, 2016, 07:38:09 AM
+1 to that MaX..
Would it instead possible to attach a hard coded name to a bike which can't be changed? This way there could be iterations after, titled differently, but it will always come up with the original author name..
Hmmm.... Interesting, but how would you achieve that? I mean how would you make it so that the name couldn't be changed. Also, how would that stop people changing the physics or even the model?
Hawk.
The short answer to both yours and MaX's reply is I don't know, that would be for PiBoSo to figure out. But my point was not about file encryption, more recognition. If it always came up in game as 'made by Hawk' it would at least put people off claiming it was theirs.
As for what people can use of others, I tell anyone who asks me for help with tracks or skins that they're welcome to use anything of mine as long as they give me credit as I think the more quality stuff out there the better, but I do get that MXB is a bit behind on content next to GPB, and to this date I think the only ripping problem we've had has been stuff from other games where the original author was credited but unfortunately never asked in the first place.
As for someone hacking the attached name, it's effort vs reward.. The files would already be available so if someone actually was to rip anything it would be easy, and in my experience the bulk of 'rippers' do it because they don't want to learn, don't have the knowledge / skills involved and don't fit the profile of someone who would be able to unencrypt something without 3rd party software to do it for them.
Quote from: TheFatController on August 05, 2016, 04:12:20 AM
The short answer to both yours and MaX's reply is I don't know, that would be for PiBoSo to figure out. But my point was not about file encryption, more recognition. If it always came up in game as 'made by Hawk' it would at least put people off claiming it was theirs.
Yeah that was understood, but unless you encrypt something, the "marking" won't be effective.
It could go like this: Hawk makes the bike and once all the "data" is ready BikeEd could generate a code (like the one for track registration) that depends on the data, including the author name.
When GPB loads the bike, it can check the data matches the code (like the online server checks your track and bike match the server's ones), so if you change anything, including the author name, GPB could refuse to load the bike.
The problem is that I can take all the data, change the author name from hawk to max and run BikEd to generate a new code for my "new" bike. Zero effort, unfortunately.
An example of where marking works is 3d models: if hawk creates a model and sticks his name into the 3d model somewhere (like embossing "made by Hawk" on the chassis somewhere), then it would be hard to remove/change that, because we don't have the source files but only the .edf (which is somehow similar to an encryption). Yes, one could always try to rip the model, but that would be quite some effort (rip + rework the ripped model to integrate it into GPB). So here yes, it would be an effort vs reward decision. But it only works because the source files are "encrypted".
Thinking along the lines of the 3d model, perhaps an empty object could be named such as 'creator_hawk'. That would be exported with the object and possibly read to display on the choose bike page? That would work right?
As it would be exported with the object, it would be as safe as your 3d models are in edf..
Quote from: TheFatController on August 05, 2016, 10:54:47 AM
Thinking along the lines of the 3d model, perhaps an empty object could be named such as 'creator_hawk'. That would be exported with the object and possibly read to display on the choose bike page? That would work right?
As it would be exported with the object, it would be as safe as your 3d models are in edf..
Yes, but it would protect only the 3d model, not the rest (e.g. physics files).