OM vs GWX

[FIREWALL]

Originally Posted by Reece

We all slip from time to time! I'll say nothing, especially since you are one of our great modders and I for one are very grateful for all you've done for the Silent Hunter series.
@ FIREWALL, that is a big yes!

For that Reece I vote we have the next SubSim gathering... DOWN UNDER.

Originally Posted by Reece

We all slip from time to time! I'll say nothing, especially since you are one of our great modders

No I am not.
With that post I have undone all I set out to do.

I have no one but myself to blame.
I can live with that.
What I can not live with is Good People like you Reece,
defending me.
I don't deserve that.

[Reece]

Cripes I made it worse, gee I've stuck my foot in my mouth many times! It's called being human! I have pested you many times via PM's for advice etc, you always helped beyond what I expected, don't sell yourself short, your a good friend to me and many others here, that shows in your humble response!
Be of good cheer and move forward!
Reece.

[Rockin Robbins]

Actually I was the one who brought up th legal angle so I can say with confidence that Privateer has it all wrong implying that other modders or game players were threatening to sue or prosecute GWX.

I specifically postulated that it would be Ubi who could hire the legal beagles to prosecute anyone who hacked executable code, dll or exe files, for release in a mod (personal use wouldn't be actionable as it wouldn't affect anyone else) or who released a mod that shut down a significant portion of Ubi's property, such as the U-Boat or Fleet Boat half.

It originally came up because Ducimus had shut down the U-Boat half as part of a Trigger Maru update. He subsequently released a patch to turn the U-Boat part of the game back on again.

Then GWX began trumpeting that GWX 4 would have to permanently shut down the Fleet Boat side of SH4. Now that was an even more egregious situation, because GWX was installed with an installer, not with JSGME. Ducimus could have claimed easy uninstallation of TMO with JSGME, but GWX could claim no such thing. Even so, Ducimus took steps to avoid possible problems. I had several private conversations with Privateer (imagine that!) concerning the legal situation and he wasn't worried about it. None of the conversations, nor the postings on the RFB website could be characterized as "threats." In using that word Privateer has crossed the line of untruth.

I was warning both the Fleet Boat guys and the GWX guys that Ubi owns this game and they will determine what they will accept as a mod and what they will prosecute as hacking. Up to now, and Subsim has officially endorsed this position, modding consists of modding the data files in the /data subdirectory. Mods should leave the game substantially playable and should be easily removed in case the newbie user does not like the changes they produce in Ubi's product. Modifying exe or dll files constitutes piracy, not modding.

In the final analysis, all the legal stuff goes right out the window anyway. If Ubi decides that we modders have contempt for their product, even if what we are doing is perfectly legal (shutting down half their game might remotely possibly be legal) they would just end modding forever from then on. Then where would we be?

Therefore the acid test of modding is whether Ubi likes it. Keeping them happy is all that matters. Just as soon as they're thinking we're out to ruin part of the game for one-upsmanship on another group of modders, or causing a lot of customer support calls from new players who heard that XXX was the greatest mod in the universe, installed it and then can't play their beloved U-Boats is the key to keeping modding possible, modding is over. That's not a threat, it's reality.

If I am anti-GWX for that statement then I am equally anti-TMO, maybe more so since I brought it up against TMO first. I have what I consider a good and respectful relationship with Privateer and some of the former members of the GWX team, and those people will be essential, along with many on the "other side" in the future (if any) for SH5. Time to bury the hatchet and move forward. Please, folks, cut Privateer a break for his post and accept his apology as genuine. Modders, myself included, tend to be a bit temperamental. Privateer, to the best of my knowledge, holds the moral high ground here as the only person who has ever brigged himself for committing forum flatulence. That commands my permanent respect and admiration.

[karamazovnew]

Guys, correct me if I'm wrong, but why would Ubi be hurt by a mod unless the mod would be a stand-alone not requiring the original game? Let's say they make a ****ty game... nobody's buying it and all people who have bought it hate it. Then comes an uber mod, say GWX5, breaking all the hacking rules and people start buying Ubi's game to be able to play.

How can you even imagine that Ubi would sue the modders or Neal? "Sorry, but we don't care that you make OUR game better and we're getting sales for free because of YOUR work, we want this nonsense to stop!". No way... As long as a mod doesn't hack into the DRM and doesn't bypass the need for the original game, I don't see a problem. Imagine if Valve sued the makers of Counterstrike

On the subject: http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/54...ed-By-Blizzard
http://news.cnet.com/Game-maker-sues...34.html?tag=nl
http://www.ripten.com/2009/05/11/chr...m-square-enix/

As you can see, these are cases of standalone mods, nude patches (weird) and cracks.
As for the Legal stuff we accept by clicking a button, there's a LOT of mumbo-jumbo that might sound scary there. But I highly doubt that a respectable company would risk making fools of themselves by attacking a group of people who've actually helped them selling their games for almost 10 years. At the most, they'd ask for a mod to be removed from the site.

I believe that a serious team (nodding at LukeFF now) could contact Dan and put forward a request for free-reign over the game's code. As long as they don't touch the DRM, I doubt they'd refuse them.

[Rockin Robbins]

That's been tried. The Wolves tried it with SH3 and didn't receive anything good, in spite of all they did for the game. These game companies tend to be very temperamental about their property. Some game companies which used to permit modding no longer do.

Now I was talking about the special case of SH4 which has schizophrenia between its U-Boat and Fleet Boat sides with shared parameters between the two sides. Both TMO and GWX barked up opposite sides of the same tree by threatening to shut off half the game, a move unlikely to gain the endorsement of Ubi, especially if new players installed these mods, then called customer support asking why the U-Boats or Fleet Boats vanished. That kind of stuff makes customer support people get cranky.

I think we get to have a very distorted view of our value toward a game. Of all the people who bought SH4, what percentage do you think even know there are mods out there? I'd say probably one in three at best. I'd say chances are we have some delusions of grandeur and overimportance. After all, the console game segment of the industry is killing us and it doesn't have modding. I don't believe the game companies do more than tolerate modders.

This may not be a case of game companies acting in their own best interest, but has Ubi consulted with modders before coming out with a new product? Last time they actually did, one of the modders burned them, leaking SH4 patch 1.3 before the release date, demonstrating once and for all our immense value to their company. After that we're lucky we're tolerated. Do they think we make their game better? I doubt it. They're wrong, but they have a right to be wrong. We don't necessarily have a right to be right.

[onelifecrisis]

Originally Posted by Gorshkov

Sadly but I do not own Photoshop...

Then use GIMP.

[Gorshkov]

Originally Posted by onelifecrisis

Then use GIMP.

Karamazov already did it. Besides I removed his mod from my OM+OMEGU installation and returned to stock U-boat's targeting technique.

[h.sie]

is there a (judical) difference between editing a .tga file and editing an .exe file? i ask because editing .tga files and .cfg files is standard here for modders, but editing .exe files seems to be a taboo. why? by the way: the 4GB-Patch for Sh3 does change one bit in the sh3.exe. but nobody from UBI cares.

P.S. I installed SH4+UBM+OPmonsun for the third time now and tried hard to like it, but without success. Graphics are good. Crew management is good. But there is missing something hard to describe, I call it "Das Boot"-feeling. Sh3 in my opinion has that feeling, Sh4 does not.

With this I don't want to discredit the hard and great work of Lurker_hlb. It is just my opinion, which is linked to SH4 and not to Lurkers work.

h.sie

[makman94]

Originally Posted by h.sie

....is there a (judical) difference between editing a .tga file and editing an .exe file? i ask because editing .tga files and .cfg files is standard here for modders, but editing .exe files seems to be a taboo. why? .....

hi H.sie,

i think i have figured out(just.... my conclusions after thinking a little bit of it) the why .
my thought is that ubi and devs are afraid of modders .they know that, by letting modders hack the exe files ,modders are capable to make a evolutionary game and then it will be very difficult (or...impossible ) for ubi-devs to make something better (they will have to work very hard and spend lot of money) so 'game' (and money) will be over for them.
just my thought ....no proves

[Gorshkov]

Originally Posted by h.sie

P.S. I installed SH4+UBM+OPmonsun for the third time now and tried hard to like it, but without success. Graphics are good. Crew management is good. But there is missing something hard to describe, I call it "Das Boot"-feeling. Sh3 in my opinion has that feeling, Sh4 does not.

You are talking nonsense! First, SH3 is now unplayable for wide-screen monitors and SH4 still looks impressive. Second, go blame GWX Team for abandoning GWX4 instead of issue some accusations against OM campaign. Third, before doing so take into account stock SH4 was created as PTO game in mind and SH3 is ATO game instead - that is why your feeling can be flawed.

[h.sie]

In the first post jaxa asked us to compare SH3/GWX to SH4/OpsMonsun, which I did. I answered with my personal opinion and not with nonsense. first, please reread my post. I did not say anything about the OM CAMPAIGN. second, please read the forum rules about correct speech. thank you. you might have a different opinion, no problem, but that does not give you the authority to become impolite.

[karamazovnew]

Originally Posted by h.sie

P.S. I installed SH4+UBM+OPmonsun for the third time now and tried hard to like it, but without success. Graphics are good. Crew management is good. But there is missing something hard to describe, I call it "Das Boot"-feeling. Sh3 in my opinion has that feeling, Sh4 does not.

With this I don't want to discredit the hard and great work of Lurker_hlb. It is just my opinion, which is linked to SH4 and not to Lurkers work.

h.sie

I agree with you, SH3 had "something" extra but maybe just because we've played it first. Then came GWX which managed to improve that "something". SH4 has a "something" but for fleet boats. They just fit well, regardless if you play TMO or RFB.

On the other hand OM loads up fast, doesn't bug, looks great and is just a blast to play against convoys. For some, this is reason enough to make the switch. For me it was.

[Ducimus]

Insert snide remark here.

People don't give this game enough credit.

[h.sie]

@karamozenew:

good idea. maybe i am biased. maybe I've to give it a fourth and fifth chance......

greetings,
h.sie