Question about legality of using .LOD art assets

[snowburn 355]

Hello everyone!!

 

I was reading the old discution about "hacking" the avionics DLLs and i have a question... how legal would be making al alternative open source game 100% compatible with third party LODs and Terrain Tiles? im sure TW will never realease the source code of SF2 and his artwork is protected by law, so the idea was to use the community models (with each modder permission), the .INI datafiles, Decals, and so on..

Something like this...
step 1- Basic flight model in 3rd person view / animations / decals / _data.INI
step 2- Terrain Rendering, Target Areas, Object Spawn, Airbases, Parked Aircrafts
step 3- Cockpit view with functional gauges
step 4- Weapons, Load limits, years, MER, TER, Rails, functional AG Dumb bombs

Thanks

Edited Monday at 06:53 PM by snowburn

[Stratos 3,192]

Sorry, but I don't understand what your plans are.

[+daddyairplanes 10,305]

im confused between the title and content of post; the title suggests you want to use TW LODs. but the content seems more like you want to make something new

if the third party modellers agree to you using their stuff then its perfectly legal. if they dont, then it is their IP. the issue is that most here dont have the lawyer money to sue someone if their model is used w/o permission. so in practical terms, you'd get banned from CA and mention in the same tones as Capun and YAP if you were to use a bunch of lods w/o permission

if your talking TW lods, then of course that is piracy and TK does have the money for a lawyer if caught (whether he has the motivation is another stroy)

but what youre talking abut seems to me very much like a Wings Over Flander Field situation; using SF2 as a base engine and then plugging practically everything else in. that might be worth looking at to see if its similar to what youre talking about

i dont think you are talking about straight pilfering other lods (which is the holiest of holies for creative content in here). but still be prepared for the nastygram from the other Kevin

[snowburn 355]

Sorry, i didnt knew how to explain.

I dont know if the .LOD format is owned by TW or it can be used without paying royalties.

If the .lod format can be used without paying it would be nice to have a new flightsim using some community assets, the quantity and quality of some of them is very good and superior to some comercial proyects.

A new game (commercial or open source) 100% compatible with the currents assets, datafiles, and so on will have a gigantic amount of user generated content, i wonder if it would be legally possible.

If it was, it can also be used on personal projects, like the one i did following this great initial tutorial from Why465 (creator of the excelent Tiny Combat Arena) making a semi realistic flight mode in unity (great engine but not the best for a flight simulator, it lacks 64bits transforms and it can make problemas son big worlds, larger than 20x20kms)

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOSNYa2RwLM&list=PLdjDhgESYQQaXgtz03l2rqDnPxVyqIZlY&index=2)

I made a few improvements (will upload a video soon) but im still years appart of making the 10% of that game, im sure this group have much better developers than me.

Im not trying to stole nobody work!! i was just wondering if a company or group can use the content saved on that format (excluding TW content and having permisions from each modder)

Sorry for my english!

 

[Wrench 9,882]

IIRC, "LOD" is just a format of exported 3d created items (Level of Detail). If that is true, it's not different than jpg or bmp or whathaveyou.

In my view, I'd like a LOT more clarity as to the ultimate goal of the question proposed...

What I"m reading it as ...

what is the legality of using items the same or very closely related formats as the 3rd Wire Engine (tm) uses for it's object and terrain rendering, along with the various software controls used (dll??) used to run the SF/SF2/FE/FE2 series in their various iterations.

Not a lawyer, but it if voilates and EULA and 'hacks' open (so-called) sealed libraries within the game's OS, that in my understanding is illeagle.

But again, a LOT more claiffication as to the End Goal is needed

[+EricJ 4,261]

Sounds like you're trying to create a new game using the stuff from here. I would think that it wouldn't be a good idea since the file format and other stuff is proprietary to the game, so you may be out of luck. I mean you can try and contact TK and such, but since we paid for the game, then I don't know, doesn't seem like you can do it, but that's my 2 cents. I would recommend finding a new format and making tools that allow you to mod the game you're looking to make. I mean it'll save you legal hassles from Thirdwire if they find out about it.

[Wrench 9,882]

frkking double post ... stupid machine...

Edited yesterday at 07:38 AM by Wrench
double post

[simonmiller416 1,935]

But from a development perspective, perhaps some "commercial" resources are more suitable for completing such a project.

After all, we will be facing different game engines, and many methods may be completely different.

Even only for the appearance, for example in SF2, the number of polygons/vertices of a single part is limited. If it exceeds the limit, even if it can be exported as LOD, there will be problems in the game.

Therefore, some high-quality resource, for example, may have 1 million vertices, so we have to split it into 333 parts.

If you use something like it directly in other game engines, it may look very weird.

If it were me, I would probably take a commercial resource and convert it from scratch into a usable form for your game.

Edited yesterday at 06:07 AM by simonmiller416

[OlWilly 132]

20 hours ago, snowburn said:

I dont know if the .LOD format is owned by TW or it can be used without paying royalties.

.LOD in general is not owned by TW, but this is the "umbrella" format of sorts. Some other games used .LOD too, and guess what, they are incompatible with SF2

Generally, I don't recommend this format for open source game as it is a locked format, with no easy editing. Strike Fighters .LOD models are exclusive for Strike Fighters

From what I understand, TW is very touchy on the matter of using their 3D assets, so this is a hard no. This is one of the reasons why they choose .LOD format, so no one could touch their precious 3D models

On the other hand, modders created tons of decent and great 3D assets for the game, but here comes the issue. All the mods available here are in .LOD too

So, you would need their permission and original 3DSMax/Blender/whatever models which would be hard to get. Many modders are no longer active and many original models are lost to time

TLDR - if you manage to contact the modders and convince them to share their original 3DSMax/Blender/whatever models, you are good to go. But if you want to work with SF .LOD format, you're out of luck

[+daddyairplanes 10,305]

22 minutes ago, OlWilly said:

This is one of the reasons why they choose .LOD format, so no one could touch their precious 3D models

to be fair 3d modelling is one of the  most time consuming disciplines in game making. opinions will vary with coding and terrain making(level building for non sims) depending on who you talk to.but those are the top three and the effort put into them rather justifies creator defense against someone else making one small change and claiming something new.

we skinners, decal artists and simple ini editors are second tier no (matter how good we are) to the modellers, terrain builders and FM gurus

[+Gunrunner 318]

Engine : The code that makes the game run, interprets assets

Assets : The content, planes, textures, terrains, menus, anything that is not code

File Format : The specific way content is stored and organised to be read properly by the engine

 

To clarify what OP intends as I read it :

Important, IANAL, I'm just stating generalities not specific to any country, based on commonly used laws, enforceable EULAs and existing similar efforts

OP apparently intends to provide a new engine, not using TK's intellectual property, not distributing TK's content, but compatible with its file format, meaning that if you own SF2, you would move SF2 assets to the new engine, and the game could then use them; likewise, any mods would be compatible.

IF OP provides a clean engine, developed legally, without including TK's code, it would be legal. (TA Spring IIRC is an example of this)

IF OP does so by reverse-engineering TK's code for reference and rewriting it, it would be legal in most countries. (ScummVM, OpenRCT and modern OpenTTD are good example of this)

IF OP does so by reverse-engineering TK's code but not rewriting it, it would be illegal in most countries. (Early OpenTTD is a bad example of this, it's been fixed since)

IF OP distributes any of TK's assets without a licence and his authorisation, it would be illegal. (I don't have any example of project behaving that way)

IF OP distributes the engine without assets, requiring the user to use his own legally owned copies, it would be legal (TTD Patch, OpenTTD, OpenRCT, ScummVM, TA Spring, Falcon BMS and so many other projects work that way, provide a new engine, or engine patch, but require original files for assets).

IF OP distributes the engine along community assets, following the rules of the assets' licence, it would be fine.

IF OP distributes the engine along community assets, without following the rules of the assets' licence (asking for and obtaining the creator's consent, properly crediting creators etc), it would be an issue. Some mods are under a pretty liberal licence, other under a rather restrictive one, some have no clear licence, almost none have an industry standard licence (which isn't good but hey, that's how it works here and does so mostly fine for this community), the rule of thumb would be to make sure to follow the licence, and even if not required, inform and obtain the consent of the creator.

The question is whether the file formats are proprietary, someone's intellectual property that OP can't use without a licence, or are a free format that doesn't require a licence, allowing OP to freely have their engine interpret it.

 

The "key" file formats would be :

- The CAT format, which is the main archive storage for assets, but AFAIR it's a rather basic concatenation of files and is not proprietary, besides extraction/creation tools have been provided by TK and the community for decades so it's likely not an issue. CatPack by Gerwin in extract-write mode and CAT Extractor by Mue in extract-only exist as tolerated precedents.

- The LOD format, which is used to store 3D models, it might be specific to TK in its implementation, but he provided tools to export to LOD and allowed community tools to exist provided they are read-only, his objections were to being able to extract the models for modifications. LOD Viewer by Mue exists as a read-only precedent.

- The TFD and HFD formats, which are used to store terrain tiling and height map data, likewise, they are rather generic and TK provided tools to manipulate them and never objected to third party tools. TFDTool by Gerwin exists as a read-write precedent.

- The TOD format, which is used to place non-physicalised objects on tiles, is not standard to my knowledge. TOD Editor by Mue exists as a read-write precedent.

Anything else is a rather standard and non-proprietary affair.

As you can see, even if these formats are proprietary, their use has been tolerated by the community and TK for decades at this point, so the only issue might be if the intent is to extract assets for IP infringement, or for a commercial use.

As you might have guessed, the people to contact to understand how to manipulate these file formats would be Gerwin and Mue (but be polite and patient, they already contributed a lot, have a life of their own, they might not be willing and able to help as much or as fast as you'd hope, but if you ask nicely, I'm sure they'll do their best, just don't harass them).

You would also need a FM and avionics guru as these are non-trivial and have their peculiarities.

 

This would mean that decades of work on the Strike Fighters series could get a new life on a new flight simulation engine, which could, once on par with the original, fix and even extend the damn thing.

This would be the best way forward, provided the file formats are not proprietary.

BUT... this is a monumental task (well, getting things in a workable state is "easy", getting it working as intended, polished, stable, scalable, with decent framerates, bug-free is the monstrous task), requiring a lot of time, possibly money, and expertise.

 

IF such a project were to happen, I would suggest it to be non-commercial, possibly open-source, and community-managed to avoid issues. Having it be a CombatAce project would provide an existing structure, community, possibly financing, access to knowledgeable people, and above all, people able to tell you that some things would be unethical by the community's standards if you were to take shortcuts the community isn't at ease with.

Also, a pool of people who have played these games for decades and can thus test things for you, tell you exactly how to make it behave as intended and how to improve what we've been dying to see improved for years can't hurt.

 

It would be important for the project to be source-available at the very least, to allow TK to independently check whether any of his code found its way into it, for the coders among us to offer advice and criticism without having to commit time to the project.

Open source with an adequate licence would be even better, allowing anyone to contribute to the project without getting more involved than they can afford, or allowing the community to pick the project up should real-life force you to abandon the project at some point.

It would be good for trust, transparency and long-term sustainability of such a project.

Edited 57 minutes ago by Gunrunner