rec.autos.simulators

GPL.....Interesting Topic

Andrew MacPhers

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Andrew MacPhers » Sat, 19 May 2001 04:52:00


> who also would pay  for a patch on a game that only costs about $10?

GPL did *not* cost about $10!! ...or even $50 when it first came out (ok,
so my third copy only cost about $15 ;-). Every hour we've spent playing
this game could have been spent on something else (watching TV, clipping
our toe nails, cleaning the bathroom, arguing about which is the best
modern F1 semi-simulator etc). And every $ of upgrade we've worked for and
spent could have been put to "better" use. But I'm still looking forward
to upgrading to a P1.69999 GHz or something, and a new wheel/pedal setup
fund (just for GPL) is slowly building up in a separate savings account.

So, given this commitment would I pay a similar amount for a "significant"
patch to GPL? Yes, because the world is full of mediocrity, and excellence
is most *definitely* worth paying for. Are there enough idiots like me? No
:-) Is this a Good Thing(tm)? Certainly!

Oh, and we shouldn't forget the guys who've invested serious amounts of
time and effort in the GPL tracks, utils, and mods. Only last night I
finally got round to DLing the GLEA's most recent Lotus, new***pit etc.
I didn't realise what I was missing... stunning!

Andrew McP

PS And I'd pay a small fortune for a patch that would allow three monitor
GPL while online via a single connection!

Marc Collin

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Marc Collin » Sat, 19 May 2001 07:49:24

Since other GPL patches have been done by programmers on their own time,
yes, this amount would make a big difference.  The intent would be to feed
it directly to the individuals doing the work, not to have 97% of it
filtered off by corporate inefficiency and theft.

Marc.


> Ok Ok Ok Guys. It's a nice dream but who would handle the funds
> of this Fiasco? Who would control the funds coming in & going out?
> Lastly Andrew is right! Do you honestly think Sierra or Papy would
> raise an eyebrow at $12,500 or $50k or maybe even a $100k?
> I highly doubt it. No let me take that back!! No Way! Yes it is sad
> but it is true!! Sorry Folks.. Thom_j.


> | I'd be embarrassed to approach Papyrus with anything less than $50k in
my
> | pocket. If you want to be taken seriously you have to wave serious
amounts
> | of wallet... and 50k isn't anywhere close to serious money... so maybe I
> | mean 100k.
> |
> | Of course if we had that much it might make more sense to fly to Vegas
and
> | put it into a slot machine instead (a quarter at a time ;-) Then maybe
> | we'd have enough to fund GPL2... or a Big Mac. Or maybe we'd have to
raise
> | another $20k to bail our representative after he runs out of money to
pay
> | his hotel bill :->
> |
> | Andrew McP
> |

Marc Collin

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Marc Collin » Sat, 19 May 2001 08:00:58

Considering it's worth about the same as 20 other racing games
combined...perhaps :)

Marc.


Thom j

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Thom j » Sat, 19 May 2001 10:51:40

Marc. If these programers are still under the auspicious employee of
'Papyrus aka Sierra' how do you think the companies will feel about
this? I would think they still have some legal' entitlement to Sierra or
Papyrus for anything done by Papyrus programers whether in house
or on their own! Dont you? Remember its still a Sierra aka Papyrus
game. Do you honestly think these companies will just roll over and
say "sure go ahead and we dont want anything!" Never!!
Just some food for thought... Thom_j.

| Since other GPL patches have been done by programmers on their own time,
| yes, this amount would make a big difference.  The intent would be to feed
| it directly to the individuals doing the work, not to have 97% of it
| filtered off by corporate inefficiency and theft.
|
| Marc.

Herbert Pohl

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Herbert Pohl » Sat, 19 May 2001 16:54:48



Maybe Papy can just support this guy officially and claim
to have better support for older games than other companies?
Claim that their games have more long-term value than others?

Ok, long-term value is probably not a good thing for the
industry: I could have wasted (aka buy-play-shelf) 50 average
games in the time I just played GPL over and over again ;)

   Calis

Maxx

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Maxx » Sat, 19 May 2001 19:52:38

On Thu, 17 May 2001 12:05:32 -0400, "ymenard"



>> Ok Ok Ok Guys. It's a nice dream but who would handle the funds
>> of this Fiasco? Who would control the funds coming in & going out?
>> Lastly Andrew is right! Do you honestly think Sierra or Papy would
>> raise an eyebrow at $12,500 or $50k or maybe even a $100k?
>> I highly doubt it. No let me take that back!! No Way! Yes it is sad
>> but it is true!! Sorry Folks.. Thom_j.

>It's just a delusional idea.  We should let it rest before it becomes
>embarrassing.  Like people who think there's gonna be a GPL2.

Below is a copy of my post from the GPLEA forum. It COULD
happen but not without a lot of work. It really depends on what
we REQUIRE in the PATCH and how easy it is. I worked as a
programmer etc. for over 20 years and I iknow there are
apparent "simple" changes that are virtually impossible or
at least commercially unviable, yet there are what look to
be apparent huge chyanges that can take a few hours or
days to do.

An example might be the 64 tracks limit, this could take an
hour or a few days. Whilst many would obviously not want
to pay for that, it could be a bonus in a general package.

[copy of post]

I've just scanned the game boxes littering my shelves, none of which i
play anymore or indeed played much anyway after June last year when I
got GPL.
Theres about 300 ($450) worth.

GPL has improved beyond all recognition from the original with
fabulous new tracks, texture updates, car updates, add on tools etc.
etc. All provided by individuals who had the passion and dedication to
spend hours and hours providing these for free.

Papyrus is however a business and time spent must be cost-effective.
I'm pretty sure that if we could organise this, get sufficient funds
to finance the project it would be done.

Most GPL fanatics have already spent the best part of $200 with
Papyrus, we bought the various Nascar games to convert the tracks and
we bought N4 out of curiosity to see what they'd made of the GPL
physics engine, but most of us (me inc) will never play this game. It
just sits there waiting for an N4 to GPL converter.

I'm on record for saying that I'd pay highly for a GPL2 and that I
don't think simulations of this calibre whould be lumped in with the
general games market in terms of cost.

By it's very nature, GPL and many flight sims will not be
chart-toppers and indeed would have a very small consumer base. If we
don't fund these properly they will never get made. As WSC is also
being developed for the PS2 etc. and will (I beleieve) have many
"aids" and such to make it more attractive to the none *** sim
fan they will at least have a shot at being commercial succesfull.

In the appplications market, this is already accepted and you pay more
(often significantly more) for a product with a smaller user base than
one with a larger user base.

If we really want anything to happen with GPL in terms of a patch then
we have to be serious. If you wont give $25, sorry, you ain't serious.
Me, I would like a shot, plus I'd make an extra contribution for all
the work that the GPLEA and numerous others have put into GPL so put
me down for $250.

I'm not being flash, I just recognise the worth of this product and
what it's going to take for Papy to consider this.

OK, so how the hell do we go about this, how do we collect all these
contributions etc.

1) We need someone top approach Papy. We know there are a number of
people on the GPL scene who have worked with Papy (Alison Hine & Steve
Smith to name but two). We need to find out if Papy will consider
providing further work to GPL in return for a payment from the GPL
user base.
2) If so, we then produce a list of things we'd like to see addressed
(mentioned in previous posts). We need to rate them as REQUIRED and
WOULD LIKES.
3) We'd also need to have some idea of the level of commitment in the
GPL community and some idea of the minimum funding we could raise.
4) Papy would then have to look at our requests and provide a costing,
we may have to accept the fact that we'd have to provide some funds
for that service alone. It depends on how seriously Papy takes us
whether they would provide the investigative and costing work for
free.
5)I don't think there is any realistic way to actually force people to
pay for the patch, instead we need someone in the GPL community who,
maybe has access to a commercial web site and facilities to provide a
means for "donations" to be collected.
It's clear there are others who would pay more than $25, great, let
them do so. The4y will still get the same partch that the $25 guys
get, and maybe some of the leeches who don't contribute, but what does
that matter, we are each paying what we feel is appropriate for the
patch.

If we need $20,000 and we can all see that donations are only at
$10,000 then we can do more, harrass friends to pay up, give a little
more, sell off our old games on ebay and contribure that.

Could we do that, if you think NO then there is no point in continuing
this thread.

Sorry for the long post and general rant but I thought it better to
spell out the sort of thing that would be required ratherthan just
chip in with a "me too" post.

Maxx

Thom j

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Thom j » Sun, 20 May 2001 05:02:18

Herbert {or is it Calis?}, Do you understand that there is
a copyright and trademark involved here? Think about it!
Cheers Thom_j.

<snipped appropriately>
| Maybe Papy can just support this guy officially and claim
| to have better support for older games than other companies?
| Claim that their games have more long-term value than others?
|
| Ok, long-term value is probably not a good thing for the
| industry: I could have wasted (aka buy-play-shelf) 50 average
| games in the time I just played GPL over and over again ;)
|
|    Calis

Thom j

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Thom j » Sun, 20 May 2001 05:22:01

Still the problem IS Maxx.. Will Sierra aka Papyrus do it?


<snipped appropriately>

Simon Brow

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Simon Brow » Sun, 20 May 2001 07:50:36

I agree totally.  It's very possible that some of the things that require
fixing could be done in a very short amount of time.

For instance, the P4 1.7 GHz speed-up fix.  Since N4 doesn't have this
problem, Papy probably already know how to fix this for GPL.  I suspect this
would require maybe a week to fix this.

Adding hardware vertex processing (formerly known as h/w TnL) support to the
D3D renderer.  Adding h/w VP support to a typical D3D7 app requires changing
a few lines of code, nothing more than that.  Depending on how the D3D
renderer has been coded this could be a very simple task.

Fixing the Z-buffer artifacts (again under D3D) could be achieved with one
line of code, which enabled w-buffering.

Grant Reeve wrote the D3D renderer for free in his spare time.  It's not
beyond the bounds of possibility that for a modest sum he could be pursuaded
to spruce the renderer up a bit.

(still, I know it's unlikely)


Simon Brow

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Simon Brow » Sun, 20 May 2001 08:03:16

...but it's not just about the P4 fix.  There's the numerous D3D problems
and the 65 track limit.

Also there's every chance the P4 problem is actually a fast CPU problem, and
the same thing may happen with Athlons over 1400 Mhz when they're released.
These CPU speeds are pretty rare now, but not in two years time.




> What's the subset of people who play GPL, who also have 1.4G systems or
faster,
> who also would pay  for a patch on a game that only costs about $10?
> Pretty small, I'd say.

> Eldred
> --
> Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
> Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
> F1 hcp. +25.37...F2 +151.26...

> Never argue with an idiot.  He brings you down to his level, then beats
you
> with experience...
> Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Simon Brow

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Simon Brow » Sun, 20 May 2001 09:02:03

It all depends, if you are talking about a season update for GPL, for say
1975, with different tracks, cars and drivers, then of course, there are
copyright problems.  If, on the other hand, we are talking about just
improving the beta D3D renderer and fixing the P4 speed-up bug, then I don't
see that there's a problem.

Grant Reeve wrote the D3D renderer in his own time.  Papy and Sierra
obviously didn't mind him doing this, and were even happy to release the d3d
renderer through the Papy website (although unsupported).  There's no reason
why they would mind him doing some more work on it (again, in his spare
time, but paid a sum by the GPL community for his efforts) and releasing a
new version of the renderer.


Eldre

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Eldre » Sun, 20 May 2001 14:45:29



>...but it's not just about the P4 fix.  There's the numerous D3D problems
>and the 65 track limit.

>Also there's every chance the P4 problem is actually a fast CPU problem, and
>the same thing may happen with Athlons over 1400 Mhz when they're released.
>These CPU speeds are pretty rare now, but not in two years time.

Ok, the only one of those problems that affect me is the track limit.  I have a
1.3G, and I have a 3dfx.  By the time I get a 1.4 or higher, there will
undoubtedly be more games to play.  Therefore, I don't think *I* would pay for
a patch...

Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
F1 hcp. +25.37...F2 +151.26...

Never argue with an idiot.  He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Dave Henri

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Dave Henri » Mon, 21 May 2001 12:07:05

  we've already seen quotes from Grant on VROC that stated 'FIXING' N4 was
very difficult and timeconsuming.  I really really doubt anyone at Papyrus
will get the green light to work on an issue that wasn't in the GPL design
specs.
two options methinks..
a) don't rush out and buy the latest and greatest cpu.  GPL will run for
many more years on 1.3 ghz chips.
b) Write the following on a piece of paper and put it on your wall:
re: GPL & Highspeed CPU's
  "He's Dead Jim!"

dave henrie

> It all depends, if you are talking about a season update for GPL, for say
> 1975, with different tracks, cars and drivers, then of course, there are
> copyright problems.  If, on the other hand, we are talking about just
> improving the beta D3D renderer and fixing the P4 speed-up bug, then I
don't
> see that there's a problem.

> Grant Reeve wrote the D3D renderer in his own time.  Papy and Sierra
> obviously didn't mind him doing this, and were even happy to release the
d3d
> renderer through the Papy website (although unsupported).  There's no
reason
> why they would mind him doing some more work on it (again, in his spare
> time, but paid a sum by the GPL community for his efforts) and releasing a
> new version of the renderer.



> > Marc. If these programers are still under the auspicious employee of
> > 'Papyrus aka Sierra' how do you think the companies will feel about
> > this? I would think they still have some legal' entitlement to Sierra or
> > Papyrus for anything done by Papyrus programers whether in house
> > or on their own! Dont you? Remember its still a Sierra aka Papyrus
> > game. Do you honestly think these companies will just roll over and
> > say "sure go ahead and we dont want anything!" Never!!
> > Just some food for thought... Thom_j.

Ian Greenwoo

GPL.....Interesting Topic

by Ian Greenwoo » Mon, 21 May 2001 17:19:10



or do as I suggested in my post in an earlier thread


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.