Greetings all,
Regardless of how you feel about F1RC, the following could
be of consequence to us all. Let's hope this is just a move on UBIsoft's
part, and that no other software developers will follow suit.
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
--
Colin
ICQ 25485061
This is about as stupid as it gets... 1) users add-ons, if anything help
sell and prolong the life of the game. 2) Attacking a site like that is
silly as it will generate a lot of bad press right in front of the games'
target audience...
Not to mention this is a slap in the face of the simracing community. Were
can I mail the "suit" that spewed that crap? -I want a piece of him.
Jan.
=---
<snip>
Hmm. The following phrase from UbiSoft's message:
seemed (on a first, *cursory* glance) to be somewhat more important.
Put me in a bind, that did. I can't in all conscience (given what I've
often said here and elsewhere) support any site supplying warez. On the
other hand, Ubisoft's stance with regard to patches is utterly absurd.
Having read the messages again, though, it would seem that Ubi have
backed down over the major allegation (of wholesale piracy), but are
now trying to stick to their second point. Which is, as I say, absurd.
As is mentioned elsewhere, they didn't moan about MGPRS2 patches...
looks like they're being leant on by the FIA or Bernie...
--
David. (GPLRank handicap: -5.92; Monsters of GPLRank h/cap +287.71)
The GPL Scrapyard: http://scrapyard.9ug.com
"After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
really" - Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh.
Companies should be glad these car painters are out there painting cigarette
and *** cars because the game companies aren't allowed to. This way they
get their logos out there. Everybody wins.
Tracks: same thing. Somebody downloads Road Atlanta (say) for GPL and thinks
"hey, this would be a cool track to visit".
Seasons: lets say UbiSoft decided to produce a 2001 update for F1RC. As long
as it was a reasonable price (say $25) people would buy it because they know
it would probably be higher quality than a 2001 season somebody did on his
own time for free.
As long as the patchers and updaters aren't charging for their additions,
the game companies should encourage their efforts.
(End of rant).
<snip>
<snip>
So where do you stand on Dave Noonan charging 15 quid for his addon? (I
have no real problem with it, BTW.) After all (going OT for a moment),
Amstrad allow the distribution of ZX Spectrum ROMs with emulators, but
only on a strictly non-commercial basis[1].
I think it would be very easy indeed for a company with less sense than
Papy/Sierra/whatever to squash Noonan if it wanted to, even if it had
trouble suppressing freeware products.
[1] Gerton Lunter, author of a shareware Spectrum emulator called "Z80"
has a specific agreement with Amstrad that allows him to charge for
registration. AFAIK, all recent Spectrum emulators have been freeware.
--
David. (GPLRank handicap: -5.92; Monsters of GPLRank h/cap +287.71)
The GPL Scrapyard: http://scrapyard.9ug.com
"After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
really" - Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh.
Moe
I find it absurd that Ubisoft sent an email to the Formulasim website
demanding the immediate removal of patches for F1RC. These are the only way
we can modify your games in order to provide us the most realistic F1
experience possible.
I haven't purchase F1RC because I live in Canada and it is not released
here yet, but I will save my money and continue playing with the other two
Formula One releases available to us, GP3 and F1CS2K. The two companies that
produce these games don't seem to have a problem with editors and other
utilities.
I can guarantee you this, I will not be the only one who boycotts your
products because of this. I think Ubisoft should rethink their policies.
Thanks for your time,
A once loyal Ubisoft supporter
It is just as legal, and just as acceptable a policy, for makers of
entertainment to CHARGE for including a logo or product in a film, game,
etc.
We've all seen reports already of this happening in PC games.
It is completly within the power of the PC game makers to turn the whole
***y sheebang on its ear and REFUSE to place corporate and other
propriatary logos and graphics in a game without payment for the
advertising.
KFG
Seriously, if I was that site, I would continue to put modifications to the
sim on their site.
--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
-- http://www.racesimcentral.net/
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
:-P
-- JB
>> This is about as stupid as it gets... 1) users add-ons, if anything help
>> sell and prolong the life of the game. 2) Attacking a site like that is
>> silly as it will generate a lot of bad press right in front of the games'
>> target audience...
>> Not to mention this is a slap in the face of the simracing community. Were
>> can I mail the "suit" that spewed that crap? -I want a piece of him.
>> Jan.
>> =---
>> Lugnut wrote...
>> > <snip>
Go fig.
Thankfully, not all developers and publishers are like Ubisoft.
-- JB
On Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:37:07 GMT, "Rob Adams"
>Companies should be glad these car painters are out there painting cigarette
>and *** cars because the game companies aren't allowed to. This way they
>get their logos out there. Everybody wins.
>Tracks: same thing. Somebody downloads Road Atlanta (say) for GPL and thinks
>"hey, this would be a cool track to visit".
>Seasons: lets say UbiSoft decided to produce a 2001 update for F1RC. As long
>as it was a reasonable price (say $25) people would buy it because they know
>it would probably be higher quality than a 2001 season somebody did on his
>own time for free.
>As long as the patchers and updaters aren't charging for their additions,
>the game companies should encourage their efforts.
>(End of rant).
>> people. But
>> as the 'licensed' companies become more aware of what their dollars are
>> buying and what
>> folks are getting for free...they will 'most likely' begin enforcing
>> licensing agreements with
>> much more vigor.
G-Loc
That's right - I'm sure it will be in their contract with Bernie that
they *must* pursue to the best of their ability mods, patches etc. that
infringe the rights that Ubisoft have paid for.
I think it stinks, too, but blame Bernie rather than Ubisoft.
- Michael
;)
> Greetings all,
> Regardless of how you feel about F1RC, the following could
> be of consequence to us all. Let's hope this is just a move on UBIsoft's
> part, and that no other software developers will follow suit.
> http://formulasim.gameloft.com/
