This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_01BC6614.6EBA1840
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I was just wondering where you guy's get all these nifty little utils to
edit and modify the tracks. Where can i find these? Instead of ***in and
waiting for somebody to make one, can someone please tell me where i could
find these track editing tools.
Thanks
Rad
------=_NextPart_000_01BC6614.6EBA1840
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><head></head><BODY bgcolor=3D"#C0C0C0"><p><font size=3D2 =
color=3D"#000000" face=3D"Arial">I was just wondering where you guy's =
get all these nifty little utils to edit and modify the tracks. Where =
can i find these? Instead of ***in and waiting for somebody to make =
one, can someone please tell me where i could find these track editing =
tools. <br><br>Thanks <br>Rad</p>
</font></body></html>
------=_NextPart_000_01BC6614.6EBA1840--
Quoted text (24 lines)
> : I was just wondering where you guy's get all these nifty little utils to > : edit and modify the tracks. Where can i find these? Instead of ***in and > : waiting for somebody to make one, can someone please tell me where i could > : find these track editing tools. > Well, most of them are made by the programmers who make the changes. > Most of these people want to keep the tools to themselves. This I > understand, but I also think that one of the purposes of this newsgroup > (besides sharing racing and setup tips -- oh and whining and flaming) is > to share the knowledge we gather about such things. > Unfortunately, there are a lot of people in this group who don't have > the sense to do the right thing with some of this knowledge. I guess > this is why no one is sharing it. I know that those with a level head > would hate to see Pandora's box opened only to see another Daytona legal > battle and debate on our hands. That debacle was enough to convince the > sane people that a little knowledge in the wrong hands could create a > monumental disaster. > -- > **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* > Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=Hi Michael,
It isn't so much that some of us wouldn't like to share the tools we
have it's just that we don't because of the potential for doing Papyrus
harm.
Just imagine if we released tools that allowed everyone to be able to
make their own tracks. Sounds like a great idea at the start. But now
suppose that many different Daytona tracks show up (not to mention
copies of just about every other track known to man). Suddenly we have
inadvertently given Papyrus headaches in trying to secure licensing
rights for Nascar Racing 3 or for Indy Car Racing 3.
That's something I don't want to be responsible for and because of the
potential for to much too soon doing Papy harm, the tools made by BB&B
are going to stay with BB&B (at least for the time being).
I know it's not what everyone wants to hear, I just ask that everyone
understand our point of view.
Thanks,
Chas
-----
Simulator ***world
http://sim***world.simplenet.com/
Member - The Sim Project
- BB&B Track Editors
--
-------
Chasman
Simulator ***world
http://sim
Quoted text (24 lines)
> : I was just wondering where you guy's get all these nifty little utils to > : edit and modify the tracks. Where can i find these? Instead of ***in and > : waiting for somebody to make one, can someone please tell me where i could > : find these track editing tools. > Well, most of them are made by the programmers who make the changes. > Most of these people want to keep the tools to themselves. This I > understand, but I also think that one of the purposes of this newsgroup > (besides sharing racing and setup tips -- oh and whining and flaming) is > to share the knowledge we gather about such things. > Unfortunately, there are a lot of people in this group who don't have > the sense to do the right thing with some of this knowledge. I guess > this is why no one is sharing it. I know that those with a level head > would hate to see Pandora's box opened only to see another Daytona legal > battle and debate on our hands. That debacle was enough to convince the > sane people that a little knowledge in the wrong hands could create a > monumental disaster. > -- > **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* > Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=: I was just wondering where you guy's get all these nifty little utils to
: edit and modify the tracks. Where can i find these? Instead of ***in and
: waiting for somebody to make one, can someone please tell me where i could
: find these track editing tools.
Well, most of them are made by the programmers who make the changes.
Most of these people want to keep the tools to themselves. This I
understand, but I also think that one of the purposes of this newsgroup
(besides sharing racing and setup tips -- oh and whining and flaming) is
to share the knowledge we gather about such things.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people in this group who don't have
the sense to do the right thing with some of this knowledge. I guess
this is why no one is sharing it. I know that those with a level head
would hate to see Pandora's box opened only to see another Daytona legal
battle and debate on our hands. That debacle was enough to convince the
sane people that a little knowledge in the wrong hands could create a
monumental disaster.
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>.....Just imagine if we released tools that allowed everyone to be able to
>make their own tracks. Sounds like a great idea at the start. But now
>suppose that many different Daytona tracks show up (not to mention
>copies of just about every other track known to man). Suddenly we have
>inadvertently given Papyrus headaches in trying to secure licensing
>rights for Nascar Racing 3 or for Indy Car Racing 3......
The question that comes into my mind is, did YOU (those who have these
utilities) actually write the programs? If so, then those people have the
right to do whatever they want in terms of distribution. I don't have a
problem with that. However, if the people with these utilities grabbed
them off someone's web page, and won't say where they got them because it
would undermine Papyrus, THAT is what I have a problem with.
That's like saying, more or less, that it's perfectly all right for those
with the resources to edit tracks, but it's completely unacceptable for
anyone else to. I've seen the argument of compromising licencing
negotiations between Papyrus and the track owners, many times as a reason
why not to spread the wealth. That holds no water. Papyrus pays the track
owners to put the tracks into the game, not the other way around. Why
would Bruton Smith turn down a truck load of money just because a bunch of
armchair computer NASCAR racers wanted to put "California Speedway" on a
wall?
I've edited every track I have using a program called Editrack, found at
http://mrfrench.cslab.uwlax.edu/~rueck_cw/pages/racesim/. As many of you
know, it doesn't allow you to change the configuration of the tracks, just
the graphics for the bill boards and such. I also use STP2BMP & BMP2STP
programs to change the track picture on the selection screen. Again,
nothing big. But the point is, if I could edit every track, graphically
and dimentionally, to get it as accurate to the real one as possible, I
still would not hesitate to buy the next NASCAR game off the shelf.
Simply because the Papyrus programers would embarrass any track I could
ever make from scratch. 'Game play' is the deciding factor, not the
tracks here.
Don't misunderstand. If the authors of these utilities don't want their
programs being distributed, then they have every right to set those terms.
I understand, and support their wishes. It's just the people who won't
say where freely distributed utilities are, are the people who tick me
off. That's my 2 cents.
Dave-
I don't distribute the tracks I editted. I just give others the location
of that freely distributed resource so they can do the same.
The majority of early utilities have been written by Gerhard and Jed, both
of whom guard them jealously for the very reasons Jed described earlier. It
is easy to "pooh pooh" the notion that our antics have no discernible
effect on Papy's negotiations, but until you've been on the sharp end and
know for sure then it's better to be safe. Negotiation is a big part of my
job, and anything which riles the other party and undermines your position
has an affect. Look at it this way, so far we haven't got either Daytona or
Indy.
Of course it is, and quite right it is too. If you found a large cache of
small arms and chemical weapons near your house you would be unlikely to go
down to the local "lunatic cult headquarters" and pin it to their notice
board. So too with utilities - what Gerhard, Jed and the others have
written are powerful tools, and with these gained an insight into the
workings of the sims on a technical and a commercial level. That knowledge
has been earned and guides you to act responsibly. If the editors were
freely available it's 100% sure that someone would say "screw Daytona" and
post a version - you need only look at the number of people who say that on
a regular basis to know that it's the case. That's not to say that one of
these guys couldn't make his own editing tools, I'm sure he could, but I
see no reason to make it easier for someone to do that sort of damage, and
in preparing his/her own tools it is more likely they would understand
exactly why it isn't a good idea.
That's the theory anyway. :-)
--
Cheers!
John (SRN-Europe)
(Remove "NOSPAM" from address before replying...)
: Hi Michael,
: It isn't so much that some of us wouldn't like to share the tools we
: have it's just that we don't because of the potential for doing Papyrus
: harm.
<excellent points snipped -- go back and read it>
I guess, I was just trying to be too subtle. I keep forgetting that
everyone in this newsgroup isn't level-headed and can't understand simple
concepts.
There is another point as to why these wonderful alchemistic tools
aren't being shared. Those who are laboring over these projects
(BB&B and The Sim Project, etc.) want to ensure that quality
"enhancements" are being produced.
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Hi Dave,
It's called brainstorming...Some of those who wrote these utilities were
kind enough to allow us to use them. Some of these programmers also
asked that the utilities not be distributed. We accepted these terms,
and will abide by them.
This isn't the reason why the utilities aren't freely distributed.
I'm sure you would never intentionally harm Papyrus (etc.), but it's
your misunderstanding of Papy's wishes (and the above statement)
that you do not have some of these programs.
This is <more or less> correct, and should (in a perfect world) be
the reverse...not our call, however.
Not sure.
A good attempt at a simple interface, but it has its technical flaws.
I believe these two programs were written by Gerhard Lingenburg over
a year ago. These were also never intended to be distributed
(originally).
Gerhard has never given permission for any of his utilities (other than
those available at The Pits) to be freely available.
This isn't entirely correct. There are enough utilities available to
alter
the N1 and ICR2 demos to the point where no purchase is required. It
would not be an easy task for the simpleton, but it is possible. Of
course for N1, it isn't likely that you would be able to use the Hawaii
software (online), but doesn't stop anyone from having , technically
speaking, a full-featured program.
terms.
They have.
Except were stp2bmp/bmp2stp are concerned, correct?
We (BB&B / TSP) don't withhold info on where you can download a
freely distributed utility. As a matter of fact, when the programs are
authorized (by the originator) to be distributed, we gladly post them
on our own sites. I am unaware of any utilities (that fall into the above
category) that aren't already posted on The Pits, AutoSim, Simulation
***world, or The Sim Project. There are quite a few that are posted
elsewhere that do so without permission however. You'll just have to
surf for these I'm afraid.
Again, the stp utility is not a 'freely distributed' program.
Best Regards,
Marc
Marc J. Nelson
Sim Racing News - USA
Quoted text (13 lines)
>>I, dave00444, orginally wrote; >>The question that comes into my mind is, did YOU (those who have these >>utilities) actually write the programs? If so, then those people have >>the right to do whatever they want in terms of distribution. I don't >>have a problem with that. However, if the people with these utilities >>grabbed them off someone's web page, and won't say where they got them >>because it would undermine Papyrus, THAT is what I have a problem with. >Hi Dave, >It's called brainstorming...Some of those who wrote these utilities were >kind enough to allow us to use them. Some of these programmers also >asked that the utilities not be distributed. We accepted these terms, >and will abide by them.Hi Dave,
You asked the question whether or not those that have the utilties
grabbed them off of someone's website. If that were true, wouldn't it
be very likely that all of the tools used would be widely available or
at the very least more available?
Corey's pack and unpack as well as his mip editor come to mind very
quickly.
If your assumption that the tools were found somewhere and then not
shared, yes that would be true. But that is not the case.
It's called marketing. Just look at the way Bruton is holding N. Wilkes
hostage. He isn't going to allow racing there until he gets his whiny
way. I don't know how the rich and famous think. But based on past
actions, I think we had better be safe than apologizing.
These are the track editing utilities that are widely available simply
because the programmer chose them to be. Now before we get into an
argument here about programming I should warn that I am not much of a
programmer.
Freely distributed utilities should be just that. Freely distributed.
But the site distributing the utility should also give credit to the
author. Now I can certainly see why gents like Dave Noonan want to
charge for their hard work. And that's up to them. And it's up to us
whether we will pay for their hard work or not. But it would baffle my
mind as to why anyone would want to hold back freely distributed
utilities. What would they have to gain by doing so? Just my 2 cents
worth.
Chas
--
-------
Chasman
Quoted text (14 lines)
> >.....Just imagine if we released tools that allowed everyone to be able > to > >make their own tracks. Sounds like a great idea at the start. But now > >suppose that many different Daytona tracks show up (not to mention > >copies of just about every other track known to man). Suddenly we have > >inadvertently given Papyrus headaches in trying to secure licensing > >rights for Nascar Racing 3 or for Indy Car Racing 3...... > The question that comes into my mind is, did YOU (those who have these > utilities) actually write the programs? If so, then those people have the > right to do whatever they want in terms of distribution. I don't have a > problem with that. However, if the people with these utilities grabbed > them off someone's web page, and won't say where they got them because it > would undermine Papyrus, THAT is what I have a problem with.>>The question that comes into my mind is, did YOU (those who have these
>>utilities) actually write the programs? If so, then those people have the
>>right to do whatever they want in terms of distribution. I don't have a
>>problem with that. However, if the people with these utilities grabbed
>>them off someone's web page, and won't say where they got them because it
>>would undermine Papyrus, THAT is what I have a problem with.
>You asked the question whether or not those that have the utilties
>grabbed them off of someone's website. If that were true, wouldn't it
>be very likely that all of the tools used would be widely available or
>at the very least more available?
Yes, if -all- the utilities were downloaded from a website. From what
I'm learning, not many are. The only one I see frequently is what you
say next. The rest seem to have been given to select people in
confidence from the author.
---[CUT]---
At every web page I've been to that has custom tracks, I've Emailed the
author asking them what they used to do it, and if they could tell me the
web site that some of the utilities used could be found. I havn't gotten
a reply from anyone that I've Emailed. Why? I don't know. The only
thing I can think if of, is that every utility they used was given to
them in confidence by the author. There may be a different reason, but
I'll never know.
Dave
