🌿 
:ignucius:
Ubisoft executive suggests you become comfortable not owning things
I wake up feeling wrong. Drink some tea, can't sleep decide to watch some content and find this.
https://tube.raccoon.quest/watch?v=6xxOiHZbB68
CC @noyoushutthefuckupdad @coolboymew
The more people will pay for proprietary crap the worse it will get.
https://tube.raccoon.quest/watch?v=6xxOiHZbB68
CC @noyoushutthefuckupdad @coolboymew
The more people will pay for proprietary crap the worse it will get.
@mangeurdenuage @coolboymew @noyoushutthefuckupdad these people should learn to be comfortable to live in imminent peril at all times
@coolboymew @eee @noyoushutthefuckupdad
With that attitude nothing will evolve in a positive manner.
With that attitude nothing will evolve in a positive manner.
@mangeurdenuage @eee @noyoushutthefuckupdad because it's fucking retarded dude, it's just not happening. It's as if going on about how milk in bag should pour to the ceiling. Unrealistic, never ever happening
Go on about consumer digital rights, hell, go advocate for copyright laws to only last 30 years or something. That's more realistic than expecting everything and anything to be turned into free software
Go on about consumer digital rights, hell, go advocate for copyright laws to only last 30 years or something. That's more realistic than expecting everything and anything to be turned into free software
@coolboymew @eee @noyoushutthefuckupdad
>go advocate for copyright laws to only last 30 years or something.
who says I haven't ?
>That's more realistic than expecting everything and anything to be turned into free software
I'm not asking for everything to be "gratis" I'm asking for software to be in the control of the user.
Any company will still be able to enforce anything they want thanks to trademark, they get the benefits of have an engine that gets contribution for anyone else who puts work in it (like UE), they'll benefit from not being contractually restricted (unlike UE), and the user will have it's own control of how the software behaves.
Like I said again, if one continue/perpetuates to insist that nothing will change then nothing will change.
>go advocate for copyright laws to only last 30 years or something.
who says I haven't ?
>That's more realistic than expecting everything and anything to be turned into free software
I'm not asking for everything to be "gratis" I'm asking for software to be in the control of the user.
Any company will still be able to enforce anything they want thanks to trademark, they get the benefits of have an engine that gets contribution for anyone else who puts work in it (like UE), they'll benefit from not being contractually restricted (unlike UE), and the user will have it's own control of how the software behaves.
Like I said again, if one continue/perpetuates to insist that nothing will change then nothing will change.
@mangeurdenuage @eee @noyoushutthefuckupdad "software being in the control of the user" is pointless if they can't get control of the assets and co at the same time
So advocating for free software of everything is utterly retarded, misses the point, will never ever happen, in all of the things that could potentially happen, having the companies give up significant rights to part of their stuff just cuz, while the user don't really get to control the assets either, is basically advocating for absolutely nothing whatsoever. It's not happening and in the end you would still need a rom to get the assets from or something, which you might as well just wholesale emulate and we're back to square 1
Stop advocating for this, it's fucking stupid
So advocating for free software of everything is utterly retarded, misses the point, will never ever happen, in all of the things that could potentially happen, having the companies give up significant rights to part of their stuff just cuz, while the user don't really get to control the assets either, is basically advocating for absolutely nothing whatsoever. It's not happening and in the end you would still need a rom to get the assets from or something, which you might as well just wholesale emulate and we're back to square 1
Stop advocating for this, it's fucking stupid
@coolboymew @eee @noyoushutthefuckupdad
>is pointless if they can't get control of the assets and co at the same time
I disagree. Assets don't and can't have the same functions as code has.
>while the user don't really get to control the assets either, is basically advocating for absolutely nothing whatsoever.
They don't get legal control over it, yes and it's a good compromise imo. That way companies/artists can still enforce a form of right for their work and that's normal, even the fsf does that.
>and in the end you would still need a rom to get the assets from or something
And ? Commercially speaking it doesn't change anything. Companies can still sell on physical/digital support without issues. They don't even have to put the source code by default, they just have to provide when someone asks for it.
>which you might as well just wholesale emulate and we're back to square 1
Open-MW/TDD/RCT/SAGE/RA and the like are all proof that it works and are much better than emulation itself.
>is pointless if they can't get control of the assets and co at the same time
I disagree. Assets don't and can't have the same functions as code has.
>while the user don't really get to control the assets either, is basically advocating for absolutely nothing whatsoever.
They don't get legal control over it, yes and it's a good compromise imo. That way companies/artists can still enforce a form of right for their work and that's normal, even the fsf does that.
>and in the end you would still need a rom to get the assets from or something
And ? Commercially speaking it doesn't change anything. Companies can still sell on physical/digital support without issues. They don't even have to put the source code by default, they just have to provide when someone asks for it.
>which you might as well just wholesale emulate and we're back to square 1
Open-MW/TDD/RCT/SAGE/RA and the like are all proof that it works and are much better than emulation itself.
@mangeurdenuage @eee @noyoushutthefuckupdad
>I disagree. Assets don't and can't have the same functions as code has.
It's utterly pointless to have the code without the assets. You end up having to pirate either way
Even if it was possible, you're straight up going to step 10 and skipping step 1 to 9 with all of this
>I disagree. Assets don't and can't have the same functions as code has.
It's utterly pointless to have the code without the assets. You end up having to pirate either way
Even if it was possible, you're straight up going to step 10 and skipping step 1 to 9 with all of this
@coolboymew @eee @noyoushutthefuckupdad
>It's utterly pointless to have the code without the assets.
I have trouble understanding your though process.
You get a copy of the assets when you pay for them. It's normal to pay for work as long as the work itself respect you (and is of substantial quality (pointing out zelda cdi for example)).
Which isn't the case with the current model the whole work not only deposes you of the possibility of you, and all customers, being able to do whatever they want, like for example compiling the thing to work on gnu/linux instead of windows only.
The TenhauserGate portage of the game homeworld is a good example of that where they ported it to SDL and even work in 64 bits now.
You don't need the assets to be available openly to everyone for these kinds of modification to exist. You however need, with the current legal clusterfuck, a license that gives back people the natural state of things when you buy anything.
>It's utterly pointless to have the code without the assets.
I have trouble understanding your though process.
You get a copy of the assets when you pay for them. It's normal to pay for work as long as the work itself respect you (and is of substantial quality (pointing out zelda cdi for example)).
Which isn't the case with the current model the whole work not only deposes you of the possibility of you, and all customers, being able to do whatever they want, like for example compiling the thing to work on gnu/linux instead of windows only.
The TenhauserGate portage of the game homeworld is a good example of that where they ported it to SDL and even work in 64 bits now.
You don't need the assets to be available openly to everyone for these kinds of modification to exist. You however need, with the current legal clusterfuck, a license that gives back people the natural state of things when you buy anything.
@mangeurdenuage @eee @noyoushutthefuckupdad
>You get a copy of the assets when you pay for them
No you don't
Good luck having this sort of control on a DRM'd game, or console digital download for example. Good luck trying to rip assets from a cart or game disc. It's possible, there's tools, but you need a significant amount of work to make it all work on what is ultimately a grey legality thing
You need to work on the DRM shit first and making sure that customers can actually have access to the stuff they own
Once again, you're starting at step 10 when step 1 to 3 of this haven't been properly established
>You get a copy of the assets when you pay for them
No you don't
Good luck having this sort of control on a DRM'd game, or console digital download for example. Good luck trying to rip assets from a cart or game disc. It's possible, there's tools, but you need a significant amount of work to make it all work on what is ultimately a grey legality thing
You need to work on the DRM shit first and making sure that customers can actually have access to the stuff they own
Once again, you're starting at step 10 when step 1 to 3 of this haven't been properly established
Follow
@coolboymew @eee @mangeurdenuage @noyoushutthefuckupdad I mean if you get the source code of the game and the compiled bundle with assets and what you want is to modify the game you can just leave the asset management code mostly intact. It doesn't matter if you can easily access them, the game can easily access them or else it wouldn't work.
