Bla bla bla. Seemingly you read what I posted wrong, thus your answer to me is completely irrelevant. First of, what YOU think isn't any more important than what I think. As far as I know, we are in a free world, on a forum thread, and I'm free to speak my mind, which I did. Whether you understand what I'm saying, and agree or not is none of my business, but it's still my right to do so. Now. I'm not modeling, nor using development parts. What I've been doing is skins and photoshopping. So I actually have NO personal interest in having stuff unlocked. So technically, I'm not whining for anything. If anything, I WISH modding community was more open, and not closed off just like it is right now, with some kind of elitist club holding everything and -occasionally- throwing some crumbs to people.

Let's make a quick comparison, to see how ridiculous this thing is. Let's say vehicle modelers are film producing companies, like Warner Bros and such. Let's say their models are movies. Do you really think Hollywood is going to be like "Oh my god, the movies can be ripped and illegaly downloaded! Oh my god, someone can release my movie on Youtube without paying me! Preposterous! If this is like that, I will not produce any movie ever again!". No. When someone is publishing an illegal version of their product, they make a complaint, the file is taken down, end of the story. Would it be -that- hard to do for models? I don't think so. As simple as that.

Edited August 24, 201510 yr by Hystery

 As far as I know, we are in a free world, on a forum thread, and I'm free to speak my mind, which I did. 

Good points you brought up but the moderators said that real life freedoms don't apply here. We have to follow their rules regardless. I didn't create that policy but just a small correction, Hystery. 

Let's make a quick comparison, to see how ridiculous this thing is. Let's say vehicle modelers are film producing companies, like Warner Bros and such. Let's say their models are movies. Do you really think Hollywood is going to be like "Oh my god, the movies can be ripped and illegaly downloaded! Oh my god, someone can release my movie on Youtube without paying me! Preposterous! If this is like that, I will not produce any movie ever again!". No. When someone is publishing an illegal version of their product, they make a complaint, the file is taken down, end of the story. Would it be -that- hard to do for models? I don't think so. As simple as that.

There's one main difference between movie producers and modders: Money. Movie producers are not going to stop creating films because they simply wouldn't earn money then.
Apart from that, it's actually not that different. They have many different ways to protect movies. YouTube's Content ID system usually blocks movies automatically, DVDs have copy protections and region limits. They actually have so much influence on politics that movie piracy can get you in jail. They do complain about illegal uploads, and so do modders complain about wrong credits or missing permission.

So far, locking models was pretty safe. Again, very few people managed to rip unlocked models and then actually took the time to convert them into IV again. It wouldn't even make sense for many models, since you can just convert them from other games without ripping in many cases.
Of course just keeping everything unlocked would prevent ripping, but that's useless. Sure, nobody will rip anymore, but that's just because they can take it anyway. You don't leave your door unlocked either to prevent people breaking in. It's even easier to steal something that way, same with locked models.

Since it seems like many people don't know it yet: Oleg posted that he is considering an option to prevent re-import. It would not be titled locking, since he doesn't want to give a false feeling of safety. We don't know if people release unlockers, we don't know if there'll be tools apart from ZModeler. Locking worked pretty well in IV, since most people just didn't know how to rip. Simply saying locking has no use and therefore nobody should even try it is the wrong approach in my opinion.

Edited August 24, 201510 yr by Cj24

I'm not whining for anything. If anything, I WISH modding community was more open, and not closed off just like it is right now, with some kind of elitist club holding everything and -occasionally- throwing some crumbs to people.

Please stop with the stupid generalizing. Obviously you live in your own world, the community is open. There's more than enough "crumbs" at your disposal if you're willing to put the effort into learning modeling. If you aren't willing to do so, then please stop whining about what you feel we should do and associating us with these idiotic generalizations you make.

Oh, and while I'm at it, I'll surely remember never to release "crumbs" again. Obviously the lightbar models I released recently weren't good enough.

Let's make a quick comparison, to see how ridiculous this thing is. Let's say vehicle modelers are film producing companies, like Warner Bros and such. Let's say their models are movies. Do you really think Hollywood is going to be like "Oh my god, the movies can be ripped and illegaly downloaded! Oh my god, someone can release my movie on Youtube without paying me! Preposterous! If this is like that, I will not produce any movie ever again!". No. When someone is publishing an illegal version of their product, they make a complaint, the file is taken down, end of the story. Would it be -that- hard to do for models? I don't think so. As simple as that.

If anything, your comparison is ridiculous. Companies exist primarily for one reason - to make money. We invest our own time in creating models that we release publicly for the sake of making the game better and more enjoyable for others, its not something we get paid to do.

In the end, those who support the stance on unlocked-only models will undeniably be the ones depriving the community. The fact of the matter is that none of us are going to be forced to release our work unlocked and inevitably the community will be losing out in the long run. Yes, we make mods for people to use and enjoy in their games, but we don't invest hours of effort into the making of unique mods just so that others can edit and redistribute them as if it were Ebola.

My personal opinion on this is that whoever makes something, should be allowed to say how it should be used. That this can not always be enforced is another story. But if people take proactive measures to prevent theft/editing/whatever, it is their right. I also sometimes decide to make it harder to translate my code back to source code and sometimes I released stuff without any protections or in source form. But that's up to me. Sure, there can be idiots hiding behind these "rules" and doing it only to tease people, but on the other hand, I personally never understood all the hype. It's just a model, it's not that it's a complete game changer or that it is completely unique in every regard and nothing else available. If it was a huge collection or in terms of coding a big modification, I could understand it a little bit better, but then again where is the point in working on such a big project without a community around it. Too much drama for something that doesn't happen that often and doesn't really have any effect.

 

In the end, those who support the stance on unlocked-only models will undeniably be the ones depriving the community. The fact of the matter is that none of us are going to be forced to release our work unlocked and inevitably the community will be losing out in the long run. Yes, we make mods for people to use and enjoy in their games, but we don't invest hours of effort into the making of unique mods just so that others can edit and redistribute them as if it were Ebola.

No, that's not how the word "deprive" works. I'd understand if you attacked the idea that it's "depriving the community" because it makes it seem like the community has a right to have models released at all. But if we're going with "no models released = deprived community," the people who are actually doing the depriving are the people not making and releasing models. Unless the people opposing a model lock are preventing people from uploading models (which they are not, because a) no one has any real say in the matter except people who can reverse-engineer V's file formats and b) it is quite possible to release unlocked models), they're not depriving anyone of any models. They're not even depriving anyone of a model lock feature, because they don't have a say (nor do any modelers, for that matter).

Here are some tenable positions:
"There's no 'depriving,' because no one has a right to any mods unless they make it themselves or pay someone for it."
"If the community is deprived of mods, it doesn't fall on anyone more than anyone else: anybody can make and release models if they wish, and people who modeled for IV have no special obligation. I'm not releasing because I am not satisfied with the terms available. Others aren't because they're not willing to make the effort to make the models. There's no real difference."
"People who know how to make car mods are depriving the community of those, because we aren't satisfied with the terms. Tough."

Here is NOT a tenable position:
"Really, it's all your fault that I choose not to release because the only terms are the ones you like."

While we're at it, can we stop pretending someone using your model without permission and without credit is like someone breaking into your house and stealing something? It's a really terrible analogy: it is accurate in that someone has something that you did not want them to have, but inaccurate in literally every single other way. For instance, there is a risk of violence when someone is entering your house to steal stuff. That's why burglary is such a serious crime. No risk of personal harm exists with violating modding norms. Likewise, no matter what anyone else does, you still have your model. That's why models are different from things like toasters: you don't lose your model just because someone else uses it for their own purposes and claims that they made it.

No, that's not how the word "deprive" works. I'd understand if you attacked the idea that it's "depriving the community" because it makes it seem like the community has a right to have models released at all. But if we're going with "no models released = deprived community," the people who are actually doing the depriving are the people not making and releasing models. 

I fucking love you. 

While we're at it, can we stop pretending someone using your model without permission and without credit is like someone breaking into your house and stealing something? It's a really terrible analogy: it is accurate in that someone has something that you did not want them to have, but inaccurate in literally every single other way. For instance, there is a risk of violence when someone is entering your house to steal stuff. That's why burglary is such a serious crime. No risk of personal harm exists with violating modding norms. Likewise, no matter what anyone else does, you still have your model. That's why models are different from things like toasters: you don't lose your model just because someone else uses it for their own purposes and claims that they made it.

Nobody is pretending it's the same. It's a metaphor to explain people the purpose of locking. Many people believe by keeping files unlocked you have a lower risk of people misusing them, but the opposite is the case. Just because nobody would rip them now (and as I said before, very few people actually know how to rip), even more people can use it. And as soon as more people are able to edit and redistribute a model, more people try to put their own name in the credits.
 

The question if everybody is happy with the choice of words of other posters is not exactly contributing to the question if permissions, credits, locked files or screenshots of unreleased cars are actually in favor of the community. I think it's becoming pretty obvious now that most modders here would like to make decision about locked files or permissions themselves.
I also think it's interesting that people complain about unreleased mods being shown in screenshots, yet people are fine with YouTubers "alpha-testing" vehicles, that obviously are in early development. I've written earlier that I believe people try to create quality conversions instead of being fast, but some seem to be trying to get a vehicle ingame no matter what, just to post videos. It's an attitude I don't understand, if a modder knows there're other issues, why even bothering to get it ingame? I honestly don't understand why screenshots of (yet) unreleased cars are a problem, although screenshots of cars that aren't even completely converted are fine, even though they obviously can't expect constructive feedback at such an early state and just want to show off.

Edited August 24, 201510 yr by Cj24

 

No, that's not how the word "deprive" works. I'd understand if you attacked the idea that it's "depriving the community" because it makes it seem like the community has a right to have models released at all. But if we're going with "no models released = deprived community," the people who are actually doing the depriving are the people not making and releasing models. Unless the people opposing a model lock are preventing people from uploading models (which they are not, because a) no one has any real say in the matter except people who can reverse-engineer V's file formats and b) it is quite possible to release unlocked models), they're not depriving anyone of any models. They're not even depriving anyone of a model lock feature, because they don't have a say (nor do any modelers, for that matter).

Oh please, spare the goddamn lecture. Interpret what I said however you want, but indirectly those in support and fighting for the whole unlocked-only idea will be responsible for the modelers not releasing anything if the ability to lock doesn't materialize. Its not as if these debates and the stir caused by all of those supporting this idea has gone unnoticed, they will have an impact. Anyhow, I can't help for the fact that you always attempt to stick the blame on us without looking at the bigger picture first(not that I'm at all surprised by it).

 

Nobody is pretending it's the same. It's a metaphor to explain people the purpose of locking. Many people believe by keeping files unlocked you have a lower risk of people misusing them, but the opposite is the case. Just because nobody would rip them now (and as I said before, very few people actually know how to rip), even more people can use it. And as soon as more people are able to edit and redistribute a model, more people try to put their own name in the credits.

The question if everybody is happy with the choice of words of other posters is not exactly contributing to the question if permissions, credits, locked files or screenshots of unreleased cars are actually in favor of the community. I think it's becoming pretty obvious now that most modders here would like to make decision about locked files or permissions themselves.
I also think it's interesting that people complain about unreleased mods being shown in screenshots, yet people are fine with YouTubers "alpha-testing" vehicles, that obviously are in early development. I've written earlier that I believe people try to create quality conversions instead of being fast, but some seem to be trying to get a vehicle ingame no matter what, just to post videos. It's an attitude I don't understand, if a modder knows there're other issues, why even bothering to get it ingame? I honestly don't understand why screenshots of (yet) unreleased cars are a problem, although screenshots of cars that aren't even completely converted are fine, even though they obviously can't expect constructive feedback at such an early state and just want to show off.

But it's misleading. Metaphors work when they are similar in significant ways to the topic. But the metaphor of burglary is different in pretty much all the key respects from misusing and not crediting work, and both that metaphor and the term "mod theft" have the key difference that someone breaking modding rules hasn't deprived you of your mod. And for the record, I'm not one of those people who generally complains about screenshots of unreleased cars; I don't like it when it gets to the point of taunting, but it doesn't really seem to have been that so far.

Oh please, spare the goddamn lecture. Interpret what I said however you want, but indirectly those in support and fighting for the whole unlocked-only idea will be responsible for the modelers not releasing anything if the ability to lock doesn't materialize. Its not as if these debates and the stir caused by all of those supporting this idea has gone unnoticed, they will have an impact. Anyhow, I can't help for the fact that you always attempt to stick the blame on us without looking at the bigger picture first(not that I'm at all surprised by it).

 

No. Again, you're trying to say "My decision is your fault." This isn't a complaint about the specific words you used, but about how you're trying to both make the decision you want and fail to own up to it. That's just not how it works. If you don't want to release models, that's fine. I might be a bit disappointed (your mods are pretty good), but it's entirely your call as to whether or not you want to release. But it is your call; it is not anyone else's. Which means that it's disingenuous to try to say "someone else forced me into it, blame them."

I don't like to be a burden, but just to confirm, locking models is locking people from editing the mode in question right? Not completely cutting the model from people to use in their own games?

No. Again, you're trying to say "My decision is your fault." This isn't a complaint about the specific words you used, but about how you're trying to both make the decision you want and fail to own up to it. That's just not how it works. If you don't want to release models, that's fine. I might be a bit disappointed (your mods are pretty good), but it's entirely your call as to whether or not you want to release. But it is your call; it is not anyone else's. Which means that it's disingenuous to try to say "someone else forced me into it, blame them."

No, and ironically you're avoiding the point I just addressed earlier again. You fail to see beyond simply blaming the us as individuals for making that decision. I'm not failing to own up to any decision as it is my decision to do so or not, but you seem incapable of accepting that a decision is taken as a result of influencing factors. That being said, elaborating further will just be a repetition of what I've previously said and I'm not going to waste my time endlessly saying it over and over again when obviously it goes in one ear, gets filtered to your liking, and goes out the other.

Following your one-way logic would be like having a scenario wherein a bird shat on your head and in retaliation, you made a decision to shoot that bird. Though, when you're questioned on your motive behind the decision to shoot the bird, you cannot say that it was because the bird shat on your head.

If anything, your comparison is ridiculous. Companies exist primarily for one reason - to make money. We invest our own time in creating models that we release publicly for the sake of making the game better and more enjoyable for others, its not something we get paid to do.

In the end, those who support the stance on unlocked-only models will undeniably be the ones depriving the community. The fact of the matter is that none of us are going to be forced to release our work unlocked and inevitably the community will be losing out in the long run. Yes, we make mods for people to use and enjoy in their games, but we don't invest hours of effort into the making of unique mods just so that others can edit and redistribute them as if it were Ebola.

If anything, my comparison actually stands pretty fairly, and even stronger, especially because no money is involved in releasing models. So at the end, what do you have to lose? Credits. It all comes down to that once again. So if you -really- worry that much about just having your name on a internet page, I think the problem is there.

If anything, my comparison actually stands pretty fairly, and even stronger, especially because no money is involved in releasing models. So at the end, what do you have to lose? Credits. It all comes down to that once again. So if you -really- worry that much about just having your name on a internet page, I think the problem is there.

you still don't get what Kevin's trying to put through? It's not about the name. It's about time and effort invested into making these models that many of us feel there should be a lock feature. No one paid us to do any mods. All these mods done at our own time. Conversions I couldn't care less. it's about the time and effort invested in the scratch made parts and models. 

Edited August 25, 201510 yr by ASTTrprDillon95

you still don't get what Kevin's trying to put through? It's not about the name. It's about time and effort invested into making these models that many of us feel there should be a lock feature. No one paid us to do any mods. All these mods done at our own time. Conversions I couldn't care less. it's about the time and effort invested in the scratch made parts and models. 

Now. Let's be honest. I really -highly- doubt that majority of models released are made from scratch. They can be polished, but most of them are conversions of existing models from other games (i.e DSF CVPI, or the Charger you yourself released, which is from EA). So from there, you want to lock a model that you yourself ripped from another game, from another modeler who, unlike you, modeled the car (and most likely from scratch, him). Ironic, in my opinion. You're acting as if the model was yours in the first place, when it's actually not. You just modified an existing model.

Basically, that's where I would stand. You created a model entirely from scratch? Feel free to lock it, it's truly your model and your creation. You modified an existing model that you converted from another game or similar? Locking it is hypocritical, because you are appropriating yourself the work of another person, just with your own modifications on it. If anything, you should ask the original creator if -you- can lock it (aka EA or Ubisoft, from the examples I have mentioned earlier).

Edited August 25, 201510 yr by Hystery

I fucking love you. 

At least that makes one of us.

I used to do a lot of modeling for GTA SA and a little bit in IV. I never understood the big deal with locking parts, and even credits to a degree. I made the Fed Sig Legend, Raydian, and 911 EP galaxy for SA. At least two of those ended up being ported into IV, not sure about the Raydian. Along the way it changed from lightbar by Boatinman to lightbar glass made by Boatinman etc. The credits all get really messy after the part has been used and reused.

To the point though, I never locked my stuff because, the way I see it, is (1) it's a computer game..(2) I knew that at some point I wouldn't have the time anymore to keep making mods. I want everyone to be able to use what I've made for years to come. I never got more satisfaction out of any of my mods than when I saw other people use them and port them and make them even better. That was more rewarding to me than seeing my username in some readme file.

Now. Let's be honest. I really -highly- doubt that majority of models released are made from scratch. They can be polished, but most of them are conversions of existing models from other games (i.e DSF CVPI, or the Charger you yourself released, which is from EA). So from there, you want to lock a model that you yourself ripped from another game, from another modeler who, unlike you, modeled the car (and most likely from scratch, him). Ironic, in my opinion. You're acting as if the model was yours in the first place, when it's actually not. You just modified an existing model.

Yes, that's undeniably true. Most models you'll find in the community are merely ports from existing games. Though, I haven't been arguing on behalf of those that do such. I've been arguing on behalf of the modelers such as myself that are actually capable of scratch modeling our own cars, its us that I refer to as a "minority". Classifying people that simply take ported cars and glue parts to them as modelers is incorrect.

Edited August 25, 201510 yr by KevinDV

Yes, that's undeniably true. Most models you'll find in the community are merely ports from existing games. Though, I haven't been arguing on behalf of those that do such. I've been arguing on behalf of the modelers such as myself that are actually capable of scratch modeling our own cars, its us that I refer to as a "minority". Classifying people that simply take ported cars and glue parts to them as modelers is incorrect.

I don't think anyone here has said that people who scratch make things shouldn't have a right to protect their work, although no one's really specified. The main problem I have is that someone will make, say, a lightbar, then only keep that lightbar to himself. Only he has access to that lightbar, no other modders (not "modelers," modders as in people who put mods together) can access it, and you only get one or two mods with that lightbar. This severely limits the amount of content that can be made, and is what deprives the community. The argument for this a lot of the time is "I don't want to see 100 shitty crown vics with my lightbar on it," but why not? Is it not good enough that 100 people wanted to use your model? Think about it this way: if everyone publicly releases their content, then there would be 100 shitty crown vics with 100 different lightbars on it, instead of just the one lightbar. Since there are lots models open to the modders, they can create whatever they want, instead of only being stuck with the one model.  It would be great if we could just have everything unlocked, but I don't think that will achievable, since in the end it's the creator that should decide what they want to do. I'm not saying you specifically are one of these people that doesn't release anything, you have released plenty of unlocked parts to the public. Edit: I should also add that they only have the right to set terms for the parts that they made. If you put your lightbar on a converted car, you only have rights for that lightbar. Unfortunately, partially locking something is out of the question, so you would have to set permissions saying you can use the car, but not the lightbar, which becomes too complicated, so a full "lock" takes the place of that.

However, all of the people that do not scratch make anything, and only put mods together or converted from another game, should be releasing everything unlocked. You did not make anything on that car, you only put it together, and therefore shouldn't have any right to set terms. Frankly, I don't care if you spent 5 days trying to fix the car so it doesn't crash the game. That doesn't make it yours. 

But then we end up running in circles with the people who do not scratch make anything, but have access to private mods. These people got permission from the person that scratch made the parts. The modeler most likely set terms, saying that you must only release this locked. For whatever reason, they don't want their part becoming public. Then we end up back in the GTA IV situation where you have a certain group of people with access to certain parts. I really am not sure how to solve this, since these modelers are unwilling to publicly release their models.

Edited August 25, 201510 yr by willpv23

However, all of the people that do not scratch make anything, and only put mods together or converted from another game, should be releasing everything unlocked. You did not make anything on that car, you only put it together, and therefore shouldn't have any right to set terms. Frankly, I don't care if you spent 5 days trying to fix the car so it doesn't crash the game. That doesn't make it yours. 

Of course that person did something. Converting models takes time and effort, mapping models takes time and effort and adding materials takes time and effort. It's impossible just to import development parts, most of them need editing before they actually work or get even close to the current standards.
If you want to be able to decide if a car is unlocked - do it yourself. Especially if all parts are unlocked, you have no excuse at all. Stop complaining about other modders, if you think downloading and assembling model parts is so simple, why don't you do it?
You believe unless you actually create a new polygon, you haven't actually created anything? You obviously never tried modding or modeling.

But then we end up running in circles with the people who do not scratch make anything, but have access to private mods. These people got permission from the person that scratch made the parts. The modeler most likely set terms, saying that you must only release this locked. For whatever reason, they don't want their part becoming public. Then we end up back in the GTA IV situation where you have a certain group of people with access to certain parts. I really am not sure how to solve this, since these modelers are unwilling to publicly release their models.

You talk about "solving", so you believe it's an issue people like to decide themselves. Seriously, what's the problem? Somebody doesn't create a model at all - gain for the community: Absolutely nothing. Somebody creates a model and gives it to trustworthy friends who release an awesome (locked) car - gain for the community: A high quality vehicle model everybody can download and enjoy in their game. If somebody doesn't want to release something, it's that way.
 

I don't even understand the point of the discussion. Some consumers require mods to be unlocked, but what do they gain? Nothing, because they can't even mod. Most modders say everybody should decide for themselves.
Apart from "being better the community" I haven't seen many arguments against locking so far, and in IV it was for more likely for an unlocked model to get used without credits. That's not exactly good for the community, isn't it?