Jump to content

CrimsonStrife

Members
  • Posts

    563
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CrimsonStrife

  1. This transition seems like a poor idea to me. As someone familiar with both systems and who uses them extensively, I don't see the benefit. I mean yes, UE4 is better, but if you're already working all that content in UDK, I don't see the point in moving to UE4. Not only are you then having to pay monthly (or pay once and go without updates) for a license for the engine for every person working on your project, but you also will have to recreate almost everything you've done up to this point. Seeing as how you are not using high detail assets or anything over-the-top I don't see where a free project like this is going to benefit from the move.
  2. The models themselves? Certainly. As long as you never attempted to relate them to a copyrighted universe. I.E. You couldn't design a non-SW alien, and pretend it was one, because then you'd be using the Star Wars brand. If you're talking about the mods that include said models. I.E. actually putting them in game: Well based on my understanding of it, the EULA for this game doesn't technically forbid that, so you probably could, but I don't think you'd ever get people to pay the kind of money needed to make it worth it. This would be a more legal gray area then the former.
  3. This video can be considered slightly spoiler-y for Guardians of the Galaxy, so view at your own risk. Not that the Internet hasn't already spread this like wildfire. But it is wonderful.
  4. Well the flaw there is that, especially nowadays, any games "built on those engines" are typically built on modified versions of the engines, specifically when you talk about AAA games. Now in some cases, like with most Unreal based games, you can usually get the editor working, even if they disabled it for distribution. But often because of changes they may have made in the engine code, they are not as easily modded as a generic Unreal game. Or in some cases, due to other software they may have added to the engine, and the rights that come with them, they may not be allowed and or able to allow modding. EX: Mirrors Edge has its Unreal Editor .exe and I think a few other files removed. Assuming you have a game with the same engine version, you can copy paste the missing files in, and open the Mirrors Edge in the editor, but since all it's files are baked, there is a big limit on what you can do I think. I've personally managed to get into the editor for it, but was never able to do much with it other than few files.
  5. Well considering they own it, they have the authority to do whatever they want with it. Like it or not, they could reboot the entire universe and we could do nothing but protest. And technically speaking, Lucas never officially declared a large portion of the EU to be "cannon" he just never called it "non-cannon" either, so really the odds are they aren't evening getting much protest from the man himself. All the EU authors did was license the content to work with, which unfortunately doesn't give them the legal creative rights to make their stories matter in the continuity. Now my understanding is, they aren't outright throwing the content away, but are instead establishing a "Legends" timeline, that will essentially be a separate cannon, that runs parallel to whatever they declare to be the true, primary story.
  6. Disney declared the EU to be non-cannon, and has officially relegated its stories to the "Legends" non-cannon. At this point all that matters are the films, TCW and now Rebels and any future films or spinoffs.
  7. I posted mine and it spans 3 monitors, just put it in a spoiler and it won't hurt anything lol.
  8. Like I said, Disney does have the final say. But when all this started one of two things likely happened. Either the artists where given a basic idea of the project and came up with a selection of styles and designs that eventually led to this, OR they were provided with a direction in the form of some written style document. The latter seems highly unlikely as typically a style is established after numerous concepts. While you would be almost guaranteed to see visual differences in the two shows regardless if the same team created them, you would be far more likely to see resemblances in the designs. To be honest it looks like someone started off with a model that was very much in the Clone Wars style, and then just hit the smooth tool in Maya one too many times. And there we find the root of the issue. Likely this was the very reason this series was even envisioned. Let's be honest, particularly towards the later seasons, TCW had started getting a lot darker. Not a bad thing necessarily, but also not really Saturday morning cartoon material either.
  9. Based on the videos and information I've seen, he isn't a Sith, hence the lack of a traditional name. Just a dark side force user, so if anything you might call him a dark jedi.
  10. My point was that typically animators have very established styles. And while yes, Disney gives the final say, the animation studios Art department would still have been the ones to create this style. Which if what I said is true, and much of the team is the same, is surprisingly jarring.
  11. Looks fine to me O_O -EDIT- Upon re-visiting that page, it was then stretched like the image.
  12. Is this not the exact attitude that started all of this?
  13. In the immortal words of Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw, And also
  14. As a retired staff member, I can tell you that if we DON'T take sides, things can get just as nasty as when we do. It is a no-win scenario. You're also functioning under the idea that the original comments were negative, when in fact they were not. No one told him that it looks bad, simply that it was not optimized and would cause problems. It was when Crazy openly rejected the ideas and mocked the practice of them that things became heated from both sides. Neither side was the best at stating their opinions, so neither side is innocent. Had Crazy led the conversation, or corrected Mini and co. early on that this model was destined for something like machinima use, and not for gameplay where performance is key, then much of the optimization talk would likely have never come up. He also needed to understand that no one was insulting his abilities, and indeed none of the posts prior to him becoming defensive (which he does almost immediately) insult the model or him. This, like many of the issues I have witnessed as both Staff and none, stem from people failing to communicate properly, inevitably someone becomes defensive and everyone starts picking sides. But as you will also see in that thread, once I actually explained the performance issues, and just what the limits mean, things seemed to get much more receptive. Everyone needs to just calm the fuck down, learn to read, learn to converse, and stop assuming everyone is out to get them.
  15. Exactly, doing so would cost them time and legal fees. Which is pointless on something with no money involved. It would also have resulted in a backlash from the fan base, and been a PR nightmare.
  16. I'm going to point you back to my earlier post. The reason these freely produced items get a pass is because they are at that point more costly on both a financial and social level than they are worth. It's when money comes into play that it is an issue.
  17. True, except he wanted the model of a copyrighted character, which while paying for such a thing is widely practiced, it IS by law a violation of copyrights. Not to mention, he would still have needed the model rigged and placed in game, a task that he would either be paying the same person for or finding someone that would do it for free. The fact of the matter is, even making such a model for free is a copyright violation, just one not likely to be enforced. Which is why we can do it.
  18. I don't get what all the talk about LucasArts being gone is about, yes they no longer exist as a developer, but Disney kept them as a legal entity which licenses out the IP to other developers. So all of the contracts and copyrights of the company still exist. References: http://www.thewrap.com/media/article/lucasarts-cease-making-games-will-lay-most-staff-83891/ http://www.cnet.com/news/disney-shuttering-lucasarts-moving-to-licensed-games-model/
  19. The Z95 doesn't have the X-foils of the X-wing, also you'll notice it only has 2 engines, not four.
  20. Looks like a Z95 Headhunter, not an Xwing http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Z-95_Headhunter
  21. @@eezstreet it should be noted that LucasArts does still exist, but only as a licensing company and publisher, no longer a developer. As long as they remain a legal entity the EULA will still hold in that regard. Now the release of the source code might muck with it a bit, but it doesn't change the fact that, technically speaking, ANY mod made that references or contains an IP the maker does not own, is in reality a copyright violation. So @, most mods are already technically illegal by copyright laws, but these are usually tolerated because there is no money involved and it would be stupid expensive to take someone to court over. However, copyright holders have to take action in some cases or risk losing their trademark. The moment we start marketing mods, we become a financial threat, and while fair-use exists, it is viewed on a case by case basis, and typically will only hold water in parody situations.
  22. I originally had edited this into my previous post, but given the replies since, I moved it here: I dug around for a bit and found some articles that can kinda shed some light on why this is viewed as a negative thing: While technically aimed at 'fan-art' (which is also technically what this would be considered) this is what the law says: According to copyright law, copyright holders have the sole right to distribute derivative works based on an original creation. This includes sequels and any other work that includes copyright-able elements from the original creation. As was confirmed in the “Catcher in the Rye” case, characters can be granted copyright protection as can many other non-expression elements of the original work. This is furthered that most fan creations are built upon plot elements and other copyright-able parts of the original material. That being said, fair use may protect some fan creations from being an infringement, but that is handled on a case-by-case basis, looking at the facts of the actual work. However, most fan creations, by their very nature, don’t parody or criticize the source material, which would provide a great deal of protection, nor are they highly trans-formative, meaning that they are less likely to win in the even that such a suit takes place. It is also worth noting that fan fiction and fan art can be a trademark violation as well, especially if it uses names and titles in a way that causes confusion as to whether they are official. Trademark disputes over fan creations are rare, but still possible. (Essentially, simply calling a character in a fan creation by their actual name could be considered in violation of this, depending on how it was depicted) Yet, despite a relatively strong legal position, lawsuits over fan fiction and fan art are extremely rare. This is especially odd considering that many of the rights holders who are the most common target of fan creations are also among those most aggressive at stopping other infringement of their work. So the question you're probably asking now @, is why has fan art, and the selling and commissioning of it, thrived? It is kind of an "unspoken rule", from a copyright holder viewpoint, fan fiction and art is usually not very harmful. Fans create works that are openly recognized to be non-canon to the story and are not replacements for the original. In fact, some feel these fan communities actually serve a valuable service to copyright holders by providing a thriving site for fans to visit, keeping them entertained and engage between official releases. In short, since fan creations don’t take away sales of the original work, they are often seen as free promotion and a way to grow the brand without cost or effort. The bigger issue, however, is the cost of going to war with fans. Being litigious with creators of fan art can be very costly, not just in terms of court costs, but in terms of backlash. No creator wants to sue their fans, especially when the fans aren’t earning revenue, and as such most creators will tolerate fan fiction and art under most circumstances. Some even go as far as to create fan site kits, for the purpose of aiding the creation of fan Web sites. Fan fiction and fan art communities, in turn, usually have a set of rules that they follow to preserve their symbiotic relationship. First, they agree to not profit from or sell copies of their creations. Though some of the communities run ads to cover hosting costs, most do not turn any profit and the individual authors never sell their works. Second, they always proclaim that their work is unofficial and has no connection with the creators. Finally, they respond to requests from the copyright holder to remove content and work with the creator as needed. In short, the community works to ensure they don’t hurt the original creator’s ability to profit from the work and the creator tolerates what is technically a copyright infringement in many cases. Granted, not every fan artist who sells copies of works is pursued, Magic the Gathering, for example, seems to have many artists that sell fan art of the cards but Wizards of the Coast, the makers of the game, don’t seem to actively be pursuing (at least not that I've heard). Still, that is the most common tipping point between when a fan creation goes from being a “tolerated infringement” to a legal matter. That being said though, every creator has right to make the choice for themselves where they want the line drawn and to enforce that line as they see fit, an important thing to remember when dealing with fan fiction and fan art. The key point to remember is this: Fan fiction and fan art are, usually, an infringement of the right of the copyright holder to prepare and license derivative works based on the original. This is almost without exception. However, many copyright holders, for good reasons, tolerate fan art and even encourage it, but this should not be taken as a free-pass to do what you want with the source material. There are many lines that a fan artist can cross and wind up in legal trouble. Your best bet is to study the rules for your community and obey them closely. If you do that, you should be fine but always remember that your creations only exist through the good graces of the copyright holder and they can change their mind at any point. tl;dr version: It is a big messy grey area.
  23. The game's EULA should provide somewhat of an answer to this, alas I do not have it on hand and cannot find an online version. Anyone care to enlighten us?
  24. I just remembered I once saw some software that was specifically designed to do just that, for characters at least, and was able to do it with animations too. If I can find it again I'll link it here for you.
×
×
  • Create New...