Szico VII

No shit sherlocks @D. I did say one guess per person though

No, and no more hints

Not to do with my engagement, no Thats a lovely idea though...maybe I could adjust it to fit that afterward

Sorry dude, I have only made skyboxes using radiant and photoshop! Surely google has some good space skyboxes? Remember you need a top and bottom - the above screen only looks like itd do for some of the sides.

What map will this eventually be? Prize for the first correct guess. (In the form of a personalised easter egg in final thing) One guess each

http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/Index.cfm/ID/682633 I suggest you make it look realistic with an env shader +/- specular shader to get the effect you want. The actual texture could potentially be just a flat shade of grey and then the small finish of metal quality done with the shader.

Who doesnt love a bit of drama?

We should really have to re-run the vote if theres been any shenanigans...

Spawnflags 2 is auto-clip but... 1) Try to avoid as creates a whole load of brushes which will make you hit your brush count really fast. 2) I dont know if it works on static models.

^^This

On topic: I remember seeing these back on filefront forums years ago! Wonder if he'll ever release it

CHANGE THE PATHHS TO POINT TO YOUR Q3MAP2 AND JA GAMEDATA DIRECTORY FIRST Save that into notepad, save it as a .bat file, then drag 'n drop your .map onto it and it will spit out an ASE file into the same directory

As I said, I suspect you are just going to have to simplify your useage of patch meshes. Sorry!

Did you try target_teleport?

To be frank? Depends on if a) any original author(s) has a problem with them being used in this way. b) likelihood of anyone caring. c) proportion of assets ported. d) whether or author trying or not to pass of as own work. e) whether credit given or not. f) contribution to community enjoyment of game As you can see, its a complicated decision. Not one that can be simplified into a set of standardized rules. My personal opinion on a file like that would be not to host it if the majority of models were ported, as I wouldn't personally consider that "fair use." It would be discussed with the rest of the site staff if there was any disagreement. Having said that, any old files would probably only be reviewed if a direct request to withdraw the file was made. An file like that is actually a really good example of why a specific rule just isn't enough to define what should and should not be considered acceptable.

Without going into it too much, provided consent was gained and there was only a few short clips of voicework (rather than it running into the minutes) id imagine that would be classed as fair use.

I'm sure I said the final stance is still under discussion....there will never be an "ultimate" stance as it will be subject to change and review over time. Sure, the main rules page doesn't have a specific meaning there yet, but we'll get it there soon. And @...thats why we need a fair use criteria.

"The final stance is still under discussion but I suspect it will be an "officially no porting is allowed" except under fair use" A rule such as the one proposed by eezstreet is equally prescriptive and cannot be applied to every piece of copyright. Would you be happy if someone took a piece of your work and changed one texture so it was 99% ported? I suspect not. The UK law is an example of how this kind of issue is managed in the UK, and a system which realistically is what we would have to use. You cannot make a set prescription that covers all types and variety of port/copyright which can be universally applied to any situation. Whichever way you look at it there will be some decision over whether the material should be removed left up to the site staff. This would of course take strongly into account whether there was a request for removal and how much of the included material was ported. In the event of a legal challenge, obviously our decision would be overruled by whichever legal authority was sending the papers and so we would of course take it down rather than risk such action. Its a risk of being sued or C&D'd vs being able to host creative mods to the communtiy vs. rights of copyrights and original owners to their work.

You cannot make a set of rules that will define accurately all ported content. This is why fair usage law was created. See here: The final stance is still under discussion but I suspect it will be an "officially no porting is allowed" except under fair use (i.e entire ports of any type of media would not really be acceptable, but the odd texture/sound/mesh should be ok) and the final decision will be made at the hands of the staff (or potentially the justice system, but hopefully nothing like that would ever happen) The burden of responsibility SHOULD be on the user as they are one who have decided to include ported content and as we, the staff, are not in a position to make complex legal decisions that would hold up in an actual court. The submitter must take responsibility for using such content at their own risk. In addition, of course if someone who owns the original work wants it removed they should have the absolute right to request that this happens. http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p27_work_of_others

Cases dealing with fair use and porting can be complex, as decisions are based on individual circumstances and judgements. This can be a very difficult area of copyright law. You guys seem to want a rule that covers everything - no such rule can exist. The best option is a fair use-style policy which allows mild incidental use of ported/copyright content but also allowed people the option to request their copyright be removed. For single sound inclusions or the odd texture, then that might be considered fair use. A whole map or texture set and or model would usually not be a fair use, particularly if credit is not attributed correctly.

The staff cannot check every file for every possibility of ported content. It is simply not possible. We are not omniscient - we cannot know whether a sound included in a file is actually a rip from Star Wars battlefront, we don't have an all knowing database reference program that will do this for us. We don't know if a model has been ripped from another game or if it is original work. It will be picked up if the particular staff member has a particular interest in the infringing porting media and has the background knowledge to make this link, but this would have to be a specific recognition. It is just not possible to know. The only realistic way of dealing with this, given the limited resources of the site, is to allow other users who have copyright complaints or hosted/ported content of theirs which they has slipped through the net, to give them the opportunity to express these concerns and then the file would be taken down. We have to advise all modders not to submit ported content to protect the site, however we know here and there there will undoubtedly be some ported content, and we have to attribute the responsibility of submitting such files to the authors, not the site staff.

I believe that is why we ask for people to confirm they accept the submission rules which state that. It is only subjective in the sense that the staff cannot check every file to confirm whether it is ported because 1) we do not have the time and 2) not the resources, and most importantly 3) an omniscience of knowing whether or not something is indeed ported or not. This is why we have to rely on the community and authors to point these things out if they notice and have issues with it.

Map Models are baked into the BSP and so many weren't included in the release pk3s. You'll need to install the .md3 files included in the gtk radiant 1.4.0 installation to get the useable model files to add to new maps

PM me it