Keepers?

[ZylonBane]

Nonetheless it is possible I think to have an alternative Thief world... kinda odd considering Thief is an über alternative of our own. I guess it demonstrates the depth of it all.

Not really. The goal shouldn't be to create an alternate Thief, the goal should be to -- like Thief -- create an alternate Earth... one which happens to be roughly similar to Thief's take. It should be a cousin to Thief, not a descendent.

[spix's circlet]

Understanding copyright (or right in general) is pretty simple. The one with more money wins.

Right!

I understand that once your idea is down on paper, it can become automatically copyright (such as posting the material to yourself to prove the date, should one ever end up in court). But what constitutes an idea? Thief as a whole – or its parts? Does Eidos own the intellectual property of burricks? Does having burrick-like creatures that belch red toxic fumes and are instead called "ruffians" avoid copyright?

 

 

 

 

Not really. The goal shouldn't be to create an alternate Thief, the goal should be to -- like Thief -- create an alternate Earth... one which happens to be roughly similar to Thief's take. It should be a cousin to Thief, not a descendent.

A much better description to call it a cousin. But still, depending on its scope and similarity to Thief the Dark Mod might develop to be closer kin, like a sister, or an evil twin. Though I do prefer a more distant relation as you say.

[OrbWeaver]

But what constitutes an idea? Thief as a whole – or its parts? Does Eidos own the intellectual property of burricks? Does having burrick-like creatures that belch red toxic fumes and are instead called "ruffians" avoid copyright?

 

The precise definition depends on the country and jurisdiction, but in general copyright does not protect ideas but the expression of ideas (writing, photographs, art, music etc.).

 

This is certainly the way it works in the UK; there was recently a case where a couple of authors tried to sue the publishers of The Da Vinci Code for "copying the central idea", and they lost quite spectacularly because ideas cannot be protected.

[sparhawk]

Right!

I understand that once your idea is down on paper, it can become automatically copyright (such as posting the material to yourself to prove the date, should one ever end up in court). But what constitutes an idea? Thief as a whole – or its parts? Does Eidos own the intellectual property of burricks? Does having burrick-like creatures that belch red toxic fumes and are instead called "ruffians" avoid copyright?

A much better description to call it a cousin. But still, depending on its scope and similarity to Thief the Dark Mod might develop to be closer kin, like a sister, or an evil twin. Though I do prefer a more distant relation as you say.

 

The question you raise are pretty hard to answer. Pesonally I'm not a friend of intellectual property in general, but the line is pretty diffuse. I understand that some ideas require a lot of thinking and are therefore worth to protect them. On the other hand a lot of ideas are pretty cheap and are often an obvious solution in a given context. Amazon's One Click Patent is a good example for that. The problem is how to define when an idea is trivial and when is it not. Some say that some ideas are obvious but nobody had it until they saw it implemented. After that they say "Hey! That was so obvious why did I never think of it myself?" Well. The question is, if something is really obvious but you never thought of it yourself BECAUSE it was so obvious, would this be enough to warrant a protection? IMO the Amazon One Click Patent falls into such a category.

[sparhawk]

This is certainly the way it works in the UK; there was recently a case where a couple of authors tried to sue the publishers of The Da Vinci Code for "copying the central idea", and they lost quite spectacularly because ideas cannot be protected.

 

Not yet.

[obscurus]

The question you raise are pretty hard to answer. Pesonally I'm not a friend of intellectual property in general, but the line is pretty diffuse. I understand that some ideas require a lot of thinking and are therefore worth to protect them. On the other hand a lot of ideas are pretty cheap and are often an obvious solution in a given context. Amazon's One Click Patent is a good example for that. The problem is how to define when an idea is trivial and when is it not. Some say that some ideas are obvious but nobody had it until they saw it implemented. After that they say "Hey! That was so obvious why did I never think of it myself?" Well. The question is, if something is really obvious but you never thought of it yourself BECAUSE it was so obvious, would this be enough to warrant a protection? IMO the Amazon One Click Patent falls into such a category.

 

 

Personally I think there are better ways of stimulating and encouraging innovation and creativity than patents and copyright. Copyright and patents are a form of economic protectionism that distort markets and only serve to increase inflation. They have no place in the 'Information' Age. While I am all for people being given due credit for something they have invented or created, I am not in favour of someone gaining an exclusive monopoly just because they were the first person to think of something. Maximius actually posted a nice read in the OT section which, having skimmed through, is largely in agreement with my own views, so I'm glad I'm not the only one thinking along those lines.

 

Certainly in terms of copyright, almost every concievable form of music, art etc that could remotely be described as "original" has already been done. All artists and musicians are doing these days is building on, and occasionally improving on, ideas that have already been done, whether they are aware of it or not.

And in terms of patents, it is a much more productive use of human resources to give people unfettered freedom to build on other people's ideas than to continously have to reinvent the wheel to avoid a patent infringement lawsuit.

[sparhawk]

Personally I think there are better ways of stimulating and encouraging innovation and creativity than patents and copyright. Copyright and patents are a form of economic protectionism that distort markets and only serve to increase inflation. They have no place in the 'Information' Age.

 

Actually the name "Information Age" is a good nomer, because it already says where the market is. In Information. So it's no surprise that patents and ideas are becoming hotly debated.

 

While I am all for people being given due credit for something they have invented or created, I am not in favour of someone gaining an exclusive monopoly just because they were the first person to think of something. Maximius actually posted a nice read in the OT section which, having skimmed through, is largely in agreement with my own views, so I'm glad I'm not the only one thinking along those lines.

 

I'm on the same line. In fact there is a good analogy in geame development for this. When you are going to the newsgroups dedicated for gamedevelopment there and you sart to post about this cool idea for a new game you had, nobody takes you seriously. Why? You will get exactly the same ersponse. Ideas are cheap and many people have good ideas, but it's the work of implementing it, that is the hard part. I've seen some posts of people who thought they could come there with just an idea and ebcause the idea for a game is the most important thing, everbody would have to immediately jump on the train. One posting I saw was rather ridiculous, because the guy posted along the lines, he already did all the important work (thinking of the gameidea) and now he is 'just' looking for some programmers who can code it. And he was so generous to offer 80%/20% if the game took off. 20% for the programmers of course. Somehow that is the same stance that I see in such patents. You go out for a walk, have some idea, patent it, and when somebody else has the same idea AND implements it, you can rip him off.

 

And in terms of patents, it is a much more productive use of human resources to give people unfettered freedom to build on other people's ideas than to continously have to reinvent the wheel to avoid a patent infringement lawsuit.

 

Guess what would have happend if the wheel would have been patented...

[obscurus]

"I'm sorry sir, but have you paid the licensing fee for building those nice round wheels for that chariot? No? Then I'm sorry, but I will have to launch patent infringement proceedings against you for unauthorised use of those wheels. See you in court."

[OrbWeaver]

I've seen some posts of people who thought they could come there with just an idea and ebcause the idea for a game is the most important thing, everbody would have to immediately jump on the train. One posting I saw was rather ridiculous, because the guy posted along the lines, he already did all the important work (thinking of the gameidea) and now he is 'just' looking for some programmers who can code it.

 

Wow, Kingers gets around a bit doesn't he?

[sparhawk]

[Maximius]

You should all check out that book I posted, "The Conservative Nanny State", it has a great discussion of copyright and patent protections.

[Dunedain]

Yeah, the acolyte model could be used for Keepers by FM authors (by the way, great model work,

as always, oDDity! ). The only problems are the breast plate armor, the decorative design

on the sleeve (I don't think Keepers have decorations on their sleeves) and the robe color.

oDDity, could you please adjust an alternate version of that acolyte model with no armor, plain sleeve

and a nice rich black robe color? That would be about perfect.

[Springheel]

oDDity, could you please adjust an alternate version of that acolyte model with no armor, plain sleeve

and a nice rich black robe color? That would be about perfect.

 

You've got to be kidding. We've already said we're not including keepers, so why would we go back and modify one of our models to make one? Do you think we don't have anything else to do?

 

If people want to make carbon-copy thief missions they might *gasp* actually need to do just a teeny little bit of work themselves.

[Bukary]

Personally I'm dying to see some Oddity's necromancers models. I hope he'll make them... It might be something great!

[Vadrosaul]

You guys are getting touchy recently. Something not going well in the project?

[New Horizon]

You guys are getting touchy recently. Something not going well in the project?

 

Everyone is simply working hard and there is still much ahead. We're just trying to make the best use of our time...and going back to fix a model to look like a keeper isn't the best use of our time at the moment. The mod will be fairly flexible when released...people should be able to reskin and alter things they don't find particularly to their liking.

[Springheel]

You guys are getting touchy recently. Something not going well in the project?

 

After working on this project for close to two years, I've noticed the community is full of people who want to hand us grocery lists of things for us to do, but a distinct shortage of people who actually want to roll up their sleeves and help.

 

It's one thing to discuss and debate the value of certain features, but it's highly annoying (at least to me) when someone starts asking us to custom build something specifically for them, especially when we've already said we don't plan on including it.

[Slash]

how in the F*&^ can u include Hammers and not keppers. hammers are just as copyrighted as keepers. to not include something so important in the thief world would make it unthief like. i mean think about it how dark and mysterius do the keepers make thief feel. gameplay isnt everything there are many elements that make thief feel like thief. if u include hammers its a given to include keepers. sry but thats the way its got to be lool.

 

why is this thread still going ??????

Edited June 1, 2006 by Slash

[Dunedain]

Well, first off, I wouldn't even have mentioned it if I thought a great deal of effort was involved.

I'm well aware how busy the team is and certainly don't want to add significantly to the already

large number of things to do. I was operating under the assumption that the armor could

easily be removed (and, of course, the sleeves made plain and changed in color) without requiring

any major work on the underlying main character model itself, and so it would be very fast to do,

especially for an expert. Perhaps it's actually harder to do than that.

 

And I don't think this falls under the category of a personal request. Even if you don't plan

to feature Keepers in the story line you guys plan to make at some point, A.I. models that have

a similar look to them would still be highly useful tools to have as basic building blocks for the

kinds of missions Thief fans are going to want to make. Just as the "builder" character models

are going to be essential for so many Thief FM's.

 

Anyhow, perhaps it's so easy to make those adjustments that any reasonably knowledgeable

DOOM III modeler can handle it without messing up the model in the slightest. If that's the

case, then fine, I'm sure someone will do just that.

 

And as for lending a hand, I never said I was unwilling to do that. I don't have any practical

knowledge or experience on 3D modeling or programming, but I could help write lore, story text

and such for readables, and also character dialogue, when you fellows get around to working on

your campaign.

Edited June 1, 2006 by Dunedain

[Springheel]

how in the F*&^ can u include Hammers and not keppers. to not include something so important in the thief world would make it unthief like.

 

We're not making 'the thief world'.

[Vadrosaul]

I wish I could help you guys, but I have little to no experience in the development field. I'm a "Power user" at best who loves his PC games, and I know my way around the hardware world. I hope I don't come across as demanding, I've tried to remain low-key as I enjoy absorbing the progress you guys make plus reading your discussions.

 

Maybe if there is a list of what the team needs help on I could take a look at it.

[sparhawk]

That list is easy to memorize:

 

Texture artists

Modelers

Animators

[Order of the Hammer Bureaucrat]

A.I. models that have a similar look to them would still be highly useful tools to have as basic building blocks for the kinds of missions Thief fans are going to want to make.

 

No reason at all to mimic thief by every detail. We're going after the mood, atmosphere, and feeling, not the little story details that create it. People should have some imagination. I'm for example including chemists, iron smelters, sludge producing sewer facilities, etc. in my FM.

 

I'm going to start making textures. soon. in a few days. less than in 100.

[demagogue]

BTW, while the subject is up again, I too was thinking about going around Manhattan after the bar exam when I have some free time and scoping for some textures along some choice streets with a digital camera, laptop, girlfriend, and Paintshop.

 

I used to make them years ago and I did professional webdesign for a little while (well, who didn't in the 90s?) so know my way around Paintshop pretty well. But I know there's a lot more work involved with D3 textures given the higher resolution, bump mapping, specular mapping, etc. But then I figured I could read some tuts on that stuff and try to catch up to speed, and anyway it's mostly an excuse to tour around the city looking for cool architecture (of which Manhattan has plenty) and you can take only what you like, if anything; doesn't stop me from using the project to get up to speed.

 

Anyway, if you've noticed on the Doom3 boards, the main tutorial for D3 texture making is down (first link on this page). Others are up, but not the central, first-pass one. Of course there are plenty of generic tutorials around. First, does anyone have a copy of that first tutorial? Or if not, a way to get up to speed about what's special about D3 texturing that I could build off a generic tutorial and my own past experience? Or any advice generally?

 

I'm not trying to kid myself that it's trivially easy to pick up; plenty of the tutorials I have read let me know how much time, effort, and skill is involved. But I thought, too, it's worth the time just collecting interesting source material around NYC and playing around with them in Paintshop, which is not new to me ... and if I was going to do that ANYWAY, why not do it so I can help out the Dark Mod while I'm at it? Anyway, it's the D3-specific information that I really need, though, before I can do anything ... so that's why I'm posting about it.

Edited June 1, 2006 by demagogue