BIS - Mission PROTECTION

[MattXR]

I think it should be the mission makers choice weather he wants it blocked or not.

Becuase then if someone likes something in the mission they can ask the mission maker via PM "Oh how did you make that artilliary" and if the mission maker is nice they will PM the scripts or an example mission" Problem solved.

edit: btw never compair the ofp community to the armed assualt community. Becuase it never will be the same.

[william1]

yes agree with [APS]Gnat , trying to lock the missions for just an isolated case is like killing flies with a bazooka

[[APS]Gnat]

edit: btw never compair the ofp community to the armed assualt community. Becuase it never will be the same.

Why the #$@@ not ??!!
Seems to be same so far.
Same developer, same type of game, same flexibility, same players (mostly, if not exactly lol), same tools, same principles ....... oh ... and same forum

[Balschoiw]

I guess there was a thread about this in the mission editing section a while ago and the results were basically the same as here. Some people would like to have a method to crypt the missions while others don´t. I also would be happy to have a crypt function as a lot of things are stolen without any mentioning of initial author.

Imo there is a difference between Arma com and OFP com. People do not even feel the need to do proper credits and furthermore promote that as their own stuff. This has happened with missions and addons so far.
Though I think it´s unlikely BIS will implement such.

[stainer]

Becuase then if someone likes something in the mission they can ask the mission maker via PM "Oh how did you make that artilliary" and if the mission maker is nice they will PM the scripts or an example mission" Problem solved.

edit: btw never compair the ofp community to the armed assualt community. Becuase it never will be the same.

What happens when the creator of a locked mission drops out of the community and is no longer reachable? Problem not solved.
I'm fully with Gnat on this one, locking missions simply stifles creativity and makes the learning process for budding scripters/mission makers a lot harder.

As for a different community that's ridiculous. Balschoiw don't be ignorant - the issue of 'permission' was prevalent in the OFP days with people bitching left, right and centre about lack of credit.

The only real instance I've seen of mission spinoffs is Evolution, but I bet most people playing it won't know of Kiljoy (or any of the spinoffs creators for that matter) and really don't care so long as they are enjoying themselves.
The creators of the missions should be pleased that people are taking it upon themselves to edit their mission, seeing how they made it and then adapting it to their individual needs and get maximum enjoyment out of it, even if it doesn't have their name stamped all over it.

[Baddo]

Could open-source type projects be considered to avoid your need of even discussing encrypting missions.

1) One mastermind starts a mission project, with a website and project administration tools in place, including source code repository, subversion or the like.

2) The masterind makes a design document and an initial version of a (potentially good) mission.

3) Attaches a license to the work, which essentially makes it open-source and excludes commercial usage.

4) Puts it to the source code repository.

5) Other people who like the mission and would like to see improvements done to it will join the project.

6) The community then contributes improvements to the mission source code repository. Changes must be approved by the mastermind before they are merged into the main development branch.

Could this kind of setting work for the experienced mission makers who'd like to be more in control of their missions and derivates?

Wouldn't you get the glory you need if you'd set up an open-source mission project and take the leading position? * The main point is, you could let other people join the development process but still hold the last word what goes into the mission and what doesn't.

Obvious drawbacks are, this requires lots of work to set up initially, and lots of motivation from the individuals to keep people (not least themselfs) interested in the project.

* You would get s*it too but that's a fact of life and can't be avoided, especially in leading positions you will always face opposition and complaints.

[Doolittle]

Get the glory?! It's not about glory. It's about CONTROL. Control of your work & your vision.

[Suma]

Given no game developer was able to come up with a reliable copy and reverse engineering protection for their own games, I afraid expecting to get this for user content is simply not realistic, and I am convinced it will not become possible until some trusted computing platform (like MS Palladium proposed some time ago) will be widely adopted. As the trusted computing faces a lot of opposition, I think you will have to wait very long for this.

Currently no reliable encryption is possible, because the game needs to be able to decrypt the data, and as long as anyone can reverse engineer the game, anyone can get the decryption key. Hacking any such encryption is so easy it is simply not worth implementing it.

[xxbbcc]

As the trusted computing faces a lot of opposition, I think you will have to wait very long for this.

Thank God for that! Having "Microsoft" and "trusted" in the same sentence would be a joke.

And as for mission makers craving "control": don't release your missions, then no one will be able to take anything from it. But I for sure like the ability to change things if I need to. I've seen mission makers being less than helpful when asked about changing some aspects of their mission, because they thought it was perfect and everyone liked it that way.

[quiet_man]

Quote[/b] ]I think it should be the mission makers choice weather he wants it blocked or not.

Becuase then if someone likes something in the mission they can ask the mission maker via PM "Oh how did you make that artilliary" and if the mission maker is nice they will PM the scripts or an example mission" Problem solved.

by paying for the game I pay for the development of the tools you use to create your work. So I have some minimal rights on your work.

I would only agree on protection if it would be limited. The author would need to refresh his rights every e.g. 3 months with a limit of 1 year.

Everything else would bring up the bad money ghosts. Someone would create a company to created masses of cheap missions, sell them and treat other mission makers with legal consequences if they "steal".
By the way, how much money have you put back to defend your work?

Quote[/b] ]edit: btw never compair the ofp community to the armed assualt community. Becuase it never will be the same.

Arma community is going through the same development as OFP and any other gaming community. In some weeks more an more people will drop out and only the real fans will stay. Then it will calm down.

It was this way, it is this way and it will be this way.

QuietMan