I think one of the great things about plugins is that they are free. I am making a farily extensive plug of my own, (no TC, but still an entire new stroyline and some new outfits and graphics) but I would never think of charging anything for it. Before I even saw this topic, I was browsing the addons page and thinking how great it is that plugins are free.

Also I agree with Keldor Sarn: If anyone wants me to pay for a plug, it had better be just as good as the Nova scenario. Plugs that aren't up to Nova quality would still be good, but charging for something that's not Nova-quality seems unreasonable to me.

So that's my take on this.

darth_vader, on Apr 13 2005, 04:59 PM, said:

I think one of the great things about plugins is that they are free. I am making a farily extensive plug of my own, (no TC, but still an entire new stroyline and some new outfits and graphics) but I would never think of charging anything for it. Before I even saw this topic, I was browsing the addons page and thinking how great it is that plugins are free.

Also I agree with Keldor Sarn: If anyone wants me to pay for a plug, it had better be just as good as the Nova scenario. Plugs that aren't up to Nova quality would still be good, but charging for something that's not Nova-quality seems unreasonable to me.

So that's my take on this.
View Post

One of the problems about releasing a successful plugin is that your work is not finished when you release it. I spent probably almost as long answering people's queries about Frozen Heart as I did writing it. I stopped counting after the first thousand emails. This was back in the days of dial-up when 11 MB was a huge undertaking to download. Clearly people did think it was worth paying the dial-up charges at the time. On the other hand, I had to carry on paying my dial-ups to answer people's emails.

Of course, we are now in the broad-band era.

But a question: Frozen Heart had more than 20,000 downloads, and appeared on Ambrosia's CD and on the cover CDs of MacAddicts and other magazines. Quite a few people emailed me to say they were only registering (ie paying for) EVO because they liked Frozen Heart so much.

Clearly, a part of EVO's popularity was due to FH (who can say what part, beyond the people who actually emailed me). So, everybody seems to be making money out of it except me. Is this fair?

Another point -- Frozen Heart was the first 'TC'. There were replacement games for original EV, but they either built on the existing scenario (Angels of Vengeance), or only replaced some of the graphics (especially not the landing pictures), or they replaced everything but the missions (the original Star Wars plugin, bizarrely, used the EV missions and only added a couple of Star Wars missions in at the end. Again, there were plugins that introduced new twists on the engine. But FH was the first one to do all of them. Using the arguments above, shouldn't I then be entitled to some of the credit of all the TC's that followed? I don't especially think I should, and nobody has ever offered it to me. But, using the arguments which people have used, you would think that I should.

I'd be willing to pay for a TC that did things like animated spöbs or in-game cinematics. I'd actually feel guilty not paying for a TC that actually cost the devs a sizable amount of money.

This post has been edited by Mispeled : 13 April 2005 - 12:42 PM

Martin Turner, on Apr 13 2005, 11:15 AM, said:

Another point -- Frozen Heart was the first 'TC'. There were replacement games for original EV, but they either built on the existing scenario (Angels of Vengeance), or only replaced some of the graphics (especially not the landing pictures), or they replaced everything but the missions (the original Star Wars plugin, bizarrely, used the EV missions and only added a couple of Star Wars missions in at the end. Again, there were plugins that introduced new twists on the engine. But FH was the first one to do all of them. Using the arguments above, shouldn't I then be entitled to some of the credit of all the TC's that followed? I don't especially think I should, and nobody has ever offered it to me. But, using the arguments which people have used, you would think that I should.
View Post

I had no idea of any of this...

Martin Turner said:

Another point -- Frozen Heart was the first 'TC'. There were replacement games for original EV, but they either built on the existing scenario...or only replaced some of the graphics...or they replaced everything but the missions....Again, there were plugins that introduced new twists on the engine. But FH was the first one to do all of them.

What about Elite Frontiers? Or do you not count it because it was based on another game?

(But yes, it certainly is the case that 'Frozen Heart-imitation' in many ways has become the dominant genre of Escape Velocity plug-ins.)

David Arthur, on Apr 14 2005, 08:14 PM, said:

Martin Turner said:

Another point -- Frozen Heart was the first 'TC'. There were replacement games for original EV, but they either built on the existing scenario...or only replaced some of the graphics...or they replaced everything but the missions....Again, there were plugins that introduced new twists on the engine. But FH was the first one to do all of them.

What about Elite Frontiers? Or do you not count it because it was based on another game?

(But yes, it certainly is the case that 'Frozen Heart-imitation' in many ways has become the dominant genre of Escape Velocity plug-ins.)
View Post

When was it actually released? I did a trawl of all the existing plugins for EV and EVO (actually, there were none for EVO) about a week before FH was came out. I don't remember all the names, but as far as I could make out, there were none that were really TCs. The closest was Star Wars, because it actually changed the names of the legal and pilot status, although it didn't replace the landing pictures and didn't change the missions. People carried on releasing big EV plugins for some time after EVO came out, and there were some genuine TCs among them. FH was originally released on Ambrosia's website, not on the then EVO Board site. It only made it onto the EVO Board (and hence its listed date) when the two were amalgamated. FH was originally released on 31 August 1998.

You're right, though, I think it's pushing it to call something a TC when it's based on another game or a TV series or film: it certainly isn't an original creation.

Interestingly, EVO itself wouldn't have qualified, as it didn't change the landing pics and didn't alter most of the STRs. And, despite having the software recoded, it actually introduced fewer new features than FH. Planets with two ports may be passé today, but I got at least two hundred emails from people who couldn't figure it out. FH also made more use of the new EVO features, such as QuickTime movies (although that proved to be a mixed blessing) than EVO did itself.

Of course, all this is old and irrelevant to the Nova generation, who never played EVO and therefore never played FH. Of course, FH2 is Nova ready and sitting on my desktop at this moment...

Actually Martin, FH still used the EVC game balance and ship stats, so one could make case it's not any more a "full TC" that that SW plug you mentioned.

I consider both FH and New horizons (My other Ev plug fav) To be TC's but you shouldn't exculde that SW plug just for missions when you're own plug doesn't change most ship stats.

Though certainly you could claim entitlement to some moolah, especially if Ambrosia put it on a cd....

Swithich, on Apr 9 2005, 05:45 AM, said:

I agree with donationware.
View Post

I agree with you there.

Lets just leave it at that seriously, isn't it good enough that something you made is getting 1000's of downloads? Put the TC on your resume, it is a legitamite IT project and you deserve the credit.

PS a contract is anything that is agreed upon, usually signed, and usually money is changed hands, but not always.

PSS please dont insult or belittle people's intelligence or experience.

This post has been edited by Soul Reaver : 15 April 2005 - 04:56 AM

Martin Turner, on Apr 14 2005, 10:47 PM, said:

You're right, though, I think it's pushing it to call something a TC when it's based on another game or a TV series or film: it certainly isn't an original creation.

Martin, I take serious umbrage with this statement. I've been working on Starfleet Adventures now for nearly four years, and will likely take another year before it's complete, if not longer. You're telling me that, just because it's based on a(n unlicensed) property, it's not a TC? Okay, I'll bite. What is it? A dog collar? A pepperoni pizza? The right front hubcap off a '76 Chevy Impala?

The arrogance of your statement and present attitude is staggering.

Oh yeah and look at the game market. The ONLY mods that cost money as far as I am aware of are those made by the original company or group to begin with,

It is their product who is to say it is fair that WE, nobodies make money off their blood-sweat and tears? From what I understand some of EVN's developers went through hell at one time or another.

Eg, Desert Combat doesn't make any money through downloading or shareware, the effort that went into it more than likely FAR more than any TC's we as a community could make. The same goes for the Stargate Mod and these are just mods for BF 1942. What about CS and Half-Life in general? Sure you can 'buy' CS, but that comes with HL and saves a big download.

And the same is like EVula's Lair, he only makes money through contributions and donations, it costs him I believe what $400 US a yr for that service? And he only asks for donations and probably makes -$ from the site (bloody awesome though man, one of my favourite sites )

The point is EV in ALL it's incarnations is Matt Burch's game, not ours, if he didn't make it plug-in compatible we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. Just settle on donations and leave it at that!

This post has been edited by Soul Reaver : 15 April 2005 - 08:27 AM

UncleTwitchy, on Apr 15 2005, 10:46 AM, said:

Martin, I take serious umbrage with this statement. I've been working on Starfleet Adventures now for nearly four years, and will likely take another year before it's complete, if not longer. You're telling me that, just because it's based on a(n unlicensed) property, it's not a TC? Okay, I'll bite. What is it? A dog collar? A pepperoni pizza? The right front hubcap off a '76 Chevy Impala?

The arrogance of your statement and present attitude is staggering.
View Post

It's a pity we're resorting to insults UncleTwitchy.

I think you've answered your own question. If you are violating someone else's copyright, and merely transplanting someone else's ideas and graphics from somewhere else, even if you are changing every mod, then you're really doing a port of something else.

Anyway, I wasn't the one who suggested that ports weren't TCs -- I merely agreed that it was pushing the concept of 'TC'. This is especially the case if we are talking about the right to release a shareware or donationware game. If the copyright isn't yours, you can't charge for it.

But, more to the point, what does it matter whether anyone considers it a 'true' TC or not. If you want to make it, and you actually release it, and other people play it and enjoy it, great. If you feel like calling it a TC, or a QTC, that's entirely up to you. I wasn't the one who originally called FH a TC, and FF certainly isn't one.

BTW, there was a lot of trouble early in the days of EVC because Star Trek made it very clear that someone's Star Trek mod was a breach of their copyright. This may be something to thinki about.

Satori, on Apr 15 2005, 05:31 AM, said:

Actually Martin, FH still used the EVC game balance and ship stats, so one could make case it's not any more a "full TC" that that SW plug you mentioned.

I consider both FH and New horizons (My other Ev plug fav) To be TC's but you shouldn't exculde that SW plug just for missions when you're own plug doesn't change most ship stats.

Though certainly you could claim entitlement to some moolah, especially if Ambrosia put it on a cd....
View Post

Actually most of the ship stats in FH are somewhat different from EVC, plus the fact that all of the ships you actually need to play to make the game work were brand new. In any case, FH was released for EVO so it was certainly a TC from that game -- there was no EVO code which could have been modified which wasn't modified.

I'm not sure what you mean by game balance. One of the first beta tester comments on FH when it wasn't a TC or even a particularly large mod was that the game balance was totally wrecked by having such a powerful ship so early on. I disagreed at the time, and I still do. Also, the political balance is totally different -- two super-powers, a small democratic confederation and a lot of non-aligned worlds is totally different from the Confed/Rebel idea from EVC.

The original SW didn't just include some EVC missions, it included all of them with only the most minor modifications. This was commented on by almost everyone at the time, because SW itself is so story based.

Anyway, the landing pics are a dead giveaway -- you can't say something is a TC when graphically it looks like the original.

BTW, it occurs to me that nobody ever saw the revised entry screen for FH2, which, sadly, doesn't seem to be compatible with Nova.

I'm not really suggesting that all this means anything -- why should it? I made a game for my personal enjoyment and was surprised that anybody downloaded it. I didn't expect to be paid for it. But, if I had made it as a way of supplementing my meagre income and needed the money, I don't see why I shouldn't have released it for money. Maybe less people would have played it, but that's their business not mine.

Soul Reaver, on Apr 15 2005, 01:21 PM, said:

The point is EV in ALL it's incarnations is Matt Burch's game, not ours, if he didn't make it plug-in compatible we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. Just settle on donations and leave it at that!
View Post

Don't agree at all. FH existed long before EV did. I just decided to make it available as an interactive novel in the EV format. The game engine is all Matt Burch's, the FH scenario and storyline are all mine.

Soul Reaver, on Apr 15 2005, 09:51 AM, said:

PS a contract is anything that is agreed upon, usually signed, and usually money is changed hands, but not always.

PSS please dont insult or belittle people's intelligence or experience.
View Post

Taking your two points in reverse order.

We've had a number of issues on this board and it's predecessors where people who have given legal advice when they don't actually know the law. This is dangerous and puts people in a vulnerable situation. This is one area where the 'fun' part of EVx ends and the serious part begins. Early on Star Trek threatened to sue if the Star Trek plugin wasn't withdrawn.

I deal with Intellectual Property as part of my day job. However, when I'm faced with something I'm not one hundred percent sure of, I go to a specialist in that field. It's not belittling anyone to ask what their expertise is, or indeed to challenge it. It's what anyone who was concerned not to be sued would do. Sometimes, even when you're sure you are right, you still back down because the cost of doing so is outweighed by the risk of what would happen if you took it to court.

On your first point, I don't know where you live, but under British contract law, money must change hands. If you live under another system, that's fine, but as your sig doesn't indicate where you live, it's unhelpful to post this kind of thing without some kind of disclaimer.

Sorry if you think that these (and other points) are tendentious or overly aggressive. I like a good punch-up and hold you all in the highest regard.

Martin Turner, on Apr 15 2005, 11:50 AM, said:

Sorry if you think that these (and other points) are tendentious or overly aggressive. I like a good punch-up and hold you all in the highest regard.
View Post

I'm glad that you like this. I, for one, feel more and more like bootbottom crap the longer I read this thread.

Martin Turner, on Apr 15 2005, 05:26 PM, said:

It's a pity we're resorting to insults UncleTwitchy.

Indeed. However, that's how your initial remark came across to me -- not saying it's right, but by way of explanation (not an excuse), I am a Scorpio on a short fuse until my divorce finalizes. For my part, I apologize. For your part, let's continue on to your next statement, shall we?

Quote

Anyway, I wasn't the one who suggested that ports weren't TCs -- I merely agreed that it was pushing the concept of 'TC'.

The way I read that, David was asking if that's what you thought -- not suggesting that was the case. But I'm not a mind-reader. Regardless, while I realized your comment was directed toward David, it really came across as you agreeing with your unspoken statement about which David was asking.

Regardless, what I objected to was the dismissive, superior tone that was implied. "Those people aren't working on original material, therefore they don't count."

I've always been up-front about the fact that I'm making SFA to teach myself how to do TCs in order to produce an original work. Attitudes like this make me doubt that my efforts will be appreciated by those whom I held in high regard, and question whether it's worth continuing either project.

That's what upset me.

Quote

This is especially the case if we are talking about the right to release a shareware or donationware game. If the copyright isn't yours, you can't charge for it.

In this we are in perfect agreement. After all, it's the law.

Quote

BTW, there was a lot of trouble early in the days of EVC because Star Trek made it very clear that someone's Star Trek mod was a breach of their copyright. This may be something to thinki about.

Believe me, I have, many, many times. That was also when Paramount was trying to shut down fan sites to Star Trek for the same reason. I've also paid close attention to the change in Paramount's attitude towards fan endeavors, and as long as there is no money exchanging hands, I (and FunkMaster and swimmoryi who are making a TNG-based TC) should be okay.

If Paramount sends me a cease-and-desist, I stop all plans to distribute SFA and have Pougan take down the website.

I still don't see what overwhelmingly-urgent concerns are causing people to post in such a way that an outside visitor might be tempted to think Martin Turner was the deity of plug-in development, lightning bolts in hand ready to smite anyone who disagrees with him. (Just to pre-empt, I should clarify that I'm not talking about the 'definition of TC' spat...the monetary issue is what concerns me here.)

The way I see it, intellectual property is just that: intellectual property. If someone makes a plug-in and decides to charge X amount of money, that's his business and his jurisdiction. At the same time, it is the business of the prospective consumer to decide whether X amount of money is worth the plug-in. I don't feel that it's anyone's business to tell anyone else 'you can't charge for this': it's not their business that the developer decided to create the plug-in to begin with, and it's not their business that the developer decided to release the plug-in publically. However, it is their business to demonstrate with their actions (i.e. buying it or not) whether they agree or disagree with a paid scheme.

I feel that the current primary obstacles towards charging for a plug-in involve ambigious interpretation of rights granted by Ambrosia Software regarding usage of their engine, as well as a lack of any reliable copy-protection system and perhaps apprehension towards setting a precedent. If someone can overcome these obstacles and wants compensation, good for him or her. For me the donationware concept (as I have mentioned before) I believe is the most sound for personal use, but if I were to force a donationware payment paradigm on anyone else I would be making a mockery of the very beliefs that motivated me to suggest donationware in the first place.

This post has been edited by UE_Research & Development: 15 April 2005 - 03:01 PM

Martin Turner said:

When was (Elite Frontiers) actually released?...FH was originally released on 31 August 1998.

My copy of the second release was created 5 April 1997.

Soul Reaver said:

The point is EV in ALL it's incarnations is Matt Burch's game, not ours, if he didn't make it plug-in compatible we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. Just settle on donations and leave it at that!

Certainly I agree that it would be a rare plug-in that could actually persuade people to pay for it.

Just out of curiosity, how many people here would have been willing to pay for Nova had it been released as an EV Override plug-in with a free demo, as was planned at one point?

David Arthur, on Apr 15 2005, 08:07 PM, said:

Martin Turner said:

When was (Elite Frontiers) actually released?...FH was originally released on 31 August 1998.

My copy of the second release was created 5 April 1997.

View Post

Interesting. I do remember looking at a plugin with a similar name. Did it actually change all the landing pics and the Spob pics? I don't recall any of the EV plugins doing that, but I'm willing to be corrected.

UncleTwitchy, on Apr 15 2005, 07:35 PM, said:

Indeed. However, that's how your initial remark came across to me -- not saying it's right, but by way of explanation (not an excuse), I am a Scorpio on a short fuse until my divorce finalizes. For my part, I apologize. View Post

Fair enough. I was a bit taken aback that you took it that way, seeing as we were talking specifically about the original EV Star Wars plugin, not SFA. Sorry to hear about your current situation.

The real reason I don't think Star Wars was a TC was because although it religiously changed the graphics (and did it brilliantly) for ships and weapons, and also arranged the universe and govts, it just kept the old missions and didn't do anything with the Spobs or Landing Pics. I downloaded it because I really, really wanted to play an immersive set of missions and assumed that a Star Wars storyline would be just fantastic.

As it happens, the germ for FH the plugin came from playing SW, because it showed me that you really could have your own universe rather than merely modifying the existing one, and that you could drill right down to the level of 'bantha fodder' as a pilot skill level, which I thought was fantastic.

I also enjoyed playing Angels of Vengeance and especially Eye of Orion. Angels introduced some game engine twists, which showed me that by just making one thing look like another, you could take the game into its own space. It also significantly upped the ante in terms of graphics, but it's big winner for me was that I actually got involved in the plot -- I wanted to save the Amazons and I wanted to defeat the Maursians.
Eye of Orion was very instructive because it took a personal story: you were the guy, and you couldn't be anyone else. Again, I got personally involved with it.

Unfortunately after that I got involved in working on plugins, first Clavius and Beyond and then Battle Velocity / Oreste, before finally releasing my own. It's much harder to enjoy the game for what it is when you're always wondering 'how did they do that', or, worse, finding mistakes in the text.