aquaponiee
Member
the rule about not being able to remove tha reusability tag is pretty recent, it did not exist back then.
fsonic is not reusable so you cannot use the assets from it without prior consent
Reusability, Ports, and Author's Returns
- Thread starter Charybdizs
- Start date
fsonic is not reusable so you cannot use the assets from it without prior consent
Riolucariolu
HIM
Why does it always have to be this complicated?
I have less things to take care about when I'm working in actual laboratories at university.
Might aswell have us wear labcoats while we port mods, eh?
I have less things to take care about when I'm working in actual laboratories at university.
Might aswell have us wear labcoats while we port mods, eh?
aquaponiee
Member
i agree that the system may be a bit complex, but all that legal jumble equates to "the mod must be faithful to the original"
How is it complicated?
The change is in the TL;DR and it's all about allowing ports that are faithful, are complete, are credited, are properly labelled, and aren't duplicates.
The rest of the post that surrounds it is a preface or a conclusion about why a guideline that has been in effect for years has only recently been changed and the lengthy thoughts and considerations that went behind it. You might be interested to read it if you want to know what brought this up, or have been affected by it in some way, or simply because you're curious; but you don't have to.
While I'm not very sure about university laboratories, I'm certain some laboratories do have a lengthy set of rules and guidelines to follow, some of them with a particular precent (an incident, most likely
) behind it.If something were to change, everyone would be (ideally) notified about it and the reasoning behind it.
Agreed. I know my initial post was long -- it's that way because I think giving the community the deep reasoning behind changes is way more respectful than just foisting a change on them with little or no explanation.The rest of the post that surrounds it is a preface or a conclusion about why a guideline that has been in effect for years has only recently been changed and the lengthy thoughts and considerations that went behind it. You might be interested to read it if you want to know what brought this up, or have been affected by it in some way, or simply because you're curious; but you don't have to.
While I'm not very sure about university laboratories, I'm certain some laboratories do have a lengthy set of rules and guidelines to follow, some of them with a particular precent (an incident, most likely
If something were to change, everyone would be (ideally) notified about it and the reasoning behind it.
It's there for those who really want to know all that info (they exist) -- don't worry too much about it if it's not something you needed to know. :p
Pyrodiac
Adm!n of Bootleg, Master of None
It seems this post has been relatively inactive, but I don't care because I do have a question:
What exactly prompted the existence of the reusability system? I wasn't a part of the SRB2 community until very recently so I don't have much context, but was there really anybody complaining about people making changes to their mod?
I can't exactly assume so considering I've never seen a single modding community have an issue like this, but I couldn't really think of any other reason why.
What exactly prompted the existence of the reusability system? I wasn't a part of the SRB2 community until very recently so I don't have much context, but was there really anybody complaining about people making changes to their mod?
I can't exactly assume so considering I've never seen a single modding community have an issue like this, but I couldn't really think of any other reason why.
Last edited:
In short: Yes. Very.
It's less "making changes to others' mods" and more "blatant theft from others mods." People would take sprites or scripts or other assets, and glue them together, often poorly. A lot of these mods are made by younger folk, which is kind of understandable (gotta learn modding somewhere), but it still ain't cool to steal. Something had to be done about it, so the reusability system had to be put in place, so people know "oh, I can't take from here, but I can use these assets just fine".
Oh, and there's also portlegs; porting old works to newer versions without their owners' consent, and often in botched jobs due to lack of understanding in how those works were made, which brings us to this topic.
It's less "making changes to others' mods" and more "blatant theft from others mods." People would take sprites or scripts or other assets, and glue them together, often poorly. A lot of these mods are made by younger folk, which is kind of understandable (gotta learn modding somewhere), but it still ain't cool to steal. Something had to be done about it, so the reusability system had to be put in place, so people know "oh, I can't take from here, but I can use these assets just fine".
Oh, and there's also portlegs; porting old works to newer versions without their owners' consent, and often in botched jobs due to lack of understanding in how those works were made, which brings us to this topic.
Having to get permission to make changes to someone else's work (and upload it -- the key part) is not unique to the SRB2 community at all. If you simply Google "editing other people's mods" you find tons of examples of communities where this is normal. This only gets more common as you move away from mods for a game and move into like, digital art communities. Taking someone else's work and modifying it will piss people the fuck off (and rightfully so). And yeah, even if it is fanart.
I would suggest you re-read submissions rules, we changed the porting standards to something more sensible, and your info is out of date
Pyrodiac
Adm!n of Bootleg, Master of None
I guess I'm just stupid then. That or I just so happen to be a part of communities where it doesn't really matter. Both feel equally likely knowing me.
I mean, other communities to free to do what they want and that's perfectly fine, but allowing people to freely take other people's content really isn't something we want to encourage or tolerate around here. People work pretty hard on these things and generally are pretty fine with the ability to not just let people use their own stuff typically, and those who want to share can freely mark the content as being shareable.
skeletondome
big chungus level 5 gyatt 4k uhd directors cut
I'd imagine the "no creative liberties" rule encompasses everything, but just to make sure - would cleaning up / remaking an old character mod's sprites to better fit 2.2 be allowed?
No, do not do that please.
Sls64LGamingBro
An ordinary coder...
Is there anything that's concern wrong with accepting it? I mean, I suppose given that "would cleaning up / remaking an old character mod's sprites to better fit 2.2 be allowed" the conclusion would've been slightly worse. Because that's just straight-up wrong to do so, letting the creator be mad at that person for remaking "said" character's sprites? *If my sentence doesn't make sense at all, I'm sorry for posting this. Generally.
Editing sprites goes far beyond preservation, even if it's to make it look better. You cannot do more than adjust the palette to fit with SRB2 V2+.
If you really want to edit the sprites, simply get the author's permission. Literally every updated addon on this site does that.
Sls64LGamingBro
An ordinary coder...
I guess this generally makes sense. I'm no person into editing sprites, just keep something faithful to the original from that "said" old mod.
I would know that because I've known this multiple times by now. It's not like I would be concerned about it and that's brand new for me to discover. I'm quite literally a 2.2 veteran. And a person who goes on Forums. At least thanks for this information, I'd be pleased about this.
Golden Shine
Speeding Gleam
Can I assume creative liberties for optimization/accessibility's sake are fine? Such as...
-Cropping unnecessary unused space out of sprites.
-Scaling down a massive graphic's size that'd cause crashes in some situations, usually in software mode with translucency shenanigans.
-Replacing an enemy's "player seeking" function with something far less game intensive but still accomplishes basically the same thing?
-Adding pop-in teleporters to a map after a path closes, so that the map becomes more multiplayer friendly?
-Compressing some huge 320-kbps 8MB mp3 file or huge WAV files into more filesize-friendly OGG variants?
-Cropping unnecessary unused space out of sprites.
-Scaling down a massive graphic's size that'd cause crashes in some situations, usually in software mode with translucency shenanigans.
-Replacing an enemy's "player seeking" function with something far less game intensive but still accomplishes basically the same thing?
-Adding pop-in teleporters to a map after a path closes, so that the map becomes more multiplayer friendly?
-Compressing some huge 320-kbps 8MB mp3 file or huge WAV files into more filesize-friendly OGG variants?
Yeah, absolutely @Golden Shine. That's the ideal kind of preservation.