Offering materials to BMS…
-
If you want to offer your C-130, it must have LODs and of course, comply with BMS requirements.
If you do not want to create all the LOD … BMS could (maybe) make them, but in that case we need the .max files.
…
Anyway no worries … Radium will probably start his own C-130 … and we will have all what we (BMS) need without any fears of “troubles” or risks misunderstandings.
-
Nizmo seemed to have fully understood and accepted
the deal
by post 7. The rest seems to be a couple of guys making a major argument and some confusion to readers. On his behalf ?Nizmo joined the FO dev team and i was informed by him how “things were” with BMS (at least from his understanding), thus the interest in how things really are from both perspectives and how things can proceed. One always needs to hear both sides.
Long story short… communication is key… i hope you guys can solve everything in cool ways.
-
hmmm Nizmo why does this sound as a retraction?
u create the file and lods. U share the files with BMS. They do whatever they want with those (BMS wise) they implement the model in BMS.
U have some errors either they ask of u to fix them or they fix them and inform u.
After some time u make some additions changes alteration u re submit your files.
Ain’t this the case?
What is the problem or not understanding here?
what is to talk about?
Did I misunderstood?
Unless joining FO dev team prevents u in a way to give files to BMS…???
-
Unless joining FO dev team prevents u in a way to give files to BMS…???
Who is the guy making assumptions now…??
LET ME MAKE ONE THING VERY CLEAR HERE … before this is intentional or unintentional misguided or misled into the wrong and false direction.
Falcon Online policy is completly confirm to the BMS policy.
Falcon Online supports BMS - as is - as online hosting plattform and partially as 3rd party developement, but FO is NOT obligated to BMS, NOR is BMS to FO.We also do have internal dev. forum posts and debates to ensure that this stays that way !!!
We are not (nor intent to become) a “split” OR another FF vs OF phenomena.We back BMS up as much as we can, because we do understand the importance of unity and consistency in open developement projects like ours.
Our (or my) interest in this thread was only due to the interest into the matter itself and to be able understand things in a better picture in order to avoid conflicts like we´ve seen in the “Janhas” or other “conflict of interests” cases before.
Nizmo is a free man who can act on his own behalf. Noone from FO will interfere with his decissions and doings - UNLESS it brings FO in conflict with BMS (policies); and to be very frank with your Arty, its not YOUR bussiness as you are not part of BMS nor of FO. To be fair i replied anyways.
As a side-note: there are alot of people in this world who live by rumors or believes, but not many have the courage to communicate honestly to find the truth.
-
Arty Leave FO out if this. Falcon Online is not preventing anyone to not share anything. Everyone working over there is free to share whatever they need to share. Just like there was lot of information shared to people about campaign and lot of other stuff.
Falcon Online is not a Evil place where people are just sitting and keep stuff to them self’s. Remember one must seek knowledge, knowledge just doesn’t walk to you
-
So … I think that everything has been well explained “on both sides” …
I do assume that things are clear and easy to understand now.
-
One would hope so…but hope dies at last
-
No assumptions at all. Just asking… Nizmo.
Archer??? me thinking FO as evil? wow
AS informed that Nizmo joined the FO developers team, all of the sudden without anyone asking of it, or what is the point to know that Nizmo is a member of the FO dev team since he has all it’s freedom, and since there is so much talk for nothing and couldn’t understand why AS was messing around and what was his point, (lot’s of guys asked him why???) and seeing a retraction kind of post from Nizmo I thought I ask. We r just talking here. No one is accusing anyone nor are any dark forces for anyone. Our common goal is Falcon and it’s wealthiness.
FO is known for it’s work and many many members freely enjoy their fantastic work. So don’t twist my words nor put words in my mouth.
-
-
http://screamer.alt-world.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/dark-helmet.jpg
What!?!
Hahahahaha love Space balls!!!
-
Let’s fix this thread…
marerials = materials
-
-
-
If you want to offer your C-130, it must have LODs and of course, comply with BMS requirements.
If you do not want to create all the LOD … BMS could (maybe) make them, but in that case we need the .max files.
…
Anyway no worries … Radium will probably start his own C-130 … and we will have all what we (BMS) need without any fears of “troubles” or risks misunderstandings.
The post by me on this thread was really only to let known there is a full 3d model and pit for c130 and a/c130. I put it out there so nobody had to spend 300+ hrs making a NEW c130. Why 2 3d models?
BUT, if you have a poly maker at whim, then have at it.
-
These “hurdles” have been encountered by many others and, arguably, solutions have been found.
Look here and scroll down to licenses types.
IMO, in this situation the “Attribution CC BY” or “Attribution-NonCommercial CC BY-NC” licenses would fit best.At no point would the creator loose rights to continue to work on and update his original creation.
-
These “hurdles” have been encountered by many others and, arguably, solutions have been found.
Look here and scroll down to licenses types.
IMO, in this situation the “Attribution CC BY” or “Attribution-NonCommercial CC BY-NC” licenses would fit best.At no point would the creator loose rights to continue to work on and update his original creation.
GPL is also another great license candidate
-
This is why…again…I’m offering my services…;)…okay nevermind… You guys know how to reach me.
-
I am only involved in a prospective work about the C-130. I trust this piece of work needs time to get prepared before startup, to avoid what is happening right now. What I see is only giving BMS the model they exactly need. I won’t hide my wish to join, one day, if they need me, BMS team, as a 3D artist. I am absolutely not intetested to keep things I work on with passion for myself only. Moreover, regarding the standardization policy BMS initiated, I am modeling beyond their rules, because I want to give my work the best compatibility with what exists already. When the F-2 or the C-130 will be given to BMS as a gift from me (and team mates, if there is) , they can do everything they want with it, as long as this is freeware. My 3D models have no reason to exist, if not designed for a proper integration within BMS software. I have a life outside of BMS which is a game only as I see it ; as a former flight officer in the french air force, I flought real fighter aircrafts, right now, BMS is a great entertainement ; fishing, playing soccer or modeling looks very same to me. So I am not interested to spend time on licence things : I do, BMS achieve what they want with it, simply.
-
About BMS intergration…
Give, or give not.
But no licence blahblah … If it is to loose time dealing with licence stuff, we will be faster by doing the models ourselves without worying about licence stuff.
-
About BMS intergration…
Give, or give not.
But no licence blahblah … If it is to loose time dealing with licence stuff, we will be faster by doing the models ourselves without worying about licence stuff.
This was exactly what I meant.
And this is the reason why what is done (I speak for myself, because I indirectly started this topic) by me is given to BMS with the full authority.
Because what I do has no reason to exist without BMS.
Regards,
Radium