Just to clear things up a little (I hope.)

Activision owns the code and the art to only the UI. And of course the trademark. The primary financial backers of Parsoft (I never met them) still own the rights to the sim itself. Technically, even Inertia Games was a licensee of the code for RC Simulator.

Yes, but these things are A LOT easier to do than say, build a whole new WWI sim from the ground up. I'd rather have to spend 50 man hours revamping the terrain engine and be nearly done with the to-list, than spend 50 man hours on just getting a GUI interface working and still have the rendering engine, AI, aircraft models, physics engine and graphical artwork to go...

The AI isnt that bad any more actually... I've made a TON of adjustments to the parameters in the SM files regarding min and max airspeeds, landing speeds and dive speeds. So the AI is still passable...

Sounds, yes we need some new engine sounds for sure! I've gotten some better ones in, but more are needed. FlyXwire was working on some, but he soon found out it's a pretty tough and time consuming thing to do... You have to get a good sound from a relatively low-quality wav that doesnt suck CPU and sound card power without a reverb at the right volume. Very doable (All of the current WWI sounds were edited by me in the end and a few others) but not really fun.

I agree tho Tailgunner, VDU is one very busy man. We need more with access to the source code! A LOT could be accomplished. Heck, just look was VDU was able to do, by himself over the course of 3 years. He was one man with EXTREMELY limited time and resources. If we had say 5 people on the job, we could cut that down considerably and get a fully functional WWI mod out in say 1 1/2 years. You may not have the fancy effects and polish at first, but it will be an enjoyable experience with good artwork and 3d modeling with many options you can expore that you simply can't do in RB3d. I don't think people would complain much about how there's no light glow or multi-textured transparent flame effects.

On a further note, we also have to consider one thing: Does Activision still care what happens to SDOE? As long as the community doesnt start yeilding a profit do you really think they will give a rats arse if VDU was to give others access to the source code on a personal private basis for example? I think not. I've seen mod communities hack the likes of EAW and WW2 Fighters with no backlash from the developers or publishers. Why are the SDOE community members so damned cautious about this aspect? Seems silly to me really... As long as we dont try to sell this mod commercially, what the **** could happen? It's not like we are hacking the Open Plane code, that's already open to exploration. We just want to tweak SDOE specific things like AI code and renderers...

So maybe if we were to "try" Activision in this respect. I have the WWI GUI mod almost ready to go that was pretty much hacked from the begining from a Resource explorer and a hex editor. It's in EXE form (App.exe to be exact, yes the same EXE the SDOE Patch uses) and when I release it we will see what Activision says... If no action is noticed, I think we should seriously start thinking about this.

As Daze mentioned, SDOE has poor-performing online network coding. In my opinion THIS is what's really holding FS-WWI back now.

The models are fine.

The textures are fine.

The terrain is fine.

The flight models are better than they've ever been, and competitive.

The AI is sub-par for WWI agility fighters, but for online action........heck there's AI!!! There's also co-op mission multiplay, but.........

There's severe contrainst because of the lack of servers, and the network coding stifles multiplay.

It's the online component which satisfies peoples need to group and compete together, and this is where SDOE/FS-WWI needs improvements, but that's quite beyond reach!

I wouldnt say quite beyond reach FlyXwire. VDU has the ability to change the network coding. This is FAR more of a chance than say EAW or WW2 Fighters has. He simply can't do it all in a timely fashion. We also have Hyperlobby support. This IMO makes up for A LOT. It's A LOT easier now to get together on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon than it was before.

The multiplayer code needs some revamping, true... We just need to get off our butts and see if we can get some source from VDU!

It's coding that seems to be the bottleneck everywhere we turn!

Modeler's make their models. Texturers do their thing. Others import, and do flight modeling improvemments, and tweak this or that, but we need programmers (and of course open-source code, or NA clearances), and programmers are so busy and in demand by industry that they have little time for hobby interest, let alone their own lives these days.

Mods groups pick around the periphery, while they wait for the core coding (from which all possibilities come) to catch up with everything else.

I've got no answers...............everything hinges on the code, and being able to get at it, and with those who can write it.

Show me the programmers that have the time, the clearance, and the will, because it's they that hold the key to the palace!

Well I for one know some Java and C++ and I'm quick to learn! True tho, programmers are in great need in the modding community.

Guys - surely whoever it was who released those patches for SDOE - he was one of the original team and surely he would know who to contact and also what the current state of play would be. I am a lawyer and would be happy to have a word regarding getting the wheels in motion to see about the code if I had a contact name?

WOW... Mighty Thats a BIG name from past. You can believe what he says about who owns the rights to what! Thanks for clearing that one up

OK... So, Activision own the rights to the UI ... not the Openplane Engine. Anyone looking to use that for a new sim can, at least, look beyond Activision. I don't know who funded Parsoft, but finding that out would be step number one.

My dream....

A new WW1 sim based around the OP engine, with new terrain, a brushed up renderer and a dynamic campaign

p.s. So far as I know, VDU was never a part of the original team. A couple of people were given controlled access to the source to develop patches and fix / finish off aspects of the game. This allowed the PArsoft team to move on to develop other things ( RC Sim ) whilst still satisfying the customer need for patches. Quite an enlightened concept really!

Just to clarify things a little...

Indeed, I have never been part of the original team who produced SDOE.

I do not want to sound harsh but...
Do not count on me for releasing the SDOE source code. I have signed a NDA and PERSONALLY engaged my responsability into it, which means if any legal procedure is engaged, it risks to affect myself and my familly.

I agree that the risk is probably just about non-existent, but the possibility is there, and that's enough for me.

I would be delighted if whoever owns the original code releases it (as Brian Kegels did for the source code of the network interface with Activision's blessing). In such case I'll be glad to release all the modifications and fixes done to it.

Cheers,

Vincent

NDA means just that. VDU is exactly corect in his ethics. It would be illegal and unethical for him to release the code.

It doesnt matter if Activision (or ParSoft or Inertia or whoever they become) display no interest in the software. Legally it is theirs. It cannot be considered abandonware unless they make a statement to that point. (And there are a number of legal cases to back this up). Anyone who thinks otherwise is setting themselves (and anyone who throws in with them) up for a world of hurt.

Does this mean that the matter of access to the code is not being persued? No. However companies guard their resources very jealously. (Rightly so these days). So things take time.

Too right Snick and Vincent

Speaking on behalf of myself and everyone else at SimHQ can I say that we do not condone software priacy in any form. Although Openplane may be available I/we believe that it should only be used once express permission has been obtained from the copyright holder.

Who said anything about piracy? I don't want to steal anything! If you think modifying game code without owners consent is piracy and you don't condone it, you'd better think twice then as half of the sims here have members who do just that. (EAW, WW2 Fighters, Red Baron and many others) No one has had the balls to do it to SDOE to get ahead of the game yet tho.

Ah I see VDU and Snick chimed in here. Fear not guys, I'm actively seeking access to the source in legal ways too. Not getting much of anywhere tho...

Tho we will see what happens when the new GUI rolls out...

No code is altered in Red Baron 3D.

Really? No AI tweaks? No .Dat modifications at all? If it was a file, and someone modified it knowing how, then code was changed be it thru a hex editor or something else... May not be EXE code, still code none-the-less.

I do think there is a difference between data and exe edits. Remember the BMS people (Jamm0r et al) got a "Cease and Desist" to stop spreading a new Falcon exe after they had changed the source code. However, from what I understand the people working on "data edits" are legally immune.

BTW, IMHO this shows again the fact that people will insist on their right even if IMVHO they do not plan another sim. Sad . However, it is probably human to think "we invested millions, so we will not allow people to abuse us and use it for free" instead of "We don't earn more if we stop them, so why should we?".

Ah I do not keep track of the Falcon community. Interesting to hear... But, they only told them to stop after there was a possibility to release a new Falcon game, correct? Before that, nothing was said? I'm curious...

Zander, I'm not sure what documents you think need to be written up. They already have the NDA that VDU signed, plus the licensing docs ($100k, last I heard.) AFAIK, that's all they're interested in. The contact for finding out more would be Ron Dimant.

Osram, IANAL, but there is has historically been a legal difference between changes made through reverse engineering vs changes made through source code. Just having access to the source code invalidates a reverse engineering defense. (Albeit, the wretched DMCA has made this more fuzzy.)

Zander check your PM...