Statement from the Realism Patch Group
Froglips
The Realism Patch Group continues its development work on RP5, the most
ambitious of our RPs yet. There are many new features including a
functional NCTR, minimum launch altitudes for SAMs, and variable bullet
velocities. These features will be released publicly in RP5 after adequate
testing.
The data files required for these features to function properly were
released to eFalcon 1.09 without authorization by RPG management team. The
RP data included with eFalcon is incomplete and untested. The Realism Patch
Group management team objects to this unofficial data release, and has not
cooperatively evaluated the functionality of the data set with the eFalcon
team to ensure compatibility with the eFalcon executable. This is contrary
to the "official" status listed in the recent eFalcon manual release. This
data release is not sanctioned by the Realism Patch Group. The Realism Patch
Group claims no compatibility, and the current supported version of the
Realism Patch is version 4.1 only.
Version 5 of the Realism Patch is undergoing development and testing, and
will be released in due course. We are concerned about the actions that
have occurred. However, we are most concerned about the future development
of Falcon 4.0 and our support of this ongoing work. To this end, Leo Rogic,
Executive Producer for the Realism Patch, wishes to apologize to the Falcon
community for any confusion these actions may have caused and the Realism
Patch Group wishes to urge the Falcon community to wait for the coming
release of RP5 and the patches that will make it functional.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kurt 'Froglips' Giesselman
Realism Patch Group, Bubbles, Comms, UI, general chaos
F4Alliance Webmaster, PR, Docs, and Drivel
F4Terrain Documentation and PR, Balkans Powderkeg
eFalcon PR weenie
frog...@noos.fr
UIC: 29689609
Wildkat
that was not officially released by the RP team. There was likely no
confusion until this message was posted. Now, the thousands and thousands
of folks that have downloaded and are using and enjoying this state of the
art version of Falcon are going to be confused, and are going to wonder, as
I do, what this means. Not olnly for their current eFalcon install, but for
the future of the collaborative effort.
Please keep in mind, Kurt, that the timeframe of some folks' downloads is
measured in hours, so now some people are going to realize that they might
have yet another big download in their immediate future. The wide range of
user experience contributes a great deal of confusion in the
patching/upgrading process of Falcon 4. It is not for the faint of heart.
Messages like this can add fuel to that fire.
Without this announcement, we users would have been unaware that some
performance characteristics of the RP5 data may not be 100% perfect and
tested. This is not a huge deal, really, as long as the code that was
released is stable. I do not believe that the eFalcon team would have
released their patch without having tested it thoroughly, therefore I have
confidence in 1.09 as it stands.
In my opinion, the better thing for the RP group to do is to immediately
release the verision of the RP5 patch that was leaked. Make it official,
and move on to the more perfected version as RP5a, and then let folks
upgrade their eF installations from there should the nuances prove
necessary.
Somebody jumped the gun, or there was a misunderstanding, or whatever. That
can step on folks' feelings for sure, and that can create blockages in
cooperation. There's a lot of value in the eTeam, and a lot of value in the
RP team. Working together, both groups are greater than the mere sum of
their efforts.
It's remarkable that both groups have accomplished as much as they have for
Falcon 4, and remarkable that they have done so without conventional
compensation. All they receive is the satisfaction of producing an
outstanding product and the immense gratification of the F4 community.
I hope that this incident will not hinder the positive working relationship
between these two teams. Please do not let a miscue affect both teams'
mutual futures.
We have a sort of corny, but meaningful use of the word "team" where I work:
"Together Everyone Accompishes More."
Okay, I'll shut up now...
Wildkat
Froglips <frog...@noos.fr> wrote in message
news:9bvdft$1sv6$1...@news4.isdnet.net...
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Darren Chriest
Wildkat
news:3AE348FD...@home.com...
> Oh oh...
Well said!
That was my reaction when I read Froglips' post!!!
Let's all use this thread to pitch in and support both the RP Group and the
eTeam. We've come so far with Falcon 4, and there's *still* room to for
growth. These groups rock, and have made our F-16 flight sim future better
than it ever could have been left to the devices of Hasbro and Microprose.
We owe them a lot. The least we can do is express our appreciation, and our
sincerest hopes that no rift grows between the two camps because of one faux
pas.
Wildkat
(PS - I recently jumped the gun on a development project at work, and got my
ears pinned back for it. So I know how these things go - my boss had to put
out an email just like the one Kurt did.... and it reeeaaalllyyy sux when
that happens!!)
chainbreaker
"Wildkat" <1...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:RwHE6.19738$bA2.5...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
> So what you're saying is that eFalcon v1.09 was released with data from
RP5
> that was not officially released by the RP team. There was likely no
> confusion until this message was posted. Now, the thousands and thousands
> of folks that have downloaded and are using and enjoying this state of the
> art version of Falcon are going to be confused, and are going to wonder,
as
> I do, what this means.
I'm glad you made this post, because I was wondering pretty much the same
thing, and I'm quite sure you stated things better than I could have done.
I am indebted to and appreciate ALL the work everyone has done regarding F4
and hope nothing happens to hinder the cooperation that seems to have been
occurring.
Jerry Morelock
Wemic
continued cooperation, this sim can continue to grow. What with new
campaigns and the like in the works who knows where this can go. I'm also
hoping some game publishers take heed of the large amount of interest there
is in a well designed, deep combat flight simulation.
Wemic
--
I have WAY too many flight sims....
home.nycap.rr.com/wemic/
ICQ#11192354
Go Bills!!! Go Sabres!!!
"Wildkat" <1...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:k3IE6.19763$bA2.5...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
HockeyTownUSA
the large gap between my ears. This interest goes to show what people will
do for the love of the hobby, and I, for one, would be willing to pay $200
for a simulation with this kind of support. And in actuality, have already
spent more for it considering I own three copies, upgraded my PC, and spent
a number of "sick" days learning how to drop a bandit, or ground pound some
tanks. Let this be a lesson to the community that a well thought out and
open coded flight sim will stand the test of time.
"Wemic" <djac...@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:sCJE6.26925$rk.31...@typhoon.nyroc.rr.com...
Darren Chriest
>
> Agreed! Now this sparks a thought, which are few and far between considering
> the large gap between my ears. This interest goes to show what people will
> do for the love of the hobby, and I, for one, would be willing to pay $200
> for a simulation with this kind of support. And in actuality, have already
> spent more for it considering I own three copies, upgraded my PC, and spent
> a number of "sick" days learning how to drop a bandit, or ground pound some
> tanks. Let this be a lesson to the community that a well thought out and
> open coded flight sim will stand the test of time.
in the past. 8^)
Rad
| Without this announcement, we users would have been unaware that some
| performance characteristics of the RP5 data may not be 100% perfect and
| tested.
You're shooting the messenger, Wildkat.
| In my opinion, the better thing for the RP group to do is to immediately
| release the verision of the RP5 patch that was leaked. Make it official,
| and move on to the more perfected version as RP5a, and then let folks
| upgrade their eF installations from there should the nuances prove
| necessary.
I absolutely disagree, and I'm sure many others do, too...
| There's a lot of value in the eTeam, and a lot of value in the
| RP team. Working together, both groups are greater than the mere sum of
| their efforts.
| It's remarkable that both groups have accomplished as much as they have
for
| Falcon 4, and remarkable that they have done so without conventional
| compensation. All they receive is the satisfaction of producing an
| outstanding product and the immense gratification of the F4 community.
I absolutely agree...
Okay... I'll shut up now too.
...SoBad
---------------------------
P4-1.4Ghz, 128Mb Rambus, 21" Trinitron Monitor
---
Falcon 4.0, 1.08iUS, RP4.1, F4Patch 3.2.2
---
RAD Software
Download fully-featured RAD Software
programs for free at
http://www.bigfoot.com/~radsoftware
Wildkat
I wasn't really trying to shoot the messenger. Froglips has a job to do,
and is no doubt trying to accurately portray the response of the RP Group to
the premature release of their efforts.
Another way this situation might have been handled would be for the two
teams to resolve this behind the scenes, with a simple disclaimer that the
RP5 data included with the eF 1.09 release was "beta." Instead, by voicing
it in a larger context, as Kurt did, replete with apology, disclaimer, etc.,
it seems scarier than it may actually be.
I respect your disagreement on my opinion regarding the release of RP5 - it
is only an opinion. One way to dig out from under a problem - there are
other ways I'm sure.
But all this aside, I know we agree that both camps deserve the flight sim
communities full support, and support to mend any torn fences as soon as
they can.
Wildkat
Gavin Bennett
I upgraded my P60 to a Cyrix 200 with Voodoo 1 (the 1996-1997 recommended
specs) then to a Pentium 200MMX with more RAM then to a P350 with a Banshee
and 128 megs of RAM and now a P700 with 196 megs of RAM and a V3, with a new
RAM upgrade and a GeForce card planned as soon as finances allow.
I have gotten two copies of the game. I left my manual in Ireland, so i
might even order a Binder edition before they disappear totally (i keep
seeing Chips and Bits ads for such)
But to get back on topic. I have been playing F4 quite a bit since 109
came out. I have had NO problems whatsoever. No crashes. The NCTR works
in a similar manner to DISH and JF-18 - ie. well.
Now, I know how annoying it might be for eTeam to have jumped the gun.
But... it's done. The untested function works. There is no problem for the
end user.
So, guys, be nice to one another, discuss this calmly like adults and then
move on. Between you guys, we have a GREAT sim!!! I have clocked up many
hours flying 109 already. I like.
RP5 can only improve this already GREAT sim. I am awaiting this with a
degree of impatience.
Gavin
Sleepdoc
your an old friend and a good man (or is that a good friend and an old man?
hehehe). In any case, I know enough about you and Leo to know that you felt
this response was needed. I did not read it as an admonishment of the
eGroup so much as I saw it as a information post to ensure that those who
may be counting on the realism of your efforts will not simply assume that
RPs portions is up to the standards you guys would want. I also know that
many of the points which wild cat and others have made to you are moot
because you and Leo (and most others in the RP group) are not driven toward
rivalries. To the contrary, the men of the RP group are the definition of
cooperation. So I read your post as simply informational, and I will know
that the détente and cooperation required to move forward with the other
developers of the f4 community are still soundly in place from the RP side.
Good luck and keep up the great work. As someone who knows all to well the
effect of having those not directly involved second guess you, I will not
take the same approach. I wish you all well. Keep up the great work and
the high standards. Give my regards to all the guys in RP.
Respectfully,
--
*************************
Glenn H. Kletzky
aka Sleepdoc
iBeta - CEO
www.iBeta.com
My typos are legendary. I choose not to correct them as a form of unique
signature
***************************************
"Froglips" <frog...@noos.fr> wrote in message
news:9bvdft$1sv6$1...@news4.isdnet.net...
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Bard
--
Bard
www.1vvfsc.org
Vancouver Virtual Flight Sim Club
"Froglips" <frog...@noos.fr> wrote in message
news:9bvdft$1sv6$1...@news4.isdnet.net...
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Bard
Is the data bad, is it just untested, is there really no issue besides that
egroup and the rpg should be communicating the matter between themselves?
I'm still wondering WHY the post was made? to head off complaints from 109
users about realism? I'd hate to think that the legendary anal-retention of
falcon players made it necessary for this.. err.. apology to be posted.
*shrugs*
--
Bard
www.1vvfsc.org
Vancouver Virtual Flight Sim Club
"Wildkat" <1...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:RwHE6.19738$bA2.5...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
Phil Worthen
Slee...@NOSPAMibeta.com says...
> So I read your post as simply informational, and I will know
> that the détente and cooperation required to move forward with the other
> developers of the f4 community are still soundly in place from the RP side.
Ditto Doc...
-Surfer
MoLew
will make F4 even better.
:)
--
~MoLew~
~~
Remove "BOTFEED" to respond via email
"Bard" <ba...@pissoffspam.planetfortress.com> wrote in message
news:fJME6.7599$SI5.1...@news1.telusplanet.net...
Froglips
Wildkat,
You should have read the earlier versions of the release. You would have
run screaming for the hills:)
Seriously, an enormous amount of discussion, negotiation, and compromise was
undertaken and completed before this statement was released. There were
feelings of mistrust to overcome as well as some pride of workmanship
issues. The members of both teams are all mature adults (well all except
for me) that have the single minded goal to improve Falcon. Single
mindedness does have its occasional downsides.
> Another way this situation might have been handled would be for the two
> teams to resolve this behind the scenes, with a simple disclaimer that the
> RP5 data included with the eF 1.09 release was "beta." Instead, by
voicing
> it in a larger context, as Kurt did, replete with apology, disclaimer,
etc.,
> it seems scarier than it may actually be.
The statement should be fairly clear. The RPG did not test the data for the
latest release with eFalcon. It may give some unexpected (to the RPG)
results.
The statements didn't say that eFalcon v1.09 is porked or that it has a
problem. It doesn't say the eTeam didn't test the performance of eFalcon
with the new data six ways to Sunday.
I think your final statement that all the Falcon mod groups need the
communities support is the most important one you make. Many times, after
working for months on a new RP, cockpit, theater, or eFalcon release, the
first thing we read is someone's complaint about how the new release doesn't
ring their bell for some reason. It is those times when we discuss
internally whether all the work is worth it. Since we are working for our
own satisfaction (not for limelight or glory as some genius in the Falcon
forums stated) we conclude that we should begin work on the next release and
press forward. Someday perhaps we won't.
--
Kurt 'Froglips' Giesselman
eFalcon PR weenie
F4Alliance Webmaster, PR, Docs, and Drivel
Realism Patch Group, Bubbles, Comms, UI, general chaos
F4Terrain Documentation and PR, Balkans Powderkeg
frog...@noos.fr
UIC: 29689609
Froglips
Old and old is probably most correct. Thanks for the note of support. It
is nice to have you continue to drop in every so often. Have you followed
that our final Bubble Bible has stood the test of time? We really got it
right:)
--
Kurt 'Froglips' Giesselman
eFalcon PR weenie
F4Alliance Webmaster, PR, Docs, and Drivel
Realism Patch Group, Bubbles, Comms, UI, general chaos
F4Terrain Documentation and PR, Balkans Powderkeg
frog...@noos.fr
UIC: 29689609
"Sleepdoc" <Slee...@ibeta.com> wrote in message
news:l4ME6.77525$J%5.273...@news2.rdc2.tx.home.com...
Wildkat
panic attack :) ... I guess that life is going to keep on keepin' on and
that F4 is doomed to further greatness... ;-)
Wildkat
MoLew <mo...@hickorytech.BOTFEED.net> wrote in message
news:o0NE6.6237$Os.8...@cletus.bright.net...
Gavin Bennett
That;s all.
Gavin
Wildkat
sounds like both camps have already resolved any issues and are continuing
to go forward as I and I'm sure many others have posted. Sorry for being so
ready to run screaming to the hills! (......taking 1...no....TWO
valiums..... ahhh that's better!! ;-)
Wildkat
Froglips <frog...@noos.fr> wrote in message
news:9c071t$2hdu$1...@news4.isdnet.net...
Darren Chriest
> I think your final statement that all the Falcon mod groups need the
> communities support is the most important one you make. Many times, after
> working for months on a new RP, cockpit, theater, or eFalcon release, the
> first thing we read is someone's complaint about how the new release doesn't
> ring their bell for some reason. It is those times when we discuss
> internally whether all the work is worth it. Since we are working for our
> own satisfaction (not for limelight or glory as some genius in the Falcon
> forums stated) we conclude that we should begin work on the next release and
> press forward. Someday perhaps we won't.
Argh! Please don't let a few clueless whiners ruin a good thing for
everyone! The vast majority of us wait with bated breath for each new
improvement of fix from you guys......
Please.... keep up the great work you guys are doing!
Darren Chriest
Darren Chriest
>
> Hard to imagine that it could be, but now that Froglips has responded to my
> panic attack :) ... I guess that life is going to keep on keepin' on and
> that F4 is doomed to further greatness... ;-)
>
> Wildkat
Oh no! Doomed to.... oh wait... COOL! Hehe...
Bard
--
Bard
http://www.1vvfsc.org - vancouver flight sim club
http://www3.telus.net/bard - EQ counterstrike clan
http://www.1vvfsc.org/sb - Steel Beasts RW base
"Froglips" <frog...@noos.fr> wrote in message
news:9c071t$2hdu$1...@news4.isdnet.net...
scharmers
GIST FOR THE MILL! MORE FLAMES FOR THE FLAME GOD!
--scharmers
"Froglips" <frog...@noos.fr> wrote in message
news:9bvdft$1sv6$1...@news4.isdnet.net...
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan Loebzien
<ba...@pissoffspam.planetfortress.com> wrote:
>In one sentence what does this actually mean?
That eFalcon is now not only based on stolen source code but also on
3rd party data that was obtained in a questionable way?
Jan
Wildkat
The Realism Patches were permitted by Microprose at the time that the Falcon
team was disbanded, and were released at that time under the iBeta name,
which, incidently, is where the "i" comes from in 1.08i2. These folks
continued to produce patches under The Realism Patch Group name following
the departure of the individual that owned the rights to the "iBeta" name.
The 1.09 executable is based in part on the next version of the Realism
Patch, RP5. When the 1.09 executable was released, it contained RP5 hex
edit data. I believe this was in the auto installer version, as the zipped
executable itself does not come with any data files.
To make the point even finer, the RP group does not release core Falcon 4.0
data files, merely hex edits to them as well as the F4 executable itself.
100% legit. Any cockpit art, skins, etc., are new, original data.
The eFalcon team did not steal the source code. The code was published to
an I-drive by an unknown person, and the link that was posted to the
newsgroup merely mentioned that it was something readers would find
"interesting." Once one downloaded the code and looked into the zip, it was
only at that time that one realized it was the Falcon 4 source code.
When the eFalcon 1.0799 executable was released about two months ago, I
started a thread on the ethics of using this code. That was probably the
longest conversation I've ever started in this group. There are strong
feelings pro and con, and I won't open the discussion up again.
Last I heard, though, the downloads of the 1.09 version of Falcon 4.0 have
exceeded 15,000. That's not a typo.
Safe to say that those folks are finally getting their money's worth out of
F4. Every one of them must own the original CD to Falcon for the 1.09
version to work. Hasbro/Microprose/Infogrammes are only making more and
more money on Falcon 4 with a development team that is working for free,
albeit not formally sanctioned.
I sleep well.
Wildkat
Jan Loebzien <j.loe...@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:n9d9ets7hcisuujb9...@4ax.com...
scharmers
Glad to see it ain't
--scharmers
--I've seen that movie, too, Karen
"Jan Loebzien" <j.loe...@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:n9d9ets7hcisuujb9...@4ax.com...
Wildkat
good to question them. Those folks that abhor the genesis of eFalcon will
always be there. But have fun anyway.... ;-)
Wildkat
scharmers <snakecharm...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:OApomXHzAHA.300@cpmsnbbsa07...
Froglips
Froggie
"Jan Loebzien" <j.loe...@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:n9d9ets7hcisuujb9...@4ax.com...
Sleepdoc
the history of things that have taken place. That was a very accurate
re-accounting of the history of the beta patches and the subsequent birth
toward the RP group (not to mention to events leading to the anonymous
release of the f4 code. Nice job. But don't worry. Someone will contort
your post and make unfounded claims of past events soon enough. Its the way
of the internet.
: )
--
*************************
Glenn H. Kletzky
aka Sleepdoc
iBeta - CEO
www.iBeta.com
My typos are legendary. I choose not to correct them as a form of unique
signature
***************************************
"Wildkat" <1...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:6e7F6.20694$bA2.5...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
Derek Smart (3000AD)
>Another way this situation might have been handled would be for the two
>teams to resolve this behind the scenes, with a simple disclaimer that the
>RP5 data included with the eF 1.09 release was "beta." Instead, by voicing
>it in a larger context, as Kurt did, replete with apology, disclaimer, etc.,
>it seems scarier than it may actually be.
I tend to agree with this too
As you stated, there are going to be a ton of people now asking
"....wtf does this mean, then?" as if it wasn't bad enough having to
deal with questions wrt the use of RP4.1 + eF 1.09
I smell a dissent between the two groups, as I see *no* plausible
reason *why* the post by RPG was made. Then again, wtf do I know.
*sigh*
<html>
<br>
__________________________________________________________________________<br>
Derek Smart<br>
Designer/Lead Developer<br>
<a href="http://www.3000ad.com/">The Battlecruiser Series<br>
<br>
</a>"Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a <br>
living. If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, <br>
then go ahead ...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them. <br>
- Warren Marshall, Epic Games"<br>
<br>
</html>
Derek Smart (3000AD)
wrote:
>Froglips wrote while bleeding from his wounds:
>
>Wildkat,
>You should have read the earlier versions of the release. You would have
>run screaming for the hills:)
>Seriously, an enormous amount of discussion, negotiation, and compromise was
>undertaken and completed before this statement was released.
Yeah, you guys should've added 'forethought' to that list of
conditions - as I see *no* plausible reason why the issue related to
the 'leaked' (how ironic) RPG data files was part of the
'announcement'.
Look, am not trying to flame anyone, am just stating my
opinions...they match my ass, cuz I have both :-)
Derek Smart (3000AD)
<ba...@pissoffspam.planetfortress.com> wrote:
>In one sentence what does this actually mean?
...and further on downhill we go :-)
Derek Smart (3000AD)
<ba...@pissoffspam.planetfortress.com> wrote:
>I still don't know what it means for falcon players.
>
>Is the data bad, is it just untested, is there really no issue besides that
>egroup and the rpg should be communicating the matter between themselves?
>
>I'm still wondering WHY the post was made? to head off complaints from 109
>users about realism? I'd hate to think that the legendary anal-retention of
>falcon players made it necessary for this.. err.. apology to be posted.
>
>*shrugs*
I rest my case
Derek Smart (3000AD)
<Slee...@NOSPAMibeta.com> wrote:
>Hi Froggy!.
>
>your an old friend and a good man (or is that a good friend and an old man?
>hehehe). In any case, I know enough about you and Leo to know that you felt
>this response was needed. I did not read it as an admonishment of the
>eGroup so much as I saw it as a information post to ensure that those who
>may be counting on the realism of your efforts will not simply assume that
>RPs portions is up to the standards you guys would want. I also know that
>many of the points which wild cat and others have made to you are moot
>because you and Leo (and most others in the RP group) are not driven toward
>rivalries. To the contrary, the men of the RP group are the definition of
>cooperation. So I read your post as simply informational, and I will know
>that the détente and cooperation required to move forward with the other
>developers of the f4 community are still soundly in place from the RP side.
>
>Good luck and keep up the great work. As someone who knows all to well the
>effect of having those not directly involved second guess you, I will not
>take the same approach. I wish you all well. Keep up the great work and
>the high standards. Give my regards to all the guys in RP.
>
>Respectfully,
...what he said
Derek Smart (3000AD)
<mo...@hickorytech.BOTFEED.net> wrote:
>It means that the good folks at the RP Group have an upcoming release that
>will make F4 even better.
>
>:)
LOL!!! Thanks for making that obvious to the simpletons.
Adamski
>version to work. Hasbro/Microprose/Infogrammes are only making more and
>more money on Falcon 4 with a development team that is working for free,
>albeit not formally sanctioned.
*Are* they making money on it still though? The manual will have gone
out of print years ago, and there can't be that many unsold boxes of
the original F4 around, Shirley?
Or is there a "cheap" (PDF manual) version kicking around? Even if
there is, I can't say that'd bring in much cash.
Incredible how hardly a week goes by without some other amazing tweak
or add-on to this sim. Some of the new cockpits alone are worth buying
the sim for!
Adamski
Su27 Flanker 2/2.5 Challenge Ladder: http://www.fl-air.co.uk/flanker25/
Warbirds H2H Challenge Ladder: http://www.fl-air.co.uk/warbirds/
Derek Smart (3000AD)
<ba...@pissoffspam.planetfortress.com> wrote:
>I still don't know what it means for falcon players.
>
>Is the data bad, is it just untested, is there really no issue besides that
>egroup and the rpg should be communicating the matter between themselves?
>
>I'm still wondering WHY the post was made? to head off complaints from 109
>users about realism? I'd hate to think that the legendary anal-retention of
>falcon players made it necessary for this.. err.. apology to be posted.
>
>*shrugs*
I rest my case
Derek Smart Ph.D.
Designer/Lead Developer
The Battlecruiser Series
Imagine It. Do it. No limits
www.3000ad.com
"Derek's killphilter is so amazingly advanced, some people
arrive on Usenet pre-plonked." - Usenet's Lemming
Derek Smart (3000AD)
>Another way this situation might have been handled would be for the two
>teams to resolve this behind the scenes, with a simple disclaimer that the
>RP5 data included with the eF 1.09 release was "beta." Instead, by voicing
>it in a larger context, as Kurt did, replete with apology, disclaimer, etc.,
>it seems scarier than it may actually be.
I tend to agree with this too
As you stated, there are going to be a ton of people now asking
"....wtf does this mean, then?" as if it wasn't bad enough having to
deal with questions wrt the use of RP4.1 + eF 1.09
I smell a dissent between the two groups, as I see *no* plausible
reason *why* the post by RPG was made. Then again, wtf do I know.
*sigh*
Derek Smart Ph.D.
Derek Smart (3000AD)
<ba...@pissoffspam.planetfortress.com> wrote:
>In one sentence what does this actually mean?
...and further on downhill we go :-)
Derek Smart (3000AD)
wrote:
>Froglips wrote while bleeding from his wounds:
>
>Wildkat,
>You should have read the earlier versions of the release. You would have
>run screaming for the hills:)
>Seriously, an enormous amount of discussion, negotiation, and compromise was
>undertaken and completed before this statement was released.
Yeah, you guys should've added 'forethought' to that list of
conditions - as I see *no* plausible reason why the issue related to
the 'leaked' (how ironic) RPG data files was part of the
'announcement'.
Look, am not trying to flame anyone, am just stating my
opinions...they match my ass, cuz I have both :-)
Derek Smart (3000AD)
<Slee...@NOSPAMibeta.com> wrote:
>Hi Froggy!.
>
>your an old friend and a good man (or is that a good friend and an old man?
>hehehe). In any case, I know enough about you and Leo to know that you felt
>this response was needed. I did not read it as an admonishment of the
>eGroup so much as I saw it as a information post to ensure that those who
>may be counting on the realism of your efforts will not simply assume that
>RPs portions is up to the standards you guys would want. I also know that
>many of the points which wild cat and others have made to you are moot
>because you and Leo (and most others in the RP group) are not driven toward
>rivalries. To the contrary, the men of the RP group are the definition of
>cooperation. So I read your post as simply informational, and I will know
>that the détente and cooperation required to move forward with the other
>developers of the f4 community are still soundly in place from the RP side.
>
>Good luck and keep up the great work. As someone who knows all to well the
>effect of having those not directly involved second guess you, I will not
>take the same approach. I wish you all well. Keep up the great work and
>the high standards. Give my regards to all the guys in RP.
>
>Respectfully,
...what he said
Derek Smart (3000AD)
<mo...@hickorytech.BOTFEED.net> wrote:
>It means that the good folks at the RP Group have an upcoming release that
>will make F4 even better.
>
>:)
LOL!!! Thanks for making that obvious to the simpletons.
Sim Pilot
Sim Pilot
Wildkat
there are still new copies out there...saw a few in a Best Buy not too long
ago...
Wildkat
Adamski <ad...@NOSPAMbankski.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7bacet8ht9eltrl54...@4ax.com...
Wildkat
Wildkat
Sleepdoc <Slee...@NOSPAMibeta.com> wrote in message
news:g3kF6.91459$J%5.319...@news2.rdc2.tx.home.com...
Derek Smart (3000AD)
>While it's probably no longer being published (produced, manufactured?)
>there are still new copies out there...saw a few in a Best Buy not too long
>ago...
My local CompUSA (Sunrise, FL) has a stack of them in the bargain bin
Wildkat
copy of F4 sold!
Wildkat
Derek Smart (3000AD) <dsm...@NOSPAMFORMEpobox.com> wrote in message
news:38hdet4g5n2kr716a...@4ax.com...
Erich Schneider
> While it's probably no longer being published (produced, manufactured?)
> there are still new copies out there...saw a few in a Best Buy not too long
> ago...
I doubt anyone except the retailer is getting any money when those are
sold, though. It's not like they send back a portion of their gross to
Infogrames; they bought those copies of F4 from a distributor back
when it was in print.
--
Erich Schneider er...@caltech.edu Caltech Information Technology Services
Wildkat
copy of F4 sold!
Wildkat
Derek Smart (3000AD) <dsm...@NOSPAMFORMEpobox.com> wrote in message
news:38hdet4g5n2kr716a...@4ax.com...
Wildkat
the benefit of Hasbro/Microprose/Infogrammes. I guess I forgot about the
retail "food chain." Thanks for pointing that out.
Wildkat
Erich Schneider <er...@caltech.edu> wrote in message
news:swpbspl...@caltech.edu...
Bard
--
Bard
http://www.1vvfsc.org - vancouver flight sim club
http://www3.telus.net/bard - EQ counterstrike clan
http://www.1vvfsc.org/sb - Steel Beasts RW base
"Derek Smart (3000AD)" <dsm...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:lli8etot40krsjen8...@4ax.com...
Derek Smart (3000AD)
<ba...@pissoffspam.planetfortress.com> wrote:
>heh, you smug bastard.
ROTFLMAO!!!
Derek Smart (3000AD)
>Thanks for the confirmation, Derek. With any luck, we'll get every single
>copy of F4 sold!
heh, I bought two copies. Go figure. I wanted the version with the
online PDF manual since I couldn't find it anywhere online to download
it.
Derek Smart (3000AD)
wrote:
>"Wildkat" <1...@nospam.com> writes:
>
>> While it's probably no longer being published (produced, manufactured?)
>> there are still new copies out there...saw a few in a Best Buy not too long
>> ago...
>
>I doubt anyone except the retailer is getting any money when those are
>sold, though. It's not like they send back a portion of their gross to
>Infogrames; they bought those copies of F4 from a distributor back
>when it was in print.
That is correct
WildStyle24_7
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim, and scharmers says to me...
> MORE FLAMES FOR THE FLAME GOD!
>
SO MOTE IT BE, FOR HE HUNGERS GREATLY!
--
"O God who is so big, crush our enemies with they giant feets
Confound their evil intentions and cast them all into the
lowest depths of Hades, where hot irons be applied to their
nether regions, etc etc"
-The Collect for Time of War, as remembered by funkraum,
of rec.aviation.military