Which Editor is out for HEXEN?
Garth Beagle
Are there going to be any new editors made to support Hexen?
Thanks!
Garth Beagle
Jack Vermeulen
>Does anyone know of an editor that will work with Hexen?
DeeP 8.x works with Hexen and allows full editing of linedefs, things,
and more. It also includes DeePBSP 5.01, which balances the node tree
for use with polyobjects in Hexen.
The latest version is 8.03 (which will be uploaded to cdrom.com
shortly). It will have all the registered THINGS, plus a few other
enhancements, as usual <g>. You can get DeeP off ftp.cdrom.com. The
URL is
ftp://ftp.cdrom.com/pub/idgames/newstuff/deep801s.zip
If cdrom.com is busy, download from our FTP site, which has the newer
version, 8.02. The URL is
ftp://ftp.wolfe.net/pub/sbs/deep802s.zip
Note: When the final version of DeeP is released it can be obtained
from wolfe.net one day before cdrom.com.
--
Mike Vermeulen
Tom Wheeley
> Garth Beagle <dale...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >Does anyone know of an editor that will work with Hexen?
>
> The latest version is 8.03 (which will be uploaded to cdrom.com
>
> ftp://ftp.cdrom.com/pub/idgames/newstuff/deep801s.zip
>
> ftp://ftp.wolfe.net/pub/sbs/deep802s.zip
>
Jack, weren't you 'flaming' DETH for having lots and lots of revisions?
oh well, I suppose that if you do charge for upgrades, then this is your
best way to screw money out of people.
--
Tom Wheeley, <holyhorns>
* TQ 1.0 * 101 uses for dead bodies in Quake
30) Hide around the dead and hope that you smell just as bad so the
other players don't frag you.
Jack Vermeulen
>Jack, weren't you 'flaming' DETH for having lots and lots of revisions?
Hold up a sec.....My versions currently being released are BETAS for
Hexen/DOOM, etc. There is a high demand for Hexen editors, so I'm
posting updates as I learn more about the structure of Hexen. deth
does have a lot of updates, and some of them are trivial. This is the
first time I've ever released public betas, and you have a problem
with that?
>oh well, I suppose that if you do charge for upgrades, then this is your
>best way to screw money out of people.
What the hell does this have to do with anything? All users who
register now get the next update for the price of shipping. Sorry,
but there is a real cost consideration.
Once again, someone just has to get their $.02 in. If you don't value
your time enough to invest in an editor, that's you choice. Why
resort to childish tactics? Why is it that I get lots of swear words
but no factual basis for anything I've said?
--
Jack Vermeulen
Bill McClendon
>
>>oh well, I suppose that if you do charge for upgrades, then this is
>>your best way to screw money out of people.
>
>What the hell does this have to do with anything? All users who
>register now get the next update for the price of shipping. Sorry,
>but there is a real cost consideration.
>
>Once again, someone just has to get their $.02 in. If you don't value
When you say "invest in an editor", the only investment I can
afford to make is TIME. Got a question for you, Jack (can I
call you Jack? whoops, too late to ask now, ain't it?), and I
hope you can answer it:
Why should I pay $29 for a utility that allows me to create
new levels for a game, when I can't profit off of the levels
I create? And on top of that, why should I pay $14 for each
upgrade (this is the only figure I have; you didn't say how
much shipping cost is in the above) when the upgrades come out,
on the average, every two months or so? You're talking about
sinking 84 (!) dollars (US; UK and AUS is, what, about 58?) every
year (using prior upgrade times as a baseline) PLUS the initial
$29 (US; UK and AUS should be about, oh, $20) to acquire a level
editor that won't earn me a dime.
If I can't make a dime off of all my creative energy and time
spent to create a level, why the hell should I pay money for
the editor? Doesn't take an economics major to see that this
isn't a very good deal, as I'll never (okay, not never, but
very very very very rarely) be able to recoup even my initial
investment of $29... Or is there some fantastic feature
that registered DeeP has that I'm missing, like the ability
to alter time or travel faster than light or something?
If DeeP's got either or both of those, I'll register.
Until then, DCK more than suits my needs, and it's free.
And many many thanks to Ben for making it that way. I
can honestly say that I hope he enjoys the levels I create
with it.
>resort to childish tactics? Why is it that I get lots of swear words
>but no factual basis for anything I've said?
You want the truth? Because you come across as very
standoffish, petty, and trivial. And you write like
a lawyer. This, of course, is my opinion based on
2 months of off-and-on DeeP ranting by you in this
particular newsgroup (r.g.c.d.e); your mileage may vary.
Remember, you asked.
If you want to climb up my ass for telling you the truth,
at least as I see it, be my guest. Just remember this one
thing when you're replying -- this is probably the first
non-biased, honest reply you've gotten in months.
Want some friendly advice? Too bad -- you're getting it
anyway. Chill the fuck out; it's hurting sales.
-- Bill
SDAPOI
--
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GED/H/L d-@ s:+ a>-- C++(++++) U P L E? W+(++) N+ o@ K-?
w--(---) O>++ M-- PS(+) PE(+) Y+ PGP+@ t++(*)@>$ !5-- x(+)
R@ b++++>$ tv-- DI++ D+++>$ G>++ e+>++$ h--- r+++ x+++*
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Jack Vermeulen
>s...@wolfe.net (Jack Vermeulen) wrote:
>> If you don't value your time enough
>>to invest in an editor, that's you choice.
>Ha! That's laughable. Why would one need to "invest" in an
>editor, when DCK and DEU are freeware?
Excellent question. The answer, of course, is left up to the
individual user. If somebody wants to register (as many have), they
can. If they hate DeeP or don't want to pay money, they don't. If you
see my other message, you will realize there are many features in DeeP
that you won't find in any other editor.
>Sorry, but IMO they both kick the crap out of Deep.
Besides this opinion, how do they do this?. If you think DCK is
excellent (I think it is), then use it. Just don't use these personal
attacks to accomplish your goal. You don't see me posting comments
like "EdMap bites" (and I'm *not* singling out EdMap) without
sufficient evidence of why I think so.
Here's a repeat of another post:
This is not a *spare* time effort. A thorough evaluation would show
you features not in any editor. The four most useful are:
1. Automatic switching to -any- of the games within the editor and
reloading any levels you were working on for that game.
2. Reading a level from any of the games. For example, you can read a
DOOM level, *selectively* replace the textures (search/replace),
adjust the linedefs/sectors/things of course, save and now you the
level is for HEXEN.
3. Full screen texture browsing. The whole screen fills with thumnail
textures, from 40 to 80 at a crack (depends on resolution) and you can
zoom in on them. (You can also do this with all the level maps).
4. Converting textures from any of the games and converting the
palette to match the other game. This is very useful if you have made
custom textures and want to use them in HEXEN for example. Since the
palettes are quite different, some colors are better than others.
There are many more. See the README.1st and DEEP101.DOC files.
>Maybe you should "invest" in a clue...
Why is it you can't write a complete paragraph without using a
personal attack? Perhaps because you don't have evidence to back your
claims? I invite you to give me factual information as I have given.
--
Jack Vermeulen
Tom Wheeley
thought of Jack molesting the infant r.g.c.q.e (if it gets past the vote)
--
Tom Wheeley, <holyhorns>
* TQ 1.0 * 101 uses for dead bodies in Quake
94) Serve them as bar-b-que at your restaurant with fried green tomatoes.
William Robert Night
: Why should I pay $29 for a utility that allows me to create
: new levels for a game, when I can't profit off of the levels
: I create?
On this topic... ID software has never shown a decent reason of why we
can't profit from levels. They have said they will pursue legal action,
but they don't have a leg to stand on.
There's no way for them to stop you from making money from doom levels.
Similar case. 4dos - There are many shareware utils written entirely in
the improved scripting language that comes with it.
MS Word - I recently saw a commercial package of macros to do neat stuff
with your documents. MS can't sue the author.
ID talks big, but all they've proven is that they're jerks.
Jack Vermeulen
!David / Kirsty Damerell
>Here's a repeat of another post:
>This is not a *spare* time effort. A thorough evaluation would show
>you features not in any editor. The four most useful are:
>>Maybe you should "invest" in a clue...
>Why is it you can't write a complete paragraph without using a
>personal attack?
Since you posted the above list 3 times to the same group, I can only
conclude that if you write a whole paragraph it's such a novelty you have
to re-use it once or twice. I imagine the reason you get personally
attacked in every paragraph is that you're the biggest fuckwit on
r.g.c.d.e, to be frank...
(Oooops, I've just done it myself. Oh well, one wouldn't want to break a
tradition. Perhaps we need an X-Insult-Vermeulen header?)
--
David 'Gotterdammerung' Damerell, GCV Sauricon. djs...@hermes.cam.ac.uk.
Trinity College, Cambridge University. CUWoCS President. All Hail Discordia!
|___| Pulp Fiction: Sex, Drugs and Mayhem. What more could you ask? |___|
| | | "You give her the shot!" "No, no, _you_ give her the shot!" | | |
Jack Vermeulen
>Why should I pay $29 for a utility that allows me to create
>new levels for a game, when I can't profit off of the levels
>I create?
You CAN sell PWAD files, so long as you include nothing from the IWAD
itself (including graphics, sounds, etc.). Besides, this has nothing
to do with DeeP itself.
When you buy a program, do you always have to make money with it. Why
did you buy DOOM then? Why do you buy gas to drive your car when all
it does it get you from place to place and the gas company makes all
the money off you?
>every
>year (using prior upgrade times as a baseline) PLUS the initial
>$29 (US; UK and AUS should be about, oh, $20) to acquire a level
>editor that won't earn me a dime.
Its every users choice if they want to upgrade. Just because a new
version comes out doesn't mean the old one quits working, does it? Do
you buy a new TV set every time a new model comes out? I think not,
nor does anyone else (well, maybe Gates <g>).
>>resort to childish tactics? Why is it that I get lots of swear words
>>but no factual basis for anything I've said?
>You want the truth? Because you come across as very
>standoffish, petty, and trivial. And you write like
>a lawyer.
Well, I guess you have nothing to say. Is that what you're trying to
say? Your whole comment is immature with not an ounce of fact, just
pure bs opinion. BTW, you didn't answer my question. Why do you use
swear words? Are they the only form of expression?
>If you want to climb up my ass for telling you the truth,
>at least as I see it, be my guest. Just remember this one
>thing when you're replying -- this is probably the first
>non-biased, honest reply you've gotten in months.
This is quite far from being honest. Anyone can rant meaninglessly.
This entire discussion is totally beside my original point. The point
was that John Anderson lied about DeePBSP and ZenNode. I think we can
both agree this is leading nowhere.
--
Jack Vermeulen
Evan
>can't profit from levels. They have said they will pursue legal action,
>but they don't have a leg to stand on.
>
>There's no way for them to stop you from making money from doom levels.
>
>Similar case. 4dos - There are many shareware utils written entirely in
>the improved scripting language that comes with it.
>
>MS Word - I recently saw a commercial package of macros to do neat stuff
>with your documents. MS can't sue the author.
>
>ID talks big, but all they've proven is that they're jerks.
This is possibly the most obnoxious post I've seen here
since Vermeulen came along. So, what personal gripe do you have
against id? You're analogies are ridiculous, BTW, but I'll leave you
to figure out why. You know, they didn't *have* to make the game
editable. I, for one, am actually *grateful* that they did. What a
concept.
To test your theory about their legal recourse, why don't you
get busy and make some levels you think someone will want to buy. I
can hear Romero frantically calling Johnnie Cochran now....
--Evan
Optimus
: 1. Automatic switching to -any- of the games within the editor and
: reloading any levels you were working on for that game.
This is not so unique as you claim. DCK can do -almost- the same thing.
Switching from one game to another (no Hexen yet) is as simple as picking
the game to edit off a menu, when you load up a PWAD. So if you want to
go back to work on that Heretic level after hacking your D2 one, just
click on that PWAD, then hit "Heretic" off the menu presented. DCK also
remembers the last level you were working on when you exit, and
automatically reloads it when it is restarted. But only for the last
game you were working on, so you do have one there.
Ian Merrithew - UNB Fredericton
Tom Wheeley
djs...@hermes.cam.ac.uk "!David / Kirsty Damerell" writes:
> to re-use it once or twice. I imagine the reason you get personally
> attacked in every paragraph is that you're the biggest fuckwit on
> r.g.c.d.e, to be frank...
>
> (Oooops, I've just done it myself. Oh well, one wouldn't want to break a
> tradition. Perhaps we need an X-Insult-Vermeulen header?)
I must say, Jack has made me seriously consider porting the alt.games.quake
FAQ to here... It feels like it is degenerating to the same level :(
I can just think of the entry that Jack would command in Appendix B... >:-)
(FAQ available from a.g.q or listserver, lists...@tsys.demon.co.uk with
*body* (not subject) saying "get alt.games.quake.FAQ" :-) Registered: $29
--
Tom Wheeley, <holyhorns>
* TQ 1.0 * 101 uses for dead bodies in Quake
5) Food?
Jack Vermeulen
>In article <47onrf$9...@news1.wolfe.net> s...@wolfe.net "Jack Vermeulen" writes:
>> register now get the next update for the price of shipping. Sorry,
>> but there is a real cost consideration.
>>
>Next update? Wow, generosity! Considering you release about 1 a week...
Remember, DeeP is currently being released as beta. Until I have all
the Hexen parts of DeeP finished, it will stay in beta, and have
updates every week or so. The final version will be 8.1, and after
that upgrades will be released every 4-6 weeks, just like they
normally are.
--
Jack Vermeulen
Bill McClendon
Robert Night) writes:
>: Why should I pay $29 for a utility that allows me to create
>: new levels for a game, when I can't profit off of the levels
>: I create?
>
>On this topic... ID software has never shown a decent reason of why we
>can't profit from levels. They have said they will pursue legal
>action, but they don't have a leg to stand on.
>
>There's no way for them to stop you from making money from doom
>levels.
You know, before Wednesday night, I had thought that the copyright
laws, along with the licensing agreement "contract", was a legal
means of preventing commercial sales of third-party add-ons to
Doom. Then I checked out copyright case law, and I found a couple
of cases that had very very similar situations to this one, and
lo and behold, if you made a TC and sold it, they could hire
lawyers and sue the hell out of you, but they couldn't stop you
or get any money out of you (besides the attorney's fees you'd
rack up defending the thing, of course).
Go figure.
Adam Williamson
> Its every users choice if they want to upgrade. Just because a new
> version comes out doesn't mean the old one quits working, does it? Do
> you buy a new TV set every time a new model comes out? I think not,
> nor does anyone else (well, maybe Gates <g>).
>
But...whenever Edmap gains a new feature, I upgrade free (even if it's major,
like Hexen editing). Whenever DeeP gets a new feature, all your users either
have to shell out 14 dollars or not get the feature. And how many support
messages have you answered from people with v4.x, telling them either nothing
at all or saying "UPGRADE!"?
--
Adam Williamson
Jack Vermeulen
>s...@wolfe.net (Jack Vermeulen) wrote:
> Wait a sec....you charge people for upgrades every month or
>so?
I never said that, you did. The inferences made are ridiculous. Of
course I have revisions. You're implying that I should not release
anything for six months between releases, which is ludicrous. There
have really only been three major (big changes) in DeeP, with
incremental enhancements inbetween.
Everyone obviously can upgrade whenever they choose. This is no
different than any other commercial software product. The gaming
industry moves at a relatively fast pace. My current upgrade policy
reflects the cost of shipping, $2 US, $3 foreign for any registered
beta version. Anyone can get multiple updates for this price.
Remember, I can't do mass mailings because each copy is uniquely
registered.
If upgrades concern you so much, you should write to Id and ask for a
refund for DOOM II? Or Heretic? There weren't many changes made,
were there? Oh, I presume then you prefer programs that don't make any
changes. So you bought Wordstar 2000!
>I've yet to see a single person who is
>genuinely interested in what you have to say about Deep or yourself.
Dear God, I'm sorry that I have offended thee. I can't tell what
everyone's thinking, but apparently you can?
What was that one post about? There was at least one individual who
supported me. Looks like we both need new newsgroup readers, eh?
Judging something by something you "don't see" is an interesting
scientific approach. Does that mean that Elvis is living on the moon
since I have not seen a single person who has seen him?
--
Jack Vermeulen
Evan
>Adam Williamson <Ad...@scss.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In article <47onrf$9...@news1.wolfe.net> s...@wolfe.net "Jack Vermeulen" writes:
>
>>> register now get the next update for the price of shipping. Sorry,
>>> but there is a real cost consideration.
>>>
>>Next update? Wow, generosity! Considering you release about 1 a week...
>
>Remember, DeeP is currently being released as beta. Until I have all
>the Hexen parts of DeeP finished, it will stay in beta, and have
>updates every week or so. The final version will be 8.1, and after
>that upgrades will be released every 4-6 weeks, just like they
>normally are.
Wait a sec....you charge people for upgrades every month or
so? Never mind, don't respond. Let's put an end to this ridiculous
thread once and for all. I've yet to see a single person who is
genuinely interested in what you have to say about Deep or yourself.
--Evan
Jack Vermeulen
>Jack Vermeulen (s...@wolfe.net) wrote:
>: Tom Wheeley <to...@tsys.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>: What the hell does this have to do with anything? All users who
>: register now get the next update for the price of shipping. Sorry,
>: but there is a real cost consideration.
>You're right! It just takes boat loads of cash to send something over
>internet mail now doesn't it?!?!
I don't do that since it takes way too much time. I don't think you
appreciate how many I would have to send. Your message implies that my
time is worth nothing. Does that mean that you don't get paid for the
time at work? (Is $2 even worth arguing about?)
I DO NOT distribute on the internet at all for that very reason. There
are a *few* exceptions. I think 3 so far. I also let people download
from me direct, but that does not take me any time, it's up to the
user. So before you make assumptions, think before you leap about how
much time it would take to upload a whole bunch of copies. And then
take into account the natural hassles that always occur. I spend a
whole day once trying to upload ONE program to someone.
>And if it does cost you a lot to send e-mail then it's tim to switch
>service providers, pal.
See above, I don't do it. Wrong assumption, hence comment does not
apply.
>: Once again, someone just has to get their $.02 in. If you don't value
>: your time enough to invest in an editor, that's you choice. Why
>: resort to childish tactics? Why is it that I get lots of swear words
>: but no factual basis for anything I've said?
>Well aside from the "bullshit" above you're not getting a whole lot of
>swear words from me,..
> shut the fuck up
Umm, do you mind if I echo that? My original comment to you stands.
Take five and cut back on those testerone pills.
>This petty flame war you and this other dude have started is just a
>perfect example of "childish tactics." You're both in the same boat so
>don't use that as part of your attack against the competition.
Again, I think you missed the start of this. I have no flame war with
any "dude". The only "dude" I was referring to in the *original* post
never disputed my contention that he lied about which was faster,
DeePBSP or Zen and that the original heth did not really edit hexen.
Editing things is not really editing, no matter how far he wanted to
stretch it (and some did try). I have no animosity towards the authors
of *any* editor or program, they didn't know what was going on.
All comments since then, including this one, concentrate on high
emotional content with little facts or contributions to anything.
If you or anyone wants to contribute, talk about features you would
like to see in editors. There is one I have seen bandied about, that I
will do soon. DeeP will let you draw on any existing texture. It
won't be the ultimate drawing editor, but it will give anyone easy
access to personalizing their levels without a big learning curve.
--
Jack Vermeulen
Jack Vermeulen
>In <47u1on$p...@news1.wolfe.net> s...@wolfe.net (Jack Vermeulen) writes:
>>When you buy a program, do you always have to make money with it.
>>Why did you buy DOOM then?
>Same reason I play it now: to kill stuff with a shotgun.
Exactly. For many it is fun to *play* with the editor. There is no
return on investment (in terms of money) but there is in fun. Making
exceptions for this and that is only each persons choice. Not a
rational reason one way or the other.
I don't know if RMB is working on the HEXEN version, but if anyone
would like to use RMB on HEXEN, there is an easy way to do it with
DeeP (or for any other editor that can read levels made for any of the
games).
When you are done making a HEXEN level, put DeeP into DOOM mode
1. Read in the HEXEN level you made.
2. Save this level using a *different* filename.
3. Run RMB on the DOOM level you just saved.
4. Start DeeP again. Save the REJECT portion of the DOOM level as a
file.
5. Switch DeeP back to HEXEN mode, (your last HEXEN level is still
loaded)
6. Read in the REJECT you made. Save the level.
Presto a HEXEN level with a REJECT.
> My comment is opinion. It is no less true for being opinion, however.
Interesting assumption: if anyone has an opinion it makes it true? Is
that what you are saying? Nice being able to write circular rules
like that.
>how do you figure that comment is "immature"? It is clear,
>concise, and as factual as I can make my opinion. It does not
Conundrum : How do you convince an immature person they are being
immature??
>like to ask you exactly what the "bs" means in your above reply.
>Bob Smith? I didn't think so.
Sorry, but bs and what you used are not in the same league..obviously.
"bs" I can post on *ANY* forum. Yours not. Clearly there is a line
here that you cross recklessly.
>I don't use it gratuitously, however, whatever you may think.
Self justification?
>Oh, it's "ranting" now. And how do YOU define honesty?
>I define it as "telling the truth to the best of my
>knowledge", which I have.
Nice to see that you can vouch for yourself. If you make -any sense-
at all then by your own reasoning I am as right as you are, no more no
less. Or do you have some inside track?
> You've been getting bombed from
>all sides lately and I try to help you out, and what do I
>get? What gratitude.
That was help??? Hahaha, I'm sorry, but anyone who thought they were
"helping" me in the context you did it, is really beyond my ability to
communicate with.
>>This entire discussion is totally beside my original point. The point
>>was that John Anderson lied about DeePBSP and ZenNode. I think we can
>>both agree this is leading nowhere.
>Okay. So John Anderson lied about DeePBSP and ZenNode.
But, my dear, that was the topic. What is your topic?
Oooh, help me, please I'm having a hormone attack<g>
--
Jack Vermeulen
Adam Williamson
wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com "William Robert Night" writes:
> BTW: Open ended? From what they say, Quake will be open-ended (because of
> market pressure only) but Doom was not.
>
> The initial specs were reversed engineered out of the wad, and ID tried
> to discourage any investigation into this. Only when they saw that we
> keep playing because we have tons of new levels, they relented. And then
> only with after threatening people with legal action if they tried to
> make money from it.
>
No, that is completely and utterly wrong. E-mail ID, e-mail Raphael, e-mail
ANYONE. THat is NOT what happened at all.
--
---
Adam Williamson, D1M - ad...@scss.demon.co.uk
Terminal Velocity and Wolfenstein 3D FAQ writer
for more details on either FAQ, e-mail me
"There's nothing left for you to say,
soon you'll be dead anyway" - Green Day
William Robert Night
: In article <47sui8$b...@wolfe.wimsey.com>
: wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com "William Robert Night" writes:
: > ID talks big, but all they've proven is that they're jerks.
: >
: JERKS? I admit that's what I think of them after TNT, but this is no grounds.
: ID provide the open-ended setup and the specs, and help to some authors, and
: the only grounds is that they ASK us not to make money from wads...and you
: call them JERKS?!?!?!?!
Actually, I don't care about the TNT thing... You and I didn't do any
work on it, and didn't pay any money for it, so we have no say in it.
Eugen Woiwod
>would like to use RMB on HEXEN, there is an easy way to do it with
>DeeP (or for any other editor that can read levels made for any of the
>games).
>When you are done making a HEXEN level, put DeeP into DOOM mode
Hmm Jack, seem's like you dont keep up with what OTHER author's are doing with
their program's. If you would actually check out
http://www.daimi.aau.dk/~hykkelbj/doom/rmb.html , you would find that the
author of RMB has posted a new beta version of RMB on his page that processes
HEXEN level's. Ive used it, and it work's. It's a much quicker, much better way
then your 6 step's method of converting back and forth between HEXEN and DOOM.
Oh and BTW there is a util called DM2CONV, which does the job of converting
between DOOM/DOOM2/Ultimate DOOM/Heretic, MUCH better then your "DEEP" program
ever will. And so what if the current version does not support Hexen, im sure
the next version probably will.
Jack Vermeulen
>>I don't know if RMB is working on the HEXEN version, but if anyone
>>would like to use RMB on HEXEN, there is an easy way to do it with
>>DeeP (or for any other editor that can read levels made for any of the
>>games).
>Hmm Jack, seem's like you dont keep up with what OTHER author's are doing with
>their program's.
Hmmm, I guess I don't know what "I don't know" means. What does "I
don't know" mean to you? Sorry. I've been too busy adding
features<g>.
This is the kind of post that repeatedly appears. Then, you have the
gall to make accusations, blah,blah,blah. If the few of you who have
the need to make this type of comments would concentrate on some
*meaning* around here, we could make some progress. Yeah, I can say
this just like you can say what you say<g>.
I have no problem saying I don't know. For some, I know that may be
very difficult to do<g>. And for those whose ego needs this
continuous boost, my sympathies.
There are 2 easy thing right now in DeeP for converting between
different types of games: 1) You can read any level from any of the
games and make it into any of the other ones; 2) You can convert DOOM
textures to HEXEN so the level looks *very* similar to the original
level. Heck, you don't even have to "convert" the textures.
Now some of you keep saying the same thing over and over. Contrary to
your hopes, this does not make it so. In fact, as I keep saying (but
even this is supposedly arrogant or whatever), show me the actual
*fact* where I denigrated an editor or whatever. I can show some
*others* who do<g>.
I am not arguing about any editor vs any other, nor am I putting any
program down (as some of you do, who claim to stand on a higher
ground). Each person to their own taste.
> If you would actually check out
Sorry, I don't have hours to roam all the sites, nor do I really want
to. I don't think I am unique in not knowing all the site names. Do
you know them all? Why couldn't you just write a message saying that
RMB has a new version that does HEXEN. This would have been
informative and useful, rather than inflammatory and useless.
>It's a much quicker, much better way then your 6 step's method
A needless point to make. An interesting aside is the *anonymous*
nature of this media makes you feel invincible. Hence these incredibly
obnoxious posts. I just noted that DeeP offered a way to do this (I
did this on 10/21 in a level called HEXDEEP1.WAD, posted on Cserv)
before any program existed AND as previously noted I had no real urge
to do a reject.
>Oh and BTW there is a util called DM2CONV, which does the job of converting
>between DOOM/DOOM2/Ultimate DOOM/Heretic, MUCH better then your "DEEP" program
>ever will. And so what if the current version does not support Hexen, im sure
>the next version probably will.
That's the whole point. DM2CONV does NOT do it now, yet you can with
DeeP. I (and any editor program) can put in a conversion list just
like DM2CONV, it's just not high on my list (same reason as before).
YOU are in charge of how good the conversion goes in both programs.
The output can be *identical*, the difference is the ease of use. I
only stated that you can do this and the reject (in a few simple
steps). Texture swapping is not that difficult. All you do is a search
and replace for the textures. This is not quite as easy as running
some "canned" utility, although it does offer unlimited flexibility.
--
Jack Vermeulen
William Robert Night
: >On this topic... ID software has never shown a decent reason of why we
: >but they don't have a leg to stand on.
: >
: >There's no way for them to stop you from making money from doom levels.
: This is possibly the most obnoxious post I've seen here
: since Vermeulen came along. So, what personal gripe do you have
: against id? You're analogies are ridiculous, BTW, but I'll leave you
: to figure out why. You know, they didn't *have* to make the game
: editable.
:
None. I just don't like their bussiness practices. Oh, yah, they really
tried to make it editable! For the longest time, they were against people
editing anything. And the game was NOT designed to be editable.
: I, for one, am actually *grateful* that they did. What a concept.
:
Yah, I wouldn't have thought you capable of abstract thought.
: To test your theory about their legal recourse, why don't you
: get busy and make some levels you think someone will want to buy. I
: can hear Romero frantically calling Johnnie Cochran now....
:
If it's not a threat to them, why did they say 'No selling your levels'?
And there are levels people will buy, TNT's levels sound fairly good and
the main thing keeping people here from buying them will be their
bussiness practices.
BTW: Compare ID with Paralax. Paralax helped program the first Descent
editors, ID wanted to sue them!
Evan
>Adam Williamson (Ad...@scss.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>: In article <47sui8$b...@wolfe.wimsey.com>
>: wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com "William Robert Night" writes:
>
>: > ID talks big, but all they've proven is that they're jerks.
>: >
>: JERKS? I admit that's what I think of them after TNT, but this is no grounds.
>: ID provide the open-ended setup and the specs, and help to some authors, and
>: the only grounds is that they ASK us not to make money from wads...and you
>: call them JERKS?!?!?!?!
>
>Actually, I don't care about the TNT thing... You and I didn't do any
>work on it, and didn't pay any money for it, so we have no say in it.
>
>BTW: Open ended? From what they say, Quake will be open-ended (because of
>market pressure only) but Doom was not.
>
>The initial specs were reversed engineered out of the wad, and ID tried
>to discourage any investigation into this. Only when they saw that we
>keep playing because we have tons of new levels, they relented. And then
>only with after threatening people with legal action if they tried to
>make money from it.
What, praytell, is wrong with that?! First of all, you're
making it sound like they shook fists at you when you bought it. I
think most people have a vague understanding that it is fine to edit
Doom all you want, and it's not fine, legal, or cool, to turn around
and try to sell them. Sounds like a great deal to me. How on earth
would you have handled it? The way you toss "threaten" into the mix,
and that they're "jerks" because of it, suggests some other grudge you
may have.
--Evan
Eugen Woiwod
>market pressure only) but Doom was not.
>
>The initial specs were reversed engineered out of the wad, and ID tried
>to discourage any investigation into this. Only when they saw that we
>keep playing because we have tons of new levels, they relented. And then
>only with after threatening people with legal action if they tried to
>make money from it.
Well maybe ID is like Microsoft(heaven forbid, ACK!) :-) but just be glad, when
they made DOOM back in 93, they didn't decide to actually *ENCRYPT* the wad
files themselves, as that would have really slowed everyone down trying to
figure out how the hell the wad files would be encrypted.
Ttul
Dr Sleep
>So sue him.
> -- Bill
> SDAPOI
This is getting a bit tedious. I don't think anyone even remembers the
very first post I made on 10-31-95, which was a simple announcement
about the DETH editor and what it does. Mr V and his editor weren't
mentioned, I've never mentioned DeePBSP, I never said DETH was the
best, and I haven't enjoined in this discussion since Nov 3. It's not
even entertaining anymore.
Re-read my initial post and tell me if you think it was worth all the
fuss that has been made over it. Also have a look at the various
unsubstantiated accusations, gratuitous and unprovoked personal
attacks, who they have come from, and then decide who you think would
have the best chance of winning a lawsuit for libel.
Dr Sleep
--------------------------------
John W. Anderson
76132...@compuserve.com
Adam Williamson
I'll spell it out for you.
f t p . c d r o m . c o m
/ p u b / i d g a m e s
If that's slow, when you go there you get...a list of mirrors! Woah, aren't
they kind?
--
Adam Williamson
John B. Williston
WadAuthor v1.10 is now available with Hexen support, and after a
one-time registration fee, upgrades are free for the life of the
product.
JRPRE...@news.delphi.com
registered version to play them. Just think of all the licensing
money they are passing up! Vendors could sell their Total Conversions
with an automatic royalty payment to ID if the full version was "built-in".
They don't have the resources to develop and play-test a fraction of the
possible .WADs that people would pay for.
And it won't take all that long before DOOM itself is "old technology",
as other people will write Doom clones with newer technology. They will
wish that they had done it long ago.
IMHO
Tom Wheeley
JRPRE...@news.delphi.com "JRPRE...@DELPHI.COM" writes:
> ID should allow people to sell .WADs as long as you need the full
> registered version to play them. Just think of all the licensing
> money they are passing up! Vendors could sell their Total Conversions
> with an automatic royalty payment to ID if the full version was "built-in".
Um, I don't think id are the main obstacle against selling Total Conversions
I don't think a certain movie company would be too happy if Justin Fisher
sold his Aliens-TC, now...
--
Tom Wheeley, <holyhorns>, MAMSWWBUW
* TQ 1.0 * 101 uses for dead bodies in Quake
6) Target practice
Adam Williamson
just an idea, Id decided to give us something for nothing, so stop bloody
complaining!
--
Adam Williamson
Raphael Quinet
|> In article <483r6g$d...@wolfe.wimsey.com>
|> > to discourage any investigation into this. Only when they saw that we
|> > keep playing because we have tons of new levels, they relented. And then
|> > only with after threatening people with legal action if they tried to
|> > make money from it.
|> >
|> ANYONE. THat is NOT what happened at all.
Sorry Adam, but you are wrong. Before I get too many e-mail messages about
this, I think I should give a public history lesson. :-) And, by the way,
this is my first message on these groups since a long time... So here we
go...
The subjective history of Doom editing
version 0.1 - by Raphael Quinet
When the first beta version of Doom was released, some people started
exploring the EXE and WAD files, trying to find how the game engine worked.
No information had been released by id Software. In December 1993, when
the official version was released, the basic structure of the WAD file was
known, but most of the entries were still unknown. The VERTEXES, LINEDEFS,
SECTORS and THINGS were easy to decode (except that some of their parameters
were not fully understood), but the format of the SEGS, NODES, BLOCKMAP and
other entries was not understood. Nevertheless, it didn't take long for
some editors to appear, since the basic map format was known.
In early January 1994, several THINGS editors were available. Most of them
modified the main WAD file, because they couldn't create PWADs. After some
time, these editors were converted in order to support PWADs (DEU, VERDA,
RG Doom Ed) and they were also able to change the textures on walls and
floors. But it wasn't possible to create new levels or even to change the
shape of existing levels, because all attempts to do so resulted in an
unpleasant effect which was later known as the Hall Of Mirrors effect (HOM).
In February, more and more of the LineDef types were discovered (by trial
and error, since there was still no info from id Software). The meaning of
the individual bits of the Things and LineDefs flags was also discovered.
By that time, the structure of the SEGS and SSECTORS was understood and it
was clear that the NODES were related to them in some way.
At the end of February, the structure of the NODES was discovered and some
editors (DEU 4.0 and VERDA) included a NODES viewer. The BLOCKMAP had also
been cracked and the editors were able to rebuild it (or at least build a
fake one).
During March, I worked on a NODES builder for DEU. Alistair Brown posted
some info about Doom using BSP trees, so I looked for some papers about
computer graphics and BSP trees. I eventually figured out how to create
these objects (with the help of other people on the net) and I added a
Nodes builder to DEU. On the 30th of March, DEU 5.0 was the first Doom
editor able to create new levels. Even if it wasn't perfect, the Nodes
builder was a major breaktrhough.
In April and May, more and more features were added to the editors (DEU,
VERDA, RG Doom Ed and new ones, such as DMapEdit or Geoff Allan's DoomEd).
So far, no information had been released by id Software. The only good
source of information was Matt Fell's document: the Unofficial Doom Specs,
created by Matt and lots of other people who experimented with Doom and
tried to understand how the thing worked.
In May, Jay Wilbur (CEO of id Software) posted a message saying that all
authors of Doom editors had to sign a license in order to be allowed to
distribute their editors (which were illegal, according to Doom's license
which forbids editing and reverse-engineering). This Data Utility License
was intended to protect id Software and prevent anyone from selling PWADs
or modified versions of Doom. I signed this license because I felt that I
owed something to them.
Around that time (I don't remember when exactly), things started to change:
Doom II had been announced and John Romero posted a list of Things and
LineDefs types for Doom on the doom-editing mailing list (most of them had
already been discovered, but it was interesting anyway). As far as I
remember, this was the first technical bit of information from id (apart
from a few answers given by John Romero or Dave Taylor to some technical
questions).
The situation was different for Doom II: it didn't take long before John
Romero posted the updated list of Things and LineDefs types for the new
game, thus speeding up the development of the editors (except for DEU which
was still at 5.21 because I graduated and got a job in the meantime). We
still had to find some of the info by trial and error, but at least id was
more open about it.
Well, that's about it. This year, Heretic and Hexen have been released,
and various bits of info were distributed by id Software and Raven.
I think I can understand and explain id Software's point of view: they were
the first ones to be surprised about the success of Doom and third-party
WAD files. Although the game allowed the loading of external WAD files,
they probably never expected to see so many of them. Since they didn't know
how people would behave (and they were probably afraid of seeing some big
company stepping in and making profit by selling hundreds of third-party
levels), they decided to protect themselves by creating the Data Utility
License. They didn't want to release too much info about the Doom engine,
because this would have helped competitors who were developping their own
games based on the same principle. Now, they don't feel the need to protect
themselves so much for Doom, because the game is a bit old, the Doom
community has behaved rather well regarding their copyrights and trademarks,
and they are too busy working on Quake. :-)
This is my version of the facts. If any of the old timers reads this,
please follow up with more information!
-Raphael
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| WWW: http://www.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~quinet |
| E-mail: Raphael...@eed.ericsson.se or qui...@montefiore.ulg.ac.be |
| S-mail: Raphael Quinet, 9 rue des Martyrs, 4550 Nandrin (Belgium) |
| --* Read rec.games.computer.doom.editing for info and help about DEU. *-- |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Raphael Quinet
In article <49c9jd$5...@erinews.ericsson.se>, I wrote:
|> [...]
|> Around that time (I don't remember when exactly), things started to change:
|> Doom II had been announced and John Romero posted a list of Things and
|> LineDefs types for Doom on the doom-editing mailing list (most of them had
|> already been discovered, but it was interesting anyway). As far as I
|> remember, this was the first technical bit of information from id (apart
|> from a few answers given by John Romero or Dave Taylor to some technical
|> questions).
Also in May, id Software released the source code (in Objective-C) for
their Nodes builder. I had created the Nodes builder for DEU 5.21 from
scratch before that, but it helped several other people and put all
editors on the same ground. It also helped the development of external
Nodes builders.
How could I forget that? ;-)
Adam Williamson
but they weren't exactly throwing lawsuits around :).
Michael J. Pettitt
: Um, I don't think id are the main obstacle against selling Total Conversions
: I don't think a certain movie company would be too happy if Justin Fisher
: sold his Aliens-TC, now...
True enough, but as long as everything in the WAD was 100% original
from your mind to the level editor, then I don't see where it'd be
legally impossible, as long as you made sure to "unmerge" it from your
DOOM WAD and/or .exe files before you start hawking it to make sure it
doesn't contain any copyrighted data.
-Michael Pettitt
-mu...@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu
(shareware .sig under construction)
Adam Williamson
>
> True enough, but as long as everything in the WAD was 100%
original
> from your mind to the level editor, then I don't see where it'd be
> legally impossible, as long as you made sure to "unmerge" it from
your
> DOOM WAD and/or .exe files before you start hawking it to make sure
it
> doesn't contain any copyrighted data.
Except that it wasn't, a lot of the graphics were taken from shots of
the film. Anyway, copyright laws and trademarks extend to ideas, too -
if it is patently obvious that it's come from the Alien films, even
tho no data is taken from them at all, he can still be in trouble.
Raphael Quinet
|> So it would appear that we are both wrong. Id came in later than I thought
|> but they weren't exactly throwing lawsuits around :).
They weren't throwing lawsuits around, but Jay Wilbur said that all Doom
editors were illegal unless the authors signed the "Data Utility License".
I don't know if you have seen this license, but it clearly states that
anyone who violates its rather strict rules could be sued for it.
Violations included: distributing an editor which works with the shareware
version of Doom, modifying the EXE file, using the Doom trademark
incorrectly, distributing modified versions of Doom or any part of it, etc.
I remember that some of the first few messages posted by people from id
Software regarding copyrights and trademarks left the impression that
lawsuits could be started soon. But of course, id Software will not sue
anyone if it's not worth it. For example, ask Jay Wilbur if you are allowed
to use a program such as DeHackEd. His answer will be NO and he will
probably add that you could have legal problems if you do it anyway. But
he will never add something which is tacitely implied in his message: id
Software will not sue you as long as you don't harm them. If you modify the
EXE for your personal use and you don't make a business out of it, then fine,
they will ignore this. But for legal reasons (if they want to keep their
trademarks and their rights on the program), they have to say that it is
forbidden. This is, by the way, the reason why the EXE editors and the
theme files which require modifications of DOOM.EXE are distributed in a
separate directory on the Doom ftp sites, which is not mirrored on
ftp.idsoftware.com.
William Robert Night
: In article: <49j73f$j...@news.ecn.bgu.edu> mu...@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu
: >
: > True enough, but as long as everything in the WAD was 100% original
: > from your mind to the level editor, then I don't see where it'd be
: > legally impossible, as long as you made sure to "unmerge" it from
: > your DOOM WAD and/or .exe files before you start hawking it to make
: > sure it doesn't contain any copyrighted data.
: Except that it wasn't, a lot of the graphics were taken from shots of
: the film. Anyway, copyright laws and trademarks extend to ideas, too -
: if it is patently obvious that it's come from the Alien films, even
: tho no data is taken from them at all, he can still be in trouble.
The message said "100% original", this implies that M.J.P. was talking
about something that wasn't based on a movie.
Let's ask the question again.
If you were to design a wad that didn't draw ideas directly from and
copywrited book or movie and made this into a wad, which was distributed
with no 'Id-Stuff' in it (and a program to combine this with the .WAD and
make it playable), would Id be able to sue you?
Id says yes, and maintains that they will do it.
It seems that they have a fairly weak argument, it would be like GM or
Toyota sueing the manufacturer of those pine tree-shaped car deoderizers
or of car stereos.
There is a strong precedent for marketing products which can only be used
with and which enhance a third-party product.
Arthur Chang
wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com (William Robert Night) wrote:
>If you were to design a wad that didn't draw ideas directly from and
>copywrited book or movie and made this into a wad, which was distributed
>with no 'Id-Stuff' in it (and a program to combine this with the .WAD and
>make it playable), would Id be able to sue you?
>
>Id says yes, and maintains that they will do it.
>
>It seems that they have a fairly weak argument, it would be like GM or
>Toyota sueing the manufacturer of those pine tree-shaped car deoderizers
>or of car stereos.
>
>There is a strong precedent for marketing products which can only be used
>with and which enhance a third-party product.
>
You know, I never thought of it that way...I think that you're right.
However, people who sell pwads are still scum! :)
-Arthur Chang
alc...@wanm.umd.edu
Adam Williamson
wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com "William Robert Night" writes:
> The message said "100% original", this implies that M.J.P. was talking
> about something that wasn't based on a movie.
>
Yeah, but we had got onto a discussion of specific cases (Alien-TC) and I
was furthering that argument.
Adam Williamson
> It seems that they have a fairly weak argument, it would be like GM or
> Toyota sueing the manufacturer of those pine tree-shaped car deoderizers
> or of car stereos.
>
> There is a strong precedent for marketing products which can only be used
> with and which enhance a third-party product.
>
>
And to answer this, the difference is that the thing you are making will be
running with Id's COPYRIGHTED code, and game engine.
William Robert Night
: In article <49mnk8$b...@wolfe.wimsey.com>
: wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com "William Robert Night" writes:
: > It seems that they have a fairly weak argument, it would be like GM or
: > Toyota sueing the manufacturer of those pine tree-shaped car deoderizers
: > or of car stereos.
: >
: > There is a strong precedent for marketing products which can only be used
: > with and which enhance a third-party product.
: >
: >
: And to answer this, the difference is that the thing you are making will be
: running with Id's COPYRIGHTED code, and game engine.
:
Yes, and the car-deodorant will be running in GM's PATENTED car.
Please display some original thought.
Marc Bublitz
Night) wrote:
Ahhh, but you don't actually *NEED* GM's PATENTED car to use the
deodorant, do you? I didn't think so. This analogy is running thin.
Let's try a new one.
You wouldn't take your own beef, cook it on McDonald's grill, and then
be able to sell it yourself without McDonalds stepping in and saying
something, yes? And so I feel that id should be able to say something
when you go in and use their 'grill' to make something. If nothing
else, they allow us to make the levels and distribute them. They
don't want me making any money off of the levels/editors/whatever,
then fine. I'll respect their wishes, because they have allowed me to
do something that I find enjoyable. Nobody is forcing us to make
whatever it is that we make, so we are doing it on our own time and of
our own free will. And we don't have the right to expect compensation
on something we took the initiative on.
-Marc
--
You know, I'm the last person to judge someone by the content
of their .sig file. Or at least if not absolutely the last
person, I did do it as recently as yesterday.
Marc Bublitz
Night) wrote:
>Marc Bublitz (king...@cris.com) wrote:
>
>: You wouldn't take your own beef, cook it on McDonald's grill, and then
>: be able to sell it yourself without McDonalds stepping in and saying
>: something, yes? And so I feel that id should be able to say something
>: when you go in and use their 'grill' to make something. If nothing
>: else, they allow us to make the levels and distribute them.
>
>You're not even talking about similar things anymore. ID Sells a tool,
>like a hammer, McDonalds sells a finished product. An anology involving
>McDonalds would be "If you found a way to cure cancer with a McDonalds
>hamburger...."
Okay, mine was pretty weak, I'll admit. But I was hungry. :)
>A very easy analogy to the ID/Doom package would be Microsoft and
>Windows. Does MS have the right to keep to from charging for making a
>windows program that only works with windows?
But even this isn't the same. Windows was written as an operating
system. Doom wasn't. Of COURSE Microsoft isn't going to keep us from
charging for Windows software we create, because they depend on
developers to continue writing software for their platform. Doom
isn't like that. Doom is a game. Not an operating system, but a
game. It wasn't created so that we could create our own
levels/utilities/etc. and sell them, it was written so we could have
fun playing it. Otherwise I'm sure ID would have created their own
level editor (much along the lines of the Microsoft Windows SDK, if
you still like your analogy) that we would buy from them.
Now if people are allowed to sell their doom creations, then we
suddenly have a $40 game costing us over $100. Most of Doom's replay
value comes from the add-on levels, and level creation utilities. You
would have to purchase the game ($40), an add-on level pack ($10-40),
the level editor ($20-40), and whatever other misc. utilities you
want. This could all add up to easily over a hundred dollars. I'm
sure that most people would think that ID is making money from these
utilities, and they would probably start forming opinions about ID
quite similar to the one you expressed below. Personally, I can see
why id doesn't want us to sell our Doom creations. If I were them, I
wouldn't.
If you want to sell your creations, I'm sure that with enough money,
you could license the code from ID (much like Raven, who did some
extraordinary things with it), and create your own game.
>There is no precedent in this case that would give ID the right to make
>this demand, and/or the right to sue you for going against their wishes.
>The only reason they are doing this is because they are money-hungry
>jerks who aren't satisfied with the money from selling the game engine,
>but want us to keep buying new levels from them and who want to scare
>away people who might hurt them in the pocket-book.
William Robert Night
: On 3 Dec 1995 03:51:32 GMT, wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com (William Robert
: Night) wrote:
: >Adam Williamson (Ad...@scss.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: >: wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com "William Robert Night" writes:
: >: > It seems that they have a fairly weak argument, it would be like GM or
: >: > Toyota sueing the manufacturer of those pine tree-shaped car deoderizers
: >: > or of car stereos.
: >: >
: >: And to answer this, the difference is that the thing you are making will be
: >: running with Id's COPYRIGHTED code, and game engine.
: >:
: >Yes, and the car-deodorant will be running in GM's PATENTED car.
: Ahhh, but you don't actually *NEED* GM's PATENTED car to use the
: deodorant, do you? I didn't think so. This analogy is running thin.
: Let's try a new one.
: You wouldn't take your own beef, cook it on McDonald's grill, and then
: be able to sell it yourself without McDonalds stepping in and saying
: something, yes? And so I feel that id should be able to say something
: when you go in and use their 'grill' to make something. If nothing
: else, they allow us to make the levels and distribute them.
You're not even talking about similar things anymore. ID Sells a tool,
like a hammer, McDonalds sells a finished product. An anology involving
McDonalds would be "If you found a way to cure cancer with a McDonalds
hamburger...."
: They
: don't want me making any money off of the levels/editors/whatever,
: then fine. I'll respect their wishes, because they have allowed me to
: do something that I find enjoyable. Nobody is forcing us to make
: whatever it is that we make, so we are doing it on our own time and of
: our own free will. And we don't have the right to expect compensation
: on something we took the initiative on.
Why shouldn't we have the right to expect to be able (in a legal sense) to
sell anything that we have made and own?
A very easy analogy to the ID/Doom package would be Microsoft and
Windows. Does MS have the right to keep to from charging for making a
windows program that only works with windows?
Raphael Quinet
|> On 4 Dec 1995 13:07:08 GMT, wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com (William Robert
|> Night) wrote:
|> >A very easy analogy to the ID/Doom package would be Microsoft and
|> >Windows. Does MS have the right to keep to from charging for making a
|> >windows program that only works with windows?
|>
|> system. Doom wasn't. Of COURSE Microsoft isn't going to keep us from
|> charging for Windows software we create, because they depend on
|> developers to continue writing software for their platform. Doom
|> isn't like that. Doom is a game. Not an operating system, but a
Well, that still doesn't prevent you from selling WAD files. The contents
of the WAD files do not infringe any copyright law if they are created from
scratch (this is not true if you extract anything from the IWAD, of course).
If you created the WAD file on your own, nobody can prevent you from
distributing it or selling it (the format of the WAD file is not patented).
Moreover, I don't think it can be said that the WAD file is made exclusively
for Doom. Most WADs can be played with Doom, Doom II, Heretic and Hexen
(using a convertor if necessary), but they can also be used with lots of
third-party utilities. Some of these utilities, such as Nodes viewers or
graphics editors, work without accessing the IWAD, so the WAD files can be
"used" without Doom. If you created the WAD file from scratch and if it
can be used (even in a limited way) without anything from id Software, are
you infringing any copyright laws?
|> Now if people are allowed to sell their doom creations, then we
|> suddenly have a $40 game costing us over $100. Most of Doom's replay
|> value comes from the add-on levels, and level creation utilities.
Don't misunderstand me. I think it is perfectly legal to sell WAD files,
but I don't like this. I believe in free software and in free add-ons.
That's why I worked on DEU, which is freeware. I don't want to sell my
editor or even make it shareware. People who want to sell WADs can do it,
but I simply won't buy them.
Also, I joined the TNT project when it began. At that time, it was
decided that the WAD would be free, although some people wanted to release
it as shareware. I left the project some time ago, because I didn't have
enough spare time and I wanted to spend it on DEU 5.3 and 6.0. I was
really disapointed when I heard that the people who wanted to make money
out of the WAD had won...
William R. Mattil
>On 4 Dec 1995 13:07:08 GMT, wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com (William Robert
>Night) wrote:
>
>>
..<snip>
>
>
>
>isn't like that. Doom is a game. Not an operating system, but a
>game.
Wrong, simply wrong. Doom is a way of life!
Regards
William R. Mattil
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sometimes the only way to win is to not play the game
--------------------------------------------------------------
Adam Williamson
Raphael...@eed.ericsson.se "Raphael Quinet" writes:
> Well, that still doesn't prevent you from selling WAD files. The contents
> of the WAD files do not infringe any copyright law if they are created from
> scratch (this is not true if you extract anything from the IWAD, of course).
> If you created the WAD file on your own, nobody can prevent you from
> distributing it or selling it (the format of the WAD file is not patented).
>
> -Raphael
I expect a case could be made that your wad uses Id textures - even if
they aren't in the wad - and therefore infringes their copyright/patents/
egos/whatever :)
William Robert Night
: On 4 Dec 1995 13:07:08 GMT, wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com (William Robert
: Night) wrote:
: >Marc Bublitz (king...@cris.com) wrote:
: >
: >You're not even talking about similar things anymore. ID Sells a tool,
: >like a hammer, McDonalds sells a finished product. An anology involving
: >McDonalds would be "If you found a way to cure cancer with a McDonalds
: >hamburger...."
: Okay, mine was pretty weak, I'll admit. But I was hungry. :)
Accepted! :) (This is another example of you you shouldn't compute while
hungry)
: >A very easy analogy to the ID/Doom package would be Microsoft and
: >Windows. Does MS have the right to keep to from charging for making a
: >windows program that only works with windows?
: But even this isn't the same. Windows was written as an operating
: system. Doom wasn't. Of COURSE Microsoft isn't going to keep us from
: charging for Windows software we create, because they depend on
: developers to continue writing software for their platform. Doom
: isn't like that. Doom is a game. Not an operating system, but a
: game. It wasn't created so that we could create our own
: levels/utilities/etc. and sell them, it was written so we could have
: fun playing it.
But, just because it wasn't intended, is this a reason for ID to try to
forbid it?
: Otherwise I'm sure ID would have created their own
: level editor (much along the lines of the Microsoft Windows SDK, if
: you still like your analogy) that we would buy from them.
I think a better one would be, do we have the right to sell software
written for our computers even though it runs of Intel's copywrited and
patented (chip is patented, microcode is copywrited) chip? If you imagine
Doom as the chip and the wads as the program, then ID is saying that we
can't charge for programs written on chips we didn't make. Thus I'm sure
Intel is eagerly awaiting their check from ID for all profits made from
the sale of Doom.
: Now if people are allowed to sell their doom creations, then we
: suddenly have a $40 game costing us over $100. Most of Doom's replay
: value comes from the add-on levels, and level creation utilities. You
: would have to purchase the game ($40), an add-on level pack ($10-40),
: the level editor ($20-40), and whatever other misc. utilities you
: want. This could all add up to easily over a hundred dollars. I'm
: sure that most people would think that ID is making money from these
: utilities, and they would probably start forming opinions about ID
: quite similar to the one you expressed below. Personally, I can see
: why id doesn't want us to sell our Doom creations. If I were them, I
: wouldn't.
These add-ons didn't exist for a long time, even Doom2 had additional
value beyond more levels, it gave you extra weapons and monsters. The
extra levels didn't happen until Ultimate Doom, thus the wads were
filling a niche that ID didn't even imagine (Don't forget, they didn't
make doom to be easily editable).
: If you want to sell your creations, I'm sure that with enough money,
: you could license the code from ID (much like Raven, who did some
: extraordinary things with it), and create your own game.
This is because Heretic and Hexen (and Strife?) contain copywrited code
belonging to ID.
You can produce a WAD with no ID-made data in it, and if this isn't enough,
you can distribute the WAD in the form of GIFs and WAVs and Blueprints with
a custom program to merge these into the doom wad.
Adam Williamson
wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com "William Robert Night" writes:
> But, this still doesn't explain why ID can legally prevent you (if indeed
> they can) from selling wads.
>
OK.
*IDEAS FOR KILLING THIS THREAD, NUMBER 1*
Everyone appears to have forgotten Id's e-mail address:
Send a message saying "please state your legal grounds for saying you can
sue the ass off anyone selling PWADS". Wait for the reply. Check it with a
lawyer.
Raphael Quinet
[...]
|> But, this still doesn't explain why ID can legally prevent you (if indeed
|> they can) from selling wads.
They can't. Period.
But you shouldn't sell WADs if you respect what they have done. See my
previous message if you aren't convinced.
Avery Andrews
>...
>|> But, this still doesn't explain why ID can legally prevent you (if indeed
>|> they can) from selling wads.
>They can't. Period.
>But you shouldn't sell WADs if you respect what they have done. See my
>previous message if you aren't convinced.
>-Raphael
I'm sure they could have by putting the appropriate words into the Data Utilty
License, requiring that the license for the actual utility prohibit
selling wads produced with it, as the WinTex 4.x license does.
Frans P. de Vries
} I expect a case could be made that your wad uses Id textures - even if
} they aren't in the wad - and therefore infringes their copyright/patents/
} egos/whatever :)
"Uses" as in: references. They are not re-distributed. Case dismissed :)
--
Frans P. de Vries | f...@xymph.iaf.nl | Rec.Games.Computer.Doom FAQ maintainer
Tony Fabris
up...
>But even this isn't the same. Windows was written as an operating
>system. Doom wasn't.
I seem to recall that earlier versions of doom actually said "Doom operating
system" during the bootup screens. Anyone remember this?
I would think that if your .WAD ran correctly under that version of doom, you
could legally say "I thought doom was an OS" and be safe. Just a thought.
+------------------------------------------------+
| Tony Fabris tfa...@oro.net |
+------------------------------------------------+
| REALITY.SYS corrupted. Re-boot Universe? (Y,N) |
+------------------------------------------------+
Adam Williamson
> Adam Williamson (Ad...@scss.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> } I expect a case could be made that your wad uses Id textures - even if
> } they aren't in the wad - and therefore infringes their copyright/patents/
> } egos/whatever :)
>
> "Uses" as in: references. They are not re-distributed. Case dismissed :)
>
Good point :). Heh, this is quite fun, innit?
Tom Wheeley
> Sorry to jump in here to reply to an older post, but I thought I'd bring this
> up...
>
> >But even this isn't the same. Windows was written as an operating
> >system. Doom wasn't.
>
> I seem to recall that earlier versions of doom actually said "Doom operating
> system" during the bootup screens. Anyone remember this?
>
> I would think that if your .WAD ran correctly under that version of doom, you
> could legally say "I thought doom was an OS" and be safe. Just a thought.
Well, yeah. Damn sight better OS than DOS I can tell you :P
--
Tom Wheeley, <holyhorns>
Oh, did I mention that I went to see Bottom Live last Thursday :-))
* TQ 1.0 * 101 uses for dead bodies in Quake
84) Throw their Heads into other players faces to temporarily blind them.
dusty bedford
seems to have disappeared from the Newsgroup. It was a great and very
informative message and I didn't get a chance to read it all the way
through because Netcruiser GPF'd on me.
Bottom line, if there were no DOOM patch WADs I wouldn't have purchased
DOOM II, Heretic, or Hexen. I do not plan to purchase any sequels to
Dark Forces or Descent because there are not enough alternate levels.
ID got 120$ more in sales from me because they allowed people to create
and sell Patch Wads. I have purchased a few Patch Wads disks and only
because it is more convenient than downloading them off the net, I am
making 25$/hr as a PC software tester my time is too valuable, and I
want to have fun playing new DOOM in my free time.
Last year(1994), I was laid off at a time when there weren't many
PWADs, I downloaded RANDOOM and used it extensively, and at that time I
I created a program that could generate new patch wads. I wont buy
any game that doesn't allow the use of third party levels. And if
people don't create a lot of new third-party levels for a game I won't
buy the game's sequel(s).
Dusty Bedford
Raphael Quinet
|> Could someone repost Raphael's original essay about Selling WADS. It
|> seems to have disappeared from the Newsgroup. It was a great and very
|> informative message and I didn't get a chance to read it all the way
|> through because Netcruiser GPF'd on me.
|>
Since several people expressed their interest in that article, I put an
HTML version of it on my WWW pages. You can get the article from the
following URL:
http://www.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~quinet/games/sellingwads-en.html
I think it's better to put it there, where it will stay, rather than
re-posting it because it would expire again.
Adam Williamson
> Say.. i gotta question..
> I was thinking.. Since some of you guys dont have the original
> DooM, I thought it would be good to convert the original
> DooM wad to DooM ][ wad.
> Good Idea BUT
> Is this Legal???
>
> Peter
>
No, unfortunately. Not even the shareware version :(. But then, Ultimate
Doom is pretty cheap...
--
---
Adam Williamson, D1M - ad...@scss.demon.co.uk
Terminal Velocity and Wolf 3D FAQ maintainer. Email me for more details.
"There's nothing left for you to say, soon you'll be dead anyway" - Green Day
Sig copyright Emma's Common Sense.
WylRider
: In <4a45jm$g...@erinews.ericsson.se> Raphael...@eed.ericsson.se (Raphael Quinet) writes:
[mega-snip!]
William Robert Night
: In article <4aopo9$t...@news.annex.com> pds...@annex.com "WylRider" writes:
: > Say.. i gotta question..
: > I was thinking.. Since some of you guys dont have the original
: > DooM, I thought it would be good to convert the original
: > DooM wad to DooM ][ wad.
: > Good Idea BUT
: > Is this Legal???
: >
: > Peter
: >
: No, unfortunately. Not even the shareware version :(. But then, Ultimate
: Doom is pretty cheap...
:
No, it is legal to do this, for your personal use only. If you try to
distribute it, well it's esentially Doom1.wad and is covered by ID's
copyright.
I wish hexen had better weapons (more than 4 per character) so that a
Doom2 in Hexen would be possible with all the neat features (jumping over
objects, jumping at all, flying, looking up and down, and soon(?)
eight-player deathmatch). I like the feel of doom, especially for
deathmatch, but I really HATE jumping off something and 'hitting' a
monster that's hundreds of feet below (that proceeds to shred me before I
get even close to it).
A few levels would need to be redone with wire-mesh to keep people from
flying to key places, but it would be a neat project.
Maybe if we did it, we could release a diff file between it and doom2.wad.
(a diff file is like a patch, it contains only the changes that have been
made, not the original material and thus would be legal to release on the
net)
The only question is, which weapons could we do without? Chaingun? I
rarely use it. It'd be tight.
Anyone out there interested?
Adam Williamson
wni...@vanbc.wimsey.com "William Robert Night" writes:
> No, it is legal to do this, for your personal use only. If you try to
> distribute it, well it's esentially Doom1.wad and is covered by ID's
> copyright.
>
I was assuming he wanted to distribute it :)