Closed Thread
Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 148

Thread: Public Engine3 without time restrictions

  1. #91
    Junior Member acidanarchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Hubert, NC
    Posts
    166
    Play Stats
    4h last 30d
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiars View Post
    Correct. I can understand the compromise to allow Jedi unlock code to remain secret. But I do not want to see the remainder of what is in .lua scripts and .tre file component additions and changes to end up secret because of a poorly worded attempt to exclude the Jedi unlock code.

    So while I await the change I also want you to take the time to get it right.

    I think we may be losing track of what the purpose of this change is. Based on your response here it sounds more like your mindset may be "how can I get access to some other server's stuff and copy or modify it for my own server" rather than "how can I learn how to develop something for my own server". There's countless areas and fragments of information all over the internet and these very forums that basically tell you how to do anything you want to do in the code. If you're worried about what another server is doing in their LUA and TRE files then I'm not sure you're looking at this for the right reasons. In fact, I'm still unclear on what the point of this is until details are released, because as I mentioned previously: what if a server has content that was created by a 3rd party which was contracted and paid to do the work exclusively for that server? Is that server now going to be obligated to release that paid development content to people who did not pay to have it developed or have access to it? If I managed to get Lockheed Martin to develop something for me, on paid development time, do I now need to share the source code even if it's completely unrelated to vanilla Core3 or the general roadmap?

    Yes, servers will not want to have their Jedi unlock code made public for obvious reasons, and there's also obvious reasons that certain other content should not be made public as well. I can understand the reason to have source code made public if a specific server, for example, managed to fully develop and finish JTL for SWGEmu, then sure everyone else would want that. I fail to see how a server's unique content (whether it be LUA, C++, models, plugins, etc.) should in anyway be forced into open source for everyone if it's unrelated to the Core3 roadmap.

    To be blunt, if I paid a company or person $50,000 to develop a giant pink dinosaur with a laser beam on it's forehead that zapped players into little bunny rabbits, all exclusively for my server then there's little to no chance that I'd be willing to share it with anyone unless they paid for it. On the other hand, if I happen to find unfinished Core3 content or bugs and I fix or finish them for the greater good of the entire community then of course I'd share that.

    I'm not saying this applies to me or any specific server but rather as a general feeler to see if this type of stuff is being taken into consideration when forcing the release of a lot of content which is either irrelevant to SWGEmu's roadmap or funded intellectual property. Food for thought in any case. I'd hope the final details include provisions which support the Core3 project but also protect individual developer's work. The last thing I'd want to see is this become a deterrent to community developers where some people start to lose the interest and desire to do something for their server because it will just become open source. If the focus is community and SWGEmu (free to use for anyone) then I don't think we'd want to whittle down the communities which will ultimately become the backbone after 1.0

    Quote Originally Posted by TheAnswer View Post
    And I personally can't wait to get to 1.0 and move on from this community. Once development is finished, AGPL will be lifted, engine limitations will be lifted(already are) and I will be long gone too.
    Case in point and I don't mean that in any negative or derogatory manner. I understand the need for "some things" to go open source but otherwise, and until details are released for this, I see it more as a possible deterrent to community development, where some developers may stop working on interesting and innovating things for the SWGEmu community because they don't want their source code or whatever to be released.


    Cheers
    Last edited by acidanarchy; 04-26-2015 at 05:42 AM.

  2. #92
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Hampshire ,uk
    Posts
    46
    Play Stats
    Inactive
    I think this is good news, I have been working on my own private server purely to learn how it all works (my way of learning Linux lol). If people can feed back in some of there stuff (who said Jedi?) people could then get the core code from here and have options they wanted that where approved.

    Not sure what hoops you have to jump through to sign up to it though.
    Used to be burf2000 on Europe-Chimaera. Just managed Jedi before the death of SWG (patch)!

  3. #93
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    330
    Play Stats
    Inactive
    Quote Originally Posted by acidanarchy View Post
    I think we may be losing track of what the purpose of this change is. Based on your response here it sounds more like your mindset may be "how can I get access to some other server's stuff and copy or modify it for my own server" rather than "how can I learn how to develop something for my own server". There's countless areas and fragments of information all over the internet and these very forums that basically tell you how to do anything you want to do in the code. If you're worried about what another server is doing in their LUA and TRE files then I'm not sure you're looking at this for the right reasons. In fact, I'm still unclear on what the point of this is until details are released, because as I mentioned previously: what if a server has content that was created by a 3rd party which was contracted and paid to do the work exclusively for that server? Is that server now going to be obligated to release that paid development content to people who did not pay to have it developed or have access to it? If I managed to get Lockheed Martin to develop something for me, on paid development time, do I now need to share the source code even if it's completely unrelated to vanilla Core3 or the general roadmap?

    Yes, servers will not want to have their Jedi unlock code made public for obvious reasons, and there's also obvious reasons that certain other content should not be made public as well. I can understand the reason to have source code made public if a specific server, for example, managed to fully develop and finish JTL for SWGEmu, then sure everyone else would want that. I fail to see how a server's unique content (whether it be LUA, C++, models, plugins, etc.) should in anyway be forced into open source for everyone if it's unrelated to the Core3 roadmap.

    To be blunt, if I paid a company or person $50,000 to develop a giant pink dinosaur with a laser beam on it's forehead that zapped players into little bunny rabbits, all exclusively for my server then there's little to no chance that I'd be willing to share it with anyone unless they paid for it. On the other hand, if I happen to find unfinished Core3 content or bugs and I fix or finish them for the greater good of the entire community then of course I'd share that.

    I'm not saying this applies to me or any specific server but rather as a general feeler to see if this type of stuff is being taken into consideration when forcing the release of a lot of content which is either irrelevant to SWGEmu's roadmap or funded intellectual property. Food for thought in any case. I'd hope the final details include provisions which support the Core3 project but also protect individual developer's work. The last thing I'd want to see is this become a deterrent to community developers where some people start to lose the interest and desire to do something for their server because it will just become open source. If the focus is community and SWGEmu (free to use for anyone) then I don't think we'd want to whittle down the communities which will ultimately become the backbone after 1.0



    Case in point and I don't mean that in any negative or derogatory manner. I understand the need for "some things" to go open source but otherwise, and until details are released for this, I see it more as a possible deterrent to community development, where some developers may stop working on interesting and innovating things for the SWGEmu community because they don't want their source code or whatever to be released.


    Cheers
    I'm not sure it's Tiars that is "losing track" here.

    Any play server (Bas has been said it is nothing more than a large test server) is benefiting from a open source project now. If it wasn't for that open source, there would be no other servers. There are already legal questions regarding adding to an open source project and then charging for those additions but the AGPL licensing puts an end to most all of these questions that come into play. Question that could even get the attention of a main IP holder that decides it's a little too much and makes the decision to end all of these servers. TA has to abide with his original agreement with SOE and/or LA and if he doesn't, there's another reason for all these servers to go up in smoke. We don't know the particulars of that agreement but I would imagine that "no profit" or even content that is claimed by ownership and therefore subject to sale, figured prominently. That could include up to, the "selling" of added code, lua files, etc that has been reported, at least to The Answer et al (who holds both the original agreement to allow even the conception of such a project and all rights to SWGEMU development). I can see that trying to claim copyright/ownership/right to sell/profit on any added code as being against that agreement AND against what TA et al is trying to accomplish here and is contractually bound by. And TA/EMU has the only counsel that is retained and knowledgeable of all of these matters.

    The case you provide of "Lockhead" has nothing to do with a game emulator that the original work is clearly copyrighted/patented by the original maker. And those already issued copyrights/patents/ownership apply to most ALL of the coding additions that other servers are already using. Just because you add the NGE tre files or the pre-patch 9 boxes to your server doesn't mean that SOE/LA does not hold copyrights/patents/ownership to them already so any such addition can not be claimed as owned due to the fact they already are. People seem to forget that ****** now "owns" all of the content commonly called Star Wars as well. And in the case of someone paying for development for say....., JTL (and I've heard of another server(s) doing this), this is clearly part of the "roadmap" that SWGEMU is using and they could use that information as well and is already clearly owned by others. And if you only share it with SWGEMU, it will become open source anyway just as soon as it is released upon their test server. If community developers are "deterred" by having their work as open source then they're clearly working on the wrong project now. Besides that, I do not see any deterrent with ANY of the developers at SWGEMU. Perhaps we should ask them if open source is keeping them from all the work they are completing here.

    The main objective, as I read what SWGEMU has said here, is a total NON-PROFIT situation ("free for all....") and if another so-called "server owner" is attempting to claim profit/ownership from something related to Star Wars Galaxies then they already have a lot more problems other than SWGEMU and/or TA. All "server-owners" should remember this even after the open source SWGEMU project is completed and the AGPL licensing that is coming now into effect, is lifted. And I would imagine that if "profits" get out of hand after 1.0 and Sony or LA does act, all you'll get from this original team is a large "I told you so".
    Last edited by Esquire; 04-26-2015 at 04:24 PM.

  4. #94
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    9
    Play Stats
    Inactive
    Hes talking about new, original content that was never a part of any version of swg. If we make our own models, animations, systems etc. I certainly wouldnt want to be forced to give them to everyone when the entire point of all of those hours of work was to make my server different from the rest and draw our own crowd that enjoys my work. If i make a new vehicle.that loka like a cardboard box, and it teleports you to a planet called limbo, why should i be forced to give that away? It was never part of swg and soe/daybreak/la/****** never owned the tre files ive created nor the assets in them. Again, why should original content be forced to go open source?

    Also, hes not talking about making money off of the emu, hes talkinh about paying coders and modellers etc for their time. Spending money does not = profit.
    Last edited by Lolindir; 04-26-2015 at 04:11 PM. Reason: Double post

  5. #95
    SWGEmu Admin Lolindir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    12,574
    Play Stats
    Inactive
    Quote Originally Posted by TheAnswer View Post
    Yes I have no problems with that, we have always stated that for 1.0 release the engine will be released fully unlocked.

    Actually the plan is to lift AGPL in core3 when 1.0 is released, thats why we put the disclaimer, and let communities do whatever they want with the code, but till we get there we want cooperation from everyone.
    Post #57 in this thread.
    If AGPL is lifted when we hit 1.0, then you can have your secret code. Until then, we are a development project and our code isn't finished.

    Quote Originally Posted by Khieran View Post
    Also, hes not talking about making money off of the emu, hes talkinh about paying coders and modellers etc for their time. Spending money does not = profit.
    I'm no lawyer, but its shady, since some one will make money from SWGEmu. The player/admin doing it, might not make money, but some one who can be considered a dev will.
    Last edited by Lolindir; 04-26-2015 at 04:13 PM.
    Lolindir
    SWGEmu Admin

    SWGEmu is a non-profit, open source community project.
    How to report bugs | Mantis (Bug Tracker) | Live Support
    Install SWGEmu | Fix SWGEmu | Submit a ticket

  6. #96
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    330
    Play Stats
    Inactive
    Quote Originally Posted by Khieran View Post
    Hes talking about new, original content that was never a part of any version of swg. If we make our own models, animations, systems etc. I certainly wouldnt want to be forced to give them to everyone when the entire point of all of those hours of work was to make my server different from the rest and draw our own crowd that enjoys my work. If i make a new vehicle.that loka like a cardboard box, and it teleports you to a planet called limbo, why should i be forced to give that away? It was never part of swg and soe/daybreak/la/****** never owned the tre files ive created nor the assets in them. Again, why should original content be forced to go open source?

    Also, hes not talking about making money off of the emu, hes talkinh about paying coders and modellers etc for their time. Spending money does not = profit.
    If you want ownership of a box vehicle then the easy answer is to make your own game. The problem here is your trying to install owned material into a already owned total game (the completed work) using code that is clearly open source to base your valued coding upon. Your trying to create value where you may be precluded via statute, US or otherwise, and/or an agreement for the original conception that may also preclude you from doing so. Your box vehicle is not stand alone, it requires code to operate made by SWGEMU which is open source along with being 1 system of many that makes up Star Wars Galaxies, a MMORPG game (total coding work) owned by others with intellectual property rights owned via yet another entity, a rather large one that holds the key to all of these emulator servers.

    The one single problem for ****** is actual damages with a non-profit, altho Cease and Desist does not require actual damages to prosecute and there are still ways of stopping all these EMUs without actual damages. If anyone makes the 1st dollar off of SWG now, that damage problem is now ended and opens up all the other damages in which they can ask the courts for regress on. (consequential, punitive, etc etc etc.)

    If this is what your trying to do, then my best suggestion is to speak to qualified counsel, and rather quickly.
    Last edited by Esquire; 04-26-2015 at 05:04 PM.

  7. #97
    Addicted
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,901
    Play Stats
    3h last 30d
    Quote Originally Posted by Lolindir View Post
    I'm no lawyer, but its shady, since some one will make money from SWGEmu. The player/admin doing it, might not make money, but some one who can be considered a dev will.
    What if someone 'hired' a 'dev' to code in additional features/content for a new private server, and paid them for their time and resources for writing the code? I haven't really followed this thread closely, but it seems like this is the case for a few other communities.

    I'm curious though, how exactly is that in any sort of violation against SWGEmu, legally, or non legally?

  8. #98
    The Vlada Vlada's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Vlada
    Posts
    33,034
    Play Stats
    Inactive
    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyra View Post
    What if someone 'hired' a 'dev' to code in additional features/content for a new private server, and paid them for their time and resources for writing the code? I haven't really followed this thread closely, but it seems like this is the case for a few other communities.

    I'm curious though, how exactly is that in any sort of violation against SWGEmu, legally, or non legally?
    Why would SWGEmu care if others hire someone, its not our problem. Their money, they represent a separate legal entity from SWGEmu and they will be held accountable if they do something that illegal, not SWGEmu. Now, I am no expert but as i understand it, if that dev made any changes to the Core3 then because of AGPL those would have to be made available to the public. But, like TheAnswer said, scripts/data should be separate and under different license, so if that "hired dev" made changes to those, they wouldn't need to be released to the public.

  9. #99
    Junior Member acidanarchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Hubert, NC
    Posts
    166
    Play Stats
    4h last 30d
    Quote Originally Posted by Esquire View Post
    Any play server (Bas has been said it is nothing more than a large test server) is benefiting from a open source project now. If it wasn't for that open source, there would be no other servers.
    No one is questioning the SWGEmu project but rather the approach of "Show me yours and I'll show you mine". Sure, there are servers out there who are reaping the benefits of the SWGEmu project and not giving credit where credit is due, but there's also servers out there who are doing things the right way and their developers may want to keep some of their content non-public for very obvious reasons.

    Quote Originally Posted by Khieran View Post
    Hes talking about new, original content that was never a part of any version of swg. If we make our own models, animations, systems etc. I certainly wouldnt want to be forced to give them to everyone when the entire point of all of those hours of work was to make my server different from the rest and draw our own crowd that enjoys my work. If i make a new vehicle.that loka like a cardboard box, and it teleports you to a planet called limbo, why should i be forced to give that away? It was never part of swg and soe/daybreak/la/****** never owned the tre files ive created nor the assets in them. Again, why should original content be forced to go open source?

    Also, hes not talking about making money off of the emu, hes talkinh about paying coders and modellers etc for their time. Spending money does not = profit.
    Correct

    Quote Originally Posted by Lolindir View Post
    I'm no lawyer, but its shady, since some one will make money from SWGEmu. The player/admin doing it, might not make money, but some one who can be considered a dev will.
    No one mentioned making money from anything. The concern is being forced into releasing "source" for content which was created independently of the project.

    Quote Originally Posted by Esquire View Post
    Your box vehicle is not stand alone, it requires code to operate made by SWGEMU which is open source along with being 1 system of many that makes up Star Wars Galaxies
    But it would be stand-alone because his box vehicle was developed outside of SWGEmu and outside of SWG, which his content can be tailored to be used on any platform realistically (regardless if his content is a model or compiled code). If SOE or SWGEmu released a set of "tools" which were the sole means in which it was possible to create "content", and someone created "content" on said "tools" for SWG or SWGEmu then I'd agree. If SWGEmu released a 3D modeling program to create 3D models for SWG, then sure. If he decides to release a compiled version of his box vehicle, created in Maya for example, accompanied by scripts created in Visual C++, and grant others the rights to use, but not sell or modify, the box vehicle for "something" it doesn't change the fact that he's the original creator and holds rights to the IP.

    Again, I understand the basis for the idea behind this as there are certain servers making wild claims to be doing things we all know they are not. The question becomes is there any consideration to individual developers and servers who wish to protect their content. Where is the line drawn and at what point does it become so irrelevant that it does more harm than good?

    In the end we're sitting here debating about who's content should be protected against being made public, and meanwhile most of us all know how SWGEmu came to be. Sony didn't exactly make a public release of their content. I'm not saying this in a good or bad way, but rather that it's very ironic we're even having a debate over this.

    There's most certainly developers who fully support the SWGEmu project and it would be a shame to see some of those developers decide to close shop over this decision. As I mentioned in my earlier response, if the focus is community and keeping SWG alive then why would there be a push that alienates certain people in the community who will ultimately become the backbone of the community after 1.0. I don't personally feel the direction of "Show me yours and I'll show you mine" is the best possible solution to the matter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyra View Post
    What if someone 'hired' a 'dev' to code in additional features/content for a new private server, and paid them for their time and resources for writing the code? I haven't really followed this thread closely, but it seems like this is the case for a few other communities.

    I'm curious though, how exactly is that in any sort of violation against SWGEmu, legally, or non legally?
    Correct

    Quote Originally Posted by Vlada View Post
    Now, I am no expert but as i understand it, if that dev made any changes to the Core3 then because of AGPL those would have to be made available to the public. But, like TheAnswer said, scripts/data should be separate and under different license, so if that "hired dev" made changes to those, they wouldn't need to be released to the public.
    I'm definitely no legal expect as well. I'd hope that the intent and interpretation of the licensing is to govern and mandate that "changes" to existing vanilla content be within the provisions of public access, however the additions of new content (models, source code, etc.) could remain outside the provisions of public access and be protected under a separate provision which governs the addition of custom content. My concern is that the definition of "custom content" is only going to be limited to certain things and leave a huge gap of others exposed (such as C++ source code).
    Last edited by acidanarchy; 04-26-2015 at 07:45 PM.

  10. #100
    The Vlada Vlada's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Vlada
    Posts
    33,034
    Play Stats
    Inactive
    Quote Originally Posted by acidanarchy View Post
    I'm definitely no legal expect as well. I'd hope that the intent and interpretation of the licensing is to govern and mandate that "changes" to existing vanilla content be within the provisions of public access, however the additions of new content (models, source code, etc.) could remain outside the provisions of public access and be protected under a separate provision which governs the addition of custom content. My concern is that the definition of "custom content" is only going to be limited to certain things and leave a huge gap of others exposed (such as C++ source code).
    It probably is going to cause just that, but if folks are so determined to protect their stuff then maybe they should focus only on scripts and postpone any serious Core3 changes until 1.0 and change of licensing it will bring.

  11. #101
    Junior Member acidanarchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Hubert, NC
    Posts
    166
    Play Stats
    4h last 30d
    Quote Originally Posted by Vlada View Post
    It probably is going to cause just that, but if folks are so determined to protect their stuff then maybe they should focus only on scripts and postpone any serious Core3 changes until 1.0 and change of licensing it will bring.
    That would be unfortunate but I'll wait for you folks to release further details. Personally, I feel a lot of this could be accomplished by working directly with those who run the servers (or do development) vs trying to accomplish it through licensing changes for everyone on a temporary basis. I'm sure many servers (or developers) out there would be more than happy to work with the SWGEmu staff on an individual case by case basis with requests for information when needed. Those problem servers who are attempting to "compete" would, in my opinion, be easy to isolate without effecting the rest of the community who support and wish to see the SWGEmu project succeed.

    Thanks for the responses you guys (and ladies) have all given thus far, it's much appreciated.

    Cheers

  12. #102
    Addicted Tiars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Ironforge, Uther
    Posts
    3,833
    Play Stats
    Inactive
    Quote Originally Posted by acidanarchy View Post
    I think we may be losing track of what the purpose of this change is.
    I do not think that I am losing track. My understanding is that the intention is to make it easier to complete Version 1.0 and get it out the door.

    Since the scripts and any changes to the content or by changing anything that was contained in a .tre file could cause things to be called a bug in the rest of the game code when the problem could be in those files. From experience it is very hard to debug potential problems when you do not have everything that does into recreating the problem. Since one aspect of the change is to get more people working on the code it makes no sense to even suggest that access to everything should be restricted to just the SWGEmu core team.

    In the end the owners of the SWGEmu project will create a license that does what they want it to do and most of our input will be ignored. When I made my post I was expressing that much of the discussion would remove any benefits for the project by the change and my support for them taking as long as they needed to get it right. I did not feel that I would need to post any more until the agreement was posted. The actions of others caused me to feel that I needed to say more.
    Last edited by Tiars; 04-26-2015 at 08:36 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vlada View Post
    Jedi dont ruin SWG, people ruin SWG.
    My Blog about SWG and possible changes

  13. #103
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    330
    Play Stats
    Inactive
    Quote Originally Posted by acidanarchy View Post
    That would be unfortunate but I'll wait for you folks to release further details. Personally, I feel a lot of this could be accomplished by working directly with those who run the servers (or do development) vs trying to accomplish it through licensing changes for everyone on a temporary basis. I'm sure many servers (or developers) out there would be more than happy to work with the SWGEmu staff on an individual case by case basis with requests for information when needed. Those problem servers who are attempting to "compete" would, in my opinion, be easy to isolate without effecting the rest of the community who support and wish to see the SWGEmu project succeed.

    Thanks for the responses you guys (and ladies) have all given thus far, it's much appreciated.


    Cheers
    Acid, I believe I understand where you are coming from with these concerns. But, (and it's a big one), there has already been people that are claiming "ownership" of code/scripts/tre files/etc and have sold them. And ownership implies the right for sale. TA and SWGEMU is reacting to a problem, not creating one. And that problem could be a very large one for all of us if the problem draws the attention of entities involved. We are also trying to "piggyback" on an existing agreement between TA et al and SOE. Not once have I seen TA assign or transfer his rights given to him via that agreement.

    The AGPL solution is probably the best one for all parties concerned. If there is no ownership and everyone's "stuff" is open source, there is no rights to sale and TA gets what he envisioned originally also. "SWG free for everyone".

    As I see it, and I have a server also, in fact a couple of them I paid over 3K for and knew that I had no way to recoup that expense going in, it wouldn't hurt any of us to work together and with SWGEMU. I doubt that by giving out our code/files/etc that it is going to affect donations nor will it affect our playerbase one bit. It might help someone elses and that doesn't concern me either as SWGEMU's work is sure helping us. This isn't like Cryptic v SOE v Blizzard. We can't charge for the service nor can we make or attempt to profit from the measure. All you could realize is "bragging rights" and that will get exactly nothing at the bank.
    Last edited by Esquire; 04-26-2015 at 09:14 PM.

  14. #104
    Dedicated Takhomasak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    swgsunrunner2.com
    Posts
    785
    Play Stats
    Inactive
    Well, I like it, as an SWG fam.

    Even if it's got thousands of players now... interest in this 13-year-old game is not going to last forever. The emphasis is to get to 1.0, then everyone can live their dream as they see fit. It's actually amazing that in the decade of work on EMU, nobody's just flat out made a better Star Wars game. That, of course, is why we're all still here.

    As a modder and aspiring developer, I am very happy about this. The more hands we put the tools and information in, the sooner we'll get to 1.0. The sooner that happens, the sooner we'll all see what the game really could be.

    RIP Sunrunner - <SRA><OIC><FAF><WOF><NITES><ZERG><NJO><EZ-Co><LT>
    Admin @ http://swgsunrunner2.com

  15. #105
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    9
    Play Stats
    Inactive
    Ok look, no one is really stating the obvious issue here, so i will. If all servers have the same code, what is the point of running seperate serversr? If its all the same, we may as well all play on the same server. It seems like individuality is being stripped away and we are going to forced into what amounts to online socialism where in order to be 'fair to everyone', everyone is forced to use the exact same thing. It removes all interest that i have had in this project since day 1.

Closed Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts