GPL.....Interesting Topic

This is starting to get interesting :)) .........a thread in the GPLEA Legends Central Forum. http://www.legendscentral.com/ubb/Forum29/HTML/001629.html Cheers, David. TopLoader. Melbourne, Australia.

This is starting to get interesting :)) .........a thread in the GPLEA Legends Central Forum. http://www.legendscentral.com/ubb/Forum29/HTML/001629.html Cheers, David. TopLoader. Melbourne, Australia.

>"TopLoader" <[email hidden]> wrote > This is starting to get interesting :)) .........a thread in the GPLEA > Legends Central Forum. I just see a bunch of blind people who think GPL will be patched forever because it's raced by a core of serious racers. I've seen that more then once. GPL is dead, long live GPL. There won't ever be a patch, new add-ons or anything like that. We must turn the page and accept those facts. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

If we thought it'd be patched just because it's raced by a core of serious racers we wouldn't be offering to pay for it. If 500 people pay $25 we'll have $12,500 to convince them with. If the coders make $50/hour that's 250 man hours to fix it. I bet they'd pull it off in less than 200 hours and buy GF3's with the rest. > I just see a bunch of blind people who think GPL will be patched forever > because it's raced by a core of serious racers. > -- Fran�ois M�nard<ymenard>

Quoted text (7 lines)

> -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > >

>"Kirk House" <[email hidden]> wrote > If we thought it'd be patched just because it's raced by a core of serious > racers we wouldn't be offering to pay for it. If 500 people pay $25 we'll > have $12,500 to convince them with. If the coders make $50/hour that's250 > man hours to fix it. I bet they'd pull it off in less than 200 hours and > buy GF3's with the rest. The fact is that money is not the SINGLE issue here. Oh and 12,500$ is pennies when we talk about gaming development. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

[email hidden] (Kirk House) wrote: > $12,500 I'd be embarrassed to approach Papyrus with anything less than $50k in my pocket. If you want to be taken seriously you have to wave serious amounts of wallet... and 50k isn't anywhere close to serious money... so maybe I mean 100k. Of course if we had that much it might make more sense to fly to Vegas and put it into a slot machine instead (a quarter at a time ;-) Then maybe we'd have enough to fund GPL2... or a Big Mac. Or maybe we'd have to raise another $20k to bail our representative after he runs out of money to pay his hotel bill :-> Andrew McP

> of wallet... and 50k isn't anywhere close to serious money... so maybe I > mean 100k. $100,000 just to fix the processor bug??? What'd it cost to make GPL? A few trillion?

[email hidden] (Kirk House) wrote: > just to fix the processor bug? Well, first you have to make people listen. Money talks, loose change just rattles annoyingly :-> In this hypothetical universe where we had the money, I think I'd try to get more than just a fix for high speed processors :-) But it's *possible* that the core engine would have to be reworked quite extensively if there's a serious timing problem. And even if the code is very well commented, and extremely tightly written, reworking old code is a nightmare at the best of times. 100k is probably over the top, but 12k is almost certainly far too little, especially as even a junior programmer would need to be brought up to speed by the guys who wrote in it the first place. And that's time taken from other projects, so... it gets messy. Money's the only way I know to cure messy problems. Mmm... in which case we should probably donate the 100k to curing cancer instead. Ok fellas, patch is cancelled ;-) Andrew McP

Ok Ok Ok Guys. It's a nice dream but who would handle the funds of this Fiasco? Who would control the funds coming in & going out? Lastly Andrew is right! Do you honestly think Sierra or Papy would raise an eyebrow at $12,500 or $50k or maybe even a $100k? I highly doubt it. No let me take that back!! No Way! Yes it is sad but it is true!! Sorry Folks.. Thom_j. "Andrew MacPherson" wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

| I'd be embarrassed to approach Papyrus with anything less than $50k in my | pocket. If you want to be taken seriously you have to wave serious amounts | of wallet... and 50k isn't anywhere close to serious money... so maybe I | mean 100k. | | Of course if we had that much it might make more sense to fly to Vegas and | put it into a slot machine instead (a quarter at a time ;-) Then maybe | we'd have enough to fund GPL2... or a Big Mac. Or maybe we'd have to raise | another $20k to bail our representative after he runs out of money to pay | his hotel bill :-> | | Andrew McP |

Andrew all that & then its cancelled..lmao.. Too funny but wise! <g> "Andrew MacPherson" wrote: | > just to fix the processor bug?<snipped> | Mmm... in which case we should probably donate the 100k to curing | cancer instead. Ok fellas, patch is cancelled ;-) | Andrew McP

In article <3b034c1d$0$256$[email hidden]>, "Kirk House" <[email hidden]> writes: >If we thought it'd be patched just because it's raced by a core of serious >racers we wouldn't be offering to pay for it. If 500 people pay $25 we'll >have $12,500 to convince them with. If the coders make $50/hour that's 250 >man hours to fix it. I bet they'd pull it off in less than 200 hours and >buy GF3's with the rest. Do you really think there are that many people who have fast systems who would pay? I doubt it. Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +25.37...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <fgHM6.57392$[email hidden]>, "TopLoader" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>This is starting to get interesting :)) .........a thread in the GPLEA >Legends Central Forum. > >http://www.legendscentral.com/ubb/Forum29/HTML/001629.html > >Cheers, David. >TopLoader. >Melbourne, Australia.

What's the subset of people who play GPL, who also have 1.4G systems or faster, who also would pay for a patch on a game that only costs about $10? Pretty small, I'd say. Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +25.37...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

I'd guess that the people with really fast systems would have enough spare cash to pay more than $25. We'll all have systems too fast for gpl before long. I guess they're right about the money though, haven't heard anything from Papy. Hope they don't piss off anybody that writes reviews of their games ;) > Do you really think there are that many people who have fast systems whowould

Quoted text (9 lines)

> pay? I doubt it. > > Eldred > -- > Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > F1 hcp. +25.37...F2 +151.26... > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>"Thom j." <[email hidden]> > Ok Ok Ok Guys. It's a nice dream but who would handle the funds > of this Fiasco? Who would control the funds coming in & going out? > Lastly Andrew is right! Do you honestly think Sierra or Papy would > raise an eyebrow at $12,500 or $50k or maybe even a $100k? > I highly doubt it. No let me take that back!! No Way! Yes it is sad > but it is true!! Sorry Folks.. Thom_j.

It's just a delusional idea. We should let it rest before it becomes embarrassing. Like people who think there's gonna be a GPL2. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Thats why I threw the bait ymenard and thank you for replying in educated manner... Cheers Thom_j. "ymenard" wrote: | It's just a delusional idea. We should let it rest before it becomes | embarrassing. Like people who think there's gonna be a GPL2.<snipped>

[email hidden] (ymenard) wrote: > We should let it rest before it becomes > embarrassing. Aw, come on... talk's cheap, and RAS is cheaper than most ;-) At the end of the day this discussion's just like all the other GPL conversations that have taken place over the last 3 years. It's a product of people's enthusiasm for a superb product. Nobody should be ashamed of dreaming :-> The problems come when people think dreams are reality. Pammy_E

[email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: > who also would pay for a patch on a game that only costs about $10? GPL did *not* cost about $10!! ...or even $50 when it first came out (ok, so my third copy only cost about $15 ;-). Every hour we've spent playing this game could have been spent on something else (watching TV, clipping our toe nails, cleaning the bathroom, arguing about which is the best modern F1 semi-simulator etc). And every $ of upgrade we've worked for and spent could have been put to "better" use. But I'm still looking forward to upgrading to a P1.69999 GHz or something, and a new wheel/pedal setup fund (just for GPL) is slowly building up in a separate savings account. So, given this commitment would I pay a similar amount for a "significant" patch to GPL? Yes, because the world is full of mediocrity, and excellence is most *definitely* worth paying for. Are there enough idiots like me? No :-) Is this a Good Thing(tm)? Certainly! Oh, and we shouldn't forget the guys who've invested serious amounts of time and effort in the GPL tracks, utils, and mods. Only last night I finally got round to DLing the GLEA's most recent Lotus, new cockpit etc. I didn't realise what I was missing... stunning! Andrew McP PS And I'd pay a small fortune for a patch that would allow three monitor GPL while online via a single connection!

Since other GPL patches have been done by programmers on their own time, yes, this amount would make a big difference. The intent would be to feed it directly to the individuals doing the work, not to have 97% of it filtered off by corporate inefficiency and theft. Marc. "Thom j." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:9aLM6.43$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > Ok Ok Ok Guys. It's a nice dream but who would handle the funds > of this Fiasco? Who would control the funds coming in & going out? > Lastly Andrew is right! Do you honestly think Sierra or Papy would > raise an eyebrow at $12,500 or $50k or maybe even a $100k? > I highly doubt it. No let me take that back!! No Way! Yes it is sad > but it is true!! Sorry Folks.. Thom_j. > > "Andrew MacPherson" wrote: > > | I'd be embarrassed to approach Papyrus with anything less than $50k in

my > | pocket. If you want to be taken seriously you have to wave seriousamounts > | of wallet... and 50k isn't anywhere close to serious money... so maybe I > | mean 100k. > | > | Of course if we had that much it might make more sense to fly to Vegasand > | put it into a slot machine instead (a quarter at a time ;-) Then maybe > | we'd have enough to fund GPL2... or a Big Mac. Or maybe we'd have toraise > | another $20k to bail our representative after he runs out of money topay

Quoted text (7 lines)

> | his hotel bill :-> > | > | Andrew McP > | > > >

Considering it's worth about the same as 20 other racing games combined...perhaps :) Marc. "Kirk House" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3b035b88$0$259$[email hidden]... > > $100,000 just to fix the processor bug??? What'd it cost to make GPL? A > few trillion? >

Marc. If these programers are still under the auspicious employee of 'Papyrus aka Sierra' how do you think the companies will feel about this? I would think they still have some legal' entitlement to Sierra or Papyrus for anything done by Papyrus programers whether in house or on their own! Dont you? Remember its still a Sierra aka Papyrus game. Do you honestly think these companies will just roll over and say "sure go ahead and we dont want anything!" Never!! Just some food for thought... Thom_j. "Marc Collins" wrote: | Since other GPL patches have been done by programmers on their own time, | yes, this amount would make a big difference. The intent would be to feed | it directly to the individuals doing the work, not to have 97% of it | filtered off by corporate inefficiency and theft. | | Marc.

In article <Me%M6.1712$[email hidden]>, "Thom j." <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Marc. If these programers are still under the auspicious employee of >'Papyrus aka Sierra' how do you think the companies will feel about >this? I would think they still have some legal' entitlement to Sierra or >Papyrus for anything done by Papyrus programers whether in house >or on their own! Dont you? Remember its still a Sierra aka Papyrus >game. Do you honestly think these companies will just roll over and >say "sure go ahead and we dont want anything!" Never!! >Just some food for thought... Thom_j.

Maybe Papy can just support this guy officially and claim to have better support for older games than other companies? Claim that their games have more long-term value than others? Ok, long-term value is probably not a good thing for the industry: I could have wasted (aka buy-play-shelf) 50 average games in the time I just played GPL over and over again ;) Calis

On Thu, 17 May 2001 12:05:32 -0400, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>>"Thom j." <[email hidden]> >> Ok Ok Ok Guys. It's a nice dream but who would handle the funds >> of this Fiasco? Who would control the funds coming in & going out? >> Lastly Andrew is right! Do you honestly think Sierra or Papy would >> raise an eyebrow at $12,500 or $50k or maybe even a $100k? >> I highly doubt it. No let me take that back!! No Way! Yes it is sad >> but it is true!! Sorry Folks.. Thom_j. > > >It's just a delusional idea. We should let it rest before it becomes >embarrassing. Like people who think there's gonna be a GPL2.

Below is a copy of my post from the GPLEA forum. It COULD happen but not without a lot of work. It really depends on what we REQUIRE in the PATCH and how easy it is. I worked as a programmer etc. for over 20 years and I iknow there are apparent "simple" changes that are virtually impossible or at least commercially unviable, yet there are what look to be apparent huge chyanges that can take a few hours or days to do. An example might be the 64 tracks limit, this could take an hour or a few days. Whilst many would obviously not want to pay for that, it could be a bonus in a general package. [copy of post] I've just scanned the game boxes littering my shelves, none of which i play anymore or indeed played much anyway after June last year when I got GPL. Theres about �300 ($450) worth. GPL has improved beyond all recognition from the original with fabulous new tracks, texture updates, car updates, add on tools etc. etc. All provided by individuals who had the passion and dedication to spend hours and hours providing these for free. Papyrus is however a business and time spent must be cost-effective. I'm pretty sure that if we could organise this, get sufficient funds to finance the project it would be done. Most GPL fanatics have already spent the best part of $200 with Papyrus, we bought the various Nascar games to convert the tracks and we bought N4 out of curiosity to see what they'd made of the GPL physics engine, but most of us (me inc) will never play this game. It just sits there waiting for an N4 to GPL converter. I'm on record for saying that I'd pay highly for a GPL2 and that I don't think simulations of this calibre whould be lumped in with the general games market in terms of cost. By it's very nature, GPL and many flight sims will not be chart-toppers and indeed would have a very small consumer base. If we don't fund these properly they will never get made. As WSC is also being developed for the PS2 etc. and will (I beleieve) have many "aids" and such to make it more attractive to the none hardcore sim fan they will at least have a shot at being commercial succesfull. In the appplications market, this is already accepted and you pay more (often significantly more) for a product with a smaller user base than one with a larger user base. If we really want anything to happen with GPL in terms of a patch then we have to be serious. If you wont give $25, sorry, you ain't serious. Me, I would like a shot, plus I'd make an extra contribution for all the work that the GPLEA and numerous others have put into GPL so put me down for $250. I'm not being flash, I just recognise the worth of this product and what it's going to take for Papy to consider this. OK, so how the hell do we go about this, how do we collect all these contributions etc. 1) We need someone top approach Papy. We know there are a number of people on the GPL scene who have worked with Papy (Alison Hine & Steve Smith to name but two). We need to find out if Papy will consider providing further work to GPL in return for a payment from the GPL user base. 2) If so, we then produce a list of things we'd like to see addressed (mentioned in previous posts). We need to rate them as REQUIRED and WOULD LIKES. 3) We'd also need to have some idea of the level of commitment in the GPL community and some idea of the minimum funding we could raise. 4) Papy would then have to look at our requests and provide a costing, we may have to accept the fact that we'd have to provide some funds for that service alone. It depends on how seriously Papy takes us whether they would provide the investigative and costing work for free. 5)I don't think there is any realistic way to actually force people to pay for the patch, instead we need someone in the GPL community who, maybe has access to a commercial web site and facilities to provide a means for "donations" to be collected. It's clear there are others who would pay more than $25, great, let them do so. The4y will still get the same partch that the $25 guys get, and maybe some of the leeches who don't contribute, but what does that matter, we are each paying what we feel is appropriate for the patch. If we need $20,000 and we can all see that donations are only at $10,000 then we can do more, harrass friends to pay up, give a little more, sell off our old games on ebay and contribure that. Could we do that, if you think NO then there is no point in continuing this thread. Sorry for the long post and general rant but I thought it better to spell out the sort of thing that would be required ratherthan just chip in with a "me too" post. Maxx

Herbert {or is it Calis?}, Do you understand that there is a copyright and trademark involved here? Think about it! Cheers Thom_j. "Herbert Pohlai" wrote: <snipped appropriately>

Quoted text (9 lines)

| Maybe Papy can just support this guy officially and claim | to have better support for older games than other companies? | Claim that their games have more long-term value than others? | | Ok, long-term value is probably not a good thing for the | industry: I could have wasted (aka buy-play-shelf) 50 average | games in the time I just played GPL over and over again ;) | | Calis

Still the problem IS Maxx.. Will Sierra aka Papyrus do it? "Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... <snipped appropriately>

I agree totally. It's very possible that some of the things that require fixing could be done in a very short amount of time. For instance, the P4 1.7 GHz speed-up fix. Since N4 doesn't have this problem, Papy probably already know how to fix this for GPL. I suspect this would require maybe a week to fix this. Adding hardware vertex processing (formerly known as h/w TnL) support to the D3D renderer. Adding h/w VP support to a typical D3D7 app requires changing a few lines of code, nothing more than that. Depending on how the D3D renderer has been coded this could be a very simple task. Fixing the Z-buffer artifacts (again under D3D) could be achieved with one line of code, which enabled w-buffering. Grant Reeve wrote the D3D renderer for free in his spare time. It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that for a modest sum he could be pursuaded to spruce the renderer up a bit. (still, I know it's unlikely) "Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Below is a copy of my post from the GPLEA forum. It COULD > happen but not without a lot of work. It really depends on what ><snip> > > Sorry for the long post and general rant but I thought it better to > spell out the sort of thing that would be required ratherthan just > chip in with a "me too" post. > > Maxx

...but it's not just about the P4 fix. There's the numerous D3D problems and the 65 track limit. Also there's every chance the P4 problem is actually a fast CPU problem, and the same thing may happen with Athlons over 1400 Mhz when they're released. These CPU speeds are pretty rare now, but not in two years time. "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <fgHM6.57392$[email hidden]>, "TopLoader" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > What's the subset of people who play GPL, who also have 1.4G systems orfaster,

Quoted text (10 lines)

> who also would pay for a patch on a game that only costs about $10? > Pretty small, I'd say. > > Eldred > -- > Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > F1 hcp. +25.37...F2 +151.26... > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

It all depends, if you are talking about a season update for GPL, for say 1975, with different tracks, cars and drivers, then of course, there are copyright problems. If, on the other hand, we are talking about just improving the beta D3D renderer and fixing the P4 speed-up bug, then I don't see that there's a problem. Grant Reeve wrote the D3D renderer in his own time. Papy and Sierra obviously didn't mind him doing this, and were even happy to release the d3d renderer through the Papy website (although unsupported). There's no reason why they would mind him doing some more work on it (again, in his spare time, but paid a sum by the GPL community for his efforts) and releasing a new version of the renderer. "Thom j." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Me%M6.1712$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Marc. If these programers are still under the auspicious employee of > 'Papyrus aka Sierra' how do you think the companies will feel about > this? I would think they still have some legal' entitlement to Sierra or > Papyrus for anything done by Papyrus programers whether in house > or on their own! Dont you? Remember its still a Sierra aka Papyrus > game. Do you honestly think these companies will just roll over and > say "sure go ahead and we dont want anything!" Never!! > Just some food for thought... Thom_j.

In article <UShN6.2158$[email hidden]>, "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> writes: >...but it's not just about the P4 fix. There's the numerous D3D problems >and the 65 track limit. > >Also there's every chance the P4 problem is actually a fast CPU problem, and >the same thing may happen with Athlons over 1400 Mhz when they're released. >These CPU speeds are pretty rare now, but not in two years time. Ok, the only one of those problems that affect me is the track limit. I have a 1.3G, and I have a 3dfx. By the time I get a 1.4 or higher, there will undoubtedly be more games to play. Therefore, I don't think *I* would pay for a patch... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +25.37...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

we've already seen quotes from Grant on VROC that stated 'FIXING' N4 was very difficult and timeconsuming. I really really doubt anyone at Papyrus will get the green light to work on an issue that wasn't in the GPL design specs. two options methinks.. a) don't rush out and buy the latest and greatest cpu. GPL will run for many more years on 1.3 ghz chips. b) Write the following on a piece of paper and put it on your wall: re: GPL & Highspeed CPU's "He's Dead Jim!" dave henrie "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:%JiN6.2630$[email hidden]... > It all depends, if you are talking about a season update for GPL, for say > 1975, with different tracks, cars and drivers, then of course, there are > copyright problems. If, on the other hand, we are talking about just > improving the beta D3D renderer and fixing the P4 speed-up bug, then Idon't > see that there's a problem. > > Grant Reeve wrote the D3D renderer in his own time. Papy and Sierra > obviously didn't mind him doing this, and were even happy to release thed3d > renderer through the Papy website (although unsupported). There's noreason

Quoted text (16 lines)

> why they would mind him doing some more work on it (again, in his spare > time, but paid a sum by the GPL community for his efforts) and releasing a > new version of the renderer. > > "Thom j." <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Me%M6.1712$[email hidden]... > > Marc. If these programers are still under the auspicious employee of > > 'Papyrus aka Sierra' how do you think the companies will feel about > > this? I would think they still have some legal' entitlement to Sierra or > > Papyrus for anything done by Papyrus programers whether in house > > or on their own! Dont you? Remember its still a Sierra aka Papyrus > > game. Do you honestly think these companies will just roll over and > > say "sure go ahead and we dont want anything!" Never!! > > Just some food for thought... Thom_j. > >

On Sun, 20 May 2001 03:07:05 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> we've already seen quotes from Grant on VROC that stated 'FIXING' N4 was >very difficult and timeconsuming. I really really doubt anyone at Papyrus >will get the green light to work on an issue that wasn't in the GPL design >specs. >two options methinks.. >a) don't rush out and buy the latest and greatest cpu. GPL will run for >many more years on 1.3 ghz chips. >b) Write the following on a piece of paper and put it on your wall: >re: GPL & Highspeed CPU's > "He's Dead Jim!" >

or do as I suggested in my post in an earlier thread