Modder Solves 'GTA Online' Loading Time Problem, Gets Paid By Rockstar For It
from the mods-are-your-friend dept
When it comes to how the video game industry interacts with modding communities, it can be frustrating just how often companies see modders as a menace. Nintendo has a long, long history of treating mods as a threat to its control, but it is certainly not alone. But modding by and large is not a threat to game makers. Actually, it's a boon. Mods tend to make games more interesting to more people and can often lengthen the lifecycle of a particular game.
And sometimes a mod can simply fix a game. That is what a coder, going by the name t0st, did for the long loading times in Grand Theft Auto Online.
A couple of weeks ago, we reported that a Grand Theft Auto Online player sick of the game’s notoriously long load times took matters into his own hands, broke out the disassembler, and crafted his own fix. The long load times were due to the inefficient way that the GTA Online developers chose to parse and then sort the data in a large multi-megabyte JSON file.
The fix—created by a coder known as t0st—resulted in a 70-ish percent decrease in loading times, going by t0st’s own informal benchmarks. For players suffering from the JSON parsing issue, this means that they only have to wait perhaps one or two minutes to enter a GTA Online game, rather than the six-plus minutes they were previously stuck watching the loading screen.
Now, it's easy to see how Rockstar Games could have handled this poorly. The company could have chosen to feel embarrassed by this modder fixing its product. It could have simply seen a change in coding for its game through a mod as a threat. It could have claimed that all of this was unauthorized and therefore copyright infringement.
Instead, Rockstar reached out to t0st, reviewed his work, and paid him for it.
In the two weeks since t0st’s fix was made public, GTA Online developer Rockstar got in contact with t0st and acknowledged that t0st had indeed fixed a legitimate issue with the game and that he’d be receiving a $10,000 payment under Rockstar’s bug bounty program.
It's worth noting that there is no indication t0st did this work because of the bounty program. He or she appears to simply be a fan of the game but not the loading times. By not seeing everything through a prism of control, Rockstar got its game fixed.
All of this serves as a reminder that the biggest fans of good content can be the biggest contributors to that content in ways that mean more interest and sales for the game. If you let them.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bug bounty, gta, gta online t0st, modders, support
Companies: rockstar
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Everybody knows JSON is SLOW.
"Rockstar" is clearly stupid. So it's no wonder that they're encouraging "modders". After lose control of their product, MAYBE they'll learn.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Every character in the first Grand Theft Auto is a more interesting person than you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I dunno I think random hooker model 74 might be slightly less interesting.
Can we see how he takes a pipe to the head and compare?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You calling content creators stupid now, blue? Why do you hate content creators so much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shouldn't they fix it before releasing the game?
all normal game developers can see load time as serious problem that needs to be fixed immediately. Check https://meshpage.org to see how I solved the same issue in my 3d engine. Its just lazy if you fail to fix issues like this before releasing your game.
there are only small number of features that require this treatment. Its basically just frame rates and load times that need to be profiled and fixed. So its not endless work amounts to get it working. But it needs to be done before releasing your game, not after end users complain about it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Nobody believes you, Pulkinnen. Your idea of "fixing" bugs is to kill the public domain and demand the government to destroy Pixar so you can afford your mansion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
they dont have to believe me when my message has link to a proof. Data is available if they want to check the claims. If they're lazy and don't bother to click the link, we can't really help them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
we don't have to believe you at all, copyright shill
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
scientific method is clearly too difficult for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Fam, you wouldn't know the scientific method if it gave you triplets up the ass, but that's hardly surprising for a cunt who thinks coding a Roblox clone that looks like it's made in China means the government is obligated to kiss his footprints.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
People aren't as dumb as you want them to be. They can check the past comments you made where you claimed that map sales were necessary for underground rail systems to fund their maintenance.
Your proof is garbage, which is why you have to rely on a UK teen shitposting about your trash 3D engine on a wordpress blog to shill for harsher copyright enforcement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
so you lost your reading skill sometime between the past comments and the current message? Maybe you can go back to primary school to learn the alphabet again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, numpty, it means people read your past comments and recognize that you're a waste of space trying to fleece victims to pay for bloated software, like the kind of scanners in India profiled by Jim Browning. The truth hurts, doesn't it bhenchod?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, it means we're familiar with your delusional fantasies and are requesting something we haven't laughed at 1000 times already.
Do you have any new material, or just a rehash of old jokes?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"Data is available if they want to check the claims"
Where?
"If they're lazy and don't bother to click the link,"
Do you have a link to the commits and bugfixes, not the homepage to your horrifically badly designed website that everyone's already laughed at back when you were complaining about buses?
Go on, link to the actual article that explains how you fixed the bugs, not your useless front page that gives nobody any information about wtf you're meant to be looking at.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
web browser dev console has performance tab that clearly displays actual measurement results of every web site on the planet. It only takes little amount of effort to check any performance claims by checking the nice graphs and call stacks that browser performance profiler gives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What has wed page loading optimization got to do with game loading, especially as one is organize the data to suite an existing loader, and the other write a loader to meet the games requirement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
maybe you need to check the url mentioned earlier. it might clearly explain how web page load time and game might be related. basically my web page is running a 3d engine, just like any of your games...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And that might be worth looking at if GTA Online was a browser game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
2:1 he doesn’t actually know that and despite his claims of being a self proclaimed coding god doesn’t know what the json at question in the bug is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"basically my web page is running a 3d engine, just like any of your games..."
Oh wow. Actually conflating a sandboxed html script with...a dedicated game engine designed to pull all the performance out of a high-spec GPU.
God damn, tp is hitting Baghdad Bob-levels of dunning-kruger on this one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So, not the bug fixing information you claimed? Ok..
Real coders allow access to tickets and patches.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This profiling data you get from the browser's profiler shows the status of the 3d engine load times after the bug fixes. I.e. the actual current status of the software development activities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GTA Online isn’t a browser game, shitbucket.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
profilers exist for other platforms than web platform. And my web site was mentioned in hope that you'd realize that I dont require rockstar to implement some impossible requirements that I haven't yet implemented myself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
“…give me traffic because holy shit my numbers are way down this dec—I mean, ye—sorry, I meant ‘week’.”
Your website, and your constant crawing about it, is a prime example of unearned arrogance. If your shit is so good, how come nobody but you ever talks about it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
maybe finding my web site from the flood of 2 billion other websites is more difficult task to people like you...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Might not be so “hard to find” if what you were doing was relevant to literally anything else in tech right now. But considering how the output of your software looks like shit a basic-ass 3D modeling program could’ve put out 25 years ago, are you sincerely surprised that the only way people hear about your shit is when you blather on and on about how you’re so goddamn good at something damn near everyone else can do better?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
since everyone else can do it. That includes yourself. Please explain what exactly you did for the benefit of human kind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Irrelevant. Your inability to adapt with the times — that is, your inability to let go of a passion project that is so far behind the times that you’re essentially drawing doodles on cave walls during the gotdamn Renaissance — is relevant here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
why are you requiring other people to do things that you yourself cannot or will not do?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I’m not requiring you to make something as good as what’s on the market today for…whatever the fuck your thing does. 3D modeling? Memes? What-th’fuck-ever. What I want you to do is two things:
Admit your shit is so behind the times that even the Amish think you’re off your rocker; and
You’re free to refuse. Regardless of your choice, we’re still free to laugh at how out-of-date your software is compared to stuff that came out more than a decade ago, and how you’ve built up a lot of unearned arrogance/ego as a result of simply making a thing. Free 3D modeling software is more advanced than your shit. Hell, the GNU Image Manipulation Program is more advanced than your shit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
they didn't have 3d engines running in browsers a decade ago, and my stuff already promises to teleport your animations all over the world. This basically means that when you spend small amount of time creating animation with the builder tool, you can not only show it to your family, friends, or local neighborhood, but the whole world is able to see it, as long as you can get url first passed to them. This kind of global standards that ensure 3d graphics works on every computer on the planet, simply did not exist decade ago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technically, they kinda did.
So does HTML5. I don’t see you outdoing that with…whatever the fuck your thing is. And people were showing off their animations all over the world well over a decade ago — I mean, ain’t you ever heard of Flash?
Again: Literally everyone was capable of doing this a decade or more ago, either through Flash files or through video files/YouTube. You’re not only offering nothing new with your shit, you’re offering something so outdated that Flash — which was officially killed earlier this year and is no longer supported by any major browser — still has more support than your pipe dream of a program. Imgur users can share their stuff with more speed and efficiency than with your bullshit program.
Yes, they did. Blender was first released in early 1994; it has since become one of the more ubiquitous programs in the 3D modeling arena. Before you start in: Of course it didn’t run on “every computer”. Nobody could run Blender on a potato of a computer. But its output could be exported to a number of formats that allowed for the sharing of 3D animation/sculpting. (It even exports in the widely used WebM format now, which your shitty-ass program isn’t even remotely capable of doing.)
Your head is so far up your ass that you can probably taste your lunch while it’s in your digestive tract. You sincerely have no fucking clue what you’re talking about here — and your program, such as it stands today, is worse at everything it does than literally every other program, free or paid, that can do what it does. You will never achieve anything close to the kind of widespread usage that WebGL, Blender, GIMP, or any other graphics program/engine has achieved to date.
Much like Shiva Ayyadurai, nothing you do with your program will matter because other people already beat you to the punch with better programs/standards. They’re continuing to whip the llama’s ass while you keep your head firmly up yours. Whatever you thought you could accomplish in all the time you’ve spent working on this thing you thought would/could change the world will never happen — ever.
Go look in the mirror and ask yourself if continuing development of a program that will, like you, die in obscurity and indifference is the fate for which you’re fighting. If it is? You didn’t look long enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"they didn't have 3d engines running in browsers a decade ago"
They do now, and you failed to sell your worthless unusable software to fill that gap before other people filled the need. Congratulations on admitting that you failed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Mate, give it up, move on. I've been there. I used to write my own 3D system for every game I wrote. Now we have Unreal Engine or Unity. What the hell can your old code do that these systems can't?
Doing it that way eventually takes a price from your sanity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
unreal just dropped their html5 support, so at least "run in a browser" is one candidate for such feature.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do me a favor: Put all the bullshit about web browsers aside for good. Assume you’ll never need a web browser for your 3D graphics work for any reason. Then answer this question:
Why would anyone working in 3D graphics today ever choose your shit over Blender, Unity, Unreal, Source Filmmaker, or any other 3D graphics program?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Well, maybe my shit works better than the tools mentioned above...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Narrator voice: it did not. It truly did not.
The fact that you're still here begging for mansion fund donations instead of trying to source for projects that would find your software remotely useful is, in itself, proof that nobody thinks your code is worth the toilet paper it's scribbled on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
The tech can still work better, even if noone has seen it yet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
So it doesn't exist, or it's not available for public use? All we get is a "Maybe it works, lol"?
Again... How is any of this even going to remotely convince anyone to give you money?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It exists and it is available for public use, but noone has yet bothered to check it out.
You also refused to look into it and noone here yet knows "what features are required to get 3d model to the screen with it"...
If they cannot get 3d model to the screen, then its completely impossible that anyone has seen the actual limits of the technology... People are claiming that it has tons of limitations and thus it's unsuitable for real use, but noone can even get 3d model to the screen with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Or - hear me out, hot take coming through - if your users cannot do what your "3D model to screen" program is supposed to do, nobody is going to care about your technology limits. Because broski, your tech is pretty fucking limited. Especially for tech that's supposed to be in the business of "teleporting animations to the Internet".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, assumption is at the core of all failures.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To wit: You assume your program is inherently and objectively superior to every other industry-standard 3D graphics program.
Christ, man, don’t leave yourself open like that. You make this shit way too easy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I already know what features are available in my tool.
all the industry-standard 3d graphics programs has significant learning curve. => they're inherently worse.
Also I own the tool, i.e. I have copyright ownership of the tool. That beats every industry standard 3d graphics programs on the planet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"all the industry-standard 3d graphics programs has significant learning curve. => they're inherently worse."
Any tool has a learning curve, and any professional tool takes more time to learn than an amateur tool. A paintbrush and a canvas have a larger learning curve than tracing paper and a pencil. That doesn't mean that every artist should just start tracing.
"Also I own the tool, i.e. I have copyright ownership of the tool"
Yes, you have ownership over a tool nobody wants to use. Bravo.
"That beats every industry standard 3d graphics programs on the planet."
Not according to the huge worldwide communities of professionals who use your competitors every day to create their work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"noone can even get 3d model to the screen with it"
You haven't supplied any reason for anyone to even try, except for wild unsubstantiated claims that it can do better than established products used by entire industries, for which you've provided some very basic video that looks outdated by around 3 decades.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sure, but the tech has been available for 8 years now. And noone bothered to look at it during that time. I call it laziness, i.e. they don't bother to do it, because they are too lazy.
You're now doing the same thing, basically you're bashing the tech without taking proper look at it. Noone has installed it yet. Once they get 3d model to screen, they can see all the 600 features that are available in the tool. Once they see that, they know three things: 1) the tool is easy to use 2) there's tons of features 3) all the combinations are working.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Because there is literally nothing your program can do, whether eight years ago or now, that can’t already be done by programs with more brand recognition, overall users, and broader support (user- and developer-side alike) than yours has ever had and will ever have. Or, if we including your “displays shit in browser natively” bullshit, nothing that other people need those programs to do.
We have taken as much a look at it as we need to, tp. We’ve seen what it outputs. That’s what matters most. And as far as that goes, the output of your program is inferior to every major 3D graphics program, free or paid, on the market today.
Quit being the second coming of Shiva Ayyadurai, tp, and give up the fucking ghost. Your program will never — and I do mean never — be anything people other than you will care about, especially people in the 3D graphics field. You will never beat Blender. You will never even be able to challenge Blender. You’re dropping into the middle of a thermonuclear war with a BB gun and a dream; do you really think you’ll win?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I already won long time ago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Sounds like Shiva did excellent job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Shiva, excellent? He spent thousands of dollars hiring Trump's lawyer to sue this website into the ground. And not only did he fail to destroy this site, he didn't even manage to get the judge to prove he invented email. He spent thousands of dollars to embarrass himself in court.
Then again given your arguments it's no surprise you'd call that "excellent".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Your contributions to the 3D graphics field amount to treading old ground from more thirty years ago and acting like it’s the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. When your life ends, nobody will think twice about your program — or you, for that matter.
You have won nothing.
Also, that crack about Shiva doing something good proves you’re nothing more a shithead troll. You carrying on this long about your pissant program is the icing on the horseshit cake.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Well, you couldn't even create a program of your own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Literally all the software I need for whatever I do on my PC in a given day (1) already exists, (2) works well, and (3) updates regularly. Why would I ever need to make my own?
also holy shit that’s such a weak-ass retort, holy shit dude, get some better fucking material oh my god
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"And noone bothered to look at it during that time. I call it laziness"
I call it bad marketing. From the laughable demos you have provided on your site to your incomprehensible bus adverts displayed to people who are not in the market for such a tool, you've provided zero reason for anyone to bother. Even here where you're actually getting people to engage with you, you've provided zero reason why they should use it above industry standard tools, other than wild claims of superiority which nobody can verify.
çIn fact, you've provided negative reasons to try, since you've made it clear than anyone using the software will have to deal with a single selfish egoist who places their own needs above those of potential customers and will refuse to allow them to improve the tool themselves. Even if your claims were true why would anyone bother using a product with such demonstrably poor support from its owner?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
They cannot even get 3d model to the screen, it's quite far fetched that they could add a working feature to the engine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You are — and I literally can’t stress this enough — the only person on this entire godforsaken ball of dirt floating in the middle of the whole fucking universe that cares about this “getting 3D models to the screen” bullshit. Everyone else is okay with static images (OH NO HOW ARCHAIC~!), video files, or some other kind of output that can be viewed independently of both the program and a web browser.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Well, the tool I'm offering is making this operation very simple. But no, they don't even bother to install the tool.
There's no way in hell that we would let people who haven't used the tool for 2 days to add features to the engine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Your program can make that “operation” simpler than drag-and-drop (if that were even possible), but if nobody is ever going to use it because they’re already outputting to images, video, and other shareable file formats (and have been for years) without any issues in getting people to look at their work, who the fuck is going to care how easy you make it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
drag&drop isn't even needed. Copy-paste is the level of sophistication required, and that only for url-fields.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
People can already do that with Imgur, YouTube, etc. That your program supposedly removes an extra step or two in that workflow is ultimately irrelevant, especially since the output of your program is vastly and objectively inferior to other programs on the market. Nobody will ever care that they can publish their work directly to the web from your program when your program can’t output anything at the same level as even Source Filmmaker.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They cannot do 3d models with imgur or youtube.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But they can publish videos and images to Imgur, videos to YouTube, and so forth. And they can offer the files with the necessary model/sculpt information for download as well. None of that is unusual for modern-day 3D graphics work. You might think it “archaic” or “1970s” or whatever term you want to use as an insult towards people who do that stuff every goddamn day, but that bullshit thinking is on (and in) your head.
You really don’t fucking get it, do you. Nobody doing 3D graphics work is out there begging, aching, on their knees pleading to God Herself for a program that lets them output their work directly to the web from the program. If someone is, they’re in a minority that can likely be counted on one hand with fingers left over.
Whatever you think makes your program superior is irrelevant to modern-day 3D graphics work and how people share it. I’m sorry that you’re so fucked up that you literally can’t work with other people — which is the reason you don’t know how other people manage their workflows and already take image/video/file exporting into account — but insulting other people for not destroying their workflows to use your shit-ass program with its irrelevant functionality and barely-1990s output won’t win you any points here.
Your dream is dead. Wake up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This is only because the operation has traditionally be impossible to implement. This is what my tool is changing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Being able to program API support for YouTube or Imgur or Gfycat into a graphics program isn’t the “impossible” hurdle you’d like to believe it is. But the issue there is whether people in general give enough of a fuck about such functionality to include it. Since no major graphics program (2D or 3D) has ever included such functionality as a native feature (so far as I am aware), that lack of inclusion obviously doesn’t bother the users of those programs.
You can keep harping on this point all you want, but most people who use programs like Blender and Photoshop are fine with exporting to still images, video, and native file formats before sharing those files on the Internet. Calling them idiots won’t make them any more likely to support you by using your program.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There is always room for another way to teleport your 3d models to the world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"teleport", seriously, you think saying that over and over makes you sound special and important but it's a stupid way of saying "upload"
oh, right, you don't like standards that everyone else uses
and nobody is asking for Blender to let people upload to filesharing sites straight from the app
go back to hating other people for existing and resenting your own existence, you gaping misanthropic asshole
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Yes.
And twitter's "tweet" keyword is stupid way of saying "bird singing".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So, you presumably created something with the flexibility of an Etch A Sketch.
That's not something to be ashamed of, and there are some people creating great images using only that tool. But, it's not something you'll find many graphic design professionals using.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Main target group for the tool and the engine is children and teenagers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Basically graphic design professionals are too incompetent to use it, so children are more suitable for learning new things.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"graphic design professionals are too incompetent to use it"
So, you will denigrate the entire industry of professionals who might think about using your software, and instead concentrate on kids - who will have to learn other software anyway as soon as they leave school because no industry would consider using your software as a result of you alienating the entire profession.
Yeah, I can't imagine why you are a failure...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
There's good reason for that. I expect that computer graphics professionals can use google search. So I make gameapi builder tool available in google search. Then I wait for either bug reports or announcements that they managed to get some 3d models done. Professionals know how to do that. After waiting for 8 years for that to happen even once, I have no other choice than declare that the whole computer graphics community is incompetent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
you're not getting reports because nobody is using your shit because they all have access to better programs than yours
that doesn't make them incompetent
that makes you worthless
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"There's good reason for that."
Yes, but it's not what you think it is.
"I expect that computer graphics professionals can use google search."
Yes they can. They also need a reason to use it to search for something specific, which you have failed to give them. Let me guess - you also didn't put anything into SEO to ensure that your site appeared in any search they did above the household names you're trying to compete with?
"Then I wait for either bug reports or announcements that they managed to get some 3d models done"
Yeah, so your marketing campaign was - set up a website, hope that people randomly stumble across it in Google, then whine when it didn't work. Oh, and set up a bus advert that the majority of people you were targeting would never see, and that the majority of people viewing it could not understand.
"I have no other choice than declare that the whole computer graphics community is incompetent."
There are many other choices. Unfortunately for you, the truth requires some introspection.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Main target group for the tool and the engine is children and teenagers."
Then you really need to work on your presentation skills to show them and their parents why they'd even want to try using your software, let alone your people skills in communicating with users who might have a problem when they try.
You might have an uphill struggle going against established courses using established tools that are valuable for teenagers to learn since they will be industry standard tools in whatever career they choose to pursue later - which they will have to do if you're admitting that your software is not intended for those professionals. But, I can see a value for a "my first 3D art" program if that's indeed what you're trying to do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So, you're saying that you will refuse any kind of feedback or collaboration with potential customers.
Hmmm... I wonder why you're not getting any users.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's no feedback. The engine contains scripting support which can solve your problem. Adding more features to the engine is not required until someone can find actual problem that needs fixing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"maybe my shit works better than the tools mentioned above"
Maybe it does, but you never provide any evidence of that other than some very basic looking demos that don't fit with the type of content anyone in the 21st century is actually trying to create. You could be the best at creating basic geometric shapes like the ones you show as you claim, but nobody's doing that right now in any real creative role.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Well, that's because I, working alone, don't have time to spend for cool looking youtube videos, when the actual 3d engine needs to be developed too. Basically I'm refusing to download other people's work unless absolutely necessary, so my demos are slightly lower quality than what is possible with the engine.
Basically you'd need actually get graphics designer to work with the engine or download the material from internet, which is no-go when the actual code needs to be done.
It's better to leave the "feature combinations" outside of my web page, and let end users discover how powerful the engine really is. Just need to check that it's possible to combine all developed features...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Understatement of the fucking millennium, everybody.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Well, that's because I, working alone"
No potential user of your software gives a crap that you opted to do all the design, development, marketing, support and distribution of the software yourself. In fact, other than giving people zero reason to even try your software to get the results you're trying to boast with your 1993-level demos, that's a good reason not to use your software. After all, if you're using a tool to create your own work, why would you depend on some random dude in Finland to give you the features and support you need when you can use another products backed by a community of thousands of developers and support forums - including professional designers who give full previews of what's possible using upcoming features, often while the feature is still in beta?
"Basically I'm refusing to"
develop your software for the needs of any actual users, we know.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Judging from what I’ve seen, it doesn’t. And even if it somehow did, it wouldn’t matter, because your shit isn’t widely available and everyone else’s is. You’re not just trying to compete with inertia from all these programs already existing and having both huge userbases and brand recognition, you’re trying to compete on that level with a program that doesn’t produce anything close to the kind of results that people can get with those other programs.
You can talk all this shit about how your program natively displays your renders in a browser, but that’s meaningless. So few people give a shit about that sort of thing in day-to-day life that your boasting means nothing to them. Most people are fine with static images (however “1970s” that seems to you) and videos on YouTube, Gfycat, or whatever. Most people would rather not have to download a whole new program or a whole new plugin so they can view something, especially if what they want to view can be viewed in a far more widely supported image/video format.
And while you go on about how your program does it all in terms of showing shit off in a browser without the need to export image/video files, everyone else in the world accepts that kind of exporting as part of their everyday workflow. Shit, even when it comes to 2D graphics, literally nobody is whining about how Photoshop or GIMP or Clip Studio or Aseprite or any other 2D graphics program doesn’t have a way to export work directly from the program to the web. Your supposed competition-killing feature means nothing to most artists, 2D or 3D, because it’s unnecessary to them.
Nothing about your program outperforms Blender, Unity, Unreal, or any other graphics program — 2D or 3D — in any way that matters. Nothing about your program does anything useful in a way that would make people switch to your clearly inferior product over existing programs with which they are already familiar. Nothing you say can change this fact, even if you think you’re talking a whoooooooooole bunch of good shit that you believe people will want to hear.
Your program is objectively worse than every other 3D graphics program on the market in every way that matters to the average person in the field. You’ll never be able to make it anything other than a low-level curiosity for some third-rate YouTube tech rant channel at best. Every hope you’ve ever had of being something special, every dream you’ve ever dreamed of your program becoming Super King Big-Nuts of the 3D graphics world, every fantasy about your innate superiority and intelligence that you’ve ever deluded yourself into believing — all of it is bullshit.
You’ve spent years working on this program, and all you still have to show for it is a tech demo that would’ve looked impressive forty years ago? You are literally decades behind what everyone else can do right now. (Hell, given the way you’ve talked about people and teams and such, you’re probably decades behind on socializing, too.)
I could keep going all day and make this comment such a pagebreaker that Mike would probably wonder what the fuck is wrong with me. (Answer: Damn near everything.) But the sad thing is that you’ll willingly ignore everything else I say here and pick one sentence that you think you can clapback at with little-to-no issue. How do I know this? Because that’s all you ever do: Instead of addressing either criticism or contempt — trust me, there is a difference — you find some thing on which you can be “technically correct” and lunge at it like a lion lunging at its prey.
You want unearned praise, unearned rewards, unearned arrogance for being something you’re not and making something no one else but you cares about. You are literally acting like Shiva Ayyadurai. Spoilers: That isn’t a good thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"unreal just dropped their html5 support"
This is not strictly true. It has been removed from the main project and migrated to a community supported platform extension, which unlike your stuff is freely available for the public to view and build upon.
Which simply opens up the conversation back towards where you're desperate to deflect it from - given that there are many tools available, why on earth would anyone choose to use your software instead of the tools that best meet their needs? No rambling about learning curves or magic tech that you won't let anyone look at after you fell out with the only people dumb enough to work with you - why would anyone choose you instead of well-established industry standard tools with more relevant feature sets?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, the reason why they removed it from the main project was because html5 has memory limitations and their cool demos are not working in html5 port because they take too much memory. So they are in uncomfortable situation that they are promising cool 3d rendering to the world, but then html5 port cannot deliver the same quality because the 2Gb of memory allocated for the html5 sandbox is simply not enough to run their basic demos.
This situation is supposedly unfixable, i.e. their demos need to take more memory than 2Gb, but html5 refuses to drop their memory limits.
So they moved it outside of the main branch, and they're slowly dropping the feature when "community" fails to keep it uptodate...
They keep developing cool features that eat more and more memory and expecting community to deliver the same features with smaller memory footprint than the original.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As true as all that may be, none of it answers the question you intentionally avoided answering:
Why would anyone choose to use your software instead of well-established industry standard tools with more relevant feature sets that best meet their needs?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
well, their tools are too much bloat and too difficult for ordinary people to use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not an answer. The tools are already industry standard tools; they’re the ones people will be either familiar with and able to learn in short order. “Bloat” is irrevelant; the tools have features that people in the industry consider relevant and useful, even if “ordinary people” never use most of them.
Again: Why would anyone choose to use your software instead of well-established industry standard tools with more relevant feature sets that best meet their needs?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This isn't true. The community is wasting tons of time dealing with tools that do not deliver proper user interface for the development.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The tools seem to deliver it well enough for literally everyone who regularly does 3D graphics work to keep using them. So what’s your explanation for that, other than “people are stupid and I am smart so fuck other people”?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You gotta be kidding? Last time I tried unity, its user interface kept responding to key presses with 5 second delay, completely unacceptable user interface for development.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Let's see... is the problem a tool used to create huge amounts of professional grade creative works not being up to the task. Or, the guy who's been complaining about the need to learn how to use a tool just doing the wrong thing?
The choice is fairly obvious where I'm sitting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
The blame goes to unity developers when they allow plugins to insert themselves to the key event handler without enforcing any time limits for the operations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Why is nobody else but you having a problem with it, then? If people are creating massive selling top level games using Unity and you can't work out how to create a simple animation, the problem is not the software.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Noone is using their tool even though you claim millions of people are using it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So... your position is that nobody uses Unity?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Guess they didn't use the those plugins, if they had no key event response time problems...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Which plugins did you install so incompetently that you found that it affected basic features that huge numbers of people use every day without issue?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It was some 360 degree video plugin from some large company.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So... you don't know what you installed, yet you're blaming the core Unity project for some issue you had using it that likely has nothing to do with the core program.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You didn't even install my builder tool and still you're blaming it for all kinds of things that don't hold water.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don't blame the software for anything. The guy who thinks that locking his code up so far that nobody can even run benchmark tests and whining that he can't demo it properly because it would require more than himself to work on the project on the other hand...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I even gave you explicit instructions how to use browser's profiler.
Do you really need this much handholding?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"I even gave you explicit instructions how to use browser's profiler."
...and I gave you an explanation of how that is useless for the types of tests people would actually want to run to verify your claims.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Required information is already available. It's not necessary to have source code or github repository available for these tests. Browsers give profiling feature for any web site on the planet, and if you cannot extract the info using that tool, it's your incompetence what blocks you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Browsers give profiling feature for any web site on the planet"
Yes, they do - and the result they return is worthless without something to compare it to. You refuse to offer older versions to test against, so I can't test to previous versions of your software. You refuse to adequately explain why your software does that others don't, so I can't test against something similar that is being displayed by a competing product.
It's like dealing with someone who says "I ran a race in 2 minutes". OK... so what? What were the times of the people you raced against, what was the distance, was it a sprint or hurdle race, etc.? Your time alone means nothing without context.
Your bus ads failed because you failed to explain any context to the people viewing them. Your attempts to convince others to use your software here have failed because you don't give any context as to why it's superior - other than to try and actively insult the many people who use other pieces of software.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Seems common problem in techdirt... I started the thread and immediately get insults...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
People with a history of supporting porn producers who sue army veterans don't get a lot of support anywhere.
Don't like it? Tough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're still disgruntled that I stepped up and supported prenda lawyers when the whole internet was bashing their copyright practises?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
you supporters a bunch of lying grifters who weaponized copyright law in pursuit of a quick buck
why shouldn't ypu catch shit for that, you public-domain-hating bitch
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, you forgot the part where they first managed to get a complete product to the market. You're just disgruntled that you have not been able to get products done.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And you think that justifies a get-rich-quick scam that, had it been allowed to go on unchecked, could’ve ruined lives? You think that justifies the lying and grifting and weaponizing of copyright law to coerce people into quick out-of-court settlements?
Christ, tp, I knew you hated both other people and the public domain, but you’re literally stumping for a bunch of heartless bastards who didn’t care if their scam fucked over people so long as money kept rolling in. Do you really think what Prenda did was legally, morally, and ethically sound on every level — or are you filled with so much motherfucking hate for the rest of humanity that you don’t care so long as you get to laugh and the pain and hurt and misery of others like it gives you a sexual thrill?
I know this is rich coming from me, but seriously, dude: Get a motherfucking life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
well when the market does not properly evaluate new products.. You realize that you've been spending whole afternoon bashing a fresh product without giving it a fair chance. And now you're horrified when one of the developers of such products opts to go with get rich quick scams instead of dealing with idiots that decide to insult the developers, bash the products without even installing it and then do copyright infringement.
I'm sure these problems we're seeing with 3d engines are even bigger in porn industry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah, I’m done with you after this. I’ve had my fun verbally kicking your ass, but now it’s just sad for the both of us…though it’s sadder on your part because you don’t know that you’re supposed to quit when you’re two feet deep instead of twenty.
I’ve seen the output of which your program is capable. I’ve looked at the possible output of the programs you would consider your “competitors”. Of the two sides, the side with the higher quality output, years of development, broader consumer/end user support, and brand recognition is easily the better one.
Whatever features your program may have that you consider “groundbreaking” or “innovative” are, at best, a curiosity. Nobody gives a shit about being able to upload content directly from a graphics program. If anything, given the myriad amount of sites a given artist to which an artist may need to upload — DeviantArt, ArtStation, Patreon, and that’s just for starters — the typical “do the work, export as an image/video file” workflow would still exist regardless of your program. I mean, can your program work with the Patreon API to help an artist post an image that’s meant to be locked behind a pay-to-see tier? If not, your program is worthless to that artist — because they can already export images in the program they already use, then upload those images to Patreon on their own terms.
The problem with your hatred of other people is that while you fantasize about how you think other people should work, you never learn (or never learn to care) about how other people actually work. I make image macros/memes in GIMP on an irregular basis; I don’t need a plugin or function that lets me upload to even one site from inside either program. Hell, I tend to save files in lossless WebP format first so I can make JPEG and PNG copies and upload whichever one suits my needs to any site I want. I doubt your program can even save output to a WebM file (static or animated), and the overwhelming majority of websites don’t accept WebP files as image uploads (I know for a fact that Imgur doesn’t). So I wouldn’t need your program’s supposed “killer app” functionality at all, since it wouldn’t do anything to change my workflow.
And you can’t even do that right because you piss people off before you even have a chance to scam them. That is why hating all of human existence is bad for you, tp.
You’ve done nothing to deserve mercy, fairness, or consideration for your precious wafer-thin fee-fees.
We’ve all seen the output of your program. We don’t need to know how it works on the input side to tell you its output sucks.
Quoting your words back at you is Fair Use. Do something about it, bitch.
…fucking what
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Since you didn't bother to try the product, you completely misunderstood what features are available in the program. Hint: it does not provide upload feature, you can use whatever ftp client of your choosing to push the material to your own web server.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Again, if your software doesn't even allow for uploads, calling it revolutionary because it "teleports animations to the Internet" is meaningless marketing drivel.
I'm just also going to note that for a software you claim to be aimed at children, you also expect them to be capable of understanding ftp clients. While also calling design experts "stupid" and "incompetent" for refusing to use your software.
As for the Prenda Law bit, I'll also add that you forgot the part where one of the team is in jail for five years, the other for fourteen, and the last killed himself by alcohol poisoning. So yes, thanks for putting out a trash piece of software and using convicted criminals as your role models.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Well, upload feature has debious history behind it. MegaUpload famously introduced that feature, and they're now fighting extradition to the united states to face copyright trial. Since I know the history behind various features, I can avoid features which are being misused in the wild.
Anyone who does not trust the ingenious of children has no place in creating any products aimed for children. Children actually detect from miles away when grownups are treating them like trash.
They're still in better status than you do, given that they managed to get their product to the market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Anyone who does not trust the ingenious of children has no place in creating any products aimed for children"
The fun thing is that you didn't create your product for children - such a product would at least have an interface that's comprehensible by them. Admit it, you only started claiming it was for children after you were mercifully mocked for not living up to your claims of providing a feature set comparable to the professional products you claimed to be competing with, under the false impression that people here are dumb enough to fall for the "think of the children!" excuse for bad behaviour.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're seriously underestimating children. When we were that age, we were already reading amiga hardware reference manuals and creating commercial games. Any idea that children are stupid enough to not be able to use a computer programs that works in same way as any other web site on the planet is completely bullshit talk.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"When we were that age, we were already reading amiga hardware reference manuals and creating commercial games"
Part of the reason for that is that the Amiga was a popular system that encouraged such behaviour, and inspired nerd communities locally that allowed you to talk with and share with other Amiga users.
Another part of the reason is that the skills learned were directly transferrable in the real world, with the coding skills you gained a bonus during early steps in the higher education and employment worlds.
Both of these are very good arguments for learning the current standard software, not wasting time on something else. From my experience, Blender is easier to pick up than raytracing packages on the Amiga were, yet here you are calling the professionals who use it dumb because they're happy with it and its commercial equivalents.
"Any idea that children are stupid enough to not be able to use a computer programs that works in same way as any other web site on the planet is completely bullshit talk."
I'm not saying that the kids are stupid. I'm saying that they're better off learning applications with real world uses than they are wasting time on your poorly designed software, only to have to use the other stuff later anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, given that the amiga hardware died due to obsolecence in 1993, i.e. it had less than 3 years of active lifetime in the market, and noone seemed to need 68000 asm wizards after the hardware died...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, and the coding skills learned were transferrable to other chipsets, or evolved to include object-oriented and other languages using the concepts learned during that time. In other words, there was a learning curve, which did not stop with a single toolset, but it resulted in the programming landscape we see around us today.
Yet, the outcome of this in your mind is that you decide to attack the learning curve associated with professional tools used to create quality work today. Very strange.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, I hate when people are wasting their time with poor tooling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, and that is exactly why people will learn the industry standards used by millions of people, with the ability to parlay that into a career, instead of learning your rubbish.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
There's no point waiting 5 seconds every time after pressing a key.
I know it might teach children some patience, but it just makes them hate computers and the industry standard software.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"There's no point waiting 5 seconds every time after pressing a key."
Indeed. Therefore, Occam's Razor suggests that between the idea that a mature professional grade piece of software would become an industry standard despite such a glaring flaw, and there being one person in Finland who can't even remember which plugins he installed doing something wrong, the latter must be true.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
They just got lucky with selling some game and managed to invest the money into marketing... But still they can't get simple key event handler to work right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
They just got lucky with selling some game"
Christ, you don't even know what it is or what it's used for do you?
"But still they can't get simple key event handler to work right."
It seems to work fine for everybody else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
He desperately wants people to give him money so much that he'd side with convicted criminals to make that happen and pray for the demise of every designer and developer because they won't fund his Shiva Ayyadurai-type empire.
You seriously can't make this shit up. Copyright is truly worshipped by the worst scum on the planet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Only those that can actually get working products done.
Everyone else is just wasting their time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Only those that can actually get working products done."
Which is weird, because you've spent the thread railing against the makers and users of applications that get thousands of working products made every year, yet as far as we can tell not a single user in the history of your application has done such a thing with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, the 0 users of my platform don't have viable opinion, maybe they are for copyright too...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Thanks for clarifying you have 0 users, and they have 0 viable opinions, and they have 0 viable opinions on copyright.
Copuright, especially in your dream world where the public domain doesn't exist, is a joke so bad that its punchline got sued into oblivion because you thought it infringed your copyright.
Meanwhile the world continues to use Blender, take the subway while referring to its maps, and sues porn trolls like your heroes in Malibu Media. Because, Tero, you're a fucking joke, and the reason why Scandinavia is so expensive when fucktards like you are weighing down their welfare system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think you have invented this dream world yourself
None of my messages in the last 2 years have indicated to that direction, but you still keep broadcasting the lies all over techdirt without any consideration about the truth...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180306/03423339363/project-gutenberg-blocks-access-germany-to-al l-public-domain-books-because-local-copyright-claim-18-them.shtml#c813
"The real solution is that the products which do not have active author available, will disappear from use. Once author no longer is available or refuses to give permissions, end users are not allowed to use or distribute those works, and thus their use gets smaller until it completely disappears and there will be room for newer products to take their place."
Your own words, broski. Mic drop.
Get fucked like one of those porn girls your daddy John Steele tried to film.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You can analyze the words any way you like, but that clearly says completely different message than your "public domain must disappear" BS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So, how is "products which do not have active author available, will disappear from use" not a call for the public domain to be removed?
It's certainly not a recognition of reality, since there are thousands of popular public domain works (and non-public domain works) in all genres of art that remain popular long after their original authors died. Some for longer than anyone reading this thread have been alive for. So, the only way to read that is that you're demanding that the removal is forced.
So, what is your meaning of your own words?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, during the copyright period of 70 years, the number of copies available in the world will decrease, and some products will disappear from the world, and only the most popular products will remain for the public domain... Did you think that all the products should be available in the public domain period? That's not how it works. The less popular products will simply be forgotten.
Basically the copyright cutter will drop 98% of all products produced before the 70 years has elapsed. The public domain still exists, and some products will be freed from copyright, but only if the product survives that long time. Only time tested products will be freed, not all of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This might hurt your tiny little brain thinking about it, but popularity has nothing to do with whether something gets protection.
Look, you yourself called for a solution for older things to be destroyed or wiped out from the world so newer things can take their place. It's why you keep lurking here bitching and moaning that people would rather use open source Blender than your bloatware.
You got caught lying, Pukeinnen, the least you can do is admit to it instead of digging yourself into an even deeper hole.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
making further copies is not allowed while the copyright period is ongoing. Every product will have 70 years time to disappear from the world, and if enough new products replacing the material are not produced, then some of the remaining ones will enter public domain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Overlooking the fact that none of what you said actually disproves your lying... You seriously think that's how works get approved for the public domain? They have to fade into obscurity and have no copies made, unless your new shit is proven incapable of replacing it - at which point you produce copies of the old stuff, which you expressly demanded that no copies be made of to start with?
Again, you got caught lying. You got called out on your claims that old stuff needs to due forever, you denied it, you were proved to be lying. Doubling down like this is just sad, Pukeface.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Basically there are number of situations where product might disappear:
1) too few copies available in the world
2) base technology disappears first, for example compact disks are one candidate tech that cannot be read in the future.
3) some groundbreaking tech replaces the format, making the products obsolete
4) users lose the copies by hard disks or media getting broken
5) hardware platforms disappearing
6) software standard evolution
7) interface availability (for example's twitter's api might not be available in the future, so the tweets might disappear)
8) earthquakes killing server setups
etc...
All kinds of things can happen that prevents the product from entering public domain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Basically there are number of situations where product might disappear"
Yes, and the rest of us want to stop that happening so we're not overrun by the worthless shit you and your type produce.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"No, during the copyright period of 70 years, the number of copies available in the world will decrease, and only the most popular products will remain for the public domain"
I agree, 70 years is way too long and causes problems with orphaned works which should be rectified by reducing copyright terms.
"Did you think that all the products should be available in the public domain period?"
Yes, I do. For all of human history that people have built upon, it should be available to see.
"The less popular products will simply be forgotten."
That's fine if it happens naturally. I just have a problem with assholes like you trying to delete it artificially because there's no way the turds you produce can compete.
That's your problem - you provide nothing of value, so you want to destroy the value of those that came before you to have any worth. That's not how it works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
well, I rely on stuff like adobe flash to disappear from the world and leave room for webassembly based technologies like my gameapi. It'll take a while for all flash content to disappear, but soon there will be huge demand for any animation technologies to replace the lost works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Bless him, he actually thinks the death of Flash means people will be lining up in droves to use his trash instead of HTML5, WebGL or Unity. Except that other projects exist for Flash-compatible browsers like Chromium-based apps, and archiving projects like Flash point, so Flash is still supported. It's certainly not going to be the Meshpage windfall you're desperately hoping for.
Get owned, idiot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Lets look each of them separately:
1) html5 has like several years lead time before it can produce any worthy animation technology. So I'm ahead of the curve by about 8 years.
2) WebGL is similar, i.e. the actual software that runs the animations are simply not existing and lead time (from scratch) to working animation software is 6 years at least
3) Unity is in best shape, but it already shows signs of being too bloated and slow
4) Unreal engine is dropping browser support, so no need to talk about it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And yet here you are, complaining that everyone is too incompetent to use your "child-friendly" software. No angel investors, no ad support, literally nobody but you think your trash is worth touching.
If your software was this ahead of the curve and so revolutionary you would have listed examples of your teleported animations. Instead you're here, whining that a developer paid a modder for fixing a problem with their game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
We give you the chance of the lifetime to be first person in the world to see the awesomeness of the technology.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Lmao, who the fuck is this "we"? You already made it clear that you can't stand working with other people. If your tech is so damn revolutionary you'd be flogging it off to game developers and animation studios, not hanging out here begging for cash to build a mansion you've done nothing to deserve.
Good job having a Github that redirects to a 404 by the way, really shows how legitimate your scam is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The problem is - even if the tech was as awesome as you claim it is, you've made it clear that anyone using it would have to deal with a self-obsessed delusional individual who wouldn't let anyone else but himself support or develop the software, and will block them from even considering using public domain material in their work.
Why would any creative person even consider installing your software, when you've made it clear that you consider it your mission to stifle said creativity?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Again, you talk a lot of shit about the vastly more successful competitors to you, and there's a reason why nobody uses your application - and it's not because content created with Flash hasn't disappeared.
How pathetic must your existence be - watching as thousands of hours of high quality content is created every month using your competitors' software, increasing exponentially in quality and quantity. Yet, you tell yourself that your geometric shapes and incomprehensible user interface will surely bring people to you without having to do so much as basic SEO once Flash animations disappear from the web.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"well, I rely on stuff like adobe flash to disappear from the world"
Erm, it basically has. Why are you still a failure if that's all you were waiting for?
"It'll take a while for all flash content to disappear"
It won't all disappear, and while you're waiting the people using your competent competitors are already creating works far superior than yours.
"soon there will be huge demand for any animation technologies to replace the lost works."
There's more animation produced today than there ever has been. You missed the boat. You failed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
There is room for everyone in the market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And yet here you are, angry that Blender and other open source technologies are muscling in on your mansion fund.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
When I started, the boat was leaking and everyone considered it
worse than titanic. After some software modules, like matrix calculations, primitive 3d models like spheres, cubes and cones,
the boat was intact, but the customer sections were under a mud. Then texture support and large meshes allowed customers to do great looking models, it's as if the boat had kitchen fixed. Network operations and async loading made loading 3d models a breeze. Then .obj file support allowed looking other people's models downloaded from the internet. Sponza was used as a test case for .obj support. Virtual reality gadgets and holographic screens were implemented.Then binary file support allowed improving performance. Then package files and character animations was implemented for key-frame animations. Tons of performance measurement and fixing allowed performance of the engine and the web page to shine. Now finally gltf materials and gltf animations/skinning was implemented.
And now it's all complete package. The boat is ready for business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I dunno about you, but a Web based rigging tool that doesn't even come with a guide is not what I'd call ready for business. I'll give you props for the video where you created a fuzzy cube using an interface suspiciously similar to Unreal's, which I'm guessing you didn't get their permission for. Also good to see your only linked review on the site is to the dead 2017 blog that says your site is terrible so it proves you haven't killed off all modicum of honesty in that empty vacuous hole you call a heart.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It doesnt need unreal's permission. It was implemented long before I had access to unreal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I would explain this permission thing slightly more, but unfortunately it seems there's too little space in the techdirt's columns that reading the material becomes too difficult. But this is interesting topic and need to be opened slightly better before you have proper view of what is the real problem. Ask me sometimes about "maze problem" and I'll explain it further.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
That'll be for the courts to decide. Have fun defending yourself - but seeing that you support trolls like Prenda Law going after single individuals you should have no problem with this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'll give a hint. The tech that unreal, blender and my gameapi is based on, cannot properly survive copyright's substantial similarity -test. All of them are using the same area in software, basically graph data structure, but from certain place in cpu instructions/programming language that there is little room for innovation in the graph. But maze idea will solve it: it's possible that two players mapping the same maze will result in identical maps even though they are independently creating the maze maps. Basically the defense for similarity claims between unreal and my builder's graph data structure is based on this maze idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Independent invention. Brave attempt to assert that - but I'll use the same counterarguments you used yourself since 2015: you simply looked at other people's content and got "inspired", instead of not looking at other's works and risked infringement.
Of course since your own github leads to a broken webpage, have fun trying to prove your innocence. But you think Prenda Law should be allowed to sue dead people without penalty, so you'll gladly meet the charges of copyright infringement, won't you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"The tech that unreal, blender and my gameapi is based on, cannot properly survive copyright's substantial similarity -test"
Which is clearly why they've been around for over 2 decades and have been massively successful.
Are you saying that they haven't been tested, or is this just another example of you being such a bitter failure that you can't think of any reason that anyone would use your software short of the nuclear destruction of all competitors, and your fantasy is that this will come soon?
If the latter, the funny thing is that you'd still fail. Your output is so bad, your inability to listen to users and collaborate with other people so strong, that even if that happened, a far superior open sourced product would appear to replace you in months and you'd be back to whining in moments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I haven't heard of any lawsuits targeting unreal's graph data structure.
Probably because anyone who would have possible claims knows that a lawsuit for that subject would be very risky and probably not worth the effort.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Probably because anyone who would have possible claims knows that a lawsuit for that subject would be very risky and probably not worth the effort."
More likely because they're not doing anything illegal, and nobody's dumb enough to try using that tactic as a shakedown measure.
That must make you really sad - your only hope for any success is for someone to destroy your competition for you, and nobody is even considering doing so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
They're slowly destroying themselves by collecting huge amount of bloat to their software. Once the download time and hard disk space taken by their software grows larger, they will have bigger problems maintaining the codebase, and soon the bugs and lack of progress with the development will kill their operations.
Basically it doesn't need any "someone", when the software vendor can do it themselves very easily.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"They're slowly destroying themselves by collecting huge amount of bloat to their software. Once the download time and hard disk space taken by their software grows larger, they will have bigger problems maintaining the codebase, and soon the bugs and lack of progress with the development will kill their operations."
That happens a lot with mature software operations. You know what usually happens at that point? The project is forked and maintained by developers who have different priorities to those of the main project, and users who share those priorities move to the new project. Then, if enough users are lost, the main project picks up on those priorities to retain users and improves it for everyone else.
In the case of non-FOSS proprietary projects, what usually happens is that a competing FOSS project appears and replicates the feature set of the main project until it's mature enough for people to switch. Or, and this does often happen, people just refuse to upgrade to the newer version of the software and stick with the less bloated versions until the product is fixed for their needs. That's partially what the plugin system you seem to hate is for - if features cause bloat in the main product that affects the usage of more basic features, they're rollout out into optional plugins so the user can choose their required toolset.
You know what doesn't happen? Popular products completely disappearing and people having no choice other than to use a vastly inferior project set up by a guy who hates users and collaborators.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, guess what, My software is built from ground up as a large collection of plugins. If you don't like the bloat, you can easily get rid of it by just not using it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yet, here you are whining that everybody has accepted that choice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
HUH?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You said that you give people the choice - accept the features I give you or don't use the software. People have accepted that and chosen not to use your software. Yet, here you are whining that nobody's using it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's not like that. The user community is not able to extend the software because they're lazy and don't bother.
As soon as there is any effort to actually use the existing features, I'll enable feature that allows users to extend it. But it's not enabled by default.
Did you think I didn't implement it yet?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"The user community is not able to extend the software because they're lazy and don't bother."
Demonstrably untrue, as evidenced by the many open source projects they contribute to.
"Did you think I didn't implement it yet?"
It doesn't really matter. If you're offering a piece of software that's locked down until one arrogant dickhead who calls his potential users lazy and incompetent deems it time to allow them to use the software as they wish, you're offering a piece of unreliable shit that nobody in their right mind would even attempt to use. Even if your code is as perfect as you claim, it's not worth the risk of entering in to such an ecosystem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, bleeding edge has always been unrealiable shit, and my offering is no exception to the rule. They don't call it bleeding for no good reason. It always has significant gotchas before you get actual technology working. It's like going back to research projects where the tech is being built from ground up using custom shit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Well, bleeding edge has always been unrealiable shit"
There's no way your software is "bleeding edge".
"It always has significant gotchas before you get actual technology working"
The problem isn't the technology. The problem is the arrogant dickhead in charge of the software who refuses to work with anyone, thinks he can dictate to his users when, where and how they can use it and what they are allowed to create with it, can't market worth a damn and calls potential users incompetent and lazy when they decide not to buy into that mess.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You'd be arrogant dickhead too if you were able to get software implemented.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I work with talented software developers every day, and I can honestly say that none of them have been the same kind of arrogant, self-centred type of shit that you are.
But, then, they have successful careers with many thousands of people happily using their software and quality collaboration with many of their peers. If you weren't such an asshole, I'd take pity on your failure, but since it's clear that you caused it to happen through your own behaviour... meh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don't think there is any other type in techdirt.
That's the whole purpose of the site, so that all the assholes
can receive the critique.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Everybody already knows you're an asshole, tardfucker. You said so that you're a professional troll.
If me dropping the thread where you sucked the cock of Disney so hard it'd make a whore blush wasn't embarrassing enough for you I can find the post where you shilled so hard for Malibu Media I confused it for Colette Pelissier NTR fanfiction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"I think other developers are dumb and that's why I deserve their money." - Tero Pulkinenn
Copyright's best and fucking brightest, ladies and gentlemen...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Your computer being a potato that couldn’t even power GLaDOS’s slow clap function isn’t an issue that Unity can’t solve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"Eveeybody is using Blender and Unity, nobody is using Tero's crapware"
and
"the community isnwasting tons of time dealing with tools that do not deliver proper user interface for the development"
Are mutually exclusive concepts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Animation beyond the likes of a rotating cube takes a lot of effort as it involves not just building a model, but modifying if to moves in a more or less realistic movement. It is a complex problem, and that results in complex software. For instance rigging a model with 'bones' is a simple, for the problem, a means of animating 'living' things.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I think you forgot to check how I'm implementing rigging in my web page. It is like 300 lines of code to support gltf animation/skeletons/skinning...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If there was something inspiring on your web page, and clicking images worked with he latest Firefox, I might have seen something worth investigating. In other words, where are the demonstrations that show your program has any ability in the rigging and skinning departments?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
https://meshpage.org/396
This is the very first demonstration in my web site. keys cvbnmfghjklertyui change the animation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You ignored the critical part of the comment, and that is getting clicking images to work with Firefox on Linux. Like you link, all I get is a page with your menu bar. The rest is blank.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It already works ok. I fixed that bug like 2 weeks ago. You're still kinda outdated with that bug.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
you can post call stack from browser dev console if you still have problems with it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Bug present with Debian testing and Firefox .78.8.0esr, working under Manjaro 78.8.0esr.
A hint, give people a clue by listing keys and action under the animations, especially as that approach is non standard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You’ll have to forgive tp; he doesn’t believe in standards set by other people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
usually you need to write your own version of the feature before attempting to implement existing standard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Like many things in your life, you have that ass-backwards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh course, no visitor to your website would ever know that, since those instructions are not available.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, I implemented the rigging/skinning/skeletons last weekend, so there's still tons of things to do. I didn't even put screenshot of the result to the front page. Also my web site doesnt have a field for additional text...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
A major failing if you want to sell software...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
its in my todo list already. Its actually important feature for copyright purposes...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes yes, you’ve talked at length before about how you hate the public domain. Is that because it’s filled with works by those pesky little fuckers called “other people”, whom you hate so very very much? Does it scare you to know that other people are building on the works of the past? Do you sit in a corner and cry about how even you can’t avoid the public domain because even you build upon the works of others and stand on the shoulders of giants?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
you must admit that dealing with "other people" is always very annoying operation. You never know when they change their mind and drop support. Some even outsource all the support from microsoft, and I hate nothing more than having to deal with Bill Gates...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
we get it, you hate everyone, including yourself
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
well, I blame people who created social media. They couldn't get their software to work properly so they made huge mistakes. One of the mistakes was allowing humans to participate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Who else do you suggest people be social with?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"you must admit that dealing with "other people" is always very annoying operation"
It is, but people have to do it every day, whether they call that "being gainfully employed" or "creating a meaningful and useful product".
But, you hate your potential users, hate would-be collaborators and hate listing to anything that you don't personally want, so you have no real chance of doing the latter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"Some even outsource all the support from microsoft, and I hate nothing more than having to deal with Bill Gates..."
Yet, you stated above that you use GitHub to host your project, a Microsoft service that you've opted to continue to use above it competitors after Microsoft bought them. Not that Gates has anything to do with the daily operations of Microsoft any more, but that seems very dumb if you're taking a political stance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Well, the reason why they removed it from the main project was because"
...they didn't want to support HTML5 format, and rather than just drop the entire thing they open sourced the code that would allow people to do so as they wished, with the understanding that it's no longer under the direct support remit of the core Unreal project
Whereas, you expect people to run your closed code with zero ability to examine or alter code, for which you expressly refuse to allow proper benchmarks or historical data, and whose only selling point appears to be "the guy who wrote this thinks it's great".
I'm sure that most people can understand why one is a fine argument and the other is nonsense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, but the key question is WHY? HTML5 is well established technology. You're always claiming the well established tech is acceptable, but when unreal decides to drop it, it's supposedly all ok?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Yes, but the key question is WHY?"
From what I understand it wasn't a particularly popular feature compared to standard desktop and mobile development features, and most large projects make decisions to drop support for such things when it's clear that there's limited benefit to continuing active development. It's then up to the users if they wish to maintain the community development option, or switch to another tool that better meets their requirements. Most professionals in any given field will use multiple tools for multiple use cases and regularly update their toolkit as technology inevitably changes.
This is the sort of thing that happens when your project is used and developed by more than one person in a shed in Finland. At a guess, it's the sort of thing the poor souls who had the misfortune of working with you were trying to tell you when you decided to block any assistance instead of following modern development practices.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The advantage in html5 is that people who refuse to install viruses via win32 applications can also see your development via urls. If unreal requires everyone to install win32 apps to see the material, then noone is going to check the games that are being developed with unreal. Their only option is png files and youtube videos and their actual game logic has noone installing because they're afraid of virus infections. So all the game development activities with unreal are going to waste.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"noone is going to check the games that are being developed with unreal"
LOL, yeah, the sales figures for those games are really struggling. /s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"they didn't have 3d engines running in browsers a decade ago"
Both flash and java are older than a decade. By far.
"...and my stuff already promises to teleport your animations all over the world."
"Teleport"? Really?
"...you can not only show it to your family, friends, or local neighborhood, but the whole world is able to see it, as long as you can get url first passed to them."
This existed not just ten but twenty years ago. And I'd argue it's even older than that.
"This kind of global standards that ensure 3d graphics works on every computer on the planet, simply did not exist decade ago."
Once again, yes it certainly did. Java and Flash already had 3D locked down well over a decade ago. It's part of what had Gates so very very concerned about Java in the first place - that it offered platform-neutral interoperability.
And even before flash and java there were certainly working standards of 3D engines which were making the rounds in the FOSS community and heavily applied everywhere.
Man, this is like listening to an 18th-century tinsmith running an enthusiastic spiel about his version of a stagecoach, telling everyone to pay close attention to the revolutionary invention of the wheels enabling it to bear everyone around. Just add horses and a driver...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
They still cannot get even a simple 3d model to the screen.
I don't blame them, getting coordinate systems right is tricky business, and it's easy to make a mistake big enough that the model is simply rendered outside of the screen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"They still cannot get even a simple 3d model to the screen."
You keep saying this... while attacking the people who use industry standard software to create 3D models seen in movies, TV and videogames across the world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Bitch please, you've been here since, what? Four years ago boasting that your tech has been used in every mobile phone on the globe, then when asked for proof all you can show is a Macromedia Fireworks animation from the early 2000s.
You don't do shit for the benefit of humankind, you sit here and scream like a stuck pig because the fact that the public domain exists gives you erectile dysfunction. Here's a hint: the government doesn't give out mansions to wannabe Belle Delphines boasting about how much they think they contributed to the world. Hell, if you actually tried marketing your bathwater I suspect a desert survivor would rather die of thirst than drink your swill.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
well the whole reason for this question, is to narrow down the material which you take credit for. They keep boasting how blender is significantly better than what my poor web site can do and then flash files are also beating my stuff already in 1990s.... Well, when you jump from one product to the next and pick the most successful products from the market, obviously you can find some corners where my shit cannot compete. But the real competition is between individual people -- not between one person against the whole world. Thus I'm asking again: what did you get done? After we get your answers we can start comparing the results. At least I have a web page.
This is your answer? I have already explained what I did and what I didn't do. It's now your turn to explain why exactly are you here. I'm here to teleport animations to the world, and I don't need your explanations of how my shit cannot compete against the world. What I need is information about what other people managed to do themselves, not what they googled from the fucking internet. I can google stuff myself too, so I don't need your help with that task.
But finding out what the trolls on the internet managed to do is more difficult task, when I acrually have to beg for information. I feel like being jimmy wales begging for money in his web site when i need to figure out how much you're wasting time and not producing anything useful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You don't "narrow down". You literally claimed that every mobile phone runs on technology you invented, without which they would simply not function. You were asked to show what this revolutionary tech is, and all you can show is an Adobe Flash ripoff.
Unfortunately for you this is not how consumers determine what is worth spending money on. The fact that your page looks like it was made by one person isn't noteworthy in the slightest.
Having a webpage is a fucking dumb metric to rank a person's value. Any jackoff can run a WordPress domain or whatever host you use - and make it look better than something that came out of Angelfire in the late 90s.
You're kinda right there, you don't need an explanation for why people would rather use actually functioning graphics engines than your sad 3dsmax ripoff. As for your opinion that you shouldn't need to compete with the rest of the world, tough tits. Maybe go get an actual job and compete against actual human beings for a change.
Why the fuck is this necessary? So you can feed your own delusions about your self worth? So you can point at people working in a team or department and say they're not good enough, therefore they have to fund your mansion? Not everyone is goddamn Toby Fox. Not everyone has to be an independent developer to constitute a modicum of value. But then you don't see individuals or team players pissing and moaning at the rest of the planet for daring to compete with each other, like you.
Mate, newsflash. Ever since you were on this site you've been doing nothing but beg for money, because you submitted a plan to the government and they didn't build you the mansion you wanted. This is not nearly the sympathy ploy you think it is.
And this makes you better how, exactly? Does it improve the quality of your product? Does it help you compete with Blender? Does the fact that people exist who are less productive than you suddenly convince people to give you money?
And the bit about trolls is a fucking joke. I can pull up the Malibu Media article where you praised copyright trolling because you claimed to be a professional troll. If you want to know what at trolls are doing look in the damn mirror and stop expecting me to do your homework for you.
But if you must know, I spend time on this site because reading news about how abusive assholes get the punishment they richly deserve is fucking entertaining to me. Knowing that copyright is defended by a waste of space like you, whose only claim to fame is a London bus ad that got featured once on a dead WordPress blog, is fucking ambrosia. Because if you went out on the streets to talk about Meshpage and promote it as the next Pixar animation engine, you'd be laughed out of town.
Maybe if you spent time actually "teleporting animations" instead of desperately trying to dig up info on me to feel better about yourself, you wouldn't be such a tragic waste of mitochondria.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
yeah, but you didnt do it yourself so you don't know what it takes to run a wordpress site. It might be more effort than you think.,..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What the fuck does that have to do with your program being a piece of shit that no one in any field, even amateurs, would ever want to use?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh, I know full well it takes more effort than people care to admit. Because my colleague and I, among the many hats we have to wear where we work, build websites for clients and maintain them on request.
I sure as fuck am not going to tell you what they are, because those are niche websites for which we have NDAs for, and you're still going to lord your perceived superiority over me anyway, so why give you the pleasure? But thanks for the additional reminder that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"yeah, but you didnt do it yourself so you don't know what it takes to run a wordpress site. It might be more effort than you think"
I'¡d congratulate you on your comedy skills, but I actually believe that you're too stupid to know that most virtual web hosts offer this as a one click option.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
unzipping the wordpress' technology to corner of your hard disk is just the first thing to do. Most people quit after writing few articles to their wordpress site, since the actual content creation is more difficult than expected. Then inviting your friends and family to visit it and read your articles is another problem point. But internet wants the site to be more popular than "does it blend" -shoker videos or else they refuse to look at it. It takes years and years of effort before any wordpress site is even close to usable state.
so the claims that wordpress admins are doing nothing but enabling the site from hostinbg provider panel is such awful bullshit...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"unzipping the wordpress' technology to corner of your hard disk is just the first thing to do"
Yes, unless you use a host that uses something like cPanel, in which case you just click a button. Or, you use a pre-made image provided by AWS or other cloud provider where all the work is already done and you get the site ifred up in seconds after launching an instance with that image.
Are you actually so ignorant that you don't know how virtual web hosts work, or are you just such an idiot that you insist on using the most difficult option available?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Tero Pukeface seems to be married to the idea that effort needs to be rewarded in the way he feels fit. Unless it's someone else's effort in which case it has to be dumbed down to his level so he has a fighting chance.
He's not wrong that content has to be made for a website to stay relevant, but that's not the job of the website administrator - short of posting content created by the client. Then again it's clear that he has no idea how things work. By his own admission his own site isn't usable yet because it "takes years".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You can stand on those shoulders or you can condemn yourself to the labours of Sisyphus
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's not, I've done it, multiple times.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Which is THE ENTIRE MOTHERFUCKING POINT. You come here to act like your shit is the best thing ever, that you’ve made something so groundbreaking that you only need a little bit of attention to prove it’s able to compete with everything else on the market. But when presented with the absolutely unassailable fact that anything your program can do has been done better by programs available to the general public for decades — at either cost or no cost — you change the parameters of the argument so you can somehow win.
You’re literally acting like Shiva Ayyadurai. He couldn’t reasonably claim to be the sole inventor of email, so he kept moving the goalposts until he could make that claim work for him despite all evidence saying he was bullshitting people about the claim. That’s you right now: You can’t win the “game”, so you’re changing the rules in your favor. You’re trying to fuckin’ Calvinball this argument. (Spoilers: It’s not working.)
Any asshole with an email account and access to NeoCities can have a web page. What’s your fucking point?
Oh, but you do. (Before I get into that, though: “teleport”? Really? You can say “share” or “upload” or something that makes you sound less like an arrogant dipshit.)
You’re still of the mind that your program can still somehow compete with every other program that does what yours does. But it can’t — and neither can you.
Does your program do 3D animations? So does Blender. Give me 48 hours on a non-potato computer to learn Blender and I could probably do stuff that would put your bullshit to shame.
Does your program handle 2D art? So does GIMP, Clip Studio Pro, Photoshop, and God knows how many other similar programs. People who work in MS Paint could still produce images that look more advanced than what your program is capable of outputting.
Does your program let you make memes? Cool. I can go to any number of websites and make one in seconds — or use those programs listed in the previous item to do it. (Which I do. GIMP is good for that.)
And then there’s the matter of how easy it is for people to share videos and GIFs with minimal fuss. Imgur, YouTube, Discord, email, social media — all open, all able to process uploads in popular file formats for the sake of giving people a URL to share instead of having to send a bunch of files for people to download first.
Everything you claim your program can do? Everything else can do it with greater efficiency and higher quality. Nothing — I repeat, NOTHING — your program does can outshine any (and every) other program available to the mass market.
What any of us do/have done is irrelevant to the fact that you’re trying to act like your program is a gift from God instead of a flaming bag of shit on the doorstep of life. Your program is irrelevant when compared even to programs that are built into an operating system. Sure, you can keep hyping your program as if it can compete with literally anything else on the Internet. But you’re doing nothing but making yourself look like a goddamned fool in doing so.
Now quit acting like Shiva Ayyadurai. I mean, fuck — have some respect for yourself in that regard, man.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
it doesnt have to compete with everything. Just find a niche which allows some customers. I'm not going compete against airplanes, cars, trains, televions, coca cola, drinking water, laptops, electricity etc... the list is fucking endless... there's no point competing against the whole list.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You can’t and won’t find one. Everything your program can do can already be done by programs that are far more well-known and far more capable of high quality output.
Blender has you beat on 3D modeling/animation. GIMP, Clip Studio, and their ilk have you beat on regular 2D artworks. Aseprite has you beat on pixel art. I know there are 2D animation programs out there, and I can’t name a one, but they still have you beat on that front regardless. If there’s a field in which your program could exist, it’s a field where literally everyone already uses programs that are better — in every conceivable way — than your half-cocked horseshit.
Why would anyone use your shit-ass program when they can use literally any other program and get far better results?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Synfig Studio, for anybody who is interested.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"it doesnt have to compete with everything"
Not according to the idiot who comes in here whining that people like using Blender and Pixar products instead of his unusable shit and therefore he wants a free mansion for being a failure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
gimp can't do 3d animations, so it doesnt count.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If your program can handle 2D art, GIMP does still count. Stop trying to move the goalposts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
All those features need to be in the same program. Otherwise you'll be jumping from one product to another and get absurd results.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No, they don’t. That would make your shit bloatware — and it would prevent your program from truly excelling. GIMP doesn’t include 3D modeling bullshit because it’s a Photoshop clone, and that’s all it’s ever trying to be. Your bullshit is trying to apparently be Blender, GIMP, Flash, and a hundred other programs all at once. Is it any wonder, then, that nobody gives a shit about it?
So what? People do that with all other kinds of work all the time. Or do you think people who code in Notepad++ also need Notepad++ to offer GIMP-esque graphics functionality?
The only “absurdity” here is your notion that a graphics program catered to a specific field (e.g., Blender and 3D modelling/animation) needs to have functionality for every such field. It doesn’t. It never has. It never will.
That you don’t realize it is your problem. Fixing your bullheaded ignorance isn’t mine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The reason for this rule is that otherwise you'll be comparing work done by one person to the combined work of 2 million people. I simply cannot compete against combined effort of a whole country. You need to pick effort amounts that are comparable. So if I invested 2 weeks of work to produce the shit, your side need to pick something else that was implemented in 2 weeks. Comparision only works if the elements are of same type. You get type error in any programming language compilers if you try to compare elements of different size.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Am I supposed to feel sorry for you and your pipe dream because you can’t compete, on any level, with what’s come both before and after you started work on your program?
I don’t give a fuck. Neither does anyone else here. Your program is worthless; it will always be worthless. Nobody in any niche of graphical work would ever use your program since every other program available to them already does what you claim yours can do — and they do it better, in every possible way, than yours can or will ever do. And much like Shiva Ayyadurai’s “EMAIL” program, it’s nice that you can make such a thing on your own, but it’s nowhere near close to what other people were/still are doing.
You’re once again moving the goalposts. Let me plant them firmly back in reality.
Your program is being compared to Blender, GIMP, etc. because you’ve claimed it’s some sort of great fucking program. But in comparison to those programs, it’s not — in any and every way, shape, or form. The time you needed to make your program (or the time/amount of people needed for others to make their programs) is irrelevant; what your program can do, and the fact that a shitload of other programs can do it better, is what’s relevant here. I mean, you said it yourself:
But in any niche to which you could conceivably present your program, other programs already exist that can outperform your program at levels that make your program so irrelevant that it may as well not exist. I mean, shit, can your program do what Source Filmmaker can do?
You can’t compete with other programs because your program can’t do anything well enough to ever be considered competition. It’s like holding up a toothpick in front of a tank cannon: Which one do you think will win when shit gets real?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So your argument is that everyone creating software should just quit and stop creating software? None of the products have a chance to compete against the whole world, so all activity on the planet should just magically stop and we should be in a downward spiral where nothing gets done any longer?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
otherwording (or in-other-wordsing) — noun
Summarizing a point of argument in a way that distorts the point into saying something it does not and attributes the false interpretation to the person who raised the original point.
Example: You will often find the phrases “in other words” or “so you’re saying” at the beginning of an instance of otherwording.
See also: strawman; your post
I don’t typically respond to otherwording. But in your pissant case, I’ll make an exception.
My argument is that in creating software, your program will be compared to what is already out there — and how well your program performs what it does will always be the primary comparison point. Your program will always come out looking worse if it can’t perform at the same level as other programs of a similar function. In your case, if the output of your program can’t hold a candle to anything Blender or other 3D modeling/animation programs can do, nobody who does 3D modeling/animation is going to give even one (1) fuck about your program.
How long you took to make your program? Irrelevant. Whether you did it on your own or had a team helping you? Irrelevant. The output — the functionality — is the only relevant factor.
Now, if you can’t compete on overall quality, the next best thing is to find a specific niche and excel at that. As I mentioned before, GIMP excels at being a Photoshop clone — and that means it can handle pixel art, too. But Aseprite was developed as a program designed specifically for creating pixel art (static or animated). While Aseprite lacks some of the broad functionality of GIMP, what it does do well is offer specific functionality (e.g., symmetry lines, editable grids, tile mode) that makes pixel art easier to create than it would be in GIMP. Your program lacks any such niche appeal; it offers nothing that can’t already be done better by existing programs both broad-use and niche-use.
Again: My argument is that functionality of a program matters far, far, far, far more than who made it or how long it took to make it. One person could program a Blender equivalent, but it wouldn’t mean dick if their program didn’t offer similar functionality and similar quality of output as Blender.
Oh, and don’t otherword me again. It only proves that you can’t argue for your position without setting up more strawmen than a scarecrow convention.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
1) placing 3d models to web page
2) distributing all the 3d models to your friends and family via urls
3) resulting file size isn't megabytes so loading time is quicker
4) high quality rendering output
5) animation support unmatched by any tools available today
6) possibility to choose rendering output from 400 combinable features
7) shader combinations
But it's really the combination of all these features that you cannot find anywhere in the world other than meshpage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blender can output to image or video formats, and you can always share the actual render files.
Any file-, image-, or video-sharing website is capable of doing this.
The only reason this is the case is because the quality of your renders is so low as to be meaningless.
aaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahaha are you fucking kidding me look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGw1gQe4PDw and tell me your program can even come close to that kind of output
…except no, literally every 3D modeling program (and a wide number of 2D art programs) have support for animation
this doesn’t even make any fucking sense what the fuck are you even talking about
you’re not even fucking serious any more holy fucking god you are literally braindamaged if you think Blender doesn’t have support for shaders oh my fucking god you’re trolling yourself I can’t even
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You need to be able to interactively rotate the damn model, otherwise you can't see the beauty of the actual rendering. none of the image, video or render files offer this possibility.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Which is why people can save the render/sculpt file and offer it to others for full viewing/manipulation. Or do a turnaround video/render that shows the model at multiple angles, possibly with different lighting effects. JFC, man, your program will never outperform Blender in any meaningful-to-the-real-world sense.
And by the by, most people don’t give a fuck about being about to “rotate the damn model”. Some people do, sure. Everyone else is fine with either static shots or videos.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"You need to be able to interactively rotate the damn model"
You have competitors that let you do that too. What is the use case for your crap that is not met by those?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The fun thing about this delusionist is that he provides ways to disprove his wild claims: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZxCE-RsBDc
Impressive work... if you're in 1992 and using an Amiga 500. Today, not so much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Even if that were the case, it'd be leagues better than your proposal to kill the public domain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"So your argument is that everyone creating software should just quit and stop creating software?"
Only the whiny incompetent failures.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This time spent for the program is directly related to the real cost of the program to the whole world. I.e. What customers need to pay to get access to the functionality of the program. Cost is significant factor for customers, and software vendors are trying all ways to hide the true cost from the customers, including free software, open source software etc are just a way to hide the true cost of the software produced. It's not the money amount that you pay to get access to the product where the cost comes from, but it's the effort humans need to spend to create the work in question that matters. Thus end users must choose products are cheap to produce so that the remaining effort can be used to wide range of different products.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
…the actual fuck does any of that have to do with the fact that your program literally can’t compete with any other program that does what you say yours does on the only thing that matters (quality of functionality/output)? Quit trying to shift the argument and stick with the one in play, you coward.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I can compete with the price, once you account true price of the product.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You’re literally the only person who cares about that inanity. Everyone else will use a program that works better at doing what your program does than your program ever could. People don’t give a fuck whether Blender is “costlier” in terms of the man-hours put into its creation and continued upkeep — they care about whether it works well at what it does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
problem with this is that people invest lots of time learning products like blender. If the cost of creating blender is large, then also the maintainance is costing tons of effort and money. Once the feature blender is offering becomes less important and more commonly available, the maintainance costs will kill the project that tries to maintain the software. Then all the people who invested in learning the product will lose their investments.
Same loss of investment can happen in other ways. The product might disappear for lack of interest. I.e. the original developer of the product loses interest in the product and stops maintaining the user community. This is probably what you're thinking when you look at my web page. You think it'll disappear. But the cost of producing it is cheap enough that it costs some hosting space and one programmer is spending their time to maintain the codebase. The cheap cost amount is what keeps projects like this alfloat and it'll be available for download very long amount of time, so the investment of learning the tool is not wasted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blender is a big reason 3D modeling/animation is as widespread today as it is. Other programs have come along that function better in certain aspects, but Blender is still in wide use because it’s been around for a long while and its functionality is still worthwhile.
And while learning a whole new program can take time, any program similar to Blender won’t take as much time to learn because it will already feel similar to Blender users. So even if Blender goes belly-up one day, switching to a new program won’t be the complete hassle you seem to think it’ll be. (It also won’t open the door for your program because holy shit dude your program can’t do shit compared to Blender.)
I don’t think anything about your web page because I don’t fuckin’ look at it. And if it does disappear? It won’t be missed.
And none of that matters if nobody is using your tool for anything other than laughing at how shitty it is. Your program can’t do any-fuckin’-thing better than other programs of its kind. Again: The only person who gives a fuck about this shit you’re talking about is you. Everyone else is going to look for a program that works and produces quality output — which, having seen your website only once before (which was enough), is something other programs have all over yours and then some.
Christ, dude, give up. Your program is never going to be anything more than a mild curiosity for a handful of people at best. It’ll never find use in any sort of niche, never mind a large-scale graphics industry. You’ve had your fun; now go do something worth a fuck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
we do not want all products to look and work like blender. The market needs to have large selection of different kinds of products available. The whole reason for having copyright is to enable creation of different kinds of products instead of one product allocating too much focus from the world. Otherwise we'll be watching copies of star wars all again when its not profitable to do anything else than clone star wars. We want all products to have their chance in the spotlight.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
No, that's your wishful pipe dream hoping that people who watch animations actually give a shit what software was used to make them. Plenty of people watch different animations produced by different studios. Pixar and Dreamworks off the top of my head, and their catalogs look different enough from each other. This bogeyman scenario of "everything looking the same if nobody uses Meshpage" is a shit argument and I honestly feel disgusted this had to be explained.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"The market needs to have large selection of different kinds of products available"
This is true. However, if you're competing with champagne by collecting jars of cat piss you'll probable fail, as you have found out.
"The whole reason for having copyright is to enable creation of different kinds of products instead of one product allocating too much focus from the world"
In theory, yes, copyright is meant to promote arts and useful sciences. That has nothing to do with your rambling bullshit, given that both your unusable shit and Blender are protected. by copyright.
"Otherwise we'll be watching copies of star wars all again when its not profitable to do anything else than clone star wars"
Have you seen Disney's output recently?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
their position always was that champagne can only be produced with that name in certain selected districts in france and all vendors outside france need to sell cat piss. So they got what they requested, everyone else is still providing stiff competition to champagne and now campagne producers are struggling with they luxury products in the market that focuses on price only. Cat piss seems to be significantly less expensive to produce so there is huge profits for any cat piss producers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"their position always was that champagne can only be produced with that name in certain selected districts in france and all vendors outside france need to sell cat piss"
Lol, no, but how typical of you to miss the actual point made.
High quality champagne is made across the world, they just don't call it by that name if it wasn't produced in the Champagne region. That doesn't make it low quality cat piss like your software, it simply means that the branding on good wine is slightly different across regions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, it means the classification of some products to champagne and other products to cat piss are made on arbitrary geographic basis and not based on the actual quality of the product. For example, if I asked what features are required in my builder tool to get 3d model to the screen, you wouldn't be able to answer the question, since you didn't bother to look at the actual quality of the offered products. Still you made arbitrary classification that it's lower quality than competing products simply for arbitrary (like geographic) methods, instead of focusing on the quality of the products.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Judging by the output made possible by Blender as compared to the output made possible by your program? The features of your program are ultimately irrelevant since Blender outdoes your program on the quality front in every conceivable metric. Blender can produce 3D models/animation that look far better than anything your pisswhistle of a program could ever churn out.
You’re a failure, tp. Your program is a failure. Nobody wants it, nobody really knows about it outside of these comments sections, and you’ll never be able to get anywhere near the kind of quality out that Blender and its ilk can create. You think you’re God’s gift to Pixar, but you’re literally underperforming the software available to Pixar when Pixar was first starting out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
you just cannot place the models to a web page, so noone in the world can see what you have created...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You can save and share the render/sculpt files. You can output a static shot to an image file and put it on Imgur or any other website that allows for image sharing. You can output an animation to a video file and put it on YouTube or any other website that allows for video sharing.
Do…do you really think Blender isn’t capable of any of that? Jesus H. Shitflinging Christ, dude, catch up with the rest of the world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
that was cool in 1970s... You should maybe catch up with the rest of the world.
You need actual 3d engine in your web page to match meshpage's output.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Unity and WebGL both say “hello” and “who the fuck are you”.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They would need to be part of blender. I already mentioned earlier that the features need to be part of the same program or else you'll be comparing one person's work to the combined effort of the whole country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nobody. But you. GIVES A FLYING FUCK ABOUT THAT.
If someone is looking for a 3D rendering program to use, they’re not going to care about how many people made it or whether it can do literally everything possible — they’re going to care whether it can create quality 3D renders/animation that they can then output to a variety of file formats for a variety of reasons. Blender does that. Plenty of other similar programs do that. That’s why your pissant program languishes in obscurity.
Nobody who wants to do 3D modeling/animation will ever care how much work you put into your program. They will only ever care about whether the quality of what they can do with that program — regardless of its output/export options — matches what people expect from a modern 3D modeling/animation program. Blender, Source Filmmaker, and any other such 3D-based modeling/sculpting/animation program outperforms your work in every conceivable metric vis-á-vis the quality of what can be done inside the program.
In the right hands, Blender can create 3D animation/models that look extraordinary — on par with some of the best 3D work in the field. In those same hands, your program could only ever produce low-resolution 3D models that look like some shit-ass GIF animation you would see on a 1990s GeoCities page. (Which is appropriate, since your site looks exactly like that.) And in either case, the person to whom those hands belong will not care about whether one person or a thousand made Blender; they will care only that it works better, in every possible metric, than yours.
Nobody cares if outputting renders/animations to an image or video file is an “extra step” between finalizing the work and putting it on display. 2D animators/illustrators do that shit all the time; none of them complain that they can’t upload images directly from the program to, say, Imgur or DeviantArt. It’s an accepted part of their workflow. Why would 3D artists be any different about theirs? (And trust me, they’re not.)
You can think of yourself as a “one man against the world”-type “warrior” or whatever kind of hero you think you are in the exaggerated bullshit story you tell yourself every night before you go to sleep. You can keep thinking the whole world cares whether your worse-than-the-1990s 3D modeling program is somehow “better” because it was made by one person. But all those lies and delusions mean nothing when you confront the truth: Your program is worthless because it will never be capable of producing anything resembling the output quality people expect from 3D modeling/animation programs in 2021.
Please STFU and GTFO now. Your delusions of grandeur and your wish to be compensated for your failures aren’t welcome here any more, and you’re never going to make anyone here change their minds about how much of a feckless, self-aggrandizing, panhandling, delusional dipshit of an “artist”/“programmer” you are. You have failed to be a decent commenter, a decent programmer, and a decent human being. And since I know I’m a piece of shit, you can trust me when I say you’re a bigger shitpile than I am.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Your solution would require this "someone" to learn both blender, unity, webgl and web technologies ... The learning curve is just too steep when you consider "someone looking for 3d rendering program to use"... This problem is caused by the fact that you imported the whole country's effort to the project, and not stayed inside single program.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nobody cares about any of that shit if Blender creates better output than your program — which it does. GFTO, tp, your program is as worthless as your whining.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I just proved it doesnt get better result, you're using 1970's static images when i have actual 3d engine running in my web browser....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And all it’s capable of producing is the kind of shit that would look out of place in the CGI work from 1983’s Golgo 13: The Professional. Nobody cares that your shit can be viewed in some jank-ass browser-based engine when they can literally go to YouTube and watch some 3D animation that looks infinitely better than what your program produces.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
its still better than the static images from 1970...
star wars was done around 1980s, so if I reach the same quality I'm pretty happy with the work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That’s nice.
Now how is that going to help someone who wants to produce 3D modeling/animation that looks comparable to what’s being made in 20-fuckin’-21?
Also:
You keep saying this like there’s something wrong with people if they’re looking at static images of 3D renders. So what if they’re fine with that? Lots of people are. It’s not a fuckin’ sin or a crime or some kind of heretical blasphemy against the Rendering Gods to look at a static shot of 3D models and think “hey, this looks nice”.
I mean, do you really think most people are going to be pissed when they look at, say, an image made in a 3D modeling program of some sort and can’t examine every last angle or change the lighting or some shit? (Christ, it’s like you don’t even realize that some people make 3D art with the same principles as photography or painting or some shit. Th’fuck, tp, how are you this fucking disconnected from society.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Or they learn enough blender for what they want to do, and find some easy to use tools, or assistance for the rest. Also, there are lots of resources available to help learn Blender. If they are not prepared to put in that much effort, they are not going to get far in 3d modelling and animation, which beyond a revolving cube level, takes longer than most people think it will. Note that time is not a function of the software, but rather the attention to detail that animation takes to get a worthwhile result.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
then you wouldnt get the awesome result that blender is famous for... It actually requires someone that can fully use the tool to get professional output.
How it's normally handled is that there will be a team of people, one person learning blender, and another person learning unity. But it's not suitable for one person.
but your story is falling apart very nicely
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes, that’s the point: Making something detailed and of high-quality takes time. It also takes the right tools, and your program is not one of those tools.
One person can learn and use both. Or do you think people are incapable of that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yes, many people had to do that, because they couldn't find a team where there is suitable other person available. The team building is tricky business that involves always money transfers in forms of salary etc, so its more difficult to get suitable teams setup.
But the point stands, there's a niche for my tool too, i.e. easy-to-create 3d web rendering area.
And your existing tools cannot touch that area without extended jumping from one product to another.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
We get it, you're terrible at being a team player and think you deserve to be as rich as Jeff Bezos. What a mindblower.
There's a niche for urethral sex with a catheter bag, that doesn't stop the practitioners from getting made fun of, even more than furries in hardcore sexual minority Discord communities. Because it's a fucking dumb niche, which is why the only support you have for it is a London bus advert.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And if your tool were capable of producing anything other than what a first-day learner of Blender could accomplish at the end of maybe their first hour learning the program, that might mean something.
But as I’ve said countless times before, your program can’t (and won’t ever be able to) produce any sort of renders/models/animations that can even come anywhere near close to what modern 3D artists are doing in the field. That’s why nobody gives a fuck about your program: It can’t render anything more complicated than basic geometric shapes in a world where that basic geometric shapes aren’t even practice for a 3D artist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
it can render all the same models than what blender can. You just export gltf from the blender, and import it to my tool via p_gltf, m_gltf, m_gltf_anim2 tools and you get all the good features of blender in my 3d engine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bullshit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You can try it if you want. But blender's gltf export cannot handle for example this image: http://tpgames.org/sanmiguel.png because it dies on large amount of data. But that image was rendered using my tool (it just doesn't work in web page)...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So an image rendered in your tool doesn't work on a webpage, despite your entire marketing speech being a boast that meshpage is supposed to be an integrated online 3d engine...
Meaning by your own metrics and definitions, your software can't even deliver on your own claims.
Why do we need to give you money, again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
none of the software mentioned in this thread can do it. All technology has some limits and you've just seen one of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
and neither can yours, which means if all that other software is crap because they can't do it, so is yours by your own standards
holy shit what a self-own
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I was still able to get the image from the software...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
so can Blender users
keep owning yourself, it makes shitting on you even easier
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Is your answer to complex models use Blender? Earlier you were arguing that you should be able to do your 3d modelling and rendering within one program.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Well, obviously importing models from other programs is important feature in any 3d engine, including my meshpage. But it doesnt require those other programs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Not all projects are carried out for money, and the Internet is full of all sorts of volunteer teams.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Blender has a lot of tools in it, and learning all of them is not required. As to finding some assistance, well I can see why you would have problems doing that. other people find that the Internet allows them to find all sorts of help and assistance with projects,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"It actually requires someone that can fully use the tool to get professional output."
So your complaint is that... people who work professionally need to learn the tools they use to create professional work?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"The learning curve is just too steep"
Not according to the professionals who use the products he just named on a daily basis to create vastly superior work to yours..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Says a man who is using other peoples work to produce their own program. Indeed it is almost certain that more man hours went into those libraries that the code that you have written.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"They would need to be part of blender"
Erm, he just named 2 things that are not related to Blender.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"You can output an animation to a video file and put it on YouTube or any other website that allows for video sharing"
Or, just let any modern browser using the built-in HTML5 features to play back the file.
If we're being fair, if the site does live render the raw data to create the animation it may well be an impressive bit of code. But, that feature is meaningless today. Maybe if it was the late 90s it would be a real competitor to Flash for certain applications while avoiding the buggy nightmare plugins required there, but there's no real use for that feature today.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"No, it means the classification of some products to champagne and other products to cat piss are made on arbitrary geographic basis and not based on the actual quality of the product"
Exactly, so you have the analogy backwards. A winery in the Champagne region could sell cat piss under that name, while competing brands in other areas would need to sell based on quality.
" For example, if I asked what features are required in my builder tool to get 3d model to the screen, you wouldn't be able to answer the question, since you didn't bother to look at the actual quality of the offered products"
No, because I'm not a digital artist. I would, however, ask a digital artist their opinion, and I'd bet a significant sum of money that their responses more closely matched the feature set of Blender than your atrocious product.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So your strategy is "pray that people magically forget about Blender and kill off all support for it, then redirect all the money and attention to you"? No wonder you're here begging desperately for attention.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
i'm in business of teleporting animations to the world...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Aw, cute. It's been reduced to spouting it's corporate vision and mission thinking that it means anything.
You've been spending this thread shitposting about how people need to stop using Blender, then stammer and stall when called out on it. Nobody is going to use your waste of code you call a program, Tero Pukeface.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're in the business of whining about your product's failure against better alternatives. I assume you code occasionally, but since you've refused to display your bug tracking or road map, I presume it's a distant second.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, I have private github repo. I dunno if I told you the story of how it went. I used to have the whole project as open source with source and bug tracking and open issues openly visible to everyone. But guess what, internet's idea of how those tools should be used was kinda strange. They didn't try to help me improve the software, or do the famous eyeballs finds all the bugs from the software. Instead they spent hours and hours trying to make it less worthy of praise, i.e. they misused the provided services like version control access to purposes which original open source ideals do not subscribe to. I.e. the world is no longer using open source ideals, and thus my project needed to move to more private approach, with version control and issue tracking and other github services closed behind impenetrable walled garden.
So there you got it, you're doing exactly the same, basically trying to find reasons to bash other people's projects. You're destroying open source and their ideals while you do this. Basically open source ideals is that people are helping other people in their projects, but that's not what the current reality is... instead they just want other people to feel bad. That's a recent change in the attitudes of people, and it kinda destroyed open source for my project. In the golder 1990s, the attitudes towards people who tried to create something useful was very different. People would welcome the efforts of other people instead of trying the force them to quit and travel to bahamas.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Well, I have private github repo."
Exactly, you refuse to provide any method of verifying your claims. Which is weird, because someone proud of their software performance as a selling point would at least provide a historical record of performance improvements with each release, rather that expecting people to randomly run metrics of their own with no way of tracking improvements.
"But guess what, internet's idea of how those tools should be used was kinda strange"
I'm going to guess that there's only one person on the internet with strange ideas about how your software works. You'll find him in the same place as Candyman.
"They didn't try to help me improve the software, or do the famous eyeballs finds all the bugs from the software."
No, they worked on useful software without a rambling idiot in charge of the project. You know, the competitors you have that are used by millions because they're actually useful.
"You're destroying open source and their ideals while you do this"
No, I'm telling you how useless you shitty project is compared to your successful open source competitors.
By the way, how am I attacking open source if you've hidden the code? Are you doing that in violation of of the licence you use, or is the reason you're so bitter because someone forked the project and turned it into something useful already?
"People would welcome the efforts of other people instead of trying the force them to quit and travel to bahamas."
Oh no, I'm potentially forcing you to retire to a tropical island and live a life free of worry about what people on the internet think about your useless software. What a monster I must be lol
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
¨> > "Well, I have private github repo."
I told you exactly how to verify the claims. If you have eyes in your ass and cannot use profilers then that's your failure.... Verifying the claims do not require access to the source code.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In this case? Yeah, it does. Show the code or GTFO.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
you will just misuse your version control access for purposes which are not acceptable according to open source ideals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
being able to look at code ≠ having “version control access”
And open source ideals are basically “anyone can examine the code for any reason they want”, so again: Show us the code or GTFO.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"I told you exactly how to verify the claims"
Yes, and you have failed to give an actual method to do so. You say to use a tool to look at the current speed, but that does not verify your claim that speed has improved. Without access to those changes or a historical version of the code, I cannot work out whether or not you're full of shit, other than by understanding your standard behaviour here.
"Verifying the claims do not require access to the source code."
But, checking whether or not you're violating the GPL or other licence used in your previously open version of the code, before you realised that your insane ramblings don't help collaborate with other coders and locked it up, does. Hmmm...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
that's not the claim. The current profiling info can verify that no further optimizations are possible, i.e. the optimization opportunities are all exhausted. This is fundamentally the claim, that further improvement requires something that mere optimizations cannot provide.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"The current profiling info can verify that no further optimizations are possible"
No, they won't. Whatever bullshit you think you've achieved, you're still at the mercy of the browser and its engine, and those are in a constant state of change that may or may not affect the performance of your software. The only real valid benchmark is looking at the difference between version X and version Y of your software on the same browser version, and you have failed to provide that option.
Yet again, your grandiose claims fall apart the moment logic and real-life observation is applied.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Of course when profiling data shows that its jpeg decoding that eats all the time, then its clear that either you need to change jpeg files to something else or if that is not possible then optimizations require touching the jpeg decoding code. If the profiling data says that network operations eat all the time, then you can blame internet's inefficiencies for the delay. and so on...
if you cant extract the required information from that data, you're not very professional...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"You're not very professional" is not something that a guy who supports porn trolls should be saying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"problem with this is that people invest lots of time learning products like blender"
That's called "investment", and people who have invested in a tool get a lot out of it when they have developed the relevant skills.
You know, like a skilled coder would if he spends time creating a valuable tool instead of posting rambling fantasies on sites where people laugh at him.
"The product might disappear for lack of interest."
How much interest does your incomprehensible, dated demo page get other than click from people here for comedy value?
"But the cost of producing it is cheap enough that it costs some hosting space and one programmer is spending their time to maintain the codebase"
It is certainly cheap to maintain a website that looks like it uses zero modern design or coding concepts to service zero users, I'll give you that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
That's why it succeeds better than blender or gimp. It simply hasn't destroyed lives of that many people. (just mine and some poor fellow who maintains the hosting space)...
There's also competition in the world related to who can less destroy lives of other people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"That's why it succeeds better than blender or gimp"
By what metric?
"It simply hasn't destroyed lives of that many people."
Nobody using a shitty piece of software helps it not ruin their day.
Meanwhile, your named competitors have enabled millions of the people to access free tools to be extremely creative in ways that would normally cost them hundreds of dollars and thus place that creativity out of reach.
While your useless shit is only known about and laughed at by the people mocking you on this site, your useful competitors have helped to launch entire creative careers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Price != value.
You forgot to create something with value, therefore the market price is nothing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"This time spent for the program is directly related to the real cost of the program to the whole world. I.e. What customers need to pay to get access to the functionality of the program."
So, let's see the invoices for what you paid for the browser, operating system, protocols and everything else you used to post you ignorant drivel here.
I assume you paid, thus not making you a hypocrite? Right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"I simply cannot compete against combined effort of a whole country."
You can't compete with the effort of a barely competent teenager who codes for 2 hours every Saturday morning.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
There is a difference between your code, and those programs you cannot compete against, and it is simply that many are open source, and all are the works of teams of people. I can't compete against a country is saying that you do not cooperate with other people, and that limits what your software can achieve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Didn't you just say that you don't have to compete with everything, dipshit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The Blender foundation, that those leading the development of blender, use other open source tools, including Gimp as part of their workflow for producing animated videos Indeed they make it easy to combine the strengths of the tools, .by exporting a skin to be painted in Gimp.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Most people are'n't deliberately looking for shitty unusable rip-offs of industry standard software. We wait for idiots to come here whining about their incompetent marketing campaigns in order to look at that shit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So, you don't have any history of the bug fixes and other development? Got it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Shouldn't they fix it before releasing the game?
As I understand it, the issue stemmed from slow processing of the list of items in the in-game store. When the game first launched, there weren't many items in the store, and it wasn't an (apparent) issue.
As they added more items to the store in post-release updates, that performance hit became more and more significant, leading to the long load times.
It's still pretty bad that it took a modder to come in and identify the issue for them, but it's not as bad as it may seem initially, and at least they handled the situation with grace.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Shouldn't they fix it before releasing the game?
It's significantly bad, that the company had source code available for the game, but was beaten by some modder who did disassemble the game source code, basically binary-patching the game. If the quality issues can be fixed without proper access to game source code, they have very significant problems with the QA process.
Also, the load time is well known problem among game developers, given that it's always a problem when loading meshes or 3d models all the way from slow hard disks to the memory and then further to the gpu memory and to the screen. That whole process has significant bottlenecks with load time that every game developer that had to deal with 3d graphics must know about the importance of load time optimization.
Further problem is that the game has been available for purchase for more than 8 years now, if it lauched in 2013, so they had significant amount of time to fix the issues. The fact that it only surfaces now is very significant issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Shouldn't they fix it before releasing the game?
You see, the coders working for Rockstar are not useless one man bands who create software that's useless at its stated aims compared to its established competitors, unlike yourself. That will be working with hundreds of other people every day creating new features and fixing old bugs, and these bugs will be categorised and prioritised by management and team leads. There's not enough time in the day for employees of Rockstar to deal with the bugs they're aware of, so some minor (to Rockstar) issues will always get overlooked. From Rockstar's point of view, if the game is taking a long time to load, but once loaded people are still playing and spending money, then it's a low priority bug.
All that's happened here is that this guy decided he cared more about thise specific bug than Rockstat did and fixed it, and they decided to thank him and fix it for everyone else - before getting their employees working on other new features and old bugs that he may or may not agree are the right priority.
If you worked with other people and had actual customers, you'd probably understand some of this.
"Further problem is that the game has been available for purchase for more than 8 years now, if it lauched in 2013, so they had significant amount of time to fix the issues"
If you think it's the same game as it was when it first released and hasn't been constantly changed with massive patches and new content, you're even more ignorant and deluded than normal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Shouldn't they fix it before releasing the game?
Well, the real problem is that the load times have been removed from the trailers which form the basis of purchase decisions. Basically every trailer where they removed 6 minute load time from the game is actually lying to customers. They should prominently display the real game experience with progressbars and loading screens and whatever cutscenes they force players to watch endlessly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shouldn't they fix it before releasing the g
As usual, your understanding of human behavior and needs differ wildly from the native population of this planet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Or this dimension, for that matter.
He must be from C-138.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The load times for GTA Online were, initially, not that bad. The accumulation of items in its online shops over a period of years, which bloated the file responsible for the long-ass load times, is what led to the longer load times. Even if an “honest“ trailer as you describe it were to exist, chances are that such a trailer would’ve been made at the beginning of the game’s lifetime — when the load times would’ve been nowhere near what they were before the bug.
Go back to jerking off over the idea of destroying the public domain, tp. It’d be better for literally everyone here — including you — if you’d shut up about shit you don’t, can’t, and won’t ever know enough about to have an informed opinion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
if they find out that load times are increasing, then they should of course update their trailer to be up-to-date with the real status of the game experience. If their servers are overloaded or software implementation using too slow algorithms, they need to explain customers what exactly is happening. Selling the game with the same old trailer that worked when no-one was DDOSing their servers is not very honest thing to do after the shit hits the fan...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Says the man whose website is so obscure and opaque that very few visitors figure out why it is there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You really don’t get the point of trailers and bullshots, huh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Shouldn't they fix it before releasing the game?
And as any developer can tell you:
Fixing what is broken and security vulnerabilities takes priority over slow until unusable any day of the week.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE: the bug bounty
It's worth noting, as well, that the bug bounty program is made to let people report vulnerability issues, not just general bugs. So Rockstar actually made an exception in this case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RE: the bug bounty
While it unfortunately wouldn't be the first time a company decided to shoot the messenger who tried to help them if it became known that they did so for someone who managed to turn loading times of six plus minutes into one or two I imagine they would have faced a firestorm of pissed off players so I'm not surprised that they'd make an exception here, as rewarding someone who just made the game better is a good move both short term and long($10K is nothing for the PR they just got and if people see him being rewarded others might try to solve other issues), while slapping him down would have been a really stupid response.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: RE: the bug bounty
Sadly the really stupid response is the main one we see play out more and more.
10K is probably less than it would have cost to have someone locate and ponder this problem & fix... once they finally worked down the list of game breaking horrible bugs & got to oh our load time is a bit long portion of the list.
The other benefit moving forward is this issue being solved might let them move forward on another project that the load time bug was keeping back burnered.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's also a reminder that basic common sense like this is rare enough to be newsworthy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Contrary to tp's fraudulent narratives, here's what actually slowed down the load time:
The game was reading a JSON list that was 10mb in size with around 63,000 entries, containing every item that could possibly purchased in the online space.
the program would read a single byte of the file, count the string length of the entire 10mb file, return the byte of parsed string, move on to the next byte
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ummm...
Okay, I only took a couple of basic (not BASIC) programming courses at uni, long, long ago --- but I have to admit that I have no freaking clue why anybody would think it made sense to go to that much effort.
(except maybe, just possibly, some fancy approach to controlling duplicate entries? Nah, that doesn't make sense either...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Computer games have come full circle. In the 80s, games took forever to load from cassette. Even Commodore's floppy disk drive was notoriously slow and games could take 2-3 minutes to load (at least in the beginning).
Then came the era of hard drives and games would generally load in seconds.
Now we're back to multi-minute load times.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To be fair, a vast difference exists between DOOM (1993) and Doom Eternal in terms of graphics. Of course one would load faster than the other these days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
While that's true, it's also true that hard drive speeds and computers have continued to get faster. Today you have hard drives advertised as having a 6GB/s transfer speed and multi-core CPUs running at 3Ghz. Even if a system had 30GB of RAM, it should theoretically only take 5 seconds to transfer enough data to fill it. I know that real world transfer speeds never match the advertised speeds, so let's be generous and say it takes 10 seconds to transfer 6GB. That still only works out to 50 seconds to fill 30GB of RAM.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Modern games don't just transfer data to memory like your Commodore 64 would have done, there's usually a lot of decompression and processing that needs to go on at the same time.
That was the problem above - GTA wasn't taking a long time to copy a file, it was taking a long time to process a ginormous JSON file. The fix found was a better method of parsing the file.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm amused that something that was done and incentivized by the company and thus totally legal got attacked. The trolls need to take their medicine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's trolls for you. They view any result that doesn't fuck over the end user as an attempt to weaken copyright. Thus they double down on their stupidity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]