A serious proposal to Cyan. Can WE get MORE up and running?

Anything that isn't directly related to Age Creation but that might be interesting to Age developers.

Re: A serious proposal to Cyan. Can WE get MORE up and running?

Postby Tsar Hoikas » Sat Nov 29, 2008 6:39 pm

Dr Crisger wrote:There is a valid proposal on the table eloquently phrased with great sincertiy. I find the sniping at Cyan to be offensive to say the very least. Let us honor the sincerity of this propsal and I suggest the mods trim out the chaff, ie the hostile and angry posts so we can deal with a sincere idea about helping Cyan. I will give it some serious thought.


Look who's talking :roll:
Image
Tsar Hoikas
Councilor of Technical Direction
 
Posts: 2180
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 9:45 pm
Location: South Georgia

Re: A serious proposal to Cyan. Can WE get MORE up and running?

Postby BAD » Sat Nov 29, 2008 8:37 pm

Chacal wrote:J'Kla is right about staying on topic though.
We should stop discussing PlasmaView other than about it being a possible alternative to having Cyan run a MO:RE server. Or split the thread.


If you want to discuss the technical aspects seperately, start a new thread. So far this has stayed mostly on topic.

Cris,

I take offense that you presume to represent Cyan. It is not your duty or right to be anything for them. If Cyan is offended by our discussion about them, they are more than capable to come here and express that.

Lets keep the discussion on subject and not turn this into a bash the bashers fest like some seem to like so much on the MOUL forums.
BAD is as good as he gets
User avatar
BAD
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 9:44 am

Re: A serious proposal to Cyan. Can WE get MORE up and running?

Postby J'Kla » Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:13 am

Ok I have had a try at your app Lontahv I followed Chacals' advice and loaded the two dll files from the internet and I have downloaded and installed the MSVC runtime 2008.

I am running on a standard Windows XP Pro platform but get a message saying "the application has requested the the runtime to close it in an unusual way"

any ideas? anybody.
User avatar
J'Kla
 
Posts: 1003
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:16 pm
Location: Geordieland UK

Re: A serious proposal to Cyan. Can WE get MORE up and running?

Postby diafero » Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:34 am

I finally got it working after also installing the MSVC 2005 Redistributable. DonÄt ask me why it was necessary but, that did the trick :D

@J'Kla: You have to drag'n'drop an age or prp file on the exe file
I prefer e-mails to "diafero arcor de" (after adding the at and the dot) over PMs.

"Many people's horizon is a circle with a radius of zero. They call it their point of view."

Deep Island Shard | Offline KI
diafero
Deep Island Admin
 
Posts: 2972
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 5:50 am
Location: Germany

Re: A serious proposal to Cyan. Can WE get MORE up and running?

Postby Aloys » Sun Nov 30, 2008 11:24 am

To go back to the original topic of this thread (and although it's already been said): Suggesting anything to Cyan is in vain, especially these days. It's just wasted time and energy. I wish them the best but they're on their own..
User avatar
Aloys
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 7:57 pm
Location: France (GMT +1)

Re: A serious proposal to Cyan. Can WE get MORE up and running?

Postby J'Kla » Sun Nov 30, 2008 12:39 pm

Thanks diafero it did the business now how do I achieve verticality?

I believe you alloys and I also believe they have chosen that for themselves. I guess that means till they come back out to play we are on our own as well.
User avatar
J'Kla
 
Posts: 1003
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:16 pm
Location: Geordieland UK

Re: A serious proposal to Cyan. Can WE get MORE up and running?

Postby BAD » Sun Nov 30, 2008 12:42 pm

I don't think it's in vain, but certainly it's not recommended to hold your breath.

I agree with Aloys that timing is very important, and now may not be a good time.

**For clarity**

When I suggested that those who are trying out Lontahv's software start a new thread about his project, I did not mean they try to moderate this thread. It's a simple as writing a thread titled, "Continuation of discussion about Lontahv's Project", then putting a link to this discussion. As I see it, Lontahv's work, could possibly be a part of this proposal, and the talk about it here doesn't need to be removed.

Simply, if you want to discuss it purely technically, then start a new thread. Easy as that. The staff is not here to split every thread apart every time the discussion veers off topic slightly.
BAD is as good as he gets
User avatar
BAD
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 9:44 am

Re: A serious proposal to Cyan. Can WE get MORE up and running?

Postby Nalates » Wed Dec 03, 2008 12:38 pm

J’Kla, your black box idea certainly handles the IP server issues. I’m not sure how the PRP files issues and textures and related issues of the existing ages will be handled. That may give Cyan grounds to block use of the game in a fan created black box or not server.

I see the motives of Cyan as the motives of the Miller’s not some nebulous corporation. Your jaded view and comments about their motives and/or intensions, I think, rubs many of us the wrong way. I can’t prove you’re wrong. You make a reasonable argument for your opinion, so I won’t put it down. I just disagree.

Your push to get something moving seems very much like the effort that brought UU to life. I think at this time this is a good idea. Jamey’s and your push may lead to Until MO:RE (UM).

I also think the push may make problems for Cyan…. May be I should say ‘more stress’ for Cyan. But waiting makes it more ‘stressed’ for fans. Cyan left to their devices they will take the course of least resistance for them. There is no reason the fans should not do the same. And waiting on Cyan seems like the wrong thing to do. So, the idea seems like a positive step.

Waiting until one day when Cyan is again flush with cash and tells us the game is too old to revive, or they close the doors and vanish… seems like a real bummer. If Cyan wins the lotto, I suspect none of this will prevent them from bringing MO:RE online.

If a black box server is built, would we be able to build in ways to add smaller bits of fan created content? What other features could we add? … Features like AV improvement would be on the client side so I suspect improvements there are out.
ImageNalates - Guild of Cartographers
Guild Apprentice: GoW, GoMa - Liaison: GoC to GoMe, GoC to SL (Nalates Urriah)
MO:UL 00 379 343 - Author: Uru Maps Tech Data
Nalates
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:59 am
Location: California

Re: A serious proposal to Cyan. Can WE get MORE up and running?

Postby J'Kla » Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:45 pm

I don't disagree with you Nalates even I feel my view is jaded as I have said I hold a cynical outlook that I am holding up for debate. I have a vain hope that someone from Cyan will join the debate and I also agree with BAD that it would be a bad move to hold breath.

I am sorry if this rubs you or anyone the wrong way, it's not my intention to cause friction. I feel that sometimes progress relies on a heretical proposal I am just hoping I don't end up ostracised or excommunicated.

There have to be issues arising out of the Black box idea with regard to PRP files, and in order to comply with the current agreement with Cyan that using Cyan textures have been placed off limit.

What if someone creates a new texture using a digital graphics package and uses a standard 512 x 512 square launched on a 8 point star geometric pattern that looks a little or even a lot like something Cyan used. It's my understanding that Cyan started with Blender and moved on to other packages so there's a good chance given the number of structures in an age there's a chance of some overlap.

I have made a point in my own age of using a graphic created from nature so as to achieve a naturalistic view that should steer clear of any pseudo random effect.

I also understand your argument that if we do build a black box shard would it contravene the licence if it was used to run Cyan ages.

My best case scenario would have Cyan saying

"Here's your licensed UntilMORE binaries that run the MOUL ages and your fan created stuff it's going to cost you ' X ' dollars a year to run a shard and a user licence will be ' Y ' dollars a month each shard is only allowed ' Z ' Users and each year your licence is up for review. With all monies payable to this here PayPal account."

I suspect (Look out here comes the cynic again) Cyan will exercise their normal silence (I beg to be proved wrong).
User avatar
J'Kla
 
Posts: 1003
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 3:16 pm
Location: Geordieland UK

Re: A serious proposal to Cyan. Can WE get MORE up and running?

Postby Nalates » Wed Dec 03, 2008 7:26 pm

Galileo was a heretic. You are in good company.

Similar images is a gray point in US Copyright law. How similar becomes an issue. All new self created textures, even if they give the same feel to a place are unlikely to violate the law. But, if one builds a recognizable Ae'gura, even with original meshes and textures, they may violate Copyrights.

Trying to use the black box idea, to build something that looks the same... is probably not going to work.

Silence... I think unless Cyan has something positive to say, they will be silent. Otherwise they have little to gain by saying anything. I doubt expecting behavior similar to past performance is cynical...

Our best bet is to buy them pizza and wire the delivery guy... video and audio...
ImageNalates - Guild of Cartographers
Guild Apprentice: GoW, GoMa - Liaison: GoC to GoMe, GoC to SL (Nalates Urriah)
MO:UL 00 379 343 - Author: Uru Maps Tech Data
Nalates
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:59 am
Location: California

PreviousNext

Return to Off-Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest