Forums » General
I just stumbled about the "PCC" link, curious as I am, I clicked on it, read it and was like "ok, I want to get my hands dirty" and...yeh...no link? I've an online time of 3 days which should be enough...and there is not even a time counter or anything.
Is it the first task to find the link on where to file my application? If yes...I failed, because I found nothing...not even in the plain html code.
please help me to help you.
Is it the first task to find the link on where to file my application? If yes...I failed, because I found nothing...not even in the plain html code.
please help me to help you.
Detructor, the page states:
"Anyone is welcome to join the PCC, as long as you are a game subscriber in good standing who fits the above-mentioned parameters of Trust, Maturity, Involvement and English Writing. We presently also require 25 hours of in-game time, to be sure you are familiar with the game and storyline.
If you are logged into a subscribed account, you will see either an application link below, or information about how much more time is needed to qualify."
The bit about seeing the link below is wrong, since it's actually at the top of the page.
"Anyone is welcome to join the PCC, as long as you are a game subscriber in good standing who fits the above-mentioned parameters of Trust, Maturity, Involvement and English Writing. We presently also require 25 hours of in-game time, to be sure you are familiar with the game and storyline.
If you are logged into a subscribed account, you will see either an application link below, or information about how much more time is needed to qualify."
The bit about seeing the link below is wrong, since it's actually at the top of the page.
doh! should've seen that...thanks.
uh...lost interest in it anyway after reading the next page.
uh...lost interest in it anyway after reading the next page.
Chicken
pfff...when I create work it's MY work, I simply allow others to use it. Or (if I get paid for it) I'll allow 'em to use and alter it without my further permission, but I still have "my" version of the source code and can alter it as I want.
plus I thought I could change some things in the game itself (like better graphical user interface/helping the devs by coding stuff or fixing bugs(if I can)...) but instead I should've created missions? meh. and no sarcasm? and oh, i've to be involved, else I'm not part of the PCC? and still they won't give me money but instead kick me outta it if I don't pay for the game.
sorry, but...no. if I've to pay to work something is definetly wrong. (work as in "I'm working as an employee of $company")
plus I thought I could change some things in the game itself (like better graphical user interface/helping the devs by coding stuff or fixing bugs(if I can)...) but instead I should've created missions? meh. and no sarcasm? and oh, i've to be involved, else I'm not part of the PCC? and still they won't give me money but instead kick me outta it if I don't pay for the game.
sorry, but...no. if I've to pay to work something is definetly wrong. (work as in "I'm working as an employee of $company")
Many people have been asking how they can volunteer to help make the game better. The PCC is one good way that many people can access.
I think Guild was advised to make the content agreement as it is so that they would be unencumbered by disagreements over rights should they sell the game or allow themselves to be acquired by another company. You are certainly entitled to refuse to agree, but there's no call for bashing Guild about it - they're just a little company trying to keep their options open for future opportunities.
I think Guild was advised to make the content agreement as it is so that they would be unencumbered by disagreements over rights should they sell the game or allow themselves to be acquired by another company. You are certainly entitled to refuse to agree, but there's no call for bashing Guild about it - they're just a little company trying to keep their options open for future opportunities.
Also, you don't have to create missions. You get full access to the interface code, and can play around with it to your heart's content, finding/fixing bugs or adding in new features. There have actually been several new things added by community members in the past.
I am confused. You are complaining that you would't get paid for volunteer work, and that you'd give up the rights to things that you give to a proprietary project, and that contributing to said project requires that you maintain a level of commitment and professionalism?
It would be pretty ridiculous if you created a mission for VO and then expected to be able to go reuse that mission in another project.
It would be pretty ridiculous if you created a mission for VO and then expected to be able to go reuse that mission in another project.
You're negativity and attitude are not really welcome here, and I for one am glad you are not gonna get your hands dirty. Even if you had a slight competence in coding, which I very much doubt, your ability to see past everything good in a project and think only of yourself, along with your lack of attention to detail (eg not noticing the finer points of having to wait 25 game hours before seeing the link, or the fact you also get access to lua interface code) means likely you would waste more of everyone else time then contribute of your own time. That said whatever time you did contribute would not even approach a 1:1 payoff for whatever time you wasted for others.
And nothing of value was lost :p
And nothing of value was lost :p
How about a little grace here. Let the guy blow off some steam, sleep on it, and maybe the terms Guild offers will seam OK.
Yeah, no need to attack people who don't agree. To each their own.
As to why the PCC is like that:
1) We entrust the members with access to specific tools and resources which are, to us, critical development infrastructure. This is a pretty big deal. We could theoretically firewall off the entire PCC from the rest of our development, but we thought it would be better to be more trusting and also let people help in more meaningful ways (which sometimes includes testing new functionality). This inherently means we're looking for a really dedicated group of people, who we can trust.
2) Those who are dedicated to the game are pretty easily delineated by whether or not they're subscribed. We're also a bit more comfortable trusting people who at least have billing information (not to use in any bad way, but at least we have a vague idea of who you probably are?). I don't think that's unreasonable.
3) We have to own any intellectual property created on our behalf, if we want to ever obtain additional outside investment. If we didn't, that would open up the possibility of lawsuits, which then scares off any kind of angels, venture capitalists, and equity funds.
If I could reliably make some kind of living, for myself and the other Guild Software employees, without charging for anything and without needing any kind of legalese.. that would be pretty attractive to me. But the whole "feeding yourself while building a completely open project" thing is still pretty nascent, especially for areas like game development. So the three points above mostly deal with confronting the realities of development or of existing as a business.
As to why the PCC is like that:
1) We entrust the members with access to specific tools and resources which are, to us, critical development infrastructure. This is a pretty big deal. We could theoretically firewall off the entire PCC from the rest of our development, but we thought it would be better to be more trusting and also let people help in more meaningful ways (which sometimes includes testing new functionality). This inherently means we're looking for a really dedicated group of people, who we can trust.
2) Those who are dedicated to the game are pretty easily delineated by whether or not they're subscribed. We're also a bit more comfortable trusting people who at least have billing information (not to use in any bad way, but at least we have a vague idea of who you probably are?). I don't think that's unreasonable.
3) We have to own any intellectual property created on our behalf, if we want to ever obtain additional outside investment. If we didn't, that would open up the possibility of lawsuits, which then scares off any kind of angels, venture capitalists, and equity funds.
If I could reliably make some kind of living, for myself and the other Guild Software employees, without charging for anything and without needing any kind of legalese.. that would be pretty attractive to me. But the whole "feeding yourself while building a completely open project" thing is still pretty nascent, especially for areas like game development. So the three points above mostly deal with confronting the realities of development or of existing as a business.
I put it on my resume that i develop game content. Hows that for something worth your time Mr negative OP
Vendetta Online is a near ideal environment for this sort of thing IMO. Guild isn't some giant corporation that's going to sweep away whatever you do in their next patch; The fact that they are a small company building a respectable product within a well defined niche means player involvement really matters. When they say they want you to be involved they mean it. There is a huge amount of work that goes into refining and polishing assets (like missions) before they go "live", so in the end the figurative intellectual owners of PCC creations are the entire community.
Yeah, I've written missions that have made it into production but could I have ever done it without awesome playtesters like mr_spuck? No. It's a group effort.
Given the amount of care and attention to detail I've witnessed within the PCC and VO at large I'm more than comfortable with Guild keeping intellectual rights. This game has provided me with enough entertainment and sparked my imagination to the point that I want to give back to the community. That's why I joined the PCC in the first place, and why I continue to write missions and to playtest.
Yeah, I've written missions that have made it into production but could I have ever done it without awesome playtesters like mr_spuck? No. It's a group effort.
Given the amount of care and attention to detail I've witnessed within the PCC and VO at large I'm more than comfortable with Guild keeping intellectual rights. This game has provided me with enough entertainment and sparked my imagination to the point that I want to give back to the community. That's why I joined the PCC in the first place, and why I continue to write missions and to playtest.
Yes, small projects are fun.
I intend to eventually join the PCC. Too much else I need to do right now, but hopefully within the next few months.
I intend to eventually join the PCC. Too much else I need to do right now, but hopefully within the next few months.
ok, some words to that.
top down.
first: I didn't want to bash GW, they've a pretty nice game and I love to play it (ok kinda...more content and so on...but I guess that's normal and known to everyone, if you would've the best game in the world, you would still want more of something). My problem is just, that they take something someone created and say that it is now theirs and you (as the one who created it) can't use it for something else...
@drazed I don't feed trolls.
@Pizzasgood sorry seems I wrote it the wrong way ;). I don't complain that I don't get money (as you said, it's voluntary work) but I complain about the rules I would've to obey since those rules are usually only accepted when someone get paid for doing stuff.
@inc I understand point 1 at point 2 I can see what you want to say now, I didn't really knew where that rule in the agreement was for, thanks for clarify
now to point 3: I see your point here, but there are other ways to achieve that. For example creative commons license. If you would say that the work someone does for the game is under creative commons (cc-by) it would be okay (that would mean that you can use it and just have to add his/her name to the list of creators). If you would do that, everyone would be happy: the creators could still use their work (and use it for other projects) and you could use it, change it and so on.
I don't know how that is over there in the USA (heared of those patent trolls and thinks like that) but maybe you could think about that...
because it seems that your only problem is that someone could try to say "hey, that's mine, don't use it anylonger" and that could be easily avoided by licenses as the creativecommons (there are more but that's the one that first came to my mind) because then both sides have their "copy" and can work with it.
top down.
first: I didn't want to bash GW, they've a pretty nice game and I love to play it (ok kinda...more content and so on...but I guess that's normal and known to everyone, if you would've the best game in the world, you would still want more of something). My problem is just, that they take something someone created and say that it is now theirs and you (as the one who created it) can't use it for something else...
@drazed I don't feed trolls.
@Pizzasgood sorry seems I wrote it the wrong way ;). I don't complain that I don't get money (as you said, it's voluntary work) but I complain about the rules I would've to obey since those rules are usually only accepted when someone get paid for doing stuff.
@inc I understand point 1 at point 2 I can see what you want to say now, I didn't really knew where that rule in the agreement was for, thanks for clarify
now to point 3: I see your point here, but there are other ways to achieve that. For example creative commons license. If you would say that the work someone does for the game is under creative commons (cc-by) it would be okay (that would mean that you can use it and just have to add his/her name to the list of creators). If you would do that, everyone would be happy: the creators could still use their work (and use it for other projects) and you could use it, change it and so on.
I don't know how that is over there in the USA (heared of those patent trolls and thinks like that) but maybe you could think about that...
because it seems that your only problem is that someone could try to say "hey, that's mine, don't use it anylonger" and that could be easily avoided by licenses as the creativecommons (there are more but that's the one that first came to my mind) because then both sides have their "copy" and can work with it.
@Detructor: @drazed I don't feed trolls.
Good I'm not one, and not hungry anyways.
Sounds like what you are looking for is "plugin development" which is not limited by the PCC contract. Check out http://vo-wiki.com/wiki/Plug-ins for sample plugins, and http://vo-wiki.com/racecar/index.php?title=Main_Page for useful API/links/etc.
The PCC gets access to the mission editor, and the interface code (neither which is GPL nor any other open license so it makes sense any changes you make to it wouldn't be either).
That all said, I still doubt your ability to contribute, as programming generally requires a detail oriented and pragmatic mind, which you seem to lack as shown by your posts thus far.
Feel free to make some awesome plugins, license them however you like, and prove me wrong ;)
Good I'm not one, and not hungry anyways.
Sounds like what you are looking for is "plugin development" which is not limited by the PCC contract. Check out http://vo-wiki.com/wiki/Plug-ins for sample plugins, and http://vo-wiki.com/racecar/index.php?title=Main_Page for useful API/links/etc.
The PCC gets access to the mission editor, and the interface code (neither which is GPL nor any other open license so it makes sense any changes you make to it wouldn't be either).
That all said, I still doubt your ability to contribute, as programming generally requires a detail oriented and pragmatic mind, which you seem to lack as shown by your posts thus far.
Feel free to make some awesome plugins, license them however you like, and prove me wrong ;)
> e (neither which is GPL nor any other open license so it makes sense any changes you make to it wouldn't be either).
that sentence makes no sense at all.
> and prove me wrong
I don't have to, because I know that your wrong, why should I try to change your mind? your judging ppl just by their clothes
thanks for the 2nd link in your post.
that sentence makes no sense at all.
> and prove me wrong
I don't have to, because I know that your wrong, why should I try to change your mind? your judging ppl just by their clothes
thanks for the 2nd link in your post.
> that sentence makes no sense at all.
Perhaps, perhaps not. But generally licenses have limited mixing, and since PCC materials are not on an open license it's hard to stuff in extra stuff that is on an open license. Now I do understand you "could" do some form of creative-commons license for parts of it, but your area of interest (the interface code far as I can tell from your previous comments) specifically calls for editting/adding to closed-source code. Short of making that code open there's limited play for putting open code into that. Plugins are an exception to this, because they are not a modification of existing (and licensed) code but instead completely stand-alone sandboxed additions, and don't require joining PCC or agreeing to any terms.
As an example, you can code an app for MS windows and make it whatever license you want, but if you want access to edit MS windows code you need permissions from MS to get that code, modify it, and re-distribute as opensource. This would not happen because for obvious reasons MS would not want THEIR code being open, so you would be required to sign a contract that gives THEM rights to your modifications and they re-distribute the code under their own terms not you. Guild is NOT MS, but they do offer a closed product, and if you want to work with their code you need to agree to their terms. They COULD opensource the interface code of course, but they have not to date so suck it up. Plugins can make most modifications to the interface code that you could make within, so that is likely your best bet of having the best of both worlds and is why I provided links to get you started.
> I don't have to, because I know that your wrong, why should I try to change your mind? your judging ppl just by their clothes
Actually, I'm judging by what they say. Though I will admit actions are louder then words, which is why I "could" be proved wrong and if such is the case will withdraw my judgments. On the internet, we're all naked ;)
Perhaps, perhaps not. But generally licenses have limited mixing, and since PCC materials are not on an open license it's hard to stuff in extra stuff that is on an open license. Now I do understand you "could" do some form of creative-commons license for parts of it, but your area of interest (the interface code far as I can tell from your previous comments) specifically calls for editting/adding to closed-source code. Short of making that code open there's limited play for putting open code into that. Plugins are an exception to this, because they are not a modification of existing (and licensed) code but instead completely stand-alone sandboxed additions, and don't require joining PCC or agreeing to any terms.
As an example, you can code an app for MS windows and make it whatever license you want, but if you want access to edit MS windows code you need permissions from MS to get that code, modify it, and re-distribute as opensource. This would not happen because for obvious reasons MS would not want THEIR code being open, so you would be required to sign a contract that gives THEM rights to your modifications and they re-distribute the code under their own terms not you. Guild is NOT MS, but they do offer a closed product, and if you want to work with their code you need to agree to their terms. They COULD opensource the interface code of course, but they have not to date so suck it up. Plugins can make most modifications to the interface code that you could make within, so that is likely your best bet of having the best of both worlds and is why I provided links to get you started.
> I don't have to, because I know that your wrong, why should I try to change your mind? your judging ppl just by their clothes
Actually, I'm judging by what they say. Though I will admit actions are louder then words, which is why I "could" be proved wrong and if such is the case will withdraw my judgments. On the internet, we're all naked ;)
oh okay, I think I know what's your problem: I don't want to make the closed source code open source. I (just) want to be able to use things that I add to the project in other projects, too. It's not necessary to open the sourcecode/release it under an open source license. (maybe I made a mistake there).
that they take something someone created and say that it is now theirs and you (as the one who created it) can't use it for something else.
Congratulations, you're slowly starting to figure out how IP law works in the real world.
I don't know how that is over there in the USA
And the explanation for your complete lack of understanding of how and why this works as it does, as well as your inability to articulate your thoughts (such as they may be) using the English language, emerges. Thanks for clearing that up.
Congratulations, you're slowly starting to figure out how IP law works in the real world.
I don't know how that is over there in the USA
And the explanation for your complete lack of understanding of how and why this works as it does, as well as your inability to articulate your thoughts (such as they may be) using the English language, emerges. Thanks for clearing that up.