Removing reliance on MSTS default route data.

[rpicardi1]

On the PRR Eastern, I have used my several styles of high voltage towers in place of the default pylons by just using copies of my shapes with the default names. For most default items, a substitution with a independently made item should work. It saved a lot of work along the NEC part of the route where pylons paralleled the track for miles. It would work well for gantries and fences. A compiled upload of default replacement shapes would be useful for both MSTS and Open Rail route users.

There are some shapes where this would be a problem as they appear to be multiple items at different heights and scales combined into a single object. Few route builders have used them.One odd shape listed as a barn silo is not a barn silo, it is a sawdust burner for a sawmill.

[jeff9595]

On the PRR Eastern, I have used my several styles of high voltage towers in place of the default pylons by just using copies of my shapes with the default names. For most default items, a substitution with a independently made item should work.

This would be exactly our approach. The only part of the content shared by the original MSTS file and the file created by the community is the file name. Since the file names themselves could not even be remotely considered subject to trademark or any other form of copy protection, and the "content" of the file, the shape data and the textures, are entirely unrelated to the original, there is really no issue of "permission" here. These are our own creations, just as new rolling stock and new routes are.

Clearly, the community itself can easily (well... a lot of work... but one thing we have demonstrated is the capacity for a lot of work) and appropriately provide replacement content for the default MSTS, in the same way that the OR team is providing replacement content for the application that runs the simulation. But the same rules apply to the content creators as apply to the OR team. Please don't be tempted to "borrow" any of the original shape or texture data. That *would* be inviting trouble.


Jeff..............................

[SurvivorSean]

Not to be stirring up trouble but there is an interesting point was made, that also brings up an interesting question.

Open Office for example is completely free and not only reads and writes in Office format but it's own (similar to what I believe ORTS is headed).

Now there has been tons of court cases out there for various things such as copyright, intellectual property. In particular the ability to download and copy music rulings over the past decade has opened up the floodgates. I still say MSTS falls in the "Abandonware" category regardless but from a legality standpoint one could argue that ORTS is attempting to circumvent the need for MSTS. I know it currently needs it for shapes etc. but I believe from what I see that is the goal, and I'm totally cool for that. Just like Open Office circumvents the need to buy any MS Office software (something I personally have taken advantage of).

But some could also say there are many files such as signal scripts, consists, etc. built into a script developed by Microsoft/Kuju for use with MSTS. But recent court decisions as mentioned has basically made media and messages not intellectual property only hardware and software built to use that media. In that case ORTS is completely within current laws. Jump across borders though and it takes similar laws to enforce those same rules. Regardless I don't think there is anything the team has to worry about especially when they don't make money for their volunteer efforts. M$ apparently makes plenty of money on XBOX, the next crappy version of Windows, and whatever else it can get it's hands on.

Thanks

Sean

[rpicardi1]

Please don't be tempted to "borrow" any of the original shape or texture data. That *would* be inviting trouble.


Jeff..............................

There are items currently in use, I believe the LF_Block1 and LF_Block2 are an example, that use the default textures for houses and trees. That is going to be a pain if those have to be sorted out and replaced with new ones.

None of the original shapes files are worth borrowing. They are better off being replaced with new ones.

[Vince]

........................snip...................
I still say MSTS falls in the "Abandonware" category regardless but from a legality standpoint one could argue that ORTS is attempting to circumvent the need for MSTS. I know it currently needs it for shapes etc. but I believe from what I see that is the goal, and I'm totally cool for that. ..........snip......................
But some could also say there are many files such as signal scripts, consists, etc. built into a script developed by Microsoft/Kuju for use with MSTS. Thanks, Sean

Hi Sean,
You think ORTS needs MSTS for shapes? How's that work?
What about the shapes I made?
ORTS doesn't 'need' mine but ORTS displays them very well, even better that MSTS does!

Is the structure or concept of a shape text file copywrited? I don't know! After all it's just a text file that describes an object in 3D space that can be 'read' by ORTS.
I can create a model with SketchUp, export it as a unicode text file and have that file be able to be 'read' in BOTH ORTS & MSTS.
Nothing from Microsoft was used in the production of the shape other than the concept of using a text file to describe an object in 3D space. The ONLY time Microsoft gets involved is using the Route Editor to place the shape.

Regarding signal scripts: I thought they were simple scripting language. The MSTS executable IS a copywrited program but the signal scripts are just script code telling the MSTS executable what the SignalStates are. The fact that ORTS interperts them the same way (or will in time) is coincidental.

Re: Consists . . . a simple text file list of the order in which a train is made up the type of equipment. Again, The MSTS executable 'reads' this text file so it knows how to render the train and just as previously, ORTS 'reads' the consist text file and the ORTS executable reads it also.
I can type up by hand ,using notepad, a simple text file textfile.con. If I've followed the same format that is produced by the Activity Editor, this manually typed text file will work just fine in MSTS and ORTS.

The only thing as I understand (I may be wrong here) that ORTS 'needs' from MSTS is the editors to generate a routes database files.
Tiles, World, Track and Road database. Did I forget any?

Once I make a route with NO MSTS objects AT ALL with the RE, I have created in text form, a dataset that ORTS can 'read'. To run said route on ORTS does not require anything from MSTS.

Sort of like a companyONE invents an optical storage device, lets call it a . . . CD! The companyONE's CD's can only be read, 'played' on their machines.
Then another companyORTS decodes how the data is written on the the CompanyONE CD'd and then goes ahead and builds a machine run by it's own unique program to 'read', call it play if you will, the inventor CompanyONE disks.
There is nothing CompanyONE can do about it. You cant copywrite a concept.

The MSTS concept: Lets write a program to read a bunch of text files to generate a 3D 'world'.
Anyone is free to 'read' the same "bunch of text files" and generate an even better looking 3D world.
Interesting discussion guys. Thanx.

[SurvivorSean]

I'm not going to win this debate, and I really don't care because I can't wait to see ORTS. The need I'm referencing is a file name. It's looking for a file not an image that can be created in many different programs outside of MSTS (not included with the original package). As you have mentioned using MSTS to create standard text files shouldn't be a crime. What's interesting about these standard text files is MS went through the trouble of putting something in line 1 of every one of those text files. As for the route databases that's probably much more complicated than these simple text files we've all come to love.

The other question is what is in those text files. Everything was laid out in a certain matter for MSTS to read it. For example in part of my RTS templates I've tried simply copying info from these text files and MSTS crashes because a simple character is out of whack. Normally it's simply a missing hard return.

I'm not defending MSTS. As I've said it's abandonware plain and simple and Microsoft wouldn't stand a chance. Apparently due legal rulings even a cease and desist to Open Office isn't on their radar. Train simulation is small dollars in Microsoft's eyes and they're not going to do a thing, and I for one am very happy for that. But when MS used their own buggy editors to create these files (still depending on them) and lets say hypothetically speaking that Microsoft was still interested in MSTS, the laws haven't changed, and this was payware. Having a 3d image that can be created elsewhere is no big deal, but having something that generates in a specifically set sequence of bits that was developed by an MSTS program is a different story, and you can bet if they really cared they would fight it.

I wouldn't send any letters to Microsoft as trains are not on their radar. If my legal take on this is wrong, well that's why I'm not a lawyer. I'd rather use my experience simply build something to improve the hobby and things like ORTS, RTS, and other projects under development will do just that.

Thanks

Sean

[longiron]

Patents, copyrights, legality of MSTS content use have been debated endlessly over the years. Can we stay on topic? The challenge is before the community ... this is not something the OR team can deliver as part of its efforts.

Open Rails is moving towards independence - we've already announced that we're building support for DDS texturing in addition to ACE. The team is discussing the format of a next generation shape file format that's optimized for a DX11 and beyond graphics world. We are determined to deliver a world-class realistic train sim platform that is developed by the community, for the community.

[mestevet]

Chris,

Since I'm stuck in the 20th Century using TSM Is there any modeling tool out there that currently generates shapes in a format similar to the one you're discussing, or would entirely new exporters need to be generated? What I'm angling at is what modeling software we'd need to use to take advantage of this - hopefully nothing "high end" that would be out of most users' price range. I'm also unfamiliar with DDS and DX11 - I assume there are already utilities available for converting "standard" image editing formats to these texture formats. Can you or someone point us to those (and hopefully, they're free)?

BTW, I haven't forgotten my promise about that Aberdeen Station model, I've just been swamped with other things lately...

Steve

[twpol]

Is there any modeling tool out there that currently generates shapes in a format similar to the one you're discussing, or would entirely new exporters need to be generated? What I'm angling at is what modeling software we'd need to use to take advantage of this - hopefully nothing "high end" that would be out of most users' price range.

We haven't settled on a shape format yet, but we are aware of issues of who supports what and cost of tools. To that end, there's a high chance we'll support COLLADA, which already has widespread support in tools (including SketchUp and Blender), either directly in OR or via a provided converter.

I'm also unfamiliar with DDS and DX11 - I assume there are already utilities available for converting "standard" image editing formats to these texture formats. Can you or someone point us to those (and hopefully, they're free)?

DDS is supported by lots of tools already, including programs like Paint.NET, so you should have no trouble with using them or converting to/from them.

[OTTODAD]

DDS is supported by lots of tools already, including programs like Paint.NET, so you should have no trouble with using them or converting to/from them.

Yes, like Mike Simpson's RW_Tools2 which can convert RW textures to DDS which Freeware Paint.NET can then save into a number of graphics formats for working on in appropriate for them graphics software and then convert back into DDS.

ORTS reminds me of the Flight Simulator Cambridge team which developed it as a hobby and when it took off was then taken over my M$ !

O t t o

[longiron]

Chris,

Since I'm stuck in the 20th Century using TSM Is there any modeling tool out there that currently generates shapes in a format similar to the one you're discussing, or would entirely new exporters need to be generated? What I'm angling at is what modeling software we'd need to use to take advantage of this - hopefully nothing "high end" that would be out of most users' price range.
Steve

Steve,
Rest assured TSM issues will be fully considered. I'm stuck just like you.

[SurvivorSean]

Agreed..... Every law in the land protects what your doing, so there is nothing to worry about.

Worse case you get is a cease and desist letter and you remove backward compatibility. The chances of that happening are about as likely as I win the lottery (don't play often).

Thanks

Sean

[mestevet]

Steve,
Rest assured TSM issues will be fully considered. I'm stuck just like you.

Actually, I was looking for a reason to get off my butt and start using 3DCanvas...

Steve

[Conrail Tweety]

...Worse case you get is a cease and desist letter and you remove backward compatibility. The chances of that happening are about as likely as I win the lottery (don't play often)...

Good planning would create a direct path to the end result, rather than creating a situation likely to force a lengthy detour along the way.

It would be ill advised to do anything that could turn M$ against the OR project by "pushing their buttons" to see if they react.

Dennis

[OTTODAD]

It would be ill advised to do anything that could turn M$ against the OR project by "pushing their buttons" to see if they react.

Or in other words "Don't wake a sleeping dog" !

M$ did not bat an eyelid when MSTSBin George hacked the MSTS source code, creating more interest in MSTS, selling more copies of it.

If ORTS were to rely on existing installed copies of MSTS then that would also create more interest in MSTS and again sell more copies of it ?

O t t o