volcano valley(coop) ?Hellracer?

[Freddy]

Ah, I see. Well, making your maps look as good as Hellracer's is not easy, so to assume that the quality is at least equal is quite something.
But the reason I replied was because it sounded like you thought that 'modification of maps from other people = progress'. I'm glad that turned out to be different.

It should be 'modification that brings a whole new (good) experience = progress'

This isn't true. What if he just wants to upload his map to KaMRepos so others can download it?

Yeah, didn't read carefully enough, didn't see this part. Even then, posting it with credits to the original author and with the changes made (and/or link to the original map) I don't see as a problem. I think we make maps and other content to share with others, not to make something that shouldn't ever be changed.

[The Dark Lord]

Well I must disagree with that. But I think we've already had a discussion like this somewhere on the forum...

[Freddy]

Well I must disagree with that. But I think we've already had a discussion like this somewhere on the forum...

Are you referring to the first or second part of my post? Do I understand correctly, that you are against publication of modified maps altogether?

[The Dark Lord]

Well I must disagree with that. But I think we've already had a discussion like this somewhere on the forum...

Are you referring to the first or second part of my post? Do I understand correctly, that you are against publication of modified maps altogether?

I was referring to the first part as well as the second part. No, I'm not against publication of modified maps, but I am against publication of modified maps without the author's permission. I myself wouldn't like it when someone just took my map and changed it. And I certainly wouldn't consider it 'progress'.

[Freddy]

I was referring to the first part as well as the second part. No, I'm not against publication of modified maps, but I am against publication of modified maps without the author's permission. I myself wouldn't like it when someone just took my map and changed it. And I certainly wouldn't consider it 'progress'.

Well, that is awfully arrogant. Anyway for me, this topic is finished Don't want to stir up a problem.

[The Dark Lord]

I was referring to the first part as well as the second part. No, I'm not against publication of modified maps, but I am against publication of modified maps without the author's permission. I myself wouldn't like it when someone just took my map and changed it. And I certainly wouldn't consider it 'progress'.

Well, that is awfully arrogant. Anyway for me, this topic is finished Don't want to stir up a problem.

Maybe, that's your opinion. I'm not surprised by this kind of insult, but fortunately I don't really care.

[sado1]

A person like The Dark Lord, with such a long experience in mapmaking, regarded by the most as one of the best mapmakers around (when it comes to looks, if not at all), who spends monstrous time on making his each map (no less than 6 months), has every right to have this opinion. I can't imagine anyone else being a good enough of a mapmaker to even try modifying his maps. Maybe some other "ones of the bests", but then, their opinions are quite similar on that matter, so I doubt they would ever try.

There was this old topic where we already had this discussion. I'll try to find it, since I don't feel like writing all the stuff or the second time. It had some good points there.

[Lewin]

Since most map authors don't provide a license with their maps, you have to assume they are copyright by the author and you cannot republish those maps (modified or not) without that author's permission. If we wanted to we could force map authors to agree to make their maps open source when they are added to the Remake (agree to some kind of license), but for now we don't get map authors to agree to anything at all.

Personally I like open source and allowing others to improve/modify/hack your work, as long as they give you attribution. Hence all the 100k lines of code Krom and I have written for the KaM Remake is open source and anybody is free to use that code in their own projects, or modify the KaM Remake and redistribute it (once again as long as it is attributed properly), regardless of whether their changes can be considered "progress" or if they made stupid changes we don't like. KaM Remake has benefited from other open source projects, for example PascalScript which we use for dynamic mission scripts (we would never have written something that powerful ourselves just for KaM Remake).

But I'm talking about code not maps. Perhaps maps are more like works of art than code. Sharing/copying code has obvious advantages, but it doesn't really make sense with artwork. Similarly players wouldn't like it if most maps contained bits copied directly from others (or if most maps were just slightly modified versions of old maps).

Regardless, map authors put huge amounts of time into their maps and are entitled to license them whatever way they want. Krom and I can set rules about what map licenses we accept for maps included in official releases, but so far we haven't.

[Tiank]

Perhaps maps are more like works of art than code.

Yeah, I look at some maps as a piece of art indeed. And when we're talking about art, I really doubt, that e.g. Da Vinci would like the idea of putting a hat on Mona Lisa's head and that he would consider that as progress... .

My advice for gold1, just try to find an active map maker whose map you would like to turn into co-op, it would be easier (and probably faster) than waiting for Hellracer to eventually show up again.

[Ben]

Perhaps maps are more like works of art than code.

This: Yes! I've always thought of mapmaking as an art. Maybe that's where things differentiate.

[pawel95]

I can't imagine anyone else being a good enough of a mapmaker to even try modifying his maps.

I found one. Hints: "8vs8 is Possible" / "Multiwillage is real"