Am I wrong about Mills in Assetto Corsa?

I don't like how this was done. No permission was requested. The guy changed the TSOs but still calls it Mills Metropark and uses the same layout. There is no mention of ISI or rFactor 2 at the track. When I confronted the modder, he said that he built the track from scratch and was only "inspired" by Mills ; yet he calls it Mills.

This is the thread in AC forums:

http://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/i...-(not-a-conversion)---updated-nov-15th.23491/

Obviously, it is advisable to ignore the 8 year olds talking about putting ISI on the port-o-lets and such and pay attention only to what the modder is saying.

Anyway, the combination of from scratch and only being "inspired" but using same name and layout just rubs me the wrong way ; especially having not asked permission which I didn't even know in the beginning.

 

I asked Tim about that ages ago and he mumbled something or rather. hehehe

Only fair we have their Nords ? p


and while you at it rippers grab that ProjectCars Lotus 25 for me please.

loool

 

So a ripped version of an ISI track is on AC official forum? Classy move by Kunos. It wonder how the AC fanboys would explain that links and discussions to ripped content on their official forums is cool.

Edit: Of course the OP is a troll who loves to get people wound up around here. Meh,

 

http://www.virtualr.net/rfactor-2-mills-metropark-2-0-released

Tim Wheatley:

"We gave permission for some conversions to AC (we've seen 2 of the 3 so far).

If anyone ripped from AC, report the post if it's somewhere we can control, as I know they don't want their stuff converted (and that's fine). That's their decision, as giving OKs for conversions or scratch builds based on our content is ours.

Unlike some in the community, devs don't hate each other. Our 3PA stuff is a good indication of that, as you have with-permission conversions and updates being done. While it's not going to happen with a non-ISI engine (so no AC to rF2 conversions), I don't think there really has to be any 'evening out' either. Things can go one way, or another. We're fine saying OK to conversions when we feel like it... End of discussion really?"

 

AC can convert RF2 , but can not RF2 AC what advantage ?

 

Modders asked ISI and ISI gave permission. Have any modders asked Kunos for permission?!?

 

And isn't that the rF1 Mills rather than the rF2 Mills?

 

Thanks.

 

One I know of was told no, then released anyway. The disrespect is pretty huge there. If I said no to a conversion and someone did it, it'd make my blood boil.

 

Story about this track, including these questions above, removed from VirtualR site. Interesting.

 

I'd say so, from the thread link in the OP, it was created in April this year. rF2 Mills was released in late October.

 

It's back up now which is even more unbelievable because now you know they reviewed it and, incredibly, decided to keep it.

And if that's not enough I was given a warning to no longer post in that thread.

 

It is not up to the user to go witch hunting. Report it to ISI (they know about it here already) and let them assess if it's truly scratch made or if there are reused resources, and then take it up with Kunos to remove that topic and if it's a persistent violation they can ban the user.

 

It's been stated in multiple places this isn't a conversion. It's a scratch build based on the Mills layout (which is largely unchanged since 2007 in rF1).


Tim's obviously aware that this exists, and if there was an issue with it he/ISI would request it be removed from the AC forum, just like they would remove anything from this forum if they received the same request. I fail to see where the outrage here is coming from.

 

I fail to understand your issue with the mod....it's not a conversion, it's scratch made.
Would a modding platform game condemn another modding platform game modder for reproducing one's fantasy tracks, from scratch, again?
I guess it would be down to individuals....we're yet to see a netkar pro fantasy track mod for RF2 to see how Kunos would react to that.

Conversions are a different matter and I don't see any developper agreeing on this. And if they do, well, their choice.

Are you suggesting modders should get licences for what they do? I'm sure you don't....

 

I seriously don't know what your problem is with this. It's not a conversion, he made it from scratch, not a single triangle or texture of the rFactor track was used.

 

Sometimes looks like you P.S.R. are trying to start some flames about something random. Please, don't do that.

You've been answered several times over here so yeah, that pillory has to stop here.

We are aware of that track, everything is fine.

Move on.

 

Did any of you with questions read the thread? Not rocket science. If you have specific questions about what I have said then ask. Otherwise, not going to rehash everything here.

Edit - Per Tuttle nevermind.

Edit #2 - For the record, I'm growing as tired of the accusations of starting flames as some are of my supposed starting of flames. I find it amazing that people blame me for there overreactions to sincere questions but of course whatever because clearly mob rule around here even when the mob are the ones both flying off the handle and then complaining about how what I wrote made THEM fly off the handle but whatever. Now everyone can whine about me whining

 

I do not have an AC forum account and I honestly don't need one to lurk what other guys are saying.
Same for Tim I guess. No time for these things, so, if you think there is something serious to report just send a PM or email ISI, with maybe something more than a link to a private forum. Since we are not reading our own forums realtime you see how a straight contact with us might be much more useful.

 

Will do. And did actually send screenshots of the comments on request from someone at ISI.