Modder work on ISI download page

88mphTim

88mphTim

racesimcentral.net
Hi folks

We are considering listing mods that either don't use intellectual property, or that we hold a license for and haven't yet built ourselves. Only with modders permission. While modders retain ownership.

We'd mirror them, getmod them, etc.

A grading system similar to what rfc did could be implemented.

We also have some of what we consider lower impact licenses, we may hand some out to modders where we don't see them fitting our ideas or schedule.

They'd be listed on rfnet downloads page.

So, although we pretty much know we're going to do this. Thoughts? Advice? Etc?

Tim


Sent using Tapatalk
 
First impression is that seem like really good ideas :)

Edit - I like the idea of tags like Asetto Corsa does with cars (manual transmission, etc.) so tracks coukd have any number of tags for temporary, permanent, oval, dirt, etc. Also, I like how Driving Italia has several sorts like release date, alphabetical, number of downloads, etc. Finally, not sure whether is a pro or con to allow comments but I often choose whether to download something from rfc based on comments.

Edit #2 - And some very basic objective functionality meta data such as whether includes AIW or anything else 100% objective and measureable and only to help filter content.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I personally feel the grading system at rfc was garbage. Granted, I don't see a fair way of showing the popular mods either. I personally feel if ISI is going to list it, shouldn't it be decent to begin with? My guess its going to have to be looked over to check for intellectual property?
 
I,m not a modder although I wish I had the talent, but I think its a fantastic idea of you guys sub licensing work out to modding groups that doesn't fit your schedule.
My only personal concerns ( as its just my thoughts etc ) would be who you gave the work out to.

Groups like VLM would be ideal for tracks etc and people like Apex and URD would be great for cars ( as long as they didn't charge for your ideas ), but there seem to be a lot of modders that are gunna save the world but tend to disappear of the face of it.
This side of things could be a down point for RF2.
I'm sure ISI has a massive amount of planned content that can't be kept up with so if these groups were willing to take it on then that would be great.

Something different in the way of content would be good too, there seems to be a lot of the same model car being released or about to be released in several games, its almost as though they are the only blueprints to be found to build with.
It would also be a good idea for you guys to view the work as it goes along, approving or disapproving of the way the mods are going to so that you would be happy to release them as if they were your own work.
 
freew67 said:
I personally feel the grading system at rfc was garbage. Granted, I don't see a fair way of showing the popular mods either. I personally feel if ISI is going to list it, shouldn't it be decent to begin with? My guess its going to have to be looked over to check for intellectual property?
Click to expand...

Yes unless licensed by us anyway.

I think, yes, in some ways it was. But perhaps texture quality, real road presets yes/no, garage slots, etc etc. should have some of that on our own track profiles really!


Sent using Tapatalk
 
On second thoughts, with stuff that you license out, there possibly would have to be some sort of remuneration to the modders for the work, especially if the availability of the mod lead to more sales for ISI.
 
FatCity said:
On second thoughts, with stuff that you license out, there possibly would have to be some sort of remuneration to the modders for the work, especially if the availability of the mod lead to more sales for ISI.
Click to expand...

I'm sure it'll depend on the modder. Guess we'll see. It's tough to know. There's two well used tracks we have rights for and haven't built because they did. Not wanting to kill or waste their work. We'll figure it out.


Sent using Tapatalk
 
You mentioned two tracks already made by modders that could be getting a "license"?

I'm little concerned about the quality variation, ISI so far has superior tracks in quality (later the release the better).
Would ISI staff lend a helping hand with these tracks/modders to keep up with the ISI standards or just make initial arrangement and good luck?
Then theres the accuracy, where are the data for these tracks from? Does these licenses just come to you as "do with it as you see fit", or is there points to it that the work has to fill criteria x, y and z before release?
I'm sure this would be totally out of question with car licenses right?
FatCity pointed out that if these modders disappear from the face of the earth, what happens with the track if its not complete?

I prolly could come up with questions about this all day, but the matter of the fact is that IF ISI doesnt have time to do these tracks at all, and giving out the license would somehow improve these mod tracks, its a win win situation all around.
 
No the grading system, as free says if it's good enough to go on ISI website then that's all the downloader needs to know.
Passing licensed content onto modders, again as above I think it would benefit the modder to have direct contact and help from ISI staff, otherwise you'll get a whole host of people doing one track so we'd end up with various variations which helps no one. Also on that you could get any Johnny come lately who'll whack it together in a short time and never update it (as we've already seen multiple times, mainly with tracks).

Personally like ISI to pick and choose the modder based on their previous work.
 
Would be excellent, though I think ISI would probably need to step in and take over though, or be ready to if someone leaves the community.

I think it would also be wise to release the tracks to open beta "focus testing" before putting up. Yes, most of us know when a good high quality track comes out from a modder, but I think just to get everyone sort of temporarily focused on that track to iron out any bugs or raise suggestions would be wise. Most of us here will know it's community created stuff, but I don't think that will matter to a lot of other people - remember the quad's reception? Many of the community tracks would probably need banners changed, and could also do with an AI improvement. Could be a great opportunity for ISI to lend a helping hand at that stage, teach a few tricks and allow that information to spread.

I do think it would be excellent for ISI to bring modders work into a more official realm, with such a small team you have way too many licenses for the manpower.
 
Good idea, and in addition, could a dedicated private forum with support from ISI can be open to help them to make the job in the good way to be published? Because it's a good idea to show mods on ISI pages, but we need reactive support to make them better ;).
 
THink this is a great idea Tim. Obvious precautions will have to be taken place and as said previously, that were not charged for the content. I think this will help RF2 considerably.

URDs cars are great but what would happen there if you consider there stuff. Obviously talks would happen. But what if you could acquire the licenses for their fake cars?

They are great cars. BUT..how about us that have already paid for their mods... hmmm
 
The idea is good and I appreciate it. I understand that this initiative is mainly focused on making much easier to join a server. Therefore, I would not mesh it with any type of rating of the content itself. The best indicator of how fun a track/car combo is the number of people in the server.My concerns:

- Some people that keep complaining about quality and although nobody forces them to get into servers using what they consider crappy tracks will don't accept that some people do. I think it is a fascist attitude.

- Amateur modders like myself that build imaginary tracks but that we typically grab objects or textures from here and there. I know ISI grants permission for using stuff in its tracks but supposedly other's dont. I say supposedly because of the following: I never got a reply from any modder to whom I asked permission for using or converting anything. I never got a complaint from any modder for the very same reason. I really don't know, for this reason, if my tracks comply with the legality statement that is requested in the OP.

My tracks are in the download section but I am not sure if this automatically implies that they fulfill the requirements.

Thanks for clarifying Tim...

enviado mediante tapatalk
 
I think this is a great idea, as long as it is ISI that choose the content to list and it is considered of good quality by them that's a good enough endorsement for me, no harm in having a user ranking option alongside this too.
ISI selecting which Modders could take on and work on some of it's licenses is also a great idea, again ISI can help out and monitor quality prior to listing on their website and it would bring more content.

Also I personally have no issue with paying a small amount for additional content if it is of high quality, recently I've dabbled with iracing and looked at raceroom and realised just how cheap RF2 is compared to other options, in particular when you consider the core game features like weather and real road. So I'd happily pay for fully licensed top quality content from ISI, now to me I have my moneys worth with the core game and existing content (given some features need to be implemented fully yet), if contributing to content helps bring it quicker then happy days. If someone makes a fantastic V8 Supercar mod like ORSM did for Rf1 that would be worth a few ££ ;)
 
^yeah, it's that kind of thing that divides me. I really like the way ISI are saying they will not get people to pay for additional content after purchasing the product, but at the same time, there are probably some brilliant licences they will never be able to get just because of money. That's where I would be quite happy to flick some bucks towards it though, as it really sucks for that to be the case.

Just one of these odd things that probably won't ever happen XD
That's the way they conduct their business, and its nice to see them committed to their principles like that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I also think that paying for having good content and, most important, having an updated quality sim, would be perfectly acceptable. Today's software development model is very much based on maintainance fees. I would have no problem with that as long as it is a reasonable amount.

enviado mediante tapatalk
 
I'm not sure if I understand,

1)

ISI will invite modders to build certain tracks & list them within the rfactor 2 official track list
( with a credit and ownership retained by the modder )
but ISI to quality check -aid where appropriate
great move

or

2)

ISI will start to list existing mod tracks
(not a great idea as quality is poor apart from a few exceptions )

----------------

I suggested the first one a while back so obviously think it's a great idea,
I'm more than happy to pay / donate for tracks up to recent ISI standard

I'm also assuming ISI will aid the modder to a limited degree & test/pass the track for completion to help ensure quality

some thing like this has to happen IMO to accelerate the much needed track list for rfactor 2 ( there's a great selection of cars already )

if it's option 2 then these tracks will surely need updating and the quality ramping up thus not to give rfactor 2 a bad name etc


edit : it seems most people will be happy paying a small fee for
"ISI refined community tracks" however the monies are divided
( between original modder and ISI for updating the tracks )


edit 2 : just put existing mod tracks (non ISI ) on the track lost would be a massive mistake due to poor the quality of them, in fact there's older ISI tracks that are urgently in need of updates ( I know this is happening )
there's a few exceptions of course but IMO not many
-the latest ISI tracks are very good
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top