Is everybody just slacking now, or not caring? Because there's a million and one rips showing up on the listings now. Especially in Anime.
Pokemon: Elite for example. It uses the hub description, "TEST SERVER UP FOR THIS NEW GAME!" But it's nothing new. Once you actually log into play it, it's the generic Training-Verb Game with insanely high level requirements, and almost every player afking just to say they've got the highest numbers.
Whereas games with unique coding but ripped icons are being denied just because you're looking at the map and bases and going "oh hey, it looks like BsoC". One game (Which I won't name due to the possiblity of seeming biased) has been rejected and not listed, yet it's got far superior coding to the one people are calling it a rip of.
Is there a legitimate judging scale for this stuff? Or are the guys admining this stuff just looking at one small piece of the greater picture and slapping an accepted or denied on them?
If byond is trying to promote "Originality" then maybe the stuff getting put up needs to be looked at by professionals, not players.
ID:132219
 Dec 5 2011, 2:10 pm
|
|
Calus CoRPS wrote:
PhantomKurei wrote: Ah lol. In that case here's a few that concern me, mainly because I can tell from the first 10 minutes they're rips. http://www.byond.com/games/Sin9333/PokemonDestinyQuest (PRAT Rip that somehow managed to slip buy) http://www.byond.com/games/Reaper123456789/PokemonElite (Generic pokemon game, train verb and basic startout in front of a prof, no starter/pokeballs given) http://www.byond.com/games/SatanicDave/BlackStorm (Started out original, and then reverted to the normal rippy train verb stuff) **These are all pokemon games I've noticed, other genres seem to be fine, but I wasn't sure whether to report Twilight, RP Reborn, or BlueFire from the pokemon section b/c they're all based on the same model. | |
Thanks!
PhantomKurei wrote: http://www.byond.com/games/Sin9333/PokemonDestinyQuest (PRAT Rip that somehow managed to slip buy) I have looked into this and Sin9333 claims that he has the rights to continue the game. I simply pushed the status back to pending until PRATs original owner can confirm the transition in ownership. http://www.byond.com/games/Reaper123456789/PokemonElite (Generic pokemon game, train verb and basic startout in front of a prof, no starter/pokeballs given) I did not change the hubs status; I will have to look more into it. Unfortunately, I am not too familiar with the Pokemon games on BYOND. http://www.byond.com/games/SatanicDave/BlackStorm (Started out original, and then reverted to the normal rippy train verb stuff) The game wasn't being hosted when I viewed the hub. I will refrain from changing the status until I can get a look at it. | |
Alright, thanks for at least looking into them lol. It frustrates me a bit, especially when people are using words to hide that they can't work on something themselves. A lot of these "New Game Under Works" hubs are really putting that down and pray they get listed nowadays. Which makes the legitimate original ideas suffer sometimes. xD
| |
This is exactly the point I was trying to make before.
Calus CoRPS wrote: I have looked into this and Sin9333 claims that he has the rights to continue the game. I simply pushed the status back to pending until PRATs original owner can confirm the transition in ownership. IMO the game was already listed and a single comment should not immediately cause the status to be changed. In the light of new information it may surely be helpful to have a word with the author of that hub entry, but that doesn't mean you should just change its status like that, because then no hub entry will be safe from temporary suppression if even the slightest technicality is brought up. I ask that this it be looked into that it can become official policy not to change the status on a whim but rather talk things over before making any decisions. Unless this "Sin9333" has killed someone I doubt he should need this level of scrutiny. | |
JBoer wrote:
IMO the game was already listed and a single comment should not immediately cause the status to be changed. To be fair, even the author of the hub "claimed" that the previous owner had given him the right to continue the game. Unfortunately, there were no comments by any other hub moderators, so I pushed the game back into the pending pile. The game hasn't been rejected and can quickly be brought back into the anime category. I have left a comment in the feedback area and hopefully, I will receive a reply shortly. When dealing with a potential change of ownership, we have to take the necessary steps to ensure that no rips get through. | |
Calus CoRPS wrote:
JBoer wrote: Nothing against you, but I still think that does not warrant a change in status. The status should only be changed after a discussion, not before. The only exceptions would be cases where it's obvious a hub entry would have to be rejected -- and even then, those exceptional cases should be written down somewhere to avoid confusion. Another exception that comes to mind is if the hub author is taking a long time to answer. AFAIK hub authors aren't notified of a change in status, either. So they have to find out from others that the status was changed, or happen to stumble upon their hub entry. The game hasn't been rejected and can quickly be brought back into the anime category. I have left a comment in the feedback area and hopefully, I will receive a reply shortly. And hopefully you'll receive a kinder reaction than the one I gave a few months ago. I don't take kindly to rampant decision making and I'm pretty sure others feel the same about this. Hub entries should be left alone as much as possible. Any issues should be brought up and discussed before an entry is taken down, preferably in private with the hub author. | |
JBoer wrote:
AFAIK hub authors aren't notified of a change in status, either. So they have to find out from others that the status was changed, or happen to stumble upon their hub entry. Whenever I change the status of a game from listed to pending, I leave a comment in the feedback tab. Correct me if I am wrong, but the hub owner is alerted when a comment is left. And hopefully you'll receive a kinder reaction than the one I gave a few months ago. I don't take kindly to rampant decision making and I'm pretty sure others feel the same about this. The owner just replied back and he understands the situation. Of course, I cannot please everybody, so I do expect people to be unhappy with my actions once in a while. Hub entries should be left alone as much as possible. Any issues should be brought up and discussed before an entry is taken down, preferably in private with the hub author. Generally, I will only change a hub entry back to pending if there is reasonable belief that the game does not meet the listing criteria. Because I requested proof from the hub owner, the status is unsettled, thus pending. If the hub owner provides the the proper information, just as you did with Cowed, I will quickly change the entry's status and I'd apologize for any inconveniences. This is why I try to remain online when hub owners reply, I want to make these situation flow as quickly as it can for the person. | |
"**These are all pokemon games I've noticed, other genres seem to be fine, but I wasn't sure whether to report Twilight, RP Reborn, or BlueFire from the pokemon section b/c they're all based on the same model."
I can personally stand up for Twilight, seeing as I helped Mattz program for it a long ass time ago. RP Reborn is original and I haven't played Bluefire. Please keep in mind that because a game isn't as polished or has similar elements to others, doesn't mean it's a rip. A rip uses resources from a project that wasn't given to them/made public. | |
The game is another "Continuation" without permission. The hub author said himself that there isn't a chance the original author would agree with giving him the permission.
I believe it should be rejected unless Sin can get the original author to speak to one of us directly, saying he has permission. | |
Yusuke13 wrote:
I believe it should be rejected unless Sin can get the original author to speak to one of us directly, saying he has permission. I was discussing this with him in the feedback area. His most recent post says that he and the original author are no longer on talking terms. So I am afraid that a rejection will be the final decision. I was simply giving him a day to contact the original author. | |
Calus CoRPS wrote:
I was discussing this with him in the feedback area. His most recent post says that he and the original author are no longer on talking terms. So I am afraid that a rejection will be the final decision. I was simply giving him a day to contact the original author. How did the guy get the source in the first place? This entire situation where BYOND moderators are getting involved in the nitty gritty of copyright theft allegations is just showing that you can give out your source codez to anyone you want to use for what they want, then just rescind those rights whenever you like. You guys are making decisions based on assumptions and guesses and it's starting to get really silly. | |
Murrawhip wrote:
This entire situation where BYOND moderators are getting involved in the nitty gritty of copyright theft allegations is just showing that you can give out your source codez to anyone you want to use for what they want, then just rescind those rights whenever you like. I don't get what you're trying to say. You guys are making decisions based on assumptions and guesses and it's starting to get really silly. The guy blatantly said that the game was created by somebody else, please read the feedback tab if you want to fully understand what is going on. Because BYOND developers are so willing to give their code to just anybody, thus allowing it to be leaked, we cannot trust people by their word. The original author needs to comment on this dispute, else, it will be rejected. It is unfortunate, but we need proof when dealing with the transfer of ownership. | |
Calus CoRPS wrote:
The guy blatantly says that the game was created by somebody else, please read the feedback tab if you want to fully understand what is going on. The guy says several times that the original owner gave him the source so that he could take over as owner of the game. Please read the feedback tab if you want to fully understand what is going on. The only person who should be able to contest that, is the original owner. | |
Lugia319 wrote:
Don't permit rips regardless of "continuation of source." This is one way to solve it, however barbaric the tactic may seem. However I still believe in the fact that games can, and will, change formal ownership at one point or another. If there was a way for BYOND to allow members to trade projects and their rights to one another through accounts, this entire fiasco could be avoided for the most part. Also, if people would refrain from handing out their source code like candy, plenty of arguments could be avoided entirely. I do believe that developers should have the right to trade Source Code however, but there should also be conditions. Such as if one project is too similar to one previously submitted, it will be removed. People are still free to use pre-written source (I sure as hell wouldn't however), but it keeps people from being able to change two things and resubmitting it as an entirely new game. Also, games submitted using pre-written code, also must include the source from which they're gotten, to ensure that IP rights and Copyrights are maintained in a proper, and orderly manner. Apologies for my "Devil's Advocate" standpoint, however my opinions are sacred to myself alone, and I shall express them freely, without slander or ridicule by outside parties. | |
Then how about I meet you halfway. Don't permit the game to be listed if it's still in the same state as the other game. If the game is "updating to be more original" then tell the creator to resubmit it when it's complete. After all, if it is updating to become a more complete game, then it should be marked "incomplete" anyway.
| |
Lugia319 wrote:
Then how about I meet you halfway. Don't permit the game to be listed if it's still in the same state as the other game. If the game is "updating to be more original" then tell the creator to resubmit it when it's complete. After all, if it is updating to become a more complete game, then it should be marked "incomplete" anyway. This would work, however until people update the game to make it more original, it too should be listed as Incomplete. | |
Nobody making a fan game on BYOND has any right to say "this is my game". Fan games are derivative works, and belong to the owners of the works they are based off of. When you make a Pokemon game, that game does not belong to you. You own no rights to it. It is owned by Nintendo. All Pokemon fan games are rips, they rip off the original Pokemon game series.
In my opinion, all fan games should be banned from the search, no questions asked. If they are using copyrighted works they do not own, they are rips, and should not be listed. I don't know why BYOND Volunteers should be wasting their time sorting out the chaotic mess that is the BYOND fan game community. Just hide them and be done with it. | |
Some games may get past us. Because so many people are so careless with their code, it is quite difficult to stay up-to-date with what is and isn't a rip.
The best route to take is to provide us with a link to the rip(s) and we'll look into it.