3DSen is based on reverse engineering and not IP since it’s not selling the ROMs that come with it. All completely legal to sell and don’t mind buying to support this guy’s reverse engineering and transformation effort. If it was just some stock NES emulator that he was selling, eh, I’d probably just say legal but bullshit.
Lossless Scaling is a tool/actual framework that uses released/open source API calls to apply frame gen to any game, as far as I know and that’s not violating any terms or conditions or IP either.
With this, while I can appreciate that he’s done this for other game, the terms and conditions for them is “don’t use our tools to sell mods”. Do I agree with it? Actually yes, for the most part. I’m of the firm belief that the modding community should be open, I think that these are things that should be done for passion, I like having donations set up, and that we’re lucky that we live in an age that many game companies are kind enough to release modding tools without demanding a license fee. Plus he’s not selling a framework here, he’s selling his framework built with a company’s tools that says “No paid mods because we think the modding community should be open”.
I think that IP is often tricky and I think that this is fine and not a slippery slope argument.
I think there are still misconception: CDProject was smart, albeit dishonest, into presenting the whole thing as “Cyberpunk’s Mod”; so, you (as general and misguided reader) inclined to think the modder took something from CDProject and generate something from thin air… added games are just icying on the cake.
The framework was already setup and working for several games even before Cyberpunk addition.
What is CDProject doing here is just some PR magic to blameshift their actual responsibility: they didn’t ask the modder to remove support for Cyberpunk, they went on and sink down is whole business by addressing directly another company (Patron) which are more “sensitive” to business and discuss less.
Your condescension aside, the fact that his framework worked for several games before this and their publishers/developers were fine with paid mod and if he releases the paid mod to work with BG3 and Larian would be okay with it, none of that is relevant here. So what if his software worked with other games? This particular game says you can’t have paid mods and CDProject was well within their right, and rightly so if you ask me, to make him get rid of it.
As for taking down whole business, once he scrubs his stuff of the CP 2077, he’ll be right back at it again his business is not sunk.
Now as for you argument that this was unnecessarily heavy handed and they should have asked nicely instead? Maybe, but we don’t know what either party said to each other outside of what both sides have publicly release and honestly Luke here sounds like a very unprofessional prima donna with the flare for the ultra dramatic and the only thing that seems to be solid is that they CDProject did ask that for that part of his mod, make it free and use donations instead which I still think is fair, you can release a singular package for the game with donations and have called it good while pay walling the rest who’s developers were fine with a paid mod on their game.
End of they day, even if they were heavy handed, they were well within their rights to take the mod down until their game is not part of their code base and it’s not that slippery slope argument you say it is and we just disagree on paid mods and methods used to remove them.
I think you’re missing some nuance here.
3DSen is based on reverse engineering and not IP since it’s not selling the ROMs that come with it. All completely legal to sell and don’t mind buying to support this guy’s reverse engineering and transformation effort. If it was just some stock NES emulator that he was selling, eh, I’d probably just say legal but bullshit.
Lossless Scaling is a tool/actual framework that uses released/open source API calls to apply frame gen to any game, as far as I know and that’s not violating any terms or conditions or IP either.
With this, while I can appreciate that he’s done this for other game, the terms and conditions for them is “don’t use our tools to sell mods”. Do I agree with it? Actually yes, for the most part. I’m of the firm belief that the modding community should be open, I think that these are things that should be done for passion, I like having donations set up, and that we’re lucky that we live in an age that many game companies are kind enough to release modding tools without demanding a license fee. Plus he’s not selling a framework here, he’s selling his framework built with a company’s tools that says “No paid mods because we think the modding community should be open”.
I think that IP is often tricky and I think that this is fine and not a slippery slope argument.
I think there are still misconception: CDProject was smart, albeit dishonest, into presenting the whole thing as “Cyberpunk’s Mod”; so, you (as general and misguided reader) inclined to think the modder took something from CDProject and generate something from thin air… added games are just icying on the cake.
The framework was already setup and working for several games even before Cyberpunk addition.
What is CDProject doing here is just some PR magic to blameshift their actual responsibility: they didn’t ask the modder to remove support for Cyberpunk, they went on and sink down is whole business by addressing directly another company (Patron) which are more “sensitive” to business and discuss less.
Your condescension aside, the fact that his framework worked for several games before this and their publishers/developers were fine with paid mod and if he releases the paid mod to work with BG3 and Larian would be okay with it, none of that is relevant here. So what if his software worked with other games? This particular game says you can’t have paid mods and CDProject was well within their right, and rightly so if you ask me, to make him get rid of it.
As for taking down whole business, once he scrubs his stuff of the CP 2077, he’ll be right back at it again his business is not sunk.
Now as for you argument that this was unnecessarily heavy handed and they should have asked nicely instead? Maybe, but we don’t know what either party said to each other outside of what both sides have publicly release and honestly Luke here sounds like a very unprofessional prima donna with the flare for the ultra dramatic and the only thing that seems to be solid is that they CDProject did ask that for that part of his mod, make it free and use donations instead which I still think is fair, you can release a singular package for the game with donations and have called it good while pay walling the rest who’s developers were fine with a paid mod on their game.
End of they day, even if they were heavy handed, they were well within their rights to take the mod down until their game is not part of their code base and it’s not that slippery slope argument you say it is and we just disagree on paid mods and methods used to remove them.