what are you working on? I wanna see your wads. (split)

[NiGHTMARE]

On 3/6/2024 at 12:47 AM, Arrowhead said:

Havok DM 3: MAP05: Frag District:

 

Finished a new one! I may still change some stuff up still!

 

:)

That does look great, but aren't you still using stolen textures here? Unless you have permission from 3D Realms to use Duke 3D resources, of course ;)

 

I would recommend Cage's first texture pack as an alternative.

[Arrowhead]

2 hours ago, NiGHTMARE said:

That does look great, but aren't you still using stolen textures here? Unless you have permission from 3D Realms to use Duke 3D resources, of course ;)

 

I would recommend Cage's first texture pack as an alternative.

These are from 32-in-24-15's texture pack. I didn't rip anything from 3D Realms' games.

 

Is that all of a sudden a 'taboo' pack? I thought they had listed sources for it. I wasn't aware - if that's the case, I can re-texture...

 

EDIT: Aren't there tons of pwads that use this pack? This is the first I'm hearing this about this resource, tbh. As far as I know, they don't claim all of the textures as their textures - which was the whole problem w/ Hakros' pack.

 

EDIT2: Just checked the 32-in-24-15 tex pack's readme - it only lists Gothic 1/2 as being used in it - so how is one supposed to know? If people have a problem, I can re-tex, hell, I've done it before, I just want to be able to use a relatively large pack that isn't Otex1.1 for once... I even checked CC4-tex (which this is based off? I think) and it makes no mention of using anything but D1/D2 edits and Gothic 1/2 - no mention of 3D Realms' stuff, on the Doomwiki at least. Doesn't that make literally the dozens of WADs that use this pack 'guilty' of the same thing? Genuinely curious.

Edited March 19 by Arrowhead

[Obsidian]

Considering the myriad texture packs that use Duke resources at this point (as well as the textures being freely available to download elsewhere), I'd say that it isn't an issue unless 3D Realms issues a straight-up cease and desist to the entire community.

[NiGHTMARE]

10 hours ago, Arrowhead said:

These are from 32-in-24-15's texture pack. I didn't rip anything from 3D Realms' games.

 

Is that all of a sudden a 'taboo' pack? I thought they had listed sources for it. I wasn't aware - if that's the case, I can re-texture...

 

EDIT: Aren't there tons of pwads that use this pack? This is the first I'm hearing this about this resource, tbh. As far as I know, they don't claim all of the textures as their textures - which was the whole problem w/ Hakros' pack.

 

EDIT2: Just checked the 32-in-24-15 tex pack's readme - it only lists Gothic 1/2 as being used in it - so how is one supposed to know? If people have a problem, I can re-tex, hell, I've done it before, I just want to be able to use a relatively large pack that isn't Otex1.1 for once... I even checked CC4-tex (which this is based off? I think) and it makes no mention of using anything but D1/D2 edits and Gothic 1/2 - no mention of 3D Realms' stuff, on the Doomwiki at least. Doesn't that make literally the dozens of WADs that use this pack 'guilty' of the same thing? Genuinely curious.

 

Yep, all the window textures and I think the marble bricks originate from Duke 3D. You can see some of them in the screenshots here: https://superadventuresingaming.blogspot.com/2011/06/duke-nukem-3d-ms-dos.html. The aforementioned Cage texture pack has some nice alternatives, the author having gone on to work in commercial indie games such as Ion Fury & Supplice.

 

32-in-24-15 and CC4 textures come from a whole bunch of sources e.g. KDIZD. Gothic is probably only mentioned because the Gothictx text file states that it has to be.

 

Tonnes of people use resources from commercial games in their wads (you shouldn't really even use Doom 1 resources in Doom 2 wads or vice versa). This case stands out because you'd already re-textured after discovering resources had been used without permission.

 

I've been working on a huge texture pack of my own for years. Part of the reason it's taking so long is I'm trying to meticulously credit everyone who's work has been used.

Edited March 20 by NiGHTMARE

[Wo0p]

1 hour ago, NiGHTMARE said:

 

Yep, all the window textures and I think the marble bricks originate from Duke 3D. You can see some of them in the screenshots here: https://superadventuresingaming.blogspot.com/2011/06/duke-nukem-3d-ms-dos.html. The aforementioned Cage texture pack has some nice alternatives, the author having gone on to work in commercial indie games such as Ion Fury & Supplice.

 

32-in-24-15 and CC4 textures come from a whole bunch of sources e.g. KDIZD. Gothic is probably only mentioned because the Gothictx text file states that it has to be.

 

Tonnes of people use resources from commercial games in their wads (you shouldn't really even use Doom 1 resources in Doom 2 wads or vice versa). This case stands out because you'd already re-textured after discovering resources had been used without permission.

 

I've been working on a huge texture pack of my own for years. Part of the reason it's taking so long is I'm trying to meticulously credit everyone who's work has been used.

 

Erm... nobody gives a damn about using the official textures or textures derived from them, as far as I know. It's kinda the norm around here. There are only TWO circumstances where using the OG textures or frankentexs are a problem:

 

• Using them in a commercial product without a license or agreement from the creators of the resources you're using.
• Using custom textures without giving credit so as to avoid confusion about WHO exactly made the resources you're using. As it can easily be seen as stealing and thus have a great negative impact on your reputation as a creator.

So like... I don't see ANY problem with how Arrowhead is using these textures. It's not like he's trying to sell a product or coming off as being the artist of the textures either... calm down ye?

 

One thing is being a pedant and adhering to strict "By the books" lawyering about these things on principle.

Another is understanding the context... because as Arrowhead said, hundreds and thousands of WADs would be guilty of the same and you're saying all of them should be recalled on the basis of principle. Ples, stahp. Don't be pedant.

Edited March 20 by Wo0p

[Arrowhead]

10 hours ago, NiGHTMARE said:

This case stands out because you'd already re-textured after discovering resources had been used without permission.

How is this remotely equivalent?

 

I re-textured originally - because the person in question, (who was claiming to have made the texture pack, Hakros) was providing commercial items in bulk to the public for free - in complete violation of any and all licenses associated w/ their use.

 

I switched from that, (HakrosTex) to a commonly and popularly used texture pack, 32-in-24-15-tex. You know, a set used by dozens and dozens of projects?

 

It's not even remotely the same, and it's a tad bit dishonest to imply that these two situations are the same. But hell, I'll happily use Otex1.1 for the 165th time, (not an exaggeration, I've used Otex1.1 on more published maps than anyone else in the community) or completely re-texture to something else - if I'm given a good reason. Currently I have no good reason to do so.

 

When are you going to request Community Chest 4 gets re-textured? It's made w/ a lot of the same resources that 32-in-24-15-tex is made w/.

 

The reason I don't use much smaller texture packs (usually, I'm using RFHellTX right now, but I bet you have a problem w/ that because of the D1/D2 edits, too) is because my projects are usually 12+ maps long - often 32 maps or more, even. Otex1.1 has most of what I need for a huge multi-themed project - a much smaller texture pack? Not so much. Not criticizing CageTex or any other smaller pack for its quality - I've seen it, and it's great - it just isn't suited as well for multi-themed megaWADs as say Otex1.1, or 32-in-24-15-tex / CC4tex are.

[NiGHTMARE]

Morally speaking, claiming you made a set of resources yourself is of course different than compiling a set of resources and openly stating that's what you've done, but I'm speaking from a legal point of view. Both are potentially equally illegal.

 

I'm pretty sure the Duke 3D license specifies what you are and aren't allowed to do with its resources, considering the game comes with a level and resource editor. So there's an almost certain corrolation between the two in that license terms have been breached (not by you since you never agreed to that license, but whoever originally compiled the resources for use in Doom). Duke 3D is a commercial game, so this is also an instance of commercial items being provided to the public for free.

 

i personally don't have any problem with it at all. I just found it very strange that someone who took a stance against using resources compiled without permission from the author, would switch to using a different set of resources also compiled without permission from the author.

 

In the event that you'd perhaps never played the game I thought you'd like to know, especially because Gearbox (who now hold the rights to Duke 3D) have been known to be pretty litigious. Their lawyers may well have done nothing about Duke 3D resources being used in Doom wads only because they don't know about it.

 

On the subject of smaller resource wads, why do you need to limit yourself to one per project? Slumped makes it pretty quick and easy to merge multiple texture packs together.

Edited March 20 by NiGHTMARE

[Arrowhead]

26 minutes ago, NiGHTMARE said:

i don't have any problem with it at all.

Certainly seems like you do.

 

Okay, so say I stop using CC4tex/32-in-24-15-tex. Say I stop using any and all texture packs that have ever used a derived work, or compiled existing textures from any other property, or pre-existing texture pack ever? Hmmm, for sake of example, let's take a look at the 'Afterglow Texture' page hosted on Doomworld itself:

https://www.doomworld.com/afterglow/textures/

 

At least half, if not more contain iwad edits, edits of pre-existing textures from other packs, and so on. Oh look! DW even hosts a section to download DukeNukem 3D textures! Or Blood, or Hexen 2 - but they are provided there under no expectation that DW owns or has made them, hell, they're credited to their original creators, too!

 

HakrosTex, the thing that you keep trying to equate my texturing decision to, bundled commercial stock textures as in: something being sold right now, and (thousands of them) for free - and under the impression that they were his textures. Once again, curious that you single me out when far more popular and higher profile sets have used the same resources for decades without any heat from you.

 

I'll ask again, seeing as I don't think you'd just single me out - and I also don't think you'd try to defend Hakros, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here - I'll ask again: when are you going to request / demand that Community Chest 4 re-textures? Seems curious you've been around for 25 years, and only just now have decided to make this something you complain about...

 

Yeah, I know you can combine texture packs, I'm well aware of this - I know how to use Slade. When I have combined texture packs, even just D2 + Otex1.1, I'd received feedback from multiple people that they don't blend together well, or that I should really be using just the one pack, etc. etc. So yeah, there's a reason why I haven't done that. I'm not gonna load up a much smaller pack, and then crutch it w/ another handful of packs / Otex1.1, or what have you.

 

Once again - quit w/ the false equivocation - if you wish to continue w/ the false equivocation - at least apply it equally - go complain to the project heads for any of the huge well-known projects that have used this pack.

 

It'd only be fair, right? I can't wait to post about my new singleplayer project using RFHellTX - a set that has quite a few D1/D2 edits - I'm sure you'll have something to say about that, too.

 

 

Edited March 20 by Arrowhead

[NiGHTMARE]

10 hours ago, Wo0p said:

• One thing is being a pedant and adhering to strict "By the books" lawyering about these things on principle.

• Another is understanding the context... because as Arrowhead said, hundreds and thousands of WADs would be guilty of the same and you're saying all of them should be recalled on the basis of principle. Ples, stahp. Don't be pedant.

• Erm... nobody gives a damn about using the official textures or textures derived from them, as far as I know. It's kinda the norm around here. There are only TWO circumstances where using the OG textures or frankentexs are a problem:s

• Using them in a commercial product without a license or agreement from the creators of the resources you're using.

• Using custom textures without giving credit so as to avoid confusion about WHO exactly made the resources you're using. As it can easily be seen as stealing and thus have a great negative impact on your reputation as a creator.

  So like... I don't see ANY problem with how Arrowhead is using these textures. It's not like he's trying to sell a product or coming off as being the artist of the textures either... calm down ye?

   

  One thing is being a pedant and adhering to strict "By the books" lawyering about these things on principle.

  Another is understanding the context... because as Arrowhead said, hundreds and thousands of WADs would be guilty of the same and you're saying all of them should be recalled on the basis of principle. Ples, stahp. Don't be pedant.

 

I was just about to state that you need to understand the context, then saw your last paragraph! 

 

To clarify, Arrowhead stopped using textures which I assumed was mainly because they had been compiled in breach of their licence. I didn't realise that the legal aspect wasn't actually much of a concern, and they were more concerned about the ethical aspect in that the compiler appears to have claimed to have made the textures themselves.

 

(Apologies for the quote's bullet points being screwed up - Silk browser is pretty terrible.)

[NiGHTMARE]

41 minutes ago, Arrowhead said:

HakrosTex, the thing that you keep trying to equate my texturing decision to, bundled commercial stock textures as in: something being sold right now, and (thousands of them) for free. Once again, curious that you single me out when far more popular and higher profile sets have used the same resources for decades without any heat from you.I

 

I'll let this link speak for itself:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/434050/Duke_Nukem_3D_20th_Anniversary_World_Tour/

 

Quote

 

if you wish to continue w/ the false equivocation - at least apply it equally - go complain to the project heads for any of the huge well-known projects that have used this pack.

 

It'd only be fair, right? I can't wait to post about my new singleplayer project using RFHellTX - a set that has quite a few D1/D2 edits - I'm sure you'll have something to say about that, too.

 

 

 

 

If you let me know the details of another person who's stated that they've switched resources because the original set included some/all without permission, only to use another set which included some without permission, I'll gladly contact them! As far as I'm aware this doesn't apply to any of the projects you've named so far.

 

It's not a false equivocation to state that no one in the Doom community has the legal right to use commercially licensed textures without permission, and that no one in the Doom community has the legal right to use textures from commercial games without permission. Whether you care about such legal and ethical issues is of course up to you, as is whether you only care about one and not the other. Even whether you're happy to be potentially be slapped with a cease & desist letter by the company who owns the resources one day is up to you!

 

Merging a from-scratch texture wad with one mainly/entirely featuring edits of Doom textures and merging two (or more) texture wads mainly/entirely featuring edits of Doom textures seems like a pretty false equivocation to me. Clearly no-one is going to tell you not to use rfhelltx and Doom 2 textures together and no-one is going to tell you not to use Cagetex and Doom 2 textures together, so why would anyone have a problem with using rfhelltx and Cagetex  together?

 

Comparing a mod that includes resources (modified or otherwise) from the game it's for with a mod that Includes resources from an entirely different game, especially one with a different developer and publisher, is also a false equivocation. If you care at all about these things, I'd highly recommend reading through some of these games' licenses (I wouldn't recommend it with more modern games though, unless you have a spare 8 hours).

 

The Doom 1 versus Doom 2 resource thing is not something I just made up BTW. ID Software have stated in the past that they prefer if people don't do that, and that was *before* the company was bought out by Bethesda, let alone Bethesda being bought out by Microsoft.

Edited March 20 by NiGHTMARE

[Arrowhead]

3 minutes ago, NiGHTMARE said:

 

What the hell have I done wrong by switching from a legally questionable and morally questionable texture pack to one that's hosted on DW itself!?

 

Oh no! I've committed the worst of crimes!

 

Whatever, I'll just fucking re-texture to Otex1.1 for the trillionth time. God forbid I try to branch out a bit! I learned that w/ the whole Hakros thing before, so not sure why I'm surprised now. As for combining a shit ton of packs together - I wouldn't dare want to do that! One of those textures might have been an iwad edit at some point!

 

And it is absolutely a false-equivocation to equate a pack compiled of thousands of commercial stock textures under your own name, (HakrosTex) w/ a pack that compiles existing textures mostly from other Doom projects + whatever from where else (how am I to know those are Duke3D textures when there's no mention anywhere?) as a pack, where nowhere do they claim said textures to be there own.

 

So whatever, you do you. I'll await the cease and desist letter.

[Gothic]

On 3/19/2024 at 3:02 PM, NiGHTMARE said:

aren't you still using stolen textures here? Unless you have permission from 3D Realms to use Duke 3D resources, of course ;)

You're 28 years too late to start complaining about maps using other game's resources.

[Ravendesk]

On 3/19/2024 at 9:18 PM, Arrowhead said:

Doesn't that make literally the dozens of WADs that use this pack 'guilty' of the same thing? Genuinely curious.

CC4 texture pack license states the following:

Quote

... Community Chest 4 Resource WAD, which is included with this file in cc4-tex.zip; you may use it as long as you credit the creators of the textures. Permissions have been obtained from original authors for any of their resources modified or included in this file.

Whether this is 100% true or not might be debatable considering it has textures from commercial games (quake, too, I think, not just duke?). But either way I don't think users of this pack can be legally accountable, only authors of it? Idk I'm not a lawyer.

 

32in24 I believe is a modification of cc4 pack that doesn't borrow any more third-party assets and only adds original textures or modifications/recolours of existing ones (I think? someone correct me if thats not the case). Although I can't really find how it's licensed, there is no txt in the zip and I couldn't find a license on essel's website either, but I might have not searched well enough.

 

With all that in mind I think you shouldn't be mad at nightmare, they ask pretty reasonable question about those packs. It would be nice if someone involved in creation of those or someone with good doom history grasp can clarify what's the actual legal status of the packs so people can either be assured that it's all ok, or knowingly continue to operate under "no one cares" premise (which seems fair because no one does) or choose to be pedantic and only use assets that don't have uncertain or questionable legal status.

[Arrowhead]

I get what you're saying @Ravendesk , perhaps I've sounded a bit too pissed off here. I've got nothing against NiGHTMARE personally - really, I don't - I'm not just saying that to 'smooth' the situation over. I've got no problem w/ him. Maybe I jumped the gun a bit too fast, there. Hey, I'll admit when I've reacted too quickly or brashly, I've got no problem w/ that.

 

The reason I've even got upset is because it really feels like he was just looking for a 'gotcha' moment - like: 'See, you criticize Hakros, yet you do the same thing! Haha, caught you!'

 

Yet that's just not the case at all - the comparison doesn't really make sense to me - how does using an errant Duke 3D (I didn't even know it was from Duke3D, I've never played a Build game before) texture from a commonly used texture pack hosted by DW itself, equate to re-packaging 37,000 stock / commercial stock textures for free?

 

It doesn't.

 

But that sure feels like this is what this is about - and when asked why NiGHTMARE isn't questioning the scores of other mappers who have used the same pack, or done a similar thing (used a texture from another game) he seems to continue to focus on me. So that's why I seem upset - I think that's a fair reason to be upset.

 

Realistically, there's a few things that could be done here to remedy this:

 

- the texture pack could be edited to remove tex from other games

- the texture pack could be temporarily removed, along w/ the tex packs for other games (completely unnecessary in my opinion)

- We could go about our days as if nothing has happened (I vote this one)

 

If it comes down to it, and after 28 years (like Gothic said) the community decides we can't use those type of textures anymore - then that's fine - and I will change my current project accordingly. I really don't have much more to say about it - I'm sorry if I've sounded rude or angry w/ anyone, but please don't compare me to Hakros - because, guess what? Then you have to compare dozens and dozens of mappers to Hakros - and I don't think that's accurate or realistic. I don't want 'beef' w/ anybody over something so stupid.

 

But really, I could have toned it back w/ this line: "So whatever, you do you. I'll await the cease and desist letter." That just sounds needlessly inflammatory, looking back. So yeah, apologies to NiGHTMARE for that, that does sound rude.

 

But - I'm genuinely curious what can be done, (if anything can be done) about this 'game textures in Doom projects' thing. Seems like kind of a large issue that I haven't seen addressed - at least since I've been in the community (last 5 years).

 

[roadworx]

23 hours ago, NiGHTMARE said:

I'll let this link speak for itself:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/434050/Duke_Nukem_3D_20th_Anniversary_World_Tour/

1.) anything sold by randy doesn't deserve to have its legal protections honored

2.) duke nukem 2 straight up ripped assets from all over the place without ever getting permission, so eh. not really that big of a deal when they themselves never honored legal protections.

 

anyways, unless someone wants to get into a cage match with afterglow and torm, then i kinda doubt that anyone really cares at this point.

Edited March 21 by roadworx

[thelamp]

On 3/20/2024 at 1:29 PM, NiGHTMARE said:

i personally don't have any problem with it at all. I just found it very strange that someone who took a stance against using resources compiled without permission from the author, would switch to using a different set of resources also compiled without permission from the author.

If HakrosTex is no different than any other set of resources compiled without permission then why didn't I see you in the HakrosTex thread coming to defend Hakros? Would've been a great opportunity for you to have 'gotcha' moment on the whole community: What a cruel injustice that HakrosTex should be shunned by a community that has been using assets from various idtech and build engine games from the beginning

[Ravendesk]

4 hours ago, Arrowhead said:

Yet that's just not the case at all - the comparison doesn't really make sense to me - how does using an errant Duke 3D (I didn't even know it was from Duke3D, I've never played a Build game before) texture from a commonly used texture pack hosted by DW itself, equate to re-packaging 37,000 stock / commercial stock textures for free?

yeah, of course there can be absolutely no questions to you personally or to any mapper who used the packs

 

it's just good to clarify the license matters so that mappers can make informed decisions about their texture choices going forward