[X] My Assistant

[Fossil]

I was the one of the leaders of the UCES team.

The issue of distribution user created material (including objects, scenarios, rides and tracks) has been a point of contention in the RCT community since... well, since the game came out.

There has never been universal agreement. Even within the UCES team, it was quite difficult to get the group to agree to policies. First, each individual creator of UCES materials retained copyrights to their own works.

For objects, we asked that the object creators grant UCES exclusive permission to distribute their objects for a period of six months. After that period, the creators were free to re-release (or not). UCES retained permission to distribute their work within the UCES package.

An agreement between an object creator and distributor/repackager is the correct method to obtain permission for object distribution. For use of objects created by people remaining active in the community, I recommend contacting them directly for permission to use their objects. For use of objects created by people who cannot be contacted, providing acknowledgment of their work should be sufficient, I would think.

That part was relatively simple.

None of the scenarios has been released outside the UCES package. Most of the scenarios use custom objects, and the scenario creators don't have have distribution rights to those objects. The object makers do. The UCES web site acknowledges custom objects and their creators, scenario-by-scenario. Some scenarios contain objects created by twenty or more different people. Trying to keep track of all this was an enormous headache at the time. I still remember the work involved creating object lists for each of my scenarios, properly documenting who created what.

The issues involved with releasing a UCES scenario outside of the package seem intractable. My solution, which applies to my scenarios only, is simple. Just don't do it. Problem solved.

I don't want to deal with this. There is no reason for me to deal with this. The project was a group effort. We worked, we bonded, we learned and we grew together. One of the reasons so many people generously donated so much of their time was because we felt that together we could create something bigger than any of us. I strongly feel that to the extent possible, the work should remain whole. Allowing derivative works would instantly dilute the UCES package, and diminish the visibility of those who worked so hard to create it.

[wolfman]

It's more or less permission to use the package as a basic assortment of scenarios FOR a compo series. I'm just looking for tangable permission to use the package for compos on the Pirates of RCT Compo Forum. It's pretty much just to keep the more sadistic folk of the community from pointing fingers as the Pirates of RCT, accusing us of stealing the scenarios for use in our compos forum.


But I imagine that if participants in the Pirate Compos have to come here to DL the scenario package, then they know we're not distributing the package, at least. Which is good, becase that means that the Pirates of RCT forum doesn't have to set up some sort of a downloading configuration to distribute the package ourselves.


I think that we managed to to get our intentions across, and we understand the expectations of the UCES Team. Is there anything else that we need to discuss? Any questions? Any other things we have to iron out?

[Fossil]

It's more or less permission to use the package as a basic assortment of scenarios FOR a compo series. I'm just looking for tangable permission to use the package for compos on the Pirates of RCT Compo Forum. It's pretty much just to keep the more sadistic folk of the community from pointing fingers as the Pirates of RCT, accusing us of stealing the scenarios for use in our compos forum.


But I imagine that if participants in the Pirate Compos have to come here to DL the scenario package, then they know we're not distributing the package, at least. Which is good, becase that means that the Pirates of RCT forum doesn't have to set up some sort of a downloading configuration to distribute the package ourselves.


I think that we managed to to get our intentions across, and we understand the expectations of the UCES Team. Is there anything else that we need to discuss? Any questions? Any other things we have to iron out?

OK, I understand better now. I fully support this effort, and you have my best wishes for success. I have just one favor to ask - please return here and let us know when you've got submissions. I would love to see the what people did with the scenarios.

[wolfman]

I believe we can provide a topic where the entries can be DLed & voted upon.

[wolfman]

Well, this has taken too long to be benificial.

Luketh, if you think you can get a straight answer out of these guys, go ahead. Good luck.

I'm gone.

[Spunknit]

Fossil Quote "OK, I understand better now. I fully support this effort, and you have my best wishes for success. I have just one favor to ask - please return here and let us know when you've got submissions. I would love to see the what people did with the scenarios." end/Quote

Wolfman, as I've quoted here for your convenience, you've had your answer for some time now. You were given the go ahead by the caretakers of the UCES, I'm not sure what your issue is at this point.

[Josho]

Don't get me wrong, I really admire the UCES scenarios, the talent of the people involved in their design, the improvision with the objects at hand, and of course, the talent of the object designers to provide content well and above better and more suitable (ie: versatile) to the RCT game. The bouquets to the side, I really don't see how the UCES scenarios would make good competition benches. They are already chock full of detail that pretty much mandates the need for the bulldozer tool to effectively change the whole look of the map so it doesn't tend to resemble what was originally there. The tool is needed to place a ride and then develop the stuff around it so it all fits in nicely. Five years in the making is a UCES Transformation scenario that I keep on redesigning, but one thing is consistent, (and as said at the front of the park) "Some things change" and change they do, to the point I reckon Fossil would only recognise the things I keep. As a result, I'm not sure how, in a competition perspective one could judge a UCES park given the fact that the results can be markedly varied depending on what gets demolished. Of the few competitions I entered (one here, a couple at the defunct RCT Depot) I must say the benches were fairly spartan in design, but well thought out with object packs to fit with the theme. It meant the player was able to busy themselves with making a park from scratch, not working around or within what is already there. Just my own personal opinion.

Sidenote: I really wish I had finished the RCT Mart competition which was to build an Oil Platform. Now THAT was fun. Great pieces to use, terrain was simple, just a body of water and the criteria was to simply build a platform. Sounds easy? Yet I spent many nights building and reloading old saves trying to make it what it was. I think that was just before I moved interstate and off a reliable internet connection for quite a number of years.

[Josho]

Oh, and of course, one other point. Competitions never really were too big that I remember. One which I won had just three contestants (including myself) and this was at, what was considered the second biggest RCT site at the time during a time when RCT2 was played regularly by a truckload of people.