Originally posted by Talad

2) If PlaneShift was my real life job, I would have already filed a lawsuit against you and all the insults and falsities you are saying.

Oh grow up.

I'd like to post an addition to 3hundred's latest post.

What is the definition of open-source games? From this excellent article at Wiki:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_games

Open source games are video games which are open-source software and use open content.

It then proceeds to give a specific example:

One example from 1999 is Quake 3 Arena, which was a completely proprietary game with closed source code/engine and everything in the game (graphics, sounds, music, computer models) was copyrighted by and property of the developers, id Software. In 2005, id Software released both the game and graphics engine of Quake 3 Arena under an open source license. Although the code done by the programmers was open source (a so called open source engine) the content (done by graphics artists, music composers etc.) is not, so one still must buy Quake 3 Arena to play it. The gaming community on the internet took the code and rebuilt most of the content of the original game with open content. This way, the game, renamed to OpenArena, could be published as an open source game.

Therefore, PlaneShift "leaders" and developers have been lying to the public about PlaneShift being an "open-source game".

I'm posting this after I saw a thread on the official PlaneShift forum that covers the same topic. Not surprisingly, the thread has now been deleted. Moreover, someone immediately went to Wikipedia and butchered ("edited") the whole article to hide the original content and to lie about the official definition of open-source games - disgusting. They tried to pass it off as "free games" or that having an "open-source engine" is enough to call it an "open-source game" (it isn't). However, when it comes to the definition of "open-source games", then "open content" is part of it. It is a widely accepted definition that has persisted for years.

Luckily, someone has restored the original article by now. You can click on "History" tab to see what's been going on. This shows how dishonest and desperate PlaneShift team and its cultists are.

Talad promotes uncivil behavior.

Originally posted by Twinchaos

I'm posting this after I saw a thread on the official PlaneShift forum that covers the same topic. Not surprisingly, the thread has now been deleted. Moreover, someone immediately went to Wikipedia and butchered ("edited") the whole article to hide the original content and to lie about the official definition of open-source games - disgusting. They tried to pass it off as "free games" or that having an "open-source engine" is enough to call it an "open-source game" (it isn't). However, when it comes to the definition of "open-source games", then "open content" is part of it. It is a widely accepted definition that has persisted for years.

Luckily, someone has restored the original article by now. You can click on "History" tab to see what's been going on. This shows how dishonest and desperate PlaneShift team and its cultists are.

The forums get a bit ridiclous, but it's mostly the fault of the egos and personalities you find among the moderators and devs. It makes you wonder why certain individuals say that criticisms should only be posted on their official forum. 

I don't know why Talad continues to push Planeshift's image as an open-source game.  It quite obviously isn't, and I don't understand why that's such a big deal.  The big deal is lying to people about it. Or perhaps it's just a difference of opinion? Talad told me once (actually, it might not have been him but another dev, it's been a while) that he had art and music under a closed liscense because he wanted to protect the game in the event that a developer left the team and decided to take his or her contributions with them.

Edit:  I just looked at the wikipedia entry for Planeshift. It very strongly reads like an advertisement.

Talad promotes uncivil behavior.

I see no need to elaborate - there or here.

Originally posted by Dracus

Originally posted by Talad

2) If PlaneShift was my real life job, I would have already filed a lawsuit against you and all the insults and falsities you are saying.

Oh grow up.

Going back through the thread, deleting your arguments, and replacing them with "this thread is bad" whines like a 6 year old throwing a tantrum?

Showing total ignorance of even simple law. Tthere is no way in hell anyone could sue the OP or others that are here making their arguments, as from what I have seen they are all backing them up with posts from other sites including the Planeshift site that already existed and were already fully within the public view before being reprinted here.

Talad has had this entire thread to successfully rebuke and discredit anything that was untruthful, if it is or was possible to do so. And even if there were some good counter arguments in his past posts in this thread ( which I don't believe there were ), his little re-write tantrum removed those to be replaced with the equivalent of "you're a big meanie doo-doo head" posts.

I think there is more than enough in this thread even at this point to show there are at the least very good reasons to be wary and skeptical of this game and it's developers.

Here is an interesting update on the Wikipedia situation. Apparently, after I posted a link to the Wikipedia article in this thread about the definition of Open Source Games, "Tuxide" (under the same alias as on this forum) has started a petition on Wikipedia to delete the article entirely because he can't prove the contrary:

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_September_25#Open_source_games

Interestingly, he is also trying to remove the link to The Linux Game Tome, which is referenced in open source games and a few other articles on Wiki that have to do with open source games (such as "The List of Open Source Games"). The LGT link has recently been posted on this forum by "pstruth" with a direct link to its PlaneShift discussion, where a lot of people (some are ex-regulars from PS forums) speak out against the game, its license, its unethical development, and its egoistic and dishonest leaders/devs/gms/mods/shills and where the "project leader" basically shows his true colors.

I have also noticed the same two people (possibly one person under different alias) edit several open source games related articles on Wiki, to change its definition, and also to remove the links to LGT. Some of the edits have been restored to the original articles but who knows for how long. All of the initial edits happened on or around September 16th - exactly when the thread discussing and citing the Wiki's articles appeared (and subsequently deleted) on the official PlaneShift forum.

Someone has already provided an excellent rebuttal to "Tuxide's" petition. Personally, I think that "Tuxide" has shot himself in a foot because he claims that the definition of open source games is "impossible to verify", and that according to his argument the definition and the article shouldn't exist. The problem with that statement is if it happens to be true (if there is no definition of open source games), then no game can legitimately claim to be an open source game. Therefore, any claims that PlaneShift is an "open source game" or an "open source MMORPG" are illegitimate and are still a false advertising.

Moreover, "The Linux Game Tome" does not have to cover open source games exclusively to be a great example of covering such games extensively, as has been stated in the Wiki's rebuttal.

In the end, I don't think it really matters what remains on Wikipedia or what kind of lies and PR spam PlaneShift shills attempt to spin next because the active player numbers speak for themselves. If the game was great, it wouldn't matter what anyone said anywhere, criticism or not. No matter how many times you write "fresh" on a rotten sandwich label, no one's going to eat it.

What you are saying is simply ridiculous! The devs are spending their time making this game and you are trying to put it a bad light using very weak points. None of those points is comparable to the game they built. Also your personal attacks are just mean. There is nothing bad in a developer defending his own product.

Your discussion about open source is an endless one, and has nothing to do with PlaneShift. For what I read on their web site they have stated very clearly which licenses they use and why. Also in all materials you posted, the devs are always giving proper definition of the open source and their licensing.

I really think you failing to demonstrate any of your arguments and you are making the developers angry for no reason. I hope they will listen to all the players which enjoy the game and think PlaneShift is a nice game.

I support this game, and after seeing your bad arguments, now I support it even more.

Go PlaneShift team! Continue to improve the game!

Talad promotes uncivil behavior.

"After making the same original post on the official PlaneShift forum some time ago, it was almost immediately locked after a few spiteful remarks, which failed to refute any specific points in my post."

I question the motives of someone who seems to be hiding behind an identity created just for the sole purpose of desperatly trying to cause harm to someone else and his project. What are you hiding, Mr. 3hundred? Why did you create an account on the PS forum just to post this well written , though only somewhat accurate text full of misleading 'facts'? This says it best: hydlaa.com/smf/index.php

Point one from the original post: The original idea for the game failed. Yes. I question what your point is here. Many things have failed, and most do not come back. Planeshift is one of the later that have come back.

Point two: "it doesn't look at all innovative".... from a review of the -old- client from 2001. The game has gone through a complete engine change since then, and has been completely rebuilt from ground up. We'll come back to that in a bit. First, I would like to ask you what MMORPG does look innovative? Well, it certainly is not the 'big' pay games, nor the add-per play. Cookie cutter games all. I would suggest you do not use that argument when it can describe just about every other game out there. Truly innovative games are few and far between. PS is not innovative in it's code or graphics, but in what it is attempting to do. It is innovative in the fact that it is ignoring or downplaying many of the facets that bring throngs of paying slash junkies to most other 'RPGs'. But, you were just looking for any random thing to try to discredit the project.

Point three: The famous QuantomG... Actually never heard of him until I saw that blog/whatever.  You come off rather confused as to what he actually contributed. Another quandary is why he was copywriting works going into an open SOURCE (not content) project in the first place. Now, you seem to like to quote folks who are indignant and bitchy about PS, but I have yet to see one quote from anyone who is, and has been on the team for years. Although, that would stand to reason, since this thread is intended to be a witch hunt, and not an intelligent debate.

Which brings us to your point four, being nothing more than your self-righteous opinion. You are starting to sound very much like someone I know who thought every opinion out of his mouth was da truth, and therefor everything else was a lie, or wrong.  A troll, he was, who use 'we' instead of 'I' all the time, as if pretending he was the voice of the community. Let's get to those opinions of yours.

"The rest of PlaneShift development history is a winding down path of failure..."

Well, you said it, so it must be true. Odd that their has been no 'failure' since the original project went bust. Setbacks, yes. Delays? Of course. Name off one game that has not had both. Well, that is not so easy, though, seeings how PS is open to public view as it is being made, and most other games are close to finished when they go into open/closed Beta. PS is bigger now than it ever was, in span and playerbase. There is no 'winding down' about it. So, start telling the truth, instead of making it up.

"...filled with slow updates, numerous bugs..."

And what to you expect from a project done in folk's spare time? Oh yes. If you are like the person I know, you "want it fixed, and we want it now." The more I read from you (incuding all your following posts, yes, all of them), the more I see you are a disgruntled person who did not get what he wanted, and is now grasping at straws to hurt a bunch of people. And once again, I ask you to name ONE game that was not full of bugs at PS's stage. I give you from now till forever to come up with a good answer.

"unprofessionally designed content (quests, levels, missing character models etc)"

Last time I checked, there are no 'professionals' working full time on the project. Some come close, robbing a great deal from their free time. Yes, free time. You know, that little tiny span of time between work and sleep you are supposed to be spending with your friends and family? Yes, the -maps- (levels are for hack-N-slashers) are messy and incomplete. Yes, the quest system is basic. And yes, some of the character models are missing and/or rough around the edges. And finally, yes, that is all being worked on, one day at a time as folks can in their FREE time. Oh yes, and let me remind you that most games are still locked up from prying eyes on locked company systems when they are at PS's stage. Or did you think games are born with complete maps, quest, and a full set of characters? Don't be naive. When a crafter is building a piano and you come in when it is half done, are you going to start bawling that it has no strings, and that all other pianos you have seen had strings? Are you going to cry because you can't drive on the bridge the fifth day of construction? Grow up, as another poster said, who I gather has done zero research into the matter himself.

"...with quite a few developers, contributors and community figures leaving the project."

I had to laugh when I saw this. You try to give them impression that everyone who left was leaving because they had YOUR issues. For one thing, 'quite a few devs' is as vague as it is full of crap. In the last three years, I have only known two longtime devs to have left. One had nothing to do with your 'boo hoo open source' complaint, and the other left because the -community- was (in this person's opinion) turning to crap, and it was no longer worth dealing with them (and I mean 'you' by that). It is funny how the select loud and bitchy try to set themselves up as the 'leaders' and 'voice' of the community. And then you include 'community leaders' in people who have left the project. Pardon, but we never took a vote. You were never a 'leader', and neither was anyone else. Most people did not even agree with you. The few who did do not give you the right to represent everyone. I'll reiterate something for you here. PS is a Hobby/obsession for Devs and players alike. Sometimes, life does not allow a person to have the time to continue their hobbies. Personal matters take precedence over a silly game. Some people did leave in a huff, but those were the people that everyone else, players and devs, were glad to see go. I hope the door didn't hit you too hard on the way out.

"The proof is in the game credits, forum history and the game (or shall I say "Beta") itself."

For one, no, you should not say Beta. A Beta is a nearly finish project that needs to be tested for final bugs (as I define it). In PS, they are still creating bugs, and will be for some time. PS is more of a feature testbed. They add a feature, you test it, you report what bugs you find. That is the way it works. It is a game in the same way two pieces of odd shaped cardboard are an entire 1000 part puzzle. Not to mention they have to cut each piece by hand. Secondly, you are using the old statistic trick of using misleading data to prove your point. People come, stay, and move on. That is life. It is not limited to PS. I could say by looking at a company's records that over 90% of their workforce left. Nice of me to leave out the fact that they have been in business for 100 years, isn't it? Vague numbers and twisted statistics are great in an argument... if the person listening is gullible or daft. I have to ask the rest of the people agreeing with the OP without doing research of their own on which of the two they would like to fall under.

“The project leader claims inflated figures of over 400,000 registered accounts in game now. However, ask him how many of those are active and inactive, how many have been registered but never used, how many have been abandoned after a single use and how many are unique and didn't come from the same IP. Ask him if the PlaneShift account page offers an option for each user to delete their account (the answer is "No"). The real picture is much less misleading. There are only barely ~100 people active at any given time."

Ahhhh. The wonders of twisted math. First, let me say that yes, there have been over 400,000 accounts registered. Let me also say McDonalds claims Billions served. I have yet to walk into a McD's and see over a Billion people.  And, I bet they have not even taken into account how many of those were repeat customers. And how about the one lady who sued them for spilling hot coffee (might have been another chain), did they count her as well? I got food poison twice at McD's, yet they do not let me take my number off the Billions served, plus, they count me twice in their data! Get a grip. Registered account's means registered accounts. If he said active accounts, then yes, you would have had something to whine about. As for the rest of those numbers, they are easy to get. In fact, when the 340,000 regged accounts was posted, I did exactly that.

Total PS accounts:  340,000 or so.

Accounts never used:  112114

Total characters used less than an hour : 141557

Total characters active more than ten hours:  9416

Accounts active in the last 30 days: 14787

Accounts created in the last 30 days: 18103

Accounts created in the last 30 days never used: 7614

Active accounts older than 30 days (repeat players, I like to call them):  4297

Accounts active in the last week: 3632

Active accounts in the last day: 1021

Well, shoot me in the foot and call me Gimpy. Actual facts, not smoke in the wind. Not bad for a single server start-up project built by people in their spare time over the last three years. So, my little whiny friend, yes, all you had to do is ask. Not to mention I see over 200 folks on the server quite often of late. Not to say there have not been times where I will only see 90 on a low usage time. But, unlike you, I look at both the good and the bad. Learn to do so, and you will not look so stupid to folks who know both sides of the story. I happen to think fewer people means less morons and script kiddies playing.

Now, on to your next point. The 'Myth'. I am not going to give this point a number, as I really see no point in it. You are once again tossing up some fast talker's 'truth' (read opinion) as fact. Sad, really.

"This project is no longer "only a tech demo", it is officially called a "Beta", and if anyone tells you otherwise, point them to this presentation where the project's leader states that it is a "Beta":"

I simply love it when folks hang their entire arguments on one single quote, over even a single word.  It makes it easier to make others see how foolish they are. For one thing, perhaps it is a 'Beta' in Talad's mind. In fact, a great many people define PS as a Beta. What exactly does that mean? Look it up. By some definitions, yes, PS is a Beta. By others, it is most certainly not. Have you the mental powers to look into Talad's head and see what definition he was going by? Myself, I do not consider it to be a full Beta, nor do most of the people working on it. But, it is Talad's project, and therefore falls under his definition.

"Draw your own conclusions."

Yes, I bid you good folks to do so. If you are not intelligent enough to see past the smoke and mirrors of the OP, and do some -recent- research of your own, then I do believe you are not worth talking to.

Which brings me to Twinchaos. Consummate lackey of trickery, repeating the same things that have been said already, and another disgruntled PS reject. In his first post, he acts like this is the first time he has ever heard of the project. He won't even say 'Talad', thinking that the ignorant will assume he does not already know all about the project. Classic move. It might have even worked if he did not come right out in a later post and say, "From my personal experience, this game has...". By your wordiness and stating personal opinion as fact, I have a pretty good idea of who you are. Follow on 3hundered's coat tails, or did he ask you over here to give him support? Another tactic of trickery: The same info from two sources MUST be the truth. I almost have to wonder if the two people are one and the same. The tactic has been used before.

I see absolutely no 'proof' at all in either of these 'concerned' folks posts that PS is failing terribly, and should not be played by anyone... ever.

As for the continued whining about PS not being open source because the content in not open as well, this is a thin argument. You quote Wiki as if it is gospel. Someone up and decided what an open-source game was, and stuck it on the net. A second guy comes along and agrees with it. Magic thing and sparkly fairies happen, and suddenly it is fact. There is a reason Wiki is editable. If is often inaccurate, opinionated, and sometimes just wrong. Open Source Game is a relatively new term, so who is to say what the final authority is on it?

The source is completely open. Go and DL it right now. Modify it until your heart is content. Use it elsewhere, or send it back if the team could use it. The content, meaning story, quests, art, and music are -not- source. It does not even come with the source code. PS makes and keeps its own art. It also does not use art from public archives. I really don't see what the huge problem is with that. The art and settings teams have both been growing very quickly of late. They know very well their works will belong to PS, yet still they do it. Are you accusing them of being wrong in wanting to help in a project they love working on? You're 'facts' mean nothing to them.

The game will continue to grow in span, features, size, Devs, and Players, despite anything you may cry wolf about. It will be slow in doing so. It will be plagued with bugs. Folks will come and go. Mistakes will be made, then fixed. Tempers will flare. Whiners will whine. And in the end, you will eat crow.

Next time you are going to make a thread like this, get your facts from both sides, then post it with integrity. And don't do it from behind a newnick mask.

"Those who shoot from the shadows are often the ones who fear to be in the light."

---

Originally posted by UtMoon
Not bad for a single server start-up project built by people in their spare time over the last three years.

---

Editing wikipedia to fit your needs is about as low as you can go. I mean come on what the heck are you thinking, at least use an alias lol.

And brining up that you started your own wikiproject is very weak.

Talad promotes uncivil behavior.

Originally posted by UtMoon

I question the motives of someone who seems to be hiding behind an identity created just for the sole purpose of desperatly trying to cause harm to someone else and his project.

Spoken like a true pundit! :) I don't see 3hundred's post as an attack on Talad. 3hundred simply believes that Talad is being disengenous with people. If someone said something that you thought was a lie, wouldn't you get the urge to make noise about it? (Yes, that's an attempt at humor, given that your post is an attempt at exactly that.) I actually think you and 3hundred agree more than you disagree, you just spin it differently.

Originally posted by maveric007

Editing wikipedia to fit your needs is about as low as you can go. I mean come on what the heck are you thinking, at least use an alias lol.

In all fairness, Tuxide simply thinks he's editting the wiki entry to be his idea of "correct". But yes, it was distasteful that Tuxide's defense was to brag about being an "established editor", whatever that really means in the world of wiki. Isn't wiki supposed to be non-authoritarian?

Talad promotes uncivil behavior.

I have indeed read the entire thread, though I don't have it all dedicated to memory. Gee golly, do you folks ever like to accuse me of things. :)

If Talad is in fact being called names, you have to admit that he set himself up for it.

In order to preserve/archive the relevant information in this thread, I'd like to post the excellent rebuttal made by "Bristn" against "Tuxide" on Wikipedia, just in case it isn't accessible at a later point. As per Wikipedia's policy, the Burden of Proof falls on "Tuxide" for many of the unsupported claims he makes in regards to the definition of open source games, and because he can't prove his "burden" for it to remain as the article's content, he is desperately petitioning for the article's deletion. Here is the excellent rebuttal as has been posted by "Bristn":

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_September_25#Open_source_games

*********************QUOTE**************************

The definition of open source has evolved to be more than just a program's source code. It is a common misconception to claim that open source refers strictly to software. It is now a set of principles and practices. See open source and open source (disambiguation) articles for more details and examples. The following is from the latter:

Open content, another term for open source, when the distinction between source and product is less clear.

And the following is from the article's discussion:

There is still confusion with "open source" that newbies think it means software, which is not only what it means. We should not give a definition that only includes software and excludes all other products. That would be npov. Here is the definition by Pengo:

denotes that a product includes permission to use its source code, design documents, or origins.

Note that "source code" is a form of "origins," so it is redundant.

Here is the broader npov version:

denotes that the origins of a product are publicly accessible in part or in whole

--- Mr. Ballard 20:24, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

If open source is the origins, then content is part of those origins and must be open, as least in "part", if not in "whole". Quake 3 Arena's content was never open, neither in part nor in whole.

Indeed, we need an NPOV on this. Implying that "open source games" can exclusively refer to "open source code", disregarding the content is not an NPOV. Why should it suddenly be any different when applied to open source games compared to open source film, open source journalism, open source politics or open source culture? While the open source may be commonly applied to source code, such application is not exclusive, as has been proven by open source article.

The article/definition in question is, in fact, verifiable with a reliable source. The specific example given in the article lists Quake 3 Arena, which can only be acquired via a retail(or online) purchase as a game. Therefore, as a game, Quake 3 Arena cannot be freely published and distributed as open source game due to copyrighted content. The distinction is important, since definition of a video game or computer game confirms that it requires more than just a source code or an engine to qualify for being called a game. Creating an open content to replace the proprietary one and publishing it as open source game qualifies for a distinctly new game, which can no longer be called Quake 3 Arena. Such a project has, in fact, qualified and has been published as an open source game OpenArena.

The Open Source Definition by Open Source Initiative states the following:

Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code.

Moreover, the term open content has been derived from open source, as has been mentioned before. In fact, the following article at OpenContent refers to open content as open source content as an alternative and acceptable definition.

If open source games definition simply does not exist and is unverifiable, then no game can legitimately claim to be "open source". Any game found to make such a claim would, therefore, be deliberately misleading in its description. Open source has never been about proprietary dependence or deliberate obfuscation.

In addition, the suggestion to remove the link to The Linux Game Tome is completely baseless, since the site does not have to cover open source games exclusively to be a great example of one that does cover them extensively, especially because it clearly states the licenses involved with every game listed, so it is not misleading in any way.

I also get a distinct impression from the nominator that his motives are less than sincere. He is making unprofessional and baseless accusations and is drawing personal conclusions without any proof whatsoever, which are completely irrelevant to this discussion in the first place. Contrary to his claims, a "competitor's PR spin" is what seems to be prevalent in his line of reasoning.

And that is all I'm going to say for my part.

--Bristn 18:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

*********************UNQUOTE************************

"Tuxide" has, in turn, posted his weak "rebuttal" that "Bristn" has only "a few edits on Wikipedia" in attempt to discredit the response, which is completely irrelevant to the rebuttal's content or "Bristn's" personal character. Another editor's comment to "Tuxide" calls it a "Weak delete Going with WP:RUBBISH." Meaning that he sees "Tuxide's" argument as weak and rubbish. Hence, why I stated earlier that "Tuxide" cannot prove the contrary, so he is desperately petitioning for the article's deletion. If there is no article/definition of open source games that is verifiable, then no game can legitimately advertise itself an an open source game. Therefore, the statement that PlaneShift is being falsely advertised as an open source game or open source MMORPG still stands as valid.

Talad promotes uncivil behavior.

Reading skills acquisition

Brain

You're welcome.