Take-Two Kills "Essential" Grand Theft Auto V Mod

[severedsolo]

46 minutes ago, nosirrbro said:

Perhaps, but its not good to just assume everything will be fine and don't look into it at all.

 

I'd like to point out that OpenIV was technically in breach of the EULA. Specifically this part:

"You agree not to: reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble, display, perform, prepare derivative works based on, or otherwise modify the Software, in whole or in part" - While this is boilerplate stuff, it seems that the creator of OpenIV did technically breach this.

http://gtaforums.com/topic/889348-take-two-vs-modding/ - the creator of OpenIV admits here that they did reverse engineer GTA V (albeit via "clean-room" reverse engineering, which according to wikipedia basically means, they look at the software to see how it works, and then write their own implementation, if I'm understanding it correctly. Perhaps someone with more knowledge can confirm that?

Anyway, if this is the case, it's no bother to KSP Mods at all. KSP mods do not work like that.

Edited June 15, 2017 by severedsolo

[Mako]

2 hours ago, TheRagingIrishman said:

Squad PR has confirmed multiple times that the game will stay open for modding. Please stop fear-mongering, it does nothing for anyone.

 

1 hour ago, TheRagingIrishman said:

@Badie @UomoCapra can you guys step in and quell some of these irrational fears

While I don't think it's quite time to run around and yell "The sky is falling," I don't believe the concern that Take-Two might attempt to stop some/all modding of KSP to be irrational. Despite the huge success and popularity of GTA V, Take-Two has shut down one of the major mod projects of that community. KSP isn't nearly as popular, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to accept the possibility that something similar can happen here at Take-Two's whim.

And honestly at this point asking anyone at Squad for a promise that nothing will change regarding an intellectual property they don't own the rights to seems pointless. Any word/promise/guarantee that a Squad employee could give doesn't actually have an effect on what Take-Two does, at most it could only ever influence Take-Two's decisions.

Hope for the best, but don't pretend like the worst is impossible. Being aware of what is going on regarding (one of) Take-Two's other properties and sharing concern that something similar could happen here is not quite fear-mongering.

[LoSBoL]

12 minutes ago, Mako said:

 Being aware of what is going on regarding (one of) Take-Two's other properties and sharing concern that something similar could happen here is not quite fear-mongering.

That's basically the problem, people aren't aware. They just hear 'something' and go total paranoid.

Take2 hasn't shutdown GTA modding, they shut down development of a tool, which in near future could be easily used to hack into GTAO by others who are willing to do so. That is not only in Take2's interest in 'making money', but it's not in the interest of the players who plays GTAO either.

There is also no resemblance in GTA's businessmodel vs KSP's businessmodel. KSP isn't bringing in money in Online Multiplayer, calling on modders to C&D in KSP is not going to gain anything for Take2.

[TotallyNotHuman]

I've been quite optimistic for the whole ride. But after having read the last few posts, as well as the GTA forums thread linked here, I have to say this:

Take Two, if you lock down modding/add microtransactions, I will boycott KSP. And don't even think about shoving your pile of steaming excrement down my throat - I've backed up old KSP versions on a secure thumb drive somewhere. You, Take Two, will have to pry KSP from my cold, dead hands.

As a modder, this sort of killing off modding platforms to increase one's own wealth is unconscionable, and quite frankly, a load of corporate bull.

This is not fear-mongering - I don't care what SQUAD says, because frankly, Take Two won't either.

Join the revolution. Fight. Win.

Edited June 15, 2017 by TotallyNotHuman_

[Lupi]

Just now, TotallyNotHuman_ said:

This is not fear-mongering - I don't care what SQUAD says, because frankly, Take Two won't either.

Join the revolution. Fight. Win.

Bit early for that, don't ya think? I was just bein' the big heap of worry i secretly am inside. Not time for pitchforks yet
 

8 minutes ago, LoSBoL said:

Take2 hasn't shutdown GTA modding, they shut down development of a tool, which in near future could be easily used to hack into GTAO by others who are willing to do so. That is not only in Take2's interest in 'making money', but it's not in the interest of the players who plays GTAO either.

As far as I had read (and I made sure to, I'm never the one to jump onto something without reading. I always complain about those copypastas on Discord from folk who can't be asked to google search the text before going [at]everyone with the latest "hackers" for example), OpenIV is a tool locked to singleplayer GTA, that works... sorta like our TextureReplacer? lets you put models in and stuff, and swap textures around. Lots of other mods use it, for that reason. As far as multiplayer goes, people have made other tools to create their own non-Rockstar servers that they could use mods on. Namely, third party roleplay servers where you get to play as the cops for example. I think that's where the 'multiplayer' usage comes in, because you can't own a cop car otherwise. But, that's detached from GTA Online, and doesn't work on GTA Online.

That's not to mention it's been around for 10 years, it was originally for GTA IV as the name suggested, so that's where I start to get an ounce of worry. If they're willing to decide something that's fine for 10 years is no longer fine at whatever whim, when it's such a known tool that Rockstar apparently promoted it at one time... that's where concerns over T2 superseding Squad come in, as they apparently superseded Rockstar.

----------

Long story short, I'm worried and looking for answers but I didn't mean to cause a panic. I suppose I should've realized I would cause one when I posted, though. Put the pitchforks down until we hear something, I just wanted to bring that sorta-breaking news up in the light of the acquisition.

[Mako]

@LoSBoL I agree with you and others that Take-Two would be harming themselves by blocking mods for KSP and I share the sentiment that it seems unlikely they would do something to harm themselves. However, I recognize that despite the likelihood they won't choose to harm themselves the fact remains that they could still choose to do so. To some extent they are already doing so with their current action regarding GTA V.

My concern stems from the fact that with something like GTA V, and even with something like KSP, when a company has full control over a popular product they can make unpopular decisions because they know they have a captive audience. People may say they'll boycott future products from Take-Two, but it'll take a lot of willpower for those folks to follow through when a hugely anticipated title like Red Dead 2 or the next GTA comes along and everyone is having fun while you ride you high horse... and Take-Two knows it just as much as they know people won't be happy with decisions to block or limit their modding communities.

 

Edit:

@Lupi I'm glad you brought it up because I believe it cetainly deserves attention and probably warrants some discussion. I saw the news earlier and thought that it wasn't particularly favorable.

Businesses make business decisions. That makes sense. Where it begins to not make sense is when those decisions negatively impact the customers' opinions of the product/service and the business itself. When a business continues to make these types of decisions and the customers decide they've had enough then it doesn't matter how happy the owners/shareholders are unless they're ready to cash out.

Once again, I'm not saying I think Take-Two is about to kill KSP modding in any way, but I do think it's good to be informed of what Take-Two is doing and form your own opinion. And if you're not worried about what Take-Two does you can always ignore the discussion and the folks who might want to talk about it.

Edited June 15, 2017 by Mako
Add a bit.

[TotallyNotHuman]

1 hour ago, Lupi said:

Bit early for that, don't ya think? I was just bein' the big heap of worry i secretly am inside. Not time for pitchforks yet

I get what you mean, but this is something that's already happened. If T2's already done this to GTA, who's to say they won't do the same to KSP?

[Superfluous J]

Another day, another freak-out in the KSP forums. Wake me up when something actually happens.

If you're worried, back up your current game. It's not like the game's going to change that much going forward anyway.

I'm not worried, and if I was I wouldn't need to back up my game. I've got a dozen copies going back several versions, already.

[LoSBoL]

28 minutes ago, Mako said:

@LoSBoL I agree with you and others that Take-Two would be harming themselves by blocking mods for KSP and I share the sentiment that it seems unlikely they would do something to harm themselves. However, I recognize that despite the likelihood they won't choose to harm themselves the fact remains that they could still choose to do so. To some extent they are already doing so with their current action regarding GTA V.

The Volkswagen Audi Group could decide that from tomorrow that they won't be making Audi's anymore...  Now where's the business model in that? 

Could you explain the business model for Take2 if they choose to C&D modding of KSP?  Where's the money? 

Take2's money isn't in the current KSP, it's in the Kerbal franchise as a whole. They gain nothing in C&D'ing modding for the current game called Kerbal Space Program.  There is no comparison in the way GTAO vs KSP can or is being monetized.

 

Basing your fears on 'yeah, but they could!' is not rational, not at all...

Edited June 15, 2017 by LoSBoL

[LoSBoL]

1 hour ago, Mako said:

 

@Lupi I'm glad you brought it up because I believe it cetainly deserves attention and probably warrants some discussion. I saw the news earlier and thought that it wasn't particularly favorable.

Businesses make business decisions. That makes sense. Where it begins to not make sense is when those decisions negatively impact the customers' opinions of the product/service and the business itself. When a business continues to make these types of decisions and the customers decide they've had enough then it doesn't matter how happy the owners/shareholders are unless they're ready to cash out.

 

You are right, it doesn't make sense to make decisions that don't make sense from a businesspoint perspective, so why are you trying to reason sense into such decisions?  

 

1 hour ago, Mako said:

Once again, I'm not saying I think Take-Two is about to kill KSP modding in any way, but I do think it's good to be informed of what Take-Two is doing and form your own opinion. And if you're not worried about what Take-Two does you can always ignore the discussion and the folks who might want to talk about it.

Now that's not very nice, 'please state your worries, but don't ask us to rationalize or further explain those worries and ignore the discussion and just let us worry' 

 

[TotallyNotHuman]

Okay, not rationalizing my fears was a stupid move on my part.

I've kind of lost faith in humanity for the past few months or so. From the principal of my school (see my rant in the [now locked] Complain About Your School thread) to T2 killing modding for GTA (even though I don't play it at all), my vision of humanity has been punched in the gut pretty hard. Hence my inherent distrustfulness in giant companies, and just people in general.

Well, now you know, I guess. Back on topic.

[HebaruSan]

1 hour ago, TotallyNotHuman_ said:

faith in humanity

T2 killing modding for GTA

I wonder whether you attend history classes at that school of yours. If so, proceed with caution; they may tell you about some things that are a bit more unsettling than the end of a GTA modding framework.

[passinglurker]

8 hours ago, TheRagingIrishman said:

KSP PR has confirmed several times that the game will stay open for modding. Speculations like this do nothing but create neadless fear.

Even if ksp escapes uncathed this sets a bad president for the "franchise" TT wants to establish. This behavior should be nipped in the bud now and a loud irrational negative stink is how krud gets done in the wider gaming world.

Nows the time to panic everyone make noise its a two way street either squads with modding in this and will publicly state to that effect against TT or they are against it and will sell us out at the next opportunity.

Edited June 15, 2017 by passinglurker

[TotallyNotHuman]

Okay, look, I may have blown things out of proportion.

Let's just forget my intrusion ever happened.

[FW Industries]

7 hours ago, severedsolo said:

I'd like to point out that OpenIV was technically in breach of the EULA. Specifically this part:

"You agree not to: reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble, display, perform, prepare derivative works based on, or otherwise modify the Software, in whole or in part" - While this is boilerplate stuff, it seems that the creator of OpenIV did technically breach this.

[...]

Anyway, if this is the case, it's no bother to KSP Mods at all. KSP mods do not work like that.

Some plugins very much depend on this and KSP's EULA has the same wording. It was easy enough to accept Squad's unspoken rules. But TT's legal department is another matter. Hopefully the revised EULA have better wording in this regard.

[Terwin]

4 hours ago, TotallyNotHuman_ said:

I get what you mean, but this is something that's already happened. If T2's already done this to GTA, who's to say they won't do the same to KSP?

The mod in question for GTA admits to reverse-engineering the game to figure out how to modify it.(but we only did it as much as needed for modding, scout's honor!)

That is quite some distance away from creating mods that use a published API.

As far as I am aware, none of  FAR(aerodynamics), RO(lots of fundamental changes) or Kapernicus(altering Kerbol system) required any reverse-engineering of the KSP source code, and if you can modify KSP that thoroughly without any reverse-engineering, I do not think there is much danger to the mod scene, even if T2 continues to take a hard-line against reverse engineering source code.

As far as going after mods that only use the published API, I am pretty sure T2's lawyers know that they would be laughed out of the court-room.

Now if any SQUAD employees use insider-knowledge and unpublished interfaces to create their mods, they could potentially get a C&D letter, but I would be pretty surprised if anything like that happened beyond 'oops, we intended to add that to the published API but it got lost in the shuffle, we'll add it to the next version.'

 

Admittedly, I have not looked into if any mods actually reverse-engineer the KSP source-code, but generally that is not something that is much needed when there is a mod-friendly API that has been published.

[severedsolo]

14 minutes ago, FW Industries said:

Some plugins very much depend on this

Do you have an example?

To the best of my knowledge, no plugins reverse engineer the KSP source code. If fact the Addon rules on these very forums expressly forbids it (emphasis mine):

Quote

You may not decompile, modify or distribute any of the .dll files or other files KSP comes with beyond content of the GameData folder. Follow the EULA. For assemblies, you may only use exposed public or protected members of classes, and you may not examine the code within any member.

There is a big difference between calling exposed methods, and reverse engineering.

Here's an example:

I want my plugin to stage your rocket. Now, I could call Stage() - and that would be fine.

What I couldn't do though, is look at the code inside the Stage() method, and use that to write my own staging code. That would violate the EULA.

The creators of OpenIV seem to have done the latter.

 

That's not to say I agree with T2's actions on this, but my overarching point was, that KSP mods are already not allowed to do this, so it should be a non-issue.

[Boris-Barboris]

28 minutes ago, severedsolo said:

Do you have an example?

No regrets.

[p1t1o]

I have no problem that this GTA mod was "killed".

You fuss with paid content, you're gonna get a cease+desist. And this was, undeniably, fussing with paid content.

You do not have a right to disagree with something being paid-for, you have the right to not buy it, but not to fudge the software to make it available. The fact that it was available in SP instead of MP is of little consequence.

 

7 hours ago, severedsolo said:

the creator of OpenIV admits here that they did reverse engineer GTA V (albeit via "clean-room" reverse engineering, which according to wikipedia basically means, they look at the software to see how it works, and then write their own implementation

Is this not the exact definition of reverse engineering? Anybody know what the "clean room" part supposed to mean?

[0111narwhalz]

7 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

Is this not the exact definition of reverse engineering? Anybody know what the "clean room" part supposed to mean?

"Clean room" reverse engineering appears to be treating the article as a blackbox, and analyzing it by how it reacts to various inputs.
Non-clean-room reverse engineering involves looking at the article's interior workings, by decompiling it or otherwise.

Although both technically do fall under "reverse engineering," it seems to me that the clean room approach is simply how you approach the problem. Perhaps the problem is not supposed to be approached?

[p1t1o]

13 minutes ago, 0111narwhalz said:

"Clean room" reverse engineering appears to be treating the article as a blackbox, and analyzing it by how it reacts to various inputs.
Non-clean-room reverse engineering involves looking at the article's interior workings, by decompiling it or otherwise.

Although both technically do fall under "reverse engineering," it seems to me that the clean room approach is simply how you approach the problem. Perhaps the problem is not supposed to be approached?

Ah I see, so you dont actually look at the code? Just the inputs/outputs?

To me, that doesnt seem to be as much of a violation. Except that the code still permits use of paid content without paying, so Im still fine with things.

Edited June 15, 2017 by p1t1o

[FW Industries]

48 minutes ago, severedsolo said:

To the best of my knowledge, no plugins reverse engineer the KSP source code. If fact the Addon rules on these very forums expressly forbids it

Interesting, and it seems those were the rules since forever. I've certainly written plugins in violation. But to the best of my knowledge, none of that was ever enforced.

For funsies I've searched through some code on github, here's Kopernicus and FAR.

Oh, and here's NathanKell apparently giving advice on how to best violate addon rules.

[Jarin]

Since this is in The Lounge now, here's some commentary on the Take Two situation.

[KSK]

40 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

Ah I see, so you dont actually look at the code? Just the inputs/outputs?

That's my understanding. Without going away and looking it all up, I'm not certain but I think clean room reverse engineering puts in you in a better situation regarding potential copyright infringement on the basis that if you haven't seen the code then logically you can't have copied it. The trick is in proving that you haven't seen the code, so clean room engineering tends (again I think) to be well structured and documented with that in mind.

Of course, as with most aspects of copyright law, the basics are fairly straightforward but by the time you reach the third indented level of exceptions and exceptions to those exceptions then your head starts spinning. Which is why I'm not claiming certainty for any of this.  

Edited June 15, 2017 by KSK

[HebaruSan]

7 minutes ago, Jarin said:

Since this is in The Lounge now, here's some commentary on the Take Two situation.

This gentleman didn't provide much (any?) new information, and completely left out the actual reason (ability to unlock purchasable assets without purchasing them). Ranting as if this is about pure hatred of mods is pretty foolish, but I guess it'll attract plenty of views and "engagement."