There are creators who would happily like their early creations to disappear but N3V have taken the view that removing assets, except in extreme cases, can break routes. i.e. the missing dependency problem. There has been a suggestion to hide those assets so that they cannot be used again but are still available for routes. Not sure if that has been fully thought out yet. So, I imagine someone downloading a route with that dependency will still get it but it wouldn't show up as usable for a new route. Hope that makes sense.
Here is what I am facing (And yes, I should also double post this in the CRG thread):
I used to double host my creations on the DLS and my own site. Both versions have the same kuid and version numbers.
So what could potentially happen is if for someone reason I miss the notice about the CRG wanting to "Fix" one of my assets that passed TS12 SP1 HF4 Error checking which was supposedly TANE compatible at that point if I recall that point being made when TANE was in the making. It is conceivable that the CRG breaks the model, makes a LOD for it, and re-uploads it to the DLS with a new version number.
So now the identical item I have on my site has been obsoleted by the DLS version.
This is now a MAJOR point against dual hosting.
Now take the above example, and say the assigned version number is made :127. That is the highest version number Trainz will read. Now not only is the item on my site obsoleted, I cant make a new version because Trainz wont recognize anything higher than version :127. (Yes, this has been done before with built in assets before).
Just to muddy the waters further SPorBUSt granted me the right to repair his content and reupload it to the DLS under my kuid. The repaired items passed TS12 SP1 HF4 error checking and had the build number changed back to 2.9 before upload to allow as may of the community members access to it on the DLS.
As stated, Frank's models passed TS12 SP1 HF4 error checking but do not have LOD as Frank did not implement it. I can not make LODs as Frank did not give me access to his meshes even though he was leaving the community. I even offered to buy them, but he said no.
Recently he did gave me permission to continue on fixing his content and to upload it to my own site with the advent of 09/10/12 uploads being cut off. so now along comes CRG, decides that they want the content to have LOD, breaks the mesh to make LOD, then re uploads it with a new version number.
So, now potentially the items on my site I have worked on to get them up to TS12 SP1 HF4 standards will all be obsoleted by the DLS and could potentially lock me out of making any new updates depending on the Version number (remember the :127 problem?). 09/10/12 users who have the content from my site will instantly see X number of locomotives from my site being obsoleted instantly.
I miss the CCG as well. When I first started making stuff I just printed the TC version out and sat down and flipped through it. It still has some uses but is hopelessly out of date. I don't mind the Trainz WiKi but it can be hard to find stuff.
I totally agree with you. I can't find any stronger words to express that. Its frustrating as hell to have little info to create with as of late, yet sit here an listen to people try to blame content creators because something didn't work right in Tane or that a certain asset makes Tane look bad. Nothing like belittling the people who give their free time and effort for this community. You would think that nonsense would have been dealt with swiftly,but it was not.
To summarize, I think the CRG idea needs bit of refining and they NEED to talk to content creators. I understand that my situation could be unique. Additionally Content Creators need the tools necessary to fix/upgrade their assets. As happens, sometimes the original mesh can be lost. Perhaps this wonder program that can reverse engineer meshes should be made available to the ORIGINAL creator if they wish to fix their own assets first. Perhaps N3V could work with Peter PEV and help create a tool that would allow content creators to make an LOD for their older models (in a similar fashion as his shadow maker.... brilliant piece of software by the way).
I also don't believe any of the rights you grant N3V in the upload agreement allows them to obsolete your copyrighted works on sites outside of the DLS. Again, this is a major point against dual hosting one's content.
I think N3V and the CRG might want to give these points a looking over before proceeding.
