• Guest, RaceDepartment is now on Discord!  Join Here

How did a F2002 mod from AC end up in F1 2017???

Jan 23, 2016
28
34
3D modeling is about choices. You make a choice to add in X amount of polygons so you can properly represent the object you're trying to recreate. It's an individual choice how much or how little you want to add in any particular area. I modeled the F2002 for an Assetto Corsa mod that was released on Jan 22 2016. There was a WIP thread on the Assetto Corsa forums that shows the progress. My aim was to have a model that was around 130000 triangles which would give you good performance (FPS) yet still be visually impressive enough. At the time I had a GTX 560 which was quite an old card but still ran AC well enough. So I had to make modeling choices that could fit well enough into this performance window.

Fast forward to May 17 2017 Codemasters announces classic car content to go with their F1 2017 Game. Now watching the trailer for this my eyes are drawn to, you guessed it the F2002! However it looks all too familiar here. I can see the choices the modeler made to represent the object they were trying to recreate. In fact they made eerily similar choices I did throughout the entire car. I got a sense of déjà vu. Now I didn't want to believe my work was stolen because Codemasters is a well renowned video game developer. They have people to model these things for them right? or at the very least they could ask permission right? Non of those things happened and the game was released on August 25 2017.

The game was very well received and congratulations to the team who worked on this title. Fast forward to the F2002 Assetto Corsa mod where I wanted to update but strangely I come across an Artstation page containing some assets for the F1 2017 game. One of those assets was you guessed it the F2002. Now looking at the wireframe was a dead giveaway that it was indeed my model F2002 that I worked on for months. I could see all the choices this artist made that nearly matched all the same choices I made. My heart sunk and I felt disgusted. So the only thing left to do is contact the artist that and await a response. Days go by with no response except that the Artstation page is now taken down. I've received no response by either the artist or Codemasters as of this time.:(

Below are the comparisons:
matt-jones-f2002-006.jpg
f2002_ac_001.jpg
F2002_cm_000.jpg
F2002_my_000.jpg
F2002_cm_001.jpg
F2002_my_001.jpg
F2002_cm_002.jpg
F2002_my_002.jpg
F2002_cm_004.jpg
F2002_my_004.jpg
 

Ferrari64

10RPM
Jun 17, 2009
24
34
The screenshots are showing good evidence that something went wrong during the development of F1 2017. I hope your voice get heard!
 

CC

9000RPM
Premium
Apr 27, 2013
9,481
8,154
I am speechless , A business like codemasters stealing peoples work and just straight releasing it as there own content from scratch ,

On one hand they have licenses to make this content in the 1st place , but not been contacted and paid for your work is insane :O_o:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lady Oscar

Justin Davis

100RPM
Oct 3, 2009
135
110
This is really a bummer if true, but I'm not really 100% sure it's the same model. I'm not calling anyone a liar by any means, I just think maybe we're jumping the gun here.



There are a ton of similarities, yes, but after all they're identical vehicles. The whole goal of 3D modelling something like this is being as accurate to the real car as you can while using the least amount of polygons necessary. I mean both artists are obviously quite experienced in modelling so how many different ways would you expect them to model identical shapes?

There are also areas that have massive differences, check the images of the sidepod for example, they are completely different.





Why would they make any of these changes if they were just planning on stealing the model? Also what incentive would they have to steal a community model and risk the backlash? To save time? If that were the case why did they make such significant changes to the model? To save money? Once again, someone had to make those changes, so someone was obviously paid for their work. How much money could they have saved? Also they still would have needed to do the work involved with the cars physics, paint schemes, etc...

Again, I'm not saying anyone is lying or anything like that, just maybe rushing to conclusions a little hastily.

*Edit - The new evidence provided by the op is pretty conclusive, and I'm now convinced that they are in fact the same model. I still believe it is good practice to not be too hasty with accusations like this, and not blindly conduct internet witch hunts without doing a little more research however. Apologies to OP for doubting.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: aphidgod

Coffer

250RPM
Dec 18, 2016
395
70
26
This is really a bummer if true, but I'm not really 100% sure it's the same model. I'm not calling anyone a liar by any means, I just think maybe we're jumping the gun here.


There are a ton of similarities, yes, but after all they're identical vehicles. The whole goal of 3D modelling something like this is being as accurate to the real car as you can while using the least amount of polygons necessary. I mean both artists are obviously quite experienced in modelling so how many different ways would you expect them to model identical shapes?

There are also areas that have massive differences, check the images of the sidepod for example, they are completely different.


Why would they make any of these changes if they were just planning on stealing the model? Also what incentive would they have to steal a community model and risk the backlash? To save time? If that were the case why did they make such significant changes to the model? To save money? Once again, someone had to make those changes, so someone was obviously paid for their work. How much money could they have saved? Also they still would have needed to do the work involved with the cars physics, paint schemes, etc...

Again, I'm not saying anyone is lying or anything like that, just maybe rushing to conclusions a little hastily.
This does look like conclusive evidence against the OP though, even if you're not willing to say it outright. I would've maybe given the OP the benefit of the doubt if the 2017 car was convincingly simplified for consoles, but it's not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Justin Davis

kirbyguy22

1RPM
Nov 12, 2010
2
2
I was curious about this, so I loaded both models into 3DS Max to compare two models side by side. My apologies for tinkering with your files, Salamander.
Red/Magenta = Salamander
Blue = F1 2017

Even if they are the same car, you shouldn't see that kind of polygon overlap from two different modelers.
 

neuer31

500RPM
Oct 4, 2011
726
246
I bet Codemasters made some microadjustments, nothing more ...
The polys are 99%+ identical ... this is a slightly modified copy, nothing more ...

You have also to see that the original AC mod violates copyright laws as well (even it is noncommercial, the product was distributed all over the place), so I guess suing them will backfire
 

scottm0351

75RPM
Jun 26, 2017
81
24
37
This is really a bummer if true, but I'm not really 100% sure it's the same model. I'm not calling anyone a liar by any means, I just think maybe we're jumping the gun here.



There are a ton of similarities, yes, but after all they're identical vehicles. The whole goal of 3D modelling something like this is being as accurate to the real car as you can while using the least amount of polygons necessary. I mean both artists are obviously quite experienced in modelling so how many different ways would you expect them to model identical shapes?

There are also areas that have massive differences, check the images of the sidepod for example, they are completely different.





Why would they make any of these changes if they were just planning on stealing the model? Also what incentive would they have to steal a community model and risk the backlash? To save time? If that were the case why did they make such significant changes to the model? To save money? Once again, someone had to make those changes, so someone was obviously paid for their work. How much money could they have saved? Also they still would have needed to do the work involved with the cars physics, paint schemes, etc...

Again, I'm not saying anyone is lying or anything like that, just maybe rushing to conclusions a little hastily.
The side pod topology looks like the F2002 model on Turbo Squid.

https://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/Index.cfm/ID/1073183
 

Coffer

250RPM
Dec 18, 2016
395
70
26
I was curious about this, so I loaded both models into 3DS Max to compare two models side by side. My apologies for tinkering with your files, Salamander.
Red/Magenta = Salamander
Blue = F1 2017
Even if they are the same car, you shouldn't see that kind of polygon overlap from two different modelers.
A lot of the similarities are things you'd expect to be similar. It's the kind of stuff you'd see anyone worth their salt doing. I don't see it as being evidence.
 

Pascal Herbig

100RPM
May 23, 2009
149
14
I was curious about this, so I loaded both models into 3DS Max to compare two models side by side. My apologies for tinkering with your files, Salamander.
Red/Magenta = Salamander
Blue = F1 2017

Even if they are the same car, you shouldn't see that kind of polygon overlap from two different modelers.
You can see here already big differences in front wing side plate. Red Version has different bottom plate which goes also to the inside of the side plate. This is not there on the blue model.