RD Series on Simracing.GP

Daily WTCR races on Simracing.GP Weekly GT3 Endurance races on Simracing.GP Weekly GT3 Sprint Races on Simracing.GP Weekly GT4 Sprint Races on Simracing.GP

Illegal mods, steer clear of them. Simracing604, we stand with you too.

Durge Driven

Premium
But it's okay to rip Crammond :barefoot:


walk the talk
 
Last edited:

BigMike8

SimRacing 604
Premium
What an unbelievably kind community we have. I appreciate all of you. And thank you for this article RD Team, you guys rock.

It’s been a rough day, but the outpouring of support is keeping me going. At the end of the day though, I want this to be about stolen content, not my channel. So hopefully this incident helps shed light on certain dark corners of the modding community.
 

VernWozza

Staff
Premium
But it's okay to rip Crammond :barefoot:


walk the talk
I see a pretty clear difference here. This a free mod which is inspired by gp3 and is completely scratch built using none of the original parts - essentially a cover song sung by tribute band in a pub with no entry fee.

Mod team rip content from other games and other modding teams and upload as their own and charge people for it. - essentially reuploading someone else’s song, passing it off as their own and charging people to buy it.
 
What an unbelievably kind community we have. I appreciate all of you. And thank you for this article RD Team, you guys rock.

It’s been a rough day, but the outpouring of support is keeping me going. At the end of the day though, I want this to be about stolen content, not my channel. So hopefully this incident helps shed light on certain dark corners of the modding community.

We're with you BigMike8, all the way!
 
Just leaving this here:


In F1 Challenge 99-02, a modder called Luigi70 was leeched too. Here are some of the measures which F1C uses against leeching:


Reduce the number of polygons of your cars and tracks as much as possible: in F1 Challenge '99-'02, the sky is the limit when it comes to F1C's FFB update rate. F1 Challenge '99-'02's Force FeedBack loop is tied to the refresh rate. In other words, the higher is the FPS in your game, the better will be your FFB. One of the best ways to increase your performance and driving sensations in this game is to have circuits with as few polygons as possible. In F1 Challenge, the quality of modeling is achieved by having the best possible model using a minimum number of polygons, with a quality that is consistent with the contents of the original video game. When these models are attempted to be exported to higher-end simulators, the shortcomings will become much more clear and this will discourage the purchase of many of these people.

Use 1024x1024 resolution textures or lower: When modeling vehicles, 1024x1024 resolution textures should be applied only to the chassis. Textures below 1024x1024 are acceptable in F1 Challenge '99-'02, but in today's sims, it's another story. The original game uses 1024x1024 textures very sparingly, only on vehicle models, other areas of the chassis, and specific terrain areas of a circuit. The great advantage of F1 Challenge '99-'02 is not only that its modding processes are the most efficient and fastest of any simulator known to date, but that everything can be converted to F1C without any complaints related to quality.

The Armos way This consists of locking all your MTS files for EVERY SINGLE mas file you use within your SeasonData folder, then create a new fake MAS file without the models. The true one should be hidden with a fictional and unrecognizable format. Very few people know how to do this, but I will also point out that this is the least effective way, because hidden pseudo files are easy to discover and unlock. The same goes for the locked MTS files. Nevertheless, is effective against people that don't master the English language and lacks the necessary specific tools and knowledge to do the reverse ARMOS way to unlock. This method also makes you suffer some sort of "rFactor2 syndrome", with every locked and put in such a way that new updates for your mods will be done at a much slower pace, losing F1C's saving grace as a videogame and racing simulator.

Extra tips: The most effective way to diminish leeching without harming the community in a game like F1 Challenge '99 -'02 is not done just by going private modding, but by offering a better mod than leechers do with all their gameplay features covered under permissive rules of use and exemplary ethics of its creative team, reducing the graphic and polygonal quality to the minimum standards (seen above) for the maximum benefit of fluidity and realism. Excess of quality in inappropriate areas such as 3D models or lack of it in key sections such as gameplay or consistency of physics often leads to content theft, regardless of the empathy (or lack thereof) of the person doing it.
 
Last edited:
What an unbelievably kind community we have. I appreciate all of you. And thank you for this article RD Team, you guys rock.

It’s been a rough day, but the outpouring of support is keeping me going. At the end of the day though, I want this to be about stolen content, not my channel. So hopefully this incident helps shed light on certain dark corners of the modding community.
Keep up the fantastic work Mike!
 
So if I go to the Sim Dream Development web site, specifically, what is example content that was stolen? I would be interested in seeing the original mod and what the content looks like on the Sim Dream Development web site.

In the photography world, if a photo is manipulated enough, it is considered unique. Has Sim Dream Development manipulated the original content significantly?
 

BP

Premium
So if I go to the Sim Dream Development web site, specifically, what is example content that was stolen? I would be interested in seeing the original mod and what the content looks like on the Sim Dream Development web site.

In the photography world, if a photo is manipulated enough, it is considered unique. Has Sim Dream Development manipulated the original content significantly?

Side question: in photography, wouldn't it be illegal to make financial profit from that manipulated photo if you never gained permission from the original photographer?
 
So if I go to the Sim Dream Development web site, specifically, what is example content that was stolen? I would be interested in seeing the original mod and what the content looks like on the Sim Dream Development web site.

In the photography world, if a photo is manipulated enough, it is considered unique. Has Sim Dream Development manipulated the original content significantly?
Well here's an example of something that isn't available on their website anymore... "their" BMW M4 GT3, which is a concept car that BMW Motorsport and iRacing partnered for to have in their simulator before it comes a real GT3 car in 2022. SimDream managed to rip it, stole some skins off Trading Paints, and sold it on their site. At the time, there wasn't even another 3D model of it anywhere on the internet available, and it was created suspiciously quickly after iRacing released it. A few big Youtubers even posted about it (Jimmy Broadbent posted on Twitter and managed to get the attention of iRacing, who went after SDD). It got taken down fairly quickly afterwards.

I mean just look at this, it's clearly (and very poorly) stolen from this Trading Paints skin.
 

Attachments

  • __custom_showroom_1615087427.jpg
    __custom_showroom_1615087427.jpg
    546.9 KB · Views: 291

BP

Premium
if people did more research before buying mods, the issue would be gone. If there are no money to be made, they have no incentive to steal other people's content and sell it as their own

You're not wrong, but you're also being a little unfair...look at the example above by @chihaeru : People who don't use iRacing might have no clue about the cars there or what trading paints is, etc...how would they have known that BMW was stolen if all they drive is AC?
 
Last edited:
So if I go to the Sim Dream Development web site, specifically, what is example content that was stolen? I would be interested in seeing the original mod and what the content looks like on the Sim Dream Development web site.

In the photography world, if a photo is manipulated enough, it is considered unique. Has Sim Dream Development manipulated the original content significantly?
I bought an Indycar package bundle from them and regretted it shortly after due to the "FFB" of each mod and general tardiness and execution. The mods they had "updated" were RF mods, notably the Cart Factor/Cart Extreme mod and also the 94/95 Indycar mod for RF. I've loved those mods through the years so it was immediately apparent that it was the same mod just regurgitated.
 

Sk3ptik0n

Premium
Couldn't Kunos do something to take down their domain since they're using the Assetto Corsa name?
I am no attorney nor an expert in trademarks, but "Assetto Corsa" means, literally, "Race Setup" in Italian (or "Setup Race" if we want to be picky). I doubt it would merit a trademark. It's probably been around since Ben Hur raced quadrigas downtown Rome.
 

miuqana

@Simberia
Didn't know @BigMike8 channel until this video was suggested by YouTube algorithm, and it's too bad that it was putted down. Dunno why this kind of shenanigans happens only in AC community...
 

Kurupt CDN

DirtT Tuned Motorsports
Premium
I respect the work put in by the modding community, but illegal mods and not knowing the origins of most of them is the reason I pay more for official content from developers and avoid mods these days.......load and play the game without worries of mismatches or other issues.
 
I’m not going to mention their name, they don’t deserve it. But a certain modding group have been selling illegal mods from their website for some time now and it was about time someone called them out for this shady practice.

Quite the contrary. The Sim Dream Development / AC Mods absolutely deserve to be called out as loudly as possible for this, and by "this" I mainly mean for false copyright claims on someone criticizing them (because frankly, most mods are technically illegal, at least parts of them). Which, BTW, can get you into real trouble pretty easily, because due to plenty of people misusing this, it's taken pretty seriously nowadays. The statement is pretty much pointless (especially when you spend half of it talking about how many mods RD hosts instead of the actual issue) without specifically calling them out. If you're not naming them and calling them out, the whole thing can be summed into "Mike, we absolutely support you, but we'd rather play it safe, sorry!"

(Also I have to say your definitions of what's legal (and "super illegal", because that's apparently a thing) are kinda...interesting.)
 
Last edited:
Top