Thread 3844873

Undertale's 10th anniversary is happening very soon.
Fangames? Progress? Post them!

reminder that ceroba is fat

>>3844889
not here, anon.

>>3844873 (OP)
I only just realized that that said "Delta Rune."

I've been reading that as "Della Trune" this whole time.

>>3844919
What the hell does della trune mean? That's ridiculous, anon. It doesn't make any sense.

https://youtu.be/Bee9rqbF1_w
New An ordinary undertale mod teaser vid!

>>3844919
You may be dyslexic, anon

>>3844873 (OP)
Give me a list of completed fangames.

>>3844889
Yeah, save that for the next UTY thread.

I'll never understand why projects will just throw away loads of good content because the dev that made it left the team. Makes no sense to me.

>>3844941
Undertale Yellow
Outertale

>>3844944
Last two Yellow threads were swamped with UT/DR tourists flooding over half the replies. I could barely see any discussion happening about Yellow at all, and I felt that most of the fanbase had fallen back to UT. We had two "threads" this week, but it certainly doesn't feel that way.
Honestly, I think it's time to stop making Yellow threads. There's no point in trying to get by with "stealth" threads when everyone is just there to discuss UT/DR, which have little to do with UTY or its characters.

>>3844952
we've also been getting quite a few /v/ shitters here as well.

>>3844952
That was mostly because of the anniversary, and arguably because I directly invoked discussion of UT with that header I made.
I'd say UTY threads are still viable when they aren't being actively targeted by the jannies or people purposely trying to cause problems. We even still have drawanons coming in every once in a while, so it's not like new content is completely dead either.

>>3844952
The second thread had a lot of vanilla UT, but the first thread was mostly UTY

so here is the first part of pennilton's new event, now you gotta chase him through the dark world a few times before battling him (his battle will now have a few new moves)
some other npcs also talk about him
if you've checked the wanted posters at least once, kanako will instantly recognize him and he will flee without you needing to buy his stuff
(dialogue is temp will be rewritten later)

>>3844979
if you checked the posters

>>3844981
also warp door to the cliffs and minigame you can repeat there for cash

>>3844982
btw godot 4.5 just came out, would it be ok to update to it (I want to use stencils for another project I have)
asking since oldentale and other anons use old hardware that it might not run (though I dont think the internal rendering changed much if at all)

>>3844979
You should add a use for the pebble later on, and turn it into a starwalker style running gag.

>>3844982
I like the scarf on the cooler penciller. There might be a good aura farming joke in there somewhere. Maybe something about him making his scarf flow in the wind indoors just to look cool. You could have that be a flavor text in battle if you encounter him indoors, and outside of battle if you see a passive cool penciller in the overworld indoors he has a fan next to him to make the scarf flow.

Also, it might be fun to add an optional hard mode on the cliff rematch which will reward the player with a special item or lots of money. Would be a fun extra challenge.

>>3844952
that's doomer talk, there was just a big game release that several dev anons said they were taking part in, and coming off a week where solid discussion got nuked multiple times.

>>3844983
As far as I know the existing new versions of Godot already break legacy hardware compatibility, so if you update at all I won't be able to play it on my GPU.

About koffin k... is he actually sadistic or is he simply a starlo-esque loser who's too deep into his villainous rp?

>>3844996
his whole gag is that he's just a comic book villain.

>>3844982
seeing the doors make me think of FUN events, and how seeing that yellow had fun events sold me on trying the game on the first place. any other devanons try their hand at them or does it feel like a waste at this point in the making?

>>3844998
I don't see why FUN events would be a waste of time. I have a few ideas for some FUN event related gags.

>>3844999
just wasn't sure how devanons felt about it, for me personally its really cool to see .

>>3844995
DRY is made on 4.4, wasn't it working on that windows 7 pc?

>>3845003
It was working, yes. I do know that any version with a hard Vulkan requirement will not work, since my GPU lacks Vulkan support,

>>3845000
Well I'm considering adding them to my game if I have the time and can think of a sufficient amount.

>>3845008
I look forward to seeing what you end up coming up with.

>>3844998
for DRY2 i've got ideas for fun events.
nothing concrete, and a bunch of stuff will rely on how "real" toby makes the world of deltarune.
what i do want to do, however, is april fools shitposts.

>>3845006
can't you emulate vulkan via software? I tested recently on some ancient computers like one with a 32bit celeron and core2duo and it worked (though at a very slow framerate, but I was surprised it worked at all)

>>3845009
I don't have that many ideas right now since I'm still focusing on regular background gags, but I did have one or two ideas. Like one is having a character get palette swapped for the duration of the game with no fanfare or acknowledgement. Just that guy now has blue accents instead of green.

>>3845011
Theoretically I can, but Vulkan emulation on Windows is awful. I tried it when I wanted to play another game that required it and it didn't work due to missing features.

I can do it on Linux, but that introduces major performance problems alongside all the the problems linux already has with hardware of that vintage.

>>3845012
even something like that is nice honestly. FUN events feel like the type of stuff that would start playground rumors, and even something small like that being not guaranteed feels like a good touch.
>>3845010
it really does make it tough not knowing all the deal with the dr world, but i mean there's nothing wrong with just riding out the assumptions made so far

>>3845019
I think a big appeal of FUN events is gaslighting the player. I just had this idea, but it would be really funny to make minor dialogue changes depending on fun value so people keep getting "quotes" wrong and get called secondaries and liars for quoting shit that they saw in the game.

>>3844998
>any other devanons try their hand at them or does it feel like a waste at this point in the making?
I want to try my hand at making both types of FUN events, those with gags and the creepy ones with lore implications. I wont make something as crazy as Gaster tho

>>3844949
i feel bad for the spriter anon from the previous thread, there must have been another reason, because it does feel strange to just part ways and even scrap already added in content too. I really liked the Clover entering and exiting the barrel gifs. Does anyone still have the google doc?

>>3845063
Its probably some stupid drama. That's usually why this kind of thing happens.

Anyways, can't you just get the link from the archived thread?

>>3844939
This is incredible and quite a unique twist.
>>3844949
>>3845063
Usually when existing content gets scrapped, it's either out of spite by the producer or because it was withdrawn by the artist. Either seems to indicate that whatever happened was emotionally charged, though spriteranon doesn't want to talk about it possibly to avoid getting blacklisted by the dev team.

I might as well spit out my guess as to what happened. Given current events, one of the devs probably openly celebrated a certain politically-motivated assassination. Spriteranon went "That's not cool yo" and the other terminally online vicious members of the team rallied to get him ousted. This sort of thing tends to happen a lot in indie circles.

>>3844939
Neat, but I feel like it diverted a little bit too far from UT's style with that out-of-body segment, and I think that bit with the cardboard cutout and the explosion is a little too comedic compared to the rest of the mod's apparent tone.
Still cool though.

>>3845079
>, it's either out of spite by the producer or because it was withdrawn by the artist
That's the part I don't get. Why throw out perfectly good art just because you dislike the guy who made it? And why do artists have any right to withdraw their art after contributing it?

>>3845082
NTA, but the reasons for that are probably a mix of the people remaining on the dev team not wanting to utilize material made by someone who isn't on the team anymore because it's not necessarily representative of the people who are, and the person who left the dev team not wanting their material to be used if they themself are no longer involved with the project.
Not even necessarily for this instance in particular, this kinda thing just happens a lot.

>>3844998
Devanon for crack theory Deltarune here (still trying to come up with a real name relating to SURVEY_PROGRAM).
Fun events are part of what make Undertale Undertale, and I intend to go all out with them. Right now most of my ideas are gags, mainly of the gaslighting kind. I'd definitely like to throw in some lore or creepypasta ones should I ever come up with good ideas.
I'm toying with the idea of having two different fun values per save file. This would allow for determining event probabilities more granularly and on a more individual basis.

Who the hell is going into the old /v/ threads and digging up random shit to put on r34?
Someone just posted an ancient ass image of Starlo nursing the entire feisty five with his not breast milk and I want to know who is responsible for unleashing this evil upon the modern day.

>>3845087
>Not even necessarily for this instance in particular, this kinda thing just happens a lot.
I know. It still baffles me. If I were in that situation, I'd want to use all the resources at my disposal to make the game better, regardless of if the source of those resources is still on the team. And if the person didn't want me using their stuff, then too bad, we already agreed that they were giving it to me with the knowledge that I would be using it.

>>3845095
Everyone deserves to see that image, anon

>>3845088
>(still trying to come up with a real name relating to SURVEY_PROGRAM).
PREDICTION_PROGRAM?

>>3845088
I still think SURVEY_PROGRAM_2 is the best name for it.

>>>/v/720707987

Hope I formatted this properly for a reply here, but I have to admit I respect the dedication. Those fujos could create really good animations and art that aren’t pixelslop 287191 autism comics. I respect this form of autism a lot better

>>3845187
from what the guy typed in yesterday, I find it hard to believe he was the one who decided to leave. Still overall sad, the Martlet and Clover harmonica cutscene was really cute.

>>3845293
I was speaking in terms of the phenomena in general, rather than that specific case.

>>3845295
ah, i agree in that case, my bad

>>3845187
I think it might be a matter of respect to some degree. Like, it might be considered more respectful to entirely disavow someone and their work as opposed to kicking someone to the curb but still utilizing all the things they made for you.
I also imagine there could be some kind of actionable legal problems from using someone's work without their permission, even if their work and assets are based on a pre-existing IP or were made for a non-commercial product, so it may be better to just make new assets rather than risk any kind of legal problems.

>>3845310
>I also imagine there could be some kind of actionable legal problems from using someone's work without their permission
Not if they've given you express consent to use them. Once you give someone the rights to something you can't take them back. At least not unless had a lawyer draft up a license agreement before you gave them the assets.

>>3845313
>Not if they've given you express consent to use them.
Express consent needs to be explicitly documented and binding, if there isn't sufficient documentation regarding a party giving their consent to have their work utilized in a given project, that party can absolutely start a legal endeavor in that context, and more often than not it's better to simply make new assets for the project than risk destroying everything over even the possibility of a legal dispute like that.
>Once you give someone the rights to something you can't take them back
A license to use someone's work can absolutely be withdrawn by the party in question, it just depends on a few certain factors, such as whether or not the party received financial compensation in exchange for being allowed to use their work as part of an initial agreement.

>>3845314
Where are you getting this from?

>>3845316
Historical precedent regarding legal issues surrounding various fan-projects I've seen crumble over the years, as well as multipe decades of conversation with my father about his work as an attorney dealing with IP law.
I myself am by no means an expert in this sort of thing, but I have seen projects get torn apart because some people decided to use other people's work without their express permission despite having a previously existing agreement that was subsequently made invalid.
Again, my point is that in circumstances like these, it's generally better to err on the side of caution and just make new assets for whatever project is being worked on as opposed to risking being caught up in a legal dispute over a project that won't make any financial profit anyway.

>>3845322
Which country?

Assuming its the US. What would I have to do to prevent one spiteful asshole from destroying my whole project by forcing the removal of most of the assets? Could I get it in writing that they forfeit all IP rights related to their work on the project? Would I need a lawyer for that?

I finally figured what ceroba name means
roba in japanese is donkey

>>3845214
I see what you're going for, but I think it could be perceived as "the second survey program" as opposed to "a different survey program". I'd like to clearly state this is an alternative scenario to Deltarune, not a sequel to it

>>3845207
I like the sound of this one. It communicates that the story is based on debunked predictions, which I wasn't able to capture with my ideas.

For the record, my ideas are:
- SURVEY_PROGRAM_ANOTHER: Clearly states this is "another Deltarune", and alludes to Another Him. Pretty long though
- SURVEY_PROGRAM_ALT: Same idea but shorter, though it loses out the song reference
- SURVEY_PROGRAM_202X: Alludes to the diegetic year in which the story takes place, as well as when the real-world "survey" took place. Could also be interpreted as a different "version" of the program in the same way some real-world software uses release years as version numbers (eg. Ubuntu)

>>3845333
>but I think it could be perceived as "the second survey program" as opposed to "a different survey program". I'd like to clearly state this is an alternative scenario to Deltarune, not a sequel to it
It is a sequel to Survey Program. Chapter 1 was Survey Program, while everything after was Deltarune. By making a game based on fan speculations starting from chapter 1 onwards, you are making a sequel to the original Survey Program. However the name also implies the alternate universe version of Deltarune angle, since it reflects a different development path the game could have taken, one where it remained Survey Program, instead of becoming Deltarune.

The name sounds better, works thematically, and communicates the idea properly.

>>3845323
I actually did just now consult my father regarding this topic, and he actually took quite an interest in it.
Unfortunately, it's complicated, and depends on an extremely large set of factors which may or may not be relevant based on what state, country, or supernational entity you and the other party may be subject to the laws of.
Specifically for the matter that I was arguing, it is *generally* (but not always) the case that if one party is arguing that they are legally entitled to use the work created by another party according to the terms of an agreement/contract that existed between the two parties, the party making such an argument would have to actually provide documentation proving that such an agreement/contract actually existed.
What that means can vary depending on the exact context of the situation, and is also subject to the interpretation of a court of law.

My primary point earlier ITT is that it's better to simply make new assets for the project in question since a lot of the time non-profit fan projects like this don't necessarily take the time to explicitly document every agreement that occurs between all parties involved, and therefore using another party's work without being able to prove that you have the legal rights to do so is a potentially risky move since that may then allow the other party to take you to court over unauthorized usage of their work, and such a legal dispute usually isn't something a small non-profit project can survive.

>>3845323
>Could I get it in writing that they forfeit all IP rights related to their work on the project? Would I need a lawyer for that?
Generally speaking having any sort of verifiable, written agreement is a good way to go regarding issues such as this, but I doubt most people would be willing to enter into such a contract for a non-profit project based on an existing IP, such as the mod for UTY that was the source of this discussion.
Again, it depends on the exact circumstances involved. According to my father, in the context of a dispute between an individual and their employer (as in, a larger organization they worked for), it is often the case that any work they produced explicitly for their employer during their period of employment is automatically owned by their employer, while in the case of a dispute between multiple individuals who each contributed to the creation of a particular patent, the ownership of said patent is evenly split between each contributor to said invention, regardless of how much work each party actually contributed.

In short, it depends, but having a written contract and a lawyer is generally advisable, yes.

>>3845338
>>3845344
The reason I'm asking these things is because I am a fangame dev, and I know I could not afford a major content loss that would come from the usual fangame dev drama disputes. Even with heavy vetting there's no way to 100% guarantee that no one I brought on would later turn out to be a nutcase and try to ken penders most of the art and characters. So I need some kind of extra precaution I can take to prevent that from happening that isn't just "throw away half the project when someone loses their shit".

Really what I want is to strip everyone involved, myself included, of as many intellectual property rights as possible, since as far as I'm concerned they're the great satan of the art world, and I don't want people trying to control what can be done with the characters and assets that I release to the public.

>>3845353
>fangame dev
Yeah, that's where things get a little tough. The primary issue you're going to run into there is the fact that most people aren't willing to enter into a serious legally binding contract over an endeavor that they wouldn't be making any financial return on, and due to your project's nature as a fangame, a game based on a pre-existing IP that you don't have the rights to, it inherently has no potential for financial return by itself.
People are willing to enter into contracts when working on actual commercial products usually because they're promised some amount of revenue from having worked on the project, which they view as acceptable in exchange for agreeing to be bound by the terms of the contract, whatever that may be.
Most fan-projects of any sort that consist of groups of people usually just have to rely on mutual trust, and if they end up having to scrap certain things because one or more parties decided to end their affiliation with the project, that's the way it goes.
You bring up Ken Penders, and yes, he's a good example of why having a contract (or perhaps more appropriately, keeping a good eye on your contracts) is a good idea, but it's also important to point out why that contract existed in the first place. The contract he had, or that any individual may have between themselves and their employer, is a two way agreement between both parties involved. That agreement being that one party is to provide their services to the other, and the other party is to provide payment for the services rendered by the first.
A fan-project can't do that due to it's nature as a non-profit endeavor (unless you plan on paying those people a working wage for their contributions, which would require a lot of money on your part depending on how many people you plan on employing and how much you plan on paying them), so there generally isn't much of a reason for anyone to enter such an agreement over such a project.

>>3845358
I'll take no help at all over poison help. If someone isn't willing to agree to those terms then the last thing I want is their "help". If the number of people willing to work under those terms is 0 then I'll just work alone.

My main issue is that there is no universe in which I can afford a lawyer, and I really don't want to deanonymize myself for safety reasons.

So I need some surefire way to keep people from claiming ip rights over contributions to the game that doesn't require a lawyer, doxxing myself, or thousands of dollars.

>>3845361
Well then that's that.
When it comes to projects like these, you either work with people you trust and structure your project in such a way that you can make up for any losses you may experience for whatever reason, or you work alone so you don't have to worry about anyone else interfering with your work at the cost of having a much bigger workload for yourself.
Group efforts on a small scale like this inherently require a certain amount of mutual trust between the parties involved, since the project itself is fundamentally just a hobby project as opposed to a commercial product, and the people working on the project are doing so more for their own personal enjoyment rather than a financial incentive, so trying to force them to be bound by a legal contract like that is a pretty good way to make people not want to work on your project to begin with.

Those are your two choices, trust other people enough to work with them, or don't. Either option's fair, they both have their pros and cons, but those are the only choices you have.

>>3845363
Well what's the risk of this happening assuming I do want to use stuff regardless of if the artist gets cold feet later? How hard is it for your average person to sue another average person over IP violations when no money is involved on either side? Would any lawyer even take that case?

>>3845361
For the record, I'm not disrespecting you or anything, I certainly understand wanting security not only in your creative vision but also in legal standing, I'm just telling you that the level of control you want just isn't feasible on the scale you're working at.
There are a decent number of cases where individual people having near total control over a team working on a creative project has worked out really well, like with Warren Spector on Deus Ex or Toby Fox with Deltarune, but the primary reason people were/are willing to work on those projects in such a way that they're effectively just working to fulfill someone else's creative vision is because they were being paid to do so, everything else was second to that.
Without the monetary incentive, you have to actually keep the people you're working with happy to work with you and invested in the project, and a lot of people are gonna be turned off from that if they have to sign away certain rights in order to be involved in the first place.

>>3845366
>Well what's the risk of this happening assuming I do want to use stuff regardless of if the artist gets cold feet later?
That entirely depends on the situation. If someone leaves your project on good terms and doesn't care about you using their work they made for it, basically none. I know the game Thrive has had years of contributions from people who no longer work on the project, to the point where the dev team has managed to Ship of Theseus itself multiple times during development, but there haven't been any legal issues with that game yet as far as I know.
If someone leaves your project on less friendly terms, then you can probably expect them to be less cool about you using your stuff.
>How hard is it for your average person to sue another average person over IP violations when no money is involved on either side? Would any lawyer even take that case?
Money doesn't necessarily have to be a factor for a case like this, a dispute in ownership or rights to use a given work can be enough ground for a legal dispute if any of the parties involved really want to proceed as such. As for whether or not a lawyer would take such a case, that also depends on the circumstances of the case itself, but I have seen cases of actual legal disputes heading to court over someone using another person's work without their permission, despite the person's work not being used for a commercial venture. As I said before, the usage of another person's work by itself can be enough to go to court over if they feel so inclined.

Again, it's a matter of trust. If I'm working on a hobby project with someone else, and I'm not in a position to legally force them to abide by certain restrictions, then my only choices are to either trust that they will act a certain way when working on the project, or to not work with anyone else at all.

>>3845367
I don't want the rights either. I want this all to be public domain. Or at least as much of it as can possibly be public domain. I also really dislike intellectual property and the people who believe in it, so I'd hope that at least someone else would share my view of ideas (including video games and their assets) as being free for everyone to use as they wish.

Obviously I can't make the entire game public domain. All the parts of it that are based off of Toby's work like sprites containing the delta rune, returning characters, or any writing mentioning Toby's concepts by name can't be, but that still leaves most of the assets, all of the music, and all of the new characters for people to use.

I was about to mention how the software world already operates on a similar principle, with most programmers working on free and open source software solely because they want it to exist and the world to benefit from it, and giving up their exclusive ownership of it is the best way to achieve that, but then I remembered the creative commons license exists. So there are artists like that out there.

Maybe I could just put my whole game, assets included, under the gpl license. That would force anything included in it or made from it to be free. That's still more restrictive than I'd like though. Really I just want a way to force all the content in it to be public domain, since that's the most free license in existence.

>>3845371
>intellectual property
IP is one thing, actual work is another. I agree that someone shouldn't necessarily be able to claim ownership of an idea to a certain extent, but that's not what I'm talking about here. If someone writes code, or makes sprite assets or music for your project, that isn't just IP, that's an actual product they've made, and *that's* something someone can have ownership of.
>Really I just want a way to force all the content in it to be public domain, since that's the most free license in existence.
I get that, but that's never gonna happen. Even if people are willing to work on your project for free, that doesn't necessarily mean they're willing to give up anything they make for it too, especially when it comes to specific character designs or concepts.

Again, it's about mutual trust.

>>3845366
>>3845371
Finding likeminded people isn't impossible. The important thing is being able to pick up on red flags from people who want to join. If they're trannies, avowedly political, are otherwise narcissistic, BPD, schizo, etc. then you're courting an increased risk of drama down the line even if they seem fine now. Otherwise, if you find people you trust then all should go well.
>>3845367
In Toby Fox's case, he has an established name and besides the money people want to work for him because he's considered a visionary. It's similar to how Walt Disney was able to find so many talented people. If you're a nobody it's much harder to find people.

>>3845379
>In Toby Fox's case, he has an established name and besides the money people want to work for him because he's considered a visionary.
Yes, but he only reached that status by making something largely on his own first, and that aside, even though people put Toby on a pedestal and would love the idea of working with him, money is still a factor, at least in capitalist society. Lots of people have jobs they love working, but in a society where people require money in order to live, people are willing to do jobs they don't like if it means maintaining their financial security, and conversely people are unwilling to do things they like if they aren't necessarily being paid enough for their time.
People like working with Toby on Deltarune, sure, but it's not as much of a passion project for them as it is for him, so if the money goes away, so will they.
I'm *not* saying that people will only work on something if there's a profit incentive or some other kind of extrinsic motivation, I'm saying that in a society where people need a certain amount of money in order to survive, people are less willing to dedicate huge chunks of their time and energy to something that isn't necessarily going to help them in that regard.

>>3845377
>If someone writes code, or makes sprite assets or music for your project, that isn't just IP, that's an actual product they've made, and *that's* something someone can have ownership of.
No its not. Images, words, code, its all ideas. Every time you look at an image, a line of code, some words, a copy of it is made in your brain, and if you're sufficiently skilled, you can that turn that idea into a physical thing the same way the original author, artist, programmer did. That's the reason copyright law exists, to prevent you from copying an idea someone else came up with.

The original copyright laws were written in ancient Athens to prevent chefs from copying recipes from other chefs. If you can't see why fining or jailing someone over baking a pie because someone else did it first is evil, then you're either incredibly greedy or incredibly ignorant.

>Even if people are willing to work on your project for free, that doesn't necessarily mean they're willing to give up anything they make for it too, especially when it comes to specific character designs or concepts
Sure most won't, but someone will. Programmers do it all the time. That's the entire point of free and open source software. They contribute their code to a project, knowing they automatically yield all control over that code to the license holder under the conditions of the license, and that they will not be paid for any of it. Even if most artists are too greedy and blind to accept that this can and should be applied to art as well, at least a few of them will agree.


Anyways, despite your input, I've managed to find a solution. I just need to license the project under an appropriate copyleft license which automatically makes any and all contributions to it fall under the same license, similar to the GPL.

>>3845379
>If they're trannies, avowedly political, are otherwise narcissistic, BPD, schizo, etc. then you're courting an increased risk of drama down the line even if they seem fine now.
None of these are necessarily problems in and of themselves, it just depends on the minutia of how they operate and the project they're working on.
Extremely political people can be a pretty big help if the project your working on has a lot to do with politics, just compare the political commentary of Deus Ex with that of Cyberpunk 2077. Specifically, notice how Deus Ex's writing is a lot more willing to get into the nitty-gritty of what it's talking about and go for the throat on issues like class divide and the decay of democracy, whereas 2077 was too afraid of it's own shadow to have it's punk-terrorist deuteragonist actually make any kind of criticism of the economic system the story is supposedly a critique of.
Narcissism and the other disorders can also be helpful to certain projects if you really know how to angle them and get them to put themselves into the project, but it still kinda depends.
As for trans people, that's far too broad a demographic to make any specific judgement on like that.

>>3845388
>None of these are necessarily problems
I don't to turn this into a /pol/ thread by going into painful detail about each and every one of those groups and how they can will do irrational, dangerous, and even life ruining things with little to no provocation, so I'll just leave at the fact that can and will do those things.

Maybe 20 years ago you could be reasonably expected to find sane enough people among them, but not now. Its not worth the risk.

>>3845379
The problem is that you may not know a person is untrustworthy until its too late, or they may become untrustworthy later, like that indie dev who got a brain injury, went crazy, and ruined his game on purpose to spite the fans.

>>3845382
I think you're vastly over stating the problem. We live in a very prosperous society where people have plenty of time for leisure and hobbies. There are loads of people who on things like games for free, with their only motivation being that they want to see it completed, even games that weren't their idea.

>>3845385
>If you can't see why fining or jailing someone over baking a pie because someone else did it first is evil, then you're either incredibly greedy or incredibly ignorant.
Not what I'm arguing. Making something based on something someone else made is fine, taking something someone else made and using it for yourself is more dubious than that.
If someone plays Undertale and gets inspired by Sans and decides to make a character in their own project inspired by him, that's 100% fine. If someone plays Undertale and decides to completely copy Sans and everything about him for usage in their own commercial product without permission, that's not. It's still just an idea, Sans hasn't vanished from the original source like a physical object, but the context of how that idea is being used is incredibly different in both cases.
>Sure most won't, but someone will. Programmers do it all the time.
Programmers, sure, but that's not too often the case with writers, artists, musicians, etc, or anyone else you may find yourself working with.
Yeah, it's not impossible, some people are willing to make stuff like that for free and relinquish their control over it for the sake of a project like that, but those kinds of people don't exactly grow on trees, there's a reason something on the scale of The Nameless Mod only ever happened once.

>>3845393
>We live in a very prosperous society where people have plenty of time for leisure and hobbies.
Some people do, and other people (half the population of the united states depending on who you talk to) live paycheck to paycheck, so it varies.
I'm not saying no one has time to work on projects like that for free, I'm just saying not a lot of people do, or at least not a lot of people choose to.

>>3845396
The kind of people who would be interested in working on an Undertale fangame either aren't living paycheck to paycheck, or don't care and want to do it anyways.

>>3845389
Any group can do irrational and dangerous things, that's the nature of humanity. People, especially already marginalized people, are willing to do extreme things in extreme situations.
However, no group is a monolith, as any critical analysis of any major demographic in history will reveal to you.

>>3845394
>If someone plays Undertale and decides to completely copy Sans and everything about him for usage in their own commercial product without permission, that's not.
But it should be. Intellectual property, specifically its stranglehold over fictional characters has done horrific damage to culture at large, and serves to do nothing but stifle creativity and entrench the positions of corporate media conglomerates.

That's besides the point though, since what we were originally arguing about is someone giving you assets for the express purpose of you using them in your game, then going back on their word, demanding you take the assets out, and the courts siding with them.

>It's still just an idea, Sans hasn't vanished from the original source like a physical object, but the context of how that idea is being used is incredibly different in both cases.
Not in the eyes of the law, and it never has been. Copyright laws flows fundamentally from greed not aligning with reality. There's no good reason someone shouldn't be able to draw sans and post that drawing wherever they want, only legal ones. The same is true of copying files.

>Programmers, sure, but that's not too often the case with writers, artists, musicians, etc, or anyone else you may find yourself working with
Well consider this me being the change I want to see. I am going to precipitate some change, however minor in the zeitgeist surrounding intellectual property by making mine this way.

>>3845399
>The kind of people who would be interested in working on an Undertale fangame either aren't living paycheck to paycheck, or don't care and want to do it anyways.
That's a pretty broad generalization, and a fairly self-evidently false one at that.
I feel like it's probably worth pointing out that, to date, the only complete, full length fangames this community has produced so far are UTY, and Outertale. Undertale has had one of the largest followings the internet has ever seen for an entire decade now, and it only has two fangames to show for it. Sure, UT has a lot of mods that have been thrown around, but mods generally don't require the same amount of time and resources to develop as a full game, save for the anomaly that is TNM, but I digress.
I also feel like it's worth pointing out that a lot of the fangames people talk about on here are also largely solo endeavors, with the two existing DRY takes apparently having only individual anons working on them, along with a few other fangames that are in the same boat.
Like I said, there are people out there willing to put a lot of time and energy into things without a profit motive, but those kinds of people aren't anywhere near as common as they used to be back in the day.

>>3845400
Marginalized people are usually on the margins for a reason, and that reason is usually them being irrational and dangerous, which causes most people to avoid them, leaving them on the margins.

This is getting really off topic though. We really should drop this line of debate, lest we turn this into /pol/ on /vrpg/

And that's why you get help from friends you know and trust, rather than strangers online

>>3845382
Toby also was known in the homestuck community so he already had a leg up

>>3845400
>what are statistics
If you can't grasp that certain characteristics are more likely to be associated with certain actions, and that patterns emerge when looking at things in aggregate, then there's no point in telling you what to look out for. People like yourself who go "well everyone's an iNdIvIdUaL" are a Darwin Award waiting to happen.
>>3845401
Intellectual property ultimately has done more harm than good. In my opinion, you should be able to lift someone else's character and put him in your work. Crediting the original creator is a courtesy and a social expectation.

Wait a minute, are we jumping from one /pol/ topic to another?

>>3845401
>Intellectual property, specifically its stranglehold over fictional characters has done horrific damage to culture at large, and serves to do nothing but stifle creativity and entrench the positions of corporate media conglomerates.
I think this is a bad example on your part. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Sans and the rest of the UT cast not being in the public domain hasn't done a whole lot to stop people from being creative with them, it just stops people from putting a pricetag on whatever they do with them, to a certain degree.
>someone giving you assets for the express purpose of you using them in your game, then going back on their word, demanding you take the assets out, and the courts siding with them.
"Going back on their word" is some interesting phrasing legally, but aside from that, permission to do something, even outside of legal contexts specifically, can be rescinded at any time at the discretion of the permitting party, depending on what you're actually doing.
Just because my friend gave me permission to borrow his car doesn't mean he can't take it back when he finds out that I plan to put a brick on the accelerator and send it over a cliff.

>>3845402
I don't think the fangames that died did so because of work. All of the ones I've seen died because the creator simply lost interest in the project. I can attest to my own personal experience being that way, the only reason I ever dropped creative projects is because I simply grew bored of them.

As for the devanons here. They work alone by choice. DRY1 anon already has a team for his for profit indie game, and has people lining up around the block to volunteer for him, yet he refuses to let any of them work on the project directly because he wants to work alone. I could probably find a whole team in a matter of weeks if I were to go searching on Gamejolt, Twitter, and Tumblr, I just choose not to because I don't trust those people. Naranjanon has said much the same.

If anything I'd say there's more creative people free time now than there ever was before due to the rise of neetdom and the internet allowing them to still connect with the wider world.

>>3845407
>Intellectual property ultimately has done more harm than good. In my opinion, you should be able to lift someone else's character and put him in your work. Crediting the original creator is a courtesy and a social expectation.
I agree completely. I understand the logic behind it, wanting to encourage people to invent new things by giving them a temporary monopoly on said thing, but in practice it discourages invention, prevents the proper production of new inventions, and encourages stagnation.

>Wait a minute, are we jumping from one /pol/ topic to another?
I'm not. I do not want to have an argument over the virtues of stereotyping here.

>>3845408
>Just because my friend gave me permission to borrow his car doesn't mean he can't take it back when he finds out that I plan to put a brick on the accelerator and send it over a cliff.
This isn't borrowing, this is being given the car as a gift, then ten years later he changes his mind and has you charged with grand theft auto.

You should not be able to rescind that kind of permission. That's worse than stealing, its basically fraud and framing someone else for a crime.

>>3845403
>Marginalized people are usually on the margins for a reason
Yes, there are in fact reasons for why things happen, life doesn't have RNG to decide how the world works, but you've made a critical mistake in where you place the cause.
If a nation's leaders start loudly denouncing a specific group, dehumanizing them and turning the public against them, that group then feeling threatened and being more willing to engage in extreme acts against the people who want them dead isn't a particularly surprising turn of events, and that group becoming more outwardly hostile doesn't retroactively justify the actions of the initial offenders.
It happened in the Greater German Reich with all the various ethnic groups they targeted, it's happening in the United States with all the random groups the current administration is targeting, it happened in the Soviet Union during the dekulakization, it's been happening for the better part of a century with Israel and the Palestinians, it's happened countless times throughout history, and most people are apparently incapable (or unwilling) to see the bigger picture and realize what's going on.

I agree that I don't want this thread to turn into /pol/, but you probably shouldn't have started an argument on the basis of some people being inherently born as worse people if you wanted to avoid that.

>>3845414
>this is being given the car as a gift, then ten years later he changes his mind and has you charged with grand theft auto.
Well now the problem with your argument is that there's a statute of limitations for things like that, which means that you can't necessarily take someone to court over a crime that happened over a certain amount of time ago.
The statute of limitations on grand theft auto is three years, so you know.
I agree that someone coming back after ten years and saying they don't want you to use their work in a certain way is a bad thing, which is why there's a statute of limitations on these sorts of things, so that any kind of decision like that would have to be made much more immediately to when the event actually happened, as opposed to sitting on it for thirty years and deciding to hit you with it after everything's already said and done.

>>3845412
>I do not want to have an argument over the virtues of stereotyping here.
Fair enough. Stereotypes do exist for a reason however, and if you want a non-political example you can look at the treatment of Undertale fans. Yes it sucks to be less mentally ill than the average Undertale fan and still be lumped in with them, but I can't seriously blame anyone for disliking the fanbase as a whole. If we want to change that, we just have to be better and discourage negative behavior until the stereotype changes.
>>3845416
Now this is going full-blown politics and I won't bother with counter-examples since that is primed to derail the thread.
>>3845408
Borrowing means there is an implicit agreement that ownership doesn't change hands, and that the car will be returned intact. If you damage it in any way you need to provide restitution.
When it comes to non-scarce assets, providing something and then rescinding permission to use it shouldn't matter. You should be able to use it anyway, unless if there's a contract that says you cannot.

>>3845416
I could argue with you here, but I don't want to derail the thread.

>>3845416
yeah look im with the other two, you're terribly wrong and i even had something typed up but i dont want to derail the thread.
all i'll say is that life isnt fair, and trying to pretend otherwise will only hurt you.

>>3845426
>>3845423
>>3845420
I do find it immensely interesting how you all want to say that I'm wrong, but don't actually want to back that up at all, because you wouldn't want to risk derailing the Undertale fangame thread that's spent the last five hours arguing copyright law and not fangames or Undertale.
Almost as if you know that none of you have a leg to stand on.
Huh.

>>3845418
Ok lets go with a better example.

I've got an old TV in my basement that I never use. You ask "Hey, can I have that TV?" and I say "Sure." and then you make sure to ask "And I can keep this right?" to which I reply "Yes. Keep it. Its yours."

Then the next day you wake up with me and the cops at your door, and I point to you and say "Yes officer, there's the man who stole my TV"

That's what this is the equivalent of.

>>3845420
>When it comes to non-scarce assets, providing something and then rescinding permission to use it shouldn't matter. You should be able to use it anyway, unless if there's a contract that says you cannot.
Scarcity shouldn't matter in this case. The assets weren't lent to you, they were GIVEN to you, with the express purpose of you developing and releasing a fangame containing them. That implies a permanent change of ownership.

That's why I said gave a car and not lent. If someone gives you something as a gift then its yours, no longer theirs, and they can't have it back even if they change their mind. This is basic morality you learn as a small child.

>>3845428
See, the problem there is that there's a difference between giving someone something just to have, as opposed to making something for use in a collaborative effort that you're both working on.
If I *give* someone something, I have no say at all in what they do with it from that point on, it's theirs to do with as they wish.
If I make something for use in a project for a specific purpose, that's a separate story.
You're mistaking giving someone something for making something *with* someone.
Like I said before, as my father described, if two people collaborated on a patent together, regardless of how much work went into whatever part of the invention, they both still own it, one party doesn't just surrender their claim to the patent just because the project wasn't necessarily 100% theirs.

>>3845427
because the copyright law argument is actually tangibly related since we have several devanons that have to worry about that crap.
this topic is completely unrelated.

>>3845431
And yet you're still willing to waste posts on it, just not to actually dispute the claim.
Either make your claim and back it up or shut the fuck up, pick a lane.

>>3845427
Leave, faggot.
>Gamejolt, Twitter, and Tumblr, I just choose not to because I don't trust those people.
Ironically, you'd have a better chance of finding decent people on tumblr these days than practically anywhere else. Its still a nuthouse, but a more compacted one. The real loons went to tiktok, reddit, and twitter.

>>3845433
latter half meant for >>3845409

>>3845427
Copyright is on topic because its at least related to the issues one might face releasing a fangame. And more importantly because its not a /pol/ issue. You know that anything to due with gender, marginalization, or oppressed groups is automatically /pol/, and has no bearing on fangame development.

If you really want to have this argument then make a thread on /pol/ where it belongs.

>>3845433
>Leave, faggot.
Nah.
I don't actually care to argue this either, my point with this is that if you're going to start shit like that don't be surprised when you get called on for not finishing it.

>>3845435
>You know that anything to due with gender, marginalization, or oppressed groups is automatically /pol/, and has no bearing on fangame development.
Funny you make that point, given how this argument started from someone listing off a bunch of random groups and arguing that they inherently couldn't be trusted for the sake of game development.

>>3845430
>See, the problem there is that there's a difference between giving someone something just to have, as opposed to making something for use in a collaborative effort that you're both working on.
No there's not. The law can say there is, and the police can point guns at you to make you act like its true, but that doesn't make it true or right.

You know as well as I do that those assets were given with the express intent of being used in perpetuity by the game, and so would anyone else. The only people who disagree are copyright lawyers and that's because they're paid to.

>>3845427
Copyright law and its ethics is at least tangentially related to concerns over the use of creative assets in fangames. As much as I like explaining how real-world groups earned their stereotypes, there is no such excuse here.
Also, from experience it's impossible to undo decades of conditioning in some people. There have been cases of people being literally raped by the "usual suspects" and then going on to advocate for no punishment for their rapists. Like I said earlier, there are Darwin Awards waiting to happen and there is nothing to be done except to use them as warnings to other people.
>>3845429
Gifts are a permanent change in ownership and I agree they can't be taken back. If an artist gives you a painting, he can't just take it back either. There is a big difference between "lend" and give."
>>3845437
Yes, because that was in response to an anon having trust issues over drama in a dev team. When you have online experience and keep an open eye, clear patterns emerge as to how such drama arises. Ignoring such patterns is to do so at one's own peril.

>>3845434
Less crazy is still crazy. I don't want a pissed off ex-dev doxxing me based on image metadata and mailing live spiders to my house because I called Kris a man.

>>3845442
In my defense, I said better chance of finding someone who wasn't a complete lunatic, not that such a search was wise.

>>3845440
>You know as well as I do that those assets were given with the express intent of being used in perpetuity by the game, and so would anyone else.
Yes, that's true, but that's where the issue lies.
If I give someone something, I'm relinquishing control over it in it's entirety, I no longer have a say in what happens to that thing, whatever it is, provided I am of the legal authority to make such a decision.
When I make something for use in a particular project, there exists the general understanding that it will be used in said project in the ways in which I agreed to have it used. If the way in which the thing in question is to be used changes, or if the nature of the project it was meant to be included in have changed, then the initial agreement no longer applies as the circumstances have changed.
Now, we don't know what happened behind the scenes regarding SoJ and the people working on it, but evidently circumstances changed significantly enough for the anon who was ITT earlier to depart from the project, either by their choice or by the choice of the other SoJ devs, so whatever happened behind the scenes here was clearly enough of a change in circumstance for both parties to agree to discard the work that anon had made.
That's the difference. It's not just about giving someone something, it's about the purpose for which it was given in the first place. If that changes, then whether or not that work may be used at all becomes subject to change as well.
This happens with collaborative efforts all the time, researchers working on scientific endeavors are allowed to withdraw from those endeavors in certain circumstances, and can even have their names and work redacted from the project if they so choose, depending on what their contributions were.

>>3845432
take one look at africa and its history and tell me that you truly believe what you say.
they have had the same amount of time as the rest of us, and yet they have never gone beyond mudhuts and tribal fires despite having enough trees to at the very least make wooden shacks, and plenty of natural earths to try and do something proper with clay.
modern history is littered with white people trying to help them but they tear down any infrastructure we give them.
africans brought to the first world, their grandest achievements amount to mashing two different inventions together like a monkey playing with rocks. they have never made something ground breaking or truly new.
i know your ilk. you'll just screech "MUH WHYPEPO COLONIZERS!".
they were in mud huts before we arrived, they sold their own to us as slaves like the primitives they are, and then they never tried to maintain what we gave them when we left. letting it all fall to ruin and their only grace of luxuries with it.

now, i will entertain this conversation no longer, as i actually like this place and do not want it ruined.
do not bother responding or offering a counter argument, you will get nothing from me.
now begone, faggot. reddit is more your speed.

>>3845437
Fine, if you're really gonna keep threadshitting until you get an answer while crying the victim, its that while marginalize people aren't necessarily bad people. They are usually dangerous people. Usually its due to their mental illnesses making them genuinely unsafe or unpleasant to be around, which causes them to become marginalized.

I don't think schizophrenics are bad people, but I would never ever trust one, because I've had too many experiences and seen too many cases showing why that is an incredibly bad idea. Same with BPD. And while transgenders aren't necessarily crazy, a lot of them are, and were crazy before they ever became transgender. No I'm not saying all of them are that way, but a sizeable chunk are, and its not due to just societal factors.

Contrary to what you believe, real life RNG does exist, its your genetics and the physical factors in the environment you grew up in. Schizophrenics really are born schizophrenic, BPD people really born BPD.

Some of these people aren't inherently untrustworthy, but the sheer number of them that are dangerous, unstable, or otherwise untrustworthy makes it a bad idea to trust a person that has that trait, since its very possible they are one of those unhinged crazy people that will ruin your life when they have an episode.

Now please, fuck off.

>>3845446
>take one look at africa and its history and tell me that you truly believe what you say.
>Take one look at a continent thoroughly ravaged by european imperialism, stripped of it's people and resources, and whose landmass consists half of a desert the size of the continental united states and tell me why they aren't on par with all the countries who subjugated them for multiple centuries.
Well, I can think of a few reasons, but perhaps it's more appropriate to point out that "Africa" is not a country, and doesn't have a single history to tell. Some nations in Africa are wastelands, you're right, but Ethiopia sure gave the Italians a run for their money when they had to.

The thing is, you're close. You're really close to getting the broader point I'm actually making. I argued earlier that no person is inherently *born* worse than anyone else, but you and everyone else missed the point.
It's nature vs. nurture.
There's no human being born on earth who's inherently a worse person than anyone else from the get go, but there are *cultures* that are worse than others, and that's what you should be focusing on. No one comes out of the womb with a taste for human flesh, but if you teach people to hunt and kill humans, they will. No one's born racist, but if spend years teaching them to fear people based on nothing more than the color of their skin, they will.
No one's born believing or thinking any certain way, that's something that gets put into them by their surroundings, the people around them, their culture.
That's my point.

>>3845441
>There is a big difference between "lend" and give."
And someone giving assets to use in a game that you intend to release to the public is not lending.
>>3845445
>there exists the general understanding that it will be used in said project in the ways in which I agreed to have it used.
Those ways being that it will be included in the game by developer and released to the public.
>If the way in which the thing in question is to be used changes, or if the nature of the project it was meant to be included in have changed, then the initial agreement no longer applies as the circumstances have changed.
No. You agreed that it would be used in the game by the developer, that has not changed. So you shouldn't be able to just take it back.

>>3845451
>Xhe didn't even read the post and ignored the part where colonialism was already addressed.
Yep, I'm thinking He won that one.

to try and redirect this back on topic;
for any devs here, how long does it typically take you to sprite something out, and what is your design process, if you have one at all.

>>3845456
Thank you, anon.

What I usually do is sketch a rough idea out on paper a few times first, then I open MS paint and start doing construction. Usually this is figuring out the measurements for my sprite. His height, width, and the height and width of each individual body part.

The I draw an outline, get the rough shape of his head and torso. Then copy and paste that outline to draw the arms on top of it. I'll repeat this process until I get arms that I like, then I do the legs, the head, and the torso.

Then I move on to coloring, which is much of the same copy and draw over process.

Then I start over for all the rotations of the sprite, and then make variations for the walk cycle.

This whole process can take anywhere from hours to days depending on the difficulty of the sprite in question.

>>3845452
>Those ways being that it will be included in the game by developer and released to the public.
>No. You agreed that it would be used in the game by the developer, that has not changed. So you shouldn't be able to just take it back.
Your problem here is that you're trying to drastically simplify the matter to the point where we aren't even arguing about the same things.
If I make something for a project with a specific purpose outlined for it, what I made was intended to be used for that specific purpose. If I write up some code for a facial recognition software designed to be able to identify people automatically from security footage, only to find out that my employer actually wants me to use that same code on militarized drones, the circumstances of the agreement had between me and the employer has changed, and the previous agreement is no longer valid as a result.
No one makes things so that "it would be used in the game by the developer", people make things with specific, previously agreed upon purposes in mind, and when the things they make are no longer to be used in that case, any agreements surrounding the thing's specified use are no longer applicable.

>>3845454
>completely ignoring how I described the fact that people's culture affects how they act, which would then in turn explain why they acted in such ways when interacting with others
Yep, I'm thinking you can't read.

>>3845461
>No one makes things so that "it would be used in the game by the developer",
Yes they do. They do it all the time. And whenever someone makes content for a fangame the implicit implication is that its used that way.

You're adding complications to try and justify someone lying and cheating someone else.

>>3845456
that would imply that im any good at spritework as a whole, and dont have to rely on others for the vast majority of it aside from small edits.

>>3845467
Aseprite is easy to use and you can start off with simpler sprites/tiles.

>>3845466
>Yes they do. They do it all the time. And whenever someone makes content for a fangame the implicit implication is that its used that way.
People don't just make things through divine inspiration, they have to be given some amount of direction, instructions, and at least a vague idea of what they're making something for.
If you have a musician working on your project, you don't just tell them to make "music" and then leave them alone until they have something, you have to describe the tone you want the music to convey during the scene you plan on having it in, you have to give them an idea of how long it should be, what instruments it should and shouldn't use, any leitmotifs it should include (because were talking about UT fan projects here, so of course), etc.
In other words, when someone makes something for a project like that, they are doing so based on an idea of what the thing they are making will be used for.
If I tell someone working on a project that I want a certain asset made for a specific purpose, they create the asset with said purpose in mind, only for the asset to then be used in a completely different manner that utterly disrespects the person who made it and the reason for which it was created, that person has every right to not want themself and their work to be affiliated with my project, and is completely justified in revoking their permission to use their work.
You are simplifying things to try and justify not letting other people have control over things they made for free in situations where they may not want them to be used in certain ways, which feels more dishonest than letting someone pull their work out of a project if they feel so inclined.
If someone doesn't want you to use something they made with a particular purpose in mind for something completely different, you don't just get to have it, it's not them "lying and cheating" you.

>>3845456
I just grab parts of existing sprites and edit them

lambdarune update
https://gamejolt.com/p/update-3-nearly-all-segments-are-complete-only-minor-modificati-abfqqvpt

>>3845472
Lambdarune, huh?
Don't think I've heard of this one before, what's it about?

>>3845470
>only for the asset to then be used in a completely different manner that utterly disrespects the person who made it and the reason for which it was created, that person has every right to not want themself and their work to be affiliated with my project
No they aren't, and using the work different from how you originally intended to use it isn't disrespecting them. If I originally asked for a boss theme, then decide later to use it as a stage theme instead, there's nothing wrong with that. And if they later decide they want to quit, then that's no reason for all that good content to go to waste.
>If someone doesn't want you to use something they made with a particular purpose in mind for something completely different, you don't just get to have it, it's not them "lying and cheating" you.
If they gave it to me with the express purpose of me using it in the game then later changed their mind then that's on them.

Once you give something to someone else, it becomes theirs, they have it and can do whatever they want with it. Especially if its something infinitely renewable and copy-able.

>>3845473
it is one of the alternate chapter 3 takes, it was dead for a bit but it started development again after the official 3 and 4 came out
also there was a small update on deltatraveler but it is just fixes, but rynogg also posted some blogpost about some changes but I haven't bothered reading it

>>3845475
>using the work different from how you originally intended to use it isn't disrespecting them.
That entirely depends on the context of how you're repurposing it, and it's not your choice to decide whether or not *someone else* is disrespected by something.
>And if they later decide they want to quit, then that's no reason for all that good content to go to waste.
It's not "going to waste", they're just not letting *you* use it for your project. While I discussed the idea with my father, he brought up a few legal instances in which during disputes between people who made things for certain specific purposes and their employers where the person who made the thing was allowed to actually retain the rights to their creation due to it's nature, and sometimes whether or not the creation had a lifespan of any kind, such as potentially being rendered obsolete within a certain amount of time.
In those cases, because the thing they made wasn't being used for the purpose for which it was made, ownership went back to the original creator instead of the employer it was made for.
Not being able to use someone else's work isn't the same thing as that work going to waste, you're just entitled.
>Once you give something to someone else, it becomes theirs, they have it and can do whatever they want with it.
Yes, so it's a good thing that's not at all the scenario you're describing.
People working on collaborative efforts, even ones largely centered around a single person, are not giving their work to *that person*, they're giving their work to the project itself. If any party involved has an issue with their work being used in a certain way, they're allowed to rescind the right to do so if there isn't a legally binding agreement saying otherwise.

>>3845475
To cool things down a bit, here's my last word on this.
The most surefire way to prevent your fear of someone taking away their work and crippling your project is as follows: just don't upset people making such significant contributions to your project. I know the argument briefly derailed into the subject of untrustworthy people earlier, but the truth is that whatever demographic you're talking about, the kind of person who's willing to seriously sit down and dedicate a significant amount of their time and energy to a passion project like that, with no expectation of monetary gain, isn't the kind of person who'll go off like a bomb. Just treat the people you work with like a decent human being, try and avoid any incendiary incidents, and don't try and force them to adhere to things that make them uncomfortable, and you'll never have to worry about them wanting to leave and take their work with them.
If the kind of person who's willing to dedicate years of their life to *someone else's* passion project that they won't see a single cent for decides they no longer want to be affiliated with that project and wants their work removed from it, let's be real, I don't think it was that person who was the problem.
That's the real answer, just don't be a dick to the people who are making stuff for your project for free and you probably won't have to worry too much about it.

>>3845478
>That entirely depends on the context of how you're repurposing it,
No it doesn't
>and it's not your choice to decide whether or not *someone else* is disrespected by something.
If its definition is entirely decided by the offended party then it shouldn't be admissible as a factor at all.
>It's not "going to waste", they're just not letting *you* use it for your project.
Art and assets are made for a game, artist leaves and by demand of the IP gods all assets he made for it must be removed. These assets are never used again since they're assets for someone else's intellectual property, someone whom the artist is no longer working with. That is definitionally a waste and the world is worse for it.
>you're just entitled.
You're the entitled one trying to alter
deals and tell people what they can and can't do with the files on their computer just because you drew some pictures.
> they're giving their work to the project itself.
And that doesn't change a single thing about my argument. The assets are still being used for the project, the assets still belong to the project.

> If any party involved has an issue with their work being used in a certain way, they're allowed to rescind the right to do so if there isn't a legally binding agreement saying otherwise.
No they don't. I don't care how many lawyers, judges, and police say they do. They do not, they never have, and they never should. Anything contrary is a lie invented by lawyers.

>>3845481
>just don't upset people making such significant contributions to your project.
Would've been a reasonable thing to ask 15 years ago in another fanbase. The majority of the UT fanbase (at least the portion that makes content) and the majority of all artists these days really are unreasonable lunatics. You don't have to be disrespectful or rude, just disagreeing with them will set them off.
>try and avoid any incendiary incidents,
Also basically impossible to do since, as previously stated, everything can be an incendiary incident to these people.

Anyways, I'll just put all of my project under a copyleft license, one that like GPL automatically forces all contributions made for it to also be under the same copyleft license. Just include a Licenses.txt file with the source file spelling out how they automatically yield all IP rights by working on the project. It works for all the software I use, I've seen it work for games too. It can work here.

>>3845484
>Art and assets are made for a game, artist leaves and by demand of the IP gods all assets he made for it must be removed. These assets are never used again since they're assets for someone else's intellectual property, someone whom the artist is no longer working with. That is definitionally a waste and the world is worse for it.
This argument has thus far centered around the subject of fangames. In this case, the person leading the project the other person opted to withdraw from *also* doesn't own the IP those assets were made for.
To give an example of something similar happening with a UT fan-project, when the lead guy behind UT: bits and pieces got arrested, the other devs on the team then went on to work on a different UT remaster-ish project and took some of their assets with them, leaving behind only the contributions made by the former lead dev.
Just because an asset doesn't go towards the project it was initially made for doesn't mean the person who made it can't still do their own thing with it. Whether or not they actually *will* is another matter entirely, but the fact of the matter is that the option is nevertheless available to them.
>You're the entitled one trying to alter deals and tell people what they can and can't do with the files on their computer just because you drew some pictures.
You're the one throwing a temper tantrum over the idea of someone not wanting to be affiliated with you and not wanting you to use their work as a result.
Maybe the fact that you're so worked up over this despite not actually having assembled a team for whatever project you're working on is a good indication that it should be a solo venture. Forget the other people being untrustworthy, I'm not even sure *your* head's screwed on straight.

>>3845487
>Would've been a reasonable thing to ask 15 years ago in another fanbase. The majority of the UT fanbase (at least the portion that makes content) and the majority of all artists these days really are unreasonable lunatics. You don't have to be disrespectful or rude, just disagreeing with them will set them off.
Well evidently UTY happened, and TS!US is happening, among other team-built fan projects, so obviously people in this community are, in fact, capable of cooperation without tearing themselves apart.
>Also basically impossible to do since, as previously stated, everything can be an incendiary incident to these people.
Talking to people in the UT community isn't like walking through a minefield, you're just too socially inept to understand what is and isn't considered acceptable to say or act around other people.
If you really have so much trouble working with other people, just keep things professional and don't talk about or do things that would cause problems like that in the first place.
Again, cooperation isn't impossible, it's not even that hard. People who are cooperating with each other will have disagreements or problems with each other, maybe even heated ones, but you have to be able to work past those things if you want your project to succeed. Failure to do so isn't just the fault of the other people involved, it's the fault of the one leading the effort for not making sure their team actually works well together.
>Just include a Licenses.txt file with the source file spelling out how they automatically yield all IP rights by working on the project
Not a whole lot of people are going to want to work on a project with a bear trap like that hidden in it, just look at how much shit EA got when they tried to pull something similar with that game design contest a few years back.

>>3845488
>In this case, the person leading the project the other person opted to withdraw from *also* doesn't own the IP those assets were made for.
Let me give an example of what I'm referring to. Say hypothetically Undertale Naranja had an art team, and then one of the artists quit. He drew all the Val sprites in the game, but the original design and concept for Val came from Naranjanon. Now you have a case where the IP of that art belongs to the Naranjanon, who came up with the character, and artfag, who drew the character. The character may even be jointly owned by Toby Fox since he created the original work which UTN was derived from.

Artfag can't use that character because he didn't create it. Naranjanon can't use the art because he didn't draw it. And now we can't play the game because some artist threw a tantrum and trapped half the art in IP limbo.

>You're the one throwing a temper tantrum over the idea of someone not wanting to be affiliated with you and not wanting you to use their work as a result
Its not the fact that they don't want to. Its the fact that they have any right to do it, especially if I have plainly and clearly informed them that I will be using that art even if the leave the team.

>Maybe the fact that you're so worked up over this despite not actually having assembled a team for whatever project you're working on is a good indication that it should be a solo venture.
I'm worked up over it because I'm against it on principle. Intellectual property is an evil thing which continues to make the lives of everyone (except lawyers and major corporate executives) worse.

>I'm not even sure *your* head's screwed on straight.
No, you're just too brainwashed by the IP holder propaganda to see how horrible this all is.

>>3845490
>TS!US is happening
Did you not hear about that cancellation attempt caused by one of the devs? Or about the one that happened to Wildfire?

They survived sure, but they're still in a precarious position because of it and TSUS had some major setbacks because of it.

>Not a whole lot of people are going to want to work on a project with a bear trap like that hidden in it,
They'll be fine with it. Basically all good software these days is written under copyleft licenses like GPL, LGPL, or the MIT license. Hell, parts of my engine HAVE to be LGPL already because I'm using existing LGPL code. Its just the way things work. You work on somebody else's programming project while expressly agreeing that they, and anyone else in the world, can use that code for whatever they want, as long as they too include that license with their code.

But if they're not, thats cool too. I don't want to work with people who are against free and open art.

>just look at how much shit EA got when they tried to pull something similar with that game design contest a few years back.
Because that was a proprietary license. One where EA claimed the rights to all of their submissions. Nobody minds free and open source licenses like GPL because they make the world a better place. And because it was hidden. I'll make sure this is out in the open, and that everyone knows.


You just seem to be completely unaware of the concepts of free and open source, libre licenses, and copyleft.

>>3845492
>Let me give an example of what I'm referring to. Say hypothetically Undertale Naranja had an art team, and then one of the artists quit. He drew all the Val sprites in the game, but the original design and concept for Val came from Naranjanon. Now you have a case where the IP of that art belongs to the Naranjanon, who came up with the character, and artfag, who drew the character. The character may even be jointly owned by Toby Fox since he created the original work which UTN was derived from.
If I showed this paragraph to my father, a well-versed copyright lawyer who has been practicing law for several decades, I think he'd have a stroke.
You clearly have no understanding how the law works, and why it's made the way it is. And don't get me wrong, I'm absolutely not saying American law, literally any of it, is perfect and shouldn't be questioned, I partially agree with you with some of what you were saying earlier, but the fact of the matter is that earlier ITT you asked me a question about how the law works and I took the time to try and get you as good of an answer as I could get without an actual legal consultation.
The fact that you didn't like the answer is irrelevant, it doesn't change what the law actually is regarding the matter. As far as this conversation is concerned, that's the end of the story legally speaking.

As for you on a personal level, I think it's worth pointing out that every other devanon who comes to these threads actually likes to talk about their projects themselves, happily explaining their stories, concepts, characters, game mechanics, etc, while you're here melting down over a fringe hypothetical where your project gets crippled because you couldn't refrain from pissing off the people who decided to work on *your* passion project for free.
Based on how you're talking, I wouldn't be surprised if your project is headed for an Invisible War: Revised situation.

>>3845497
>They'll be fine with it. Basically all good software these days is written under copyleft licenses like GPL, LGPL, or the MIT license. Hell, parts of my engine HAVE to be LGPL already because I'm using existing LGPL code. Its just the way things work. You work on somebody else's programming project while expressly agreeing that they, and anyone else in the world, can use that code for whatever they want, as long as they too include that license with their code.
Yes, the code is open source, but that doesn't extend to any music, art, writing, or any other creative assets the project made with that code uses, which was the crux of this argument.

>>3845498
Who says I don't talk about my project. I just also argue with people on here because this is 4chan. Everyone does that. I'm almost certain the other devs do that too. Everyone does that. That's the point of the anonymity.

One minute I can be arguing the ethics (or lack thereof) of copyright, and then another I can be discussing what my silly little scrimblos are doing on their fantasy adventure, and no one will ever know that those are both me.

Fair enough though, I definitely shouldn't have let things get as heated as they did. This is supposed to be a chill thread. I'm just fundamentally against copyright on principle, so discussing it tends to get me worked up.

Sorry if I got a bit rude back there.

>If I showed this paragraph to my father, a well-versed copyright lawyer who has been practicing law for several decades, I think he'd have a stroke
Who does Val belong to in this hypothetical then? I remember a few years back when Disney was in legal hot water for using fan art on official posters for a new Star Wars movie.

>>3845500
>but that doesn't extend to any music, art, writing, or any other creative assets the project made with that code uses, which was the crux of this argument.
It can and very often does. That's why all of the UI and sounds in open source programs are also considered free and open source. Depends on the license and how the assets are included really.

LGPL for example, has everything that's statically linked (that's included in the executable) become LGPL assets. That includes any kind of files contained in the source during compilation.

There are games that do this too. FreeDOOM, Tux Racer, and Nazi Zombies Portable are three that I know.

>>3845507
>Who does Val belong to in this hypothetical then? I remember a few years back when Disney was in legal hot water for using fan art on official posters for a new Star Wars movie.
Okay. I am going to explain this to you in good faith, as this seems to be a question asked in good faith.
Val, the character, belongs to the person who can be proven to have initially conceived him. *Art* of that character belongs to the person who made said art.
This is why you can't necessarily freely use artwork someone else made of an IP that person doesn't own, even if you happen to be the owner of the IP that person made the artwork of.
The IP may belong to you, but an individual work made of that IP by someone else belongs to that person, the original IP owner doesn't just automatically own anything created of it.
So to address the problem with your first paragraph in that last post regarding ownership of Val, no, Toby Fox does not have any legal say in the usage of Val at all, other than to potentially order that all of the original concepts present in UTN be completely disassociated from his IP.
In other words, Toby has no legal right to Val or any of the other concepts made expressly for UTN, but he could potentially issue a C&D to UTN and demand that the project no longer continue development or no longer associate itself with his IP. He wouldn't do that, Toby's a remarkably relaxed person when it comes to fangames and his own image, but he could if he wanted to. (provided all parties involved are subject to US national law, or a high supernational law)

>>3845511
So by that logic, in this hypothetical couldn't Naranjanon prevent the artist from doing anything with all of those Val drawings, since they were all depictions of his character?

>>3845510
>It can and very often does. That's why all of the UI and sounds in open source programs are also considered free and open source. Depends on the license and how the assets are included really.
Okay, it can sometimes extend to other assets, but it's not necessarily the case 100% of the time, and you'd likely be landing yourself in some legal trouble if you treated it as such.
That game I mentioned earlier, Thrive, is open source. You can go and download a copy of the game's source code and do whatever you want with it, but the game's logo, artwork made for the game by the people working on it, etc, belongs to Revolutionary Games Studio. It's theirs, you can't just grab all their art assets and put them in your game as you wish.

>>3845514
If it violates fair use law, yes, otherwise, no, an IP holder can't necessarily take legal action against someone doing something with their IP as long as it doesn't actually violate copyright law or fair use.
What a violation of fair use or other copyright law actually constitutes depends on the context of the situation, but in the case of fanart, it's usually fine.

>>3845514
For a more slightly specific answer, the IP owner for the original concepts in UTN would theoretically have roughly the same level of legal authority over whatever that artist would want to do with those sprites of Val as Toby Fox has over anything anyone does with Frisk's sprites.
It would still depend on the nature of what they're actually doing with them, but that should serve as a decent general answer to your question.

>>3845516
> It's theirs, you can't just grab all their art assets and put them in your game as you wish.
Because the license doesn't include the art assets as part of the open source portion of the game. I want to use a license that does include the assets under its umbrella of free and open source.

I know you say that common decency and being respectful should cover it, but respectful can mean different things to different people. And as you have just seen, I am an opinionated, argumentative, slightly autistic, and decidedly right wing person. And this fandom is filled with people who are also opinionated, argumentative, autistic, but decidedly left wing. Even if I think I'm being civil, I could easily say something that they find to be a personal insult, and they could likewise say something that I might not be able to brush past. And that could lead to all manner of trouble.

Even if this is still all unlikely. I'm also a very anxious person. So having this kind of possibility hanging over my head, however slim it may be, is going to eat away at me. Which is why I want to find a solution now, so I can turn my attention to the game without constant fear of it blowing up in my face.

>>3845519
>>3845520
So why are things like Pokemon fangames illegal, while that Val fanart isn't? What's the limit of fair use?

Its always seemed to me to be a term that's lost all its meaning, since I've seen all manner of things which should obviously be fair use get killed. With the only things allowed be obvious parodies like something South Park would do.

>>3845522
not that guy but that's just nintendo being petty
fangames can exist as long as the IP holder is ok with it, like how sega only goes after fangames that charge for money
nintendo is just overprotective of their IPs
meanwhile toby is likely fine as long as you don't start selling it (though materia collective may think otherwise)

>>3845521
Alright, I really do have other things I need to tend to, so the bottom line is this.
If you get someone to agree to be bound by a legal arrangement such that they forfeit any rights to their work as part of your project, such as whatever open source license you may be looking into, that's fine, it's 100% legal, no problems.
My point, however many hours ago earlier ITT, is that if you were to argue that you are legally entitled to use a person's work as part of your project per the conditions of a legally binding agreement you and the other person entered into, the responsibility is on you to be able to actually prove that in a court of law, and second, most people in this community have a tendency to get very attached to their fan-creations and are unlikely to be willing to be bound by such a contract to begin with, and third, in the absence of such a legally binding agreement, a party may be legally entitled to have their work removed from your project at their own discretion.
If you manage to find a whole team of people willing to give up everything they make for your project, then congrats, but don't be too surprised if that doesn't pan out.

>>3845523
That doesn't really change the meaning of my question though. All it adds is that Nintendo is gay while Toby is based.

I was asking why someone can release art of someone else's character and its alright, but a game in someone else's series needs the consent of the original IP holder.

>>3845525
because your OCs are your own characters, using naranja as an example again, anon could just remove all undertale references, change the UI, and use only the original characters and it would be completely legal to sell it as his own original game (what the mother 4 devs did when they rebranded to oddity (rip))
it is kinda what I did with my original game too based on the first draft of DRY1 (though I already have changed that enough where it is different from them, but the base thing of having 2 worlds and stuff is still similar, it is just not a dark world now but something else)

>>3845522
Yeah, what that other guy said basically. Toby Fox actually has exactly the same level of legal authority over fangames based on his IPs. He could've C&D'd UTY long before it ever got out the door, but he chose not to because he's a decent person.
>>3845525
It's a little bit tricky, but the general legal consensus is that fanworks of a certain nature released in a certain way can threaten the official release economically.
The justification Nintendo and their defenders tend to use is that people might see fangames like Pokemon Uranium Version as an alternative to buying an actual pokemon game, so they take it down to protect game sales.
If Toby felt so inclined, he could've easily taken down UTY on the basis that a full-length game set in his IP was threatening the sales of Undertale itself, since UTY could be seen to some people as a free alternative to the original product.

>>3845528
We're talking about if Naranjanon had an artist, and that artist left with his Val sprites to use in his own projects.

>>3845529
Toby sells merchandise of his games, and he has that Undertale art book. If he were evil (just imagine the annoying dog with a goatee) couldn't he also argue that all fanart threatens the sales of his official art and merchandise?

>>3845530
in this case it depends, the assets would belong to the artist without a contract saying otherwise, but the character would be naranjanon's
as said before (honestly I've just been glimpsing through this huge convo), fangames mostly don't have contracts due to their informal nature, so it is a huge grey area of who own what, and everyone pretty much just goes by verbal agreements unless things go south with drama as it happens so many times
it is also why I am not going to use any sprites/music made by other fan artists in DRY1, I don't want to deal with said drama, exceptions can be made with anons but it is still a bit tricky and I am somewhat hesitant still

>>3845532
yes, and materia collective is doing that on the music because they want all the money

>>3845524
Maybe I should just stick to working with people who are too poor too afford lawyers. We'd have more in common that way.

Or maybe I should get a bunch of Russians on my dev team. There are a lot of Russian UT fangame fans. It would be funny to be the only fangame to have an official Russian translation.

Jokes aside, thanks for the advice. Sorry if I took things too personally back there.

>>3845532
>couldn't he also argue that all fanart threatens the sales of his official art and merchandise?
Not all fanart, only art of a certain similarity to official artwork, or fanart that's being monetized somehow, though Toby is also pretty chill about fan merch, as long as it isn't being used as an alternative (otherwise known as a bootleg) to the official merch over at fangamer.

Does this answer all of your legal questions?

>>3845536
>Jokes aside, thanks for the advice. Sorry if I took things too personally back there.
It's fine, I got a bit heated myself.
Just, know what the law is, and treat the people you work with decently, and you won't have any problems with the sword of Damocles anytime soon.

>>3845536
Russians and other slavs might be better to work with. I don't actually have experience working with them. If you are the same anon as in >>3845521, a big reason to go with non-westerners is that they won't be radicalized as to want to kill you for having a different political stance (it's crazy that this is the world we live in, but it's a genuine worry now).

>>3845534
>yes, and materia collective is doing that on the music because they want all the money
I forgot Toby already had an evil twin.

I wonder if you could get away with putting an evil annoying dog in your fangame and calling it Sebastion, or would that be tempting fate?

>>3845538
So what I'm getting from this is that those people who do commissions to draw UT characters or those people selling Undertale t-shirts at conventions could totally be sued by Toby if he wanted to be an asshole about it.
>>3845539
I know. I've just got my own personal anxieties about these sorts of things. Never been good with people.

>>3845546
>So what I'm getting from this is that those people who do commissions to draw UT characters or those people selling Undertale t-shirts at conventions could totally be sued by Toby if he wanted to be an asshole about it.
yes he actually has the legal right to do so

>>3845546
>So what I'm getting from this is that those people who do commissions to draw UT characters or those people selling Undertale t-shirts at conventions could totally be sued by Toby if he wanted to be an asshole about it.
Yes.
>I know. I've just got my own personal anxieties about these sorts of things. Never been good with people.
I can't blame you for having those sorts of worries, but that's definitely something you'll have to work on if you want to make your project see the light of day, unless you go it alone that is.

For whatever it's worth, I hope it pans out, it'd be cool to see a new fangame for this community sometime.
Sorry I compared you to Invisible War Revised, that was harsh.

>>3845550
>Sorry I compared you to Invisible War Revised, that was harsh.
Don't worry, I don't even know what that is.

>>3845553
Most people don't.
It's better that way.

>>3845542
I wonder if could the give me alone guy to contribute. Then I credit him as "Give Me Alone Guy".

>>3845546
Yes but it's not likely to happen. MLP has a fan-driven market that might actually rival Hasbro's toy lines of the franchise in terms of scale. Though, in that case they're oriented towards entirely different audiences while there is heavy overlap between official merch and fan merch within Deltarune's community.
>>3845555
I don't know him. Also, nice get.

>>3845556
I'm talking about the guy who did that Russian Undertale Bits and Pieces mod. The one that has Ceroba speaking in broken English in the true lab.

Now that I think about it. The Russians seem to share my stance on intellectual property. They steal fan made content and reuse it all the time. Hell, they even package and sell it on store shelves. They don't even have copyright anymore (international copyright at least).

>>3845558
desu the russians were the only ones that could grab bits and piece and continue it after the lead dev got arrested and everyone else was too afraid to

>>3845559
My point exactly. They share my philosophy. Better that the mod gets finished, then that people's IP rights are respected. Though maybe they could have used at least one native English speaker to look over their dialogue.

All this arguing about legal shit's tired me out, but it did bring a question to my mind just now, albeit a mostly unrelated one.

To any devanons in this thread, why not just make a total conversion mod instead of a standalone fangame? Making a mod for a pre-existing game is (usually, I'm told) easier than making an entire game engine from scratch, and you'd be able to work with the mechanics the game already has in its code instead of having to implement them yourself.
I'm actually curious to the reasoning behind this, I wanna know why there are so many fangame projects for UT but so few UT total conversions.

>>3845563
working with the UT/DR codebase is a nightmare, the code is full spaghetti in the worst way imaginable, and not to mention the limits of gamemaker
it is easier to remake the engine than to rework it, unless you want to do something very small

>>3845563
Undertale doesn't have official mod support, its code is really bad, and mods are naturally more limited than making a whole new game. Its harder to make the kind of drastic changes you;d want for a fangame tier experience by modify vanilla undertale.

>>3845566
>>3845567
Yeah, I guess that's fair.
Most total conversion mods in general seem to be for 3d games, so I guess that's where it becomes easier to mod rather than make a game engine from scratch.

>>3845563
on top of what the other anons said, some of us are using this as a learning experience for game dev, if you wanted to make a total conversion mod you'd be forced to work with gamemaker, instead of using the engine of your choice, as far as I know none of the current devanons are using gamemaker as their engine

>>3845080
I think the out of body segment is meant to be a place for you to rest your fingers because, frankly, i think the devs saw that the gameplay was extremely intense compared to the og "an ordinary sonic romhack" and decided that they should add a slower section so that the player wouldnt be forced to lock in and stress about losing throughout all the 6 main areas, plus, gotta prevent the concept from getting old too soon as well

>>3845323
Just edit the sprites enough for the similarities to not be too plain obvious and claim you remade the sprites, its easy and the pos trying to ruin your project cant get on your ass for it because the sprites are now too different to be considered his anymore

>>3845335
When you lay it out like that, your rationale does make sense. Though I'd change it to V2 (as opposed to 2) since I think that better captures the idea of "a different development path". Without the software versioning allusion, I still believe the average newcomer, who hasn't read your explanation, would initially assume "Deltarune sequel".
As of now, I'm leaning towards either your suggestion or 202X. Leaning towards the latter since I think your ideas still apply as a "202X update" to the original Survey Program, and I think it's less likely to be confused for a DR sequel

>>3845563
From my limited experience, extensive Deltarune modding (through Undertale Mod Tool) is rather cumbersome. If Deltarune was decompiled to a Game Maker project, perhaps I'd consider, but I don't think that exists.
Even so, I think I'd prefer writing the engine primarily by hand over using Game Maker (or anything else, really). It comes down to the fact that I much prefer the extra granularity and control a custom engine provides over a premade one. A side effect of this is that my game is now theoretically portable to more platforms than what Deltarune runs on, and I think that's pretty neat.
I will note there are other games where I'd consider a total conversion mod over a recreation (eg. Pokémon). I think it comes down to how extensive the available tooling is, how comfortable I am working with it, and how difficult it would be for me to accurately recreate the game mechanics.

>>3845562
I am lurker from Russia and this discussion just made my day, thank you all.

Yellowfags, we warned you and you didn't listen. Stick to your general and stop ruining Undertale and Deltarune threads on /v/ just because you don't like Chara.

>>3845746
That's rich coming from UT/DR fags who shat up both Yellow threads we had this week

>>3845751
don't take the bait anon

Wonder how Wildfire will play out

just saw the google doc too

>this will be scrapped

kms

>>3845942
>yeah we had to remove hugging martlet because the guy who drew it didn't like us celebrating a murder :( (presumably)
you have to wonder how they managed to rationalise that in their heads

>>3845944
Alright, not to potentially divert the thread into the subject of politics again, but I think it's a little weird that everyone's just assuming that that's what the dispute behind the scenes was even about, and that those were the sides those people were on. The timing might line up, but it could easily have been some personal matter that tore things apart instead. I mean, the anon who actually posted that document and said they weren't working with the dev team for that mod anymore said they didn't wanna go into it, but I feel like it would've been pretty easy to say they just had a political dispute if that's what actually happened, especially given how most people on this site would've sucked him off if his views aligned with theirs.

>>3845942
qrd?

>>3845960
An anon posted a google doc with some assets made for the UTY mod Shades of Justice that aren't going to be used as the anon responsible for making them is no longer affiliated with the dev team for reasons the anon opted not to go into.

>>3845958
Anything he said would've ended up on /v/, which likely would've gotten spread to twitter from there. And at that point, its entirely possible it could lead to more drama, which would put heat on him. Both from the devs who kicked him out, and from the wider fandom which leans left and likes to get involved in hate mobs.

I can understand not wanting to make a big drama thing out of it.

>>3845968
Yeah, it's possible, but only if people actually knew who this anon was, and we don't.
And honestly, based on what the anon told us about the fact that both parties have agreed not to use the assets made, and how I haven't heard much of a stink from the main dev of SoJ on twitter, I'd be willing to bet that even if that guy getting shot *was* the source of the dispute, the actual resolution was probably a lot more amicable than you're giving them credit for.

Also, regarding this particular event, most left-wingers seem content to just make jokes about it, whereas right-wingers are the ones melting down over said jokes. Compare that to when representative Melissa Hortman was gunned down earlier just this year, and right-wingers were cracking jokes for weeks, while left-wingers just expressed their condolences and moved on.
Things go both ways, anon.

>>3845970
I'm not even convinced it has anything to do with that event specifically, I think it could just as easily be any number of other issues. Dramas in the UT fandom are a dime a dozen.

Anyways, once something reaches twitter, if it had the additional information some anons wanted from him included (the reason he left), the devs themselves would likely speak up and say who he was sooner or later. And things would undoubtedly get messy.

Him being vague about the details seems like the winning move to me. It keeps things amicable rather than escalating it into a drama.

>entire other half of that post
Please don't make this into a /pol/ thread

>>3845975
I doubt it has anything to do with it. They were looking for new spriters last month.

>>3845975
Alright, leaving aside the issue of politics.
>the devs themselves would likely speak up and say who he was sooner or later. And things would undoubtedly get messy.
I doubt that honestly. The devs seems fairly chill, and I don't think there's any real context they could be put in where they would really feel compelled to say what exactly went down. If the devs and the anon both agreed that they wouldn't use the work the anon made, I think it's also likely that the anon leaving the team probably isn't too much of a big deal for the mod itself, so it's not like it's some major team member leaving that warrants an announcement or anything.
>Him being vague about the details seems like the winning move to me. It keeps things amicable rather than escalating it into a drama.
I agree, I was just saying that it's kinda weird to project your feelings (assuming you were the anon who made that post with the censored text up above) about recent events onto this when it could easily have nothing to do with that and have been a rather peaceful parting of the ways as opposed to some heated ideological dispute.
All we know is that something happened behind the scenes, and that anon and his work are no longer affiliated with the mod.
Honestly, if I had to guess, I'd say it was more likely a SBFP-style situation, where there was probably just some personal issue between the anon and some other dev member(s) that caused them to not want to work with each other anymore, but was of such a nature that they were still able to settle things peacefully.

>>3845977
>assuming you were the anon who made that post with the censored text up above
I'm not

>>3845982
Alright, well, my earlier post that you at some point replied to was directed at that guy, so I'm not sure why you put yourself in the line of fire like that.
Whatever, moving on.

>>3845944
>>3845958
I was the guy who first put out that speculation and I want to emphasize that it's pure speculation. It could well have been personal issues instead. To me it's a likely possibility, but going, "THE SHADES OF JUSTICE TEAM IS MADE OF CRAZY LEFTISTS WHO WANT TO KILL PEOPLE" is completely unverified and would end up hurting spriteranon if this rumor spread. We should be mature enough to talk about possibilities without latching onto any one as absolute fact.
Don't make me regret indulging in speculation. Assuming the absolute worst of a dev team of a fangame is the last thing we should be doing.

>>3845958
>>3845997
i put presumably in there and spoilered it for a reason, that's not me saying that's the case but working off of the theory
suppose i could have put (if that is the case) at the end of the other line as well but i thought presumably made it clear enough that wasn't exactly meant to be 100% my belief
but whatever, was just meant to be a snide comment based on someone else's theory out of personal annoyance of cute shit getting potentially cut, don't take it as a sign i want it to be a politcal thing because i don't

>>3846001
Well, the definition of "presumably" is "very likely but not certain", so I think you may want to brush up on your vocabulary a bit.
Anyway, I think speculation on this is something of a moot point because what's done is done. The anon's left the team, those assets won't be used, that's it. IIRC the anon themself said they don't actually know if the concepts the assets were made for are being scrapped too, just that *those* particular assets wouldn't be used, so it's possible the general ideas showcased in that document can still end up in the mod anyway, just in a different form.

>>3845976
Yeah, I considered mentioning that earlier. This has been on their Gamejolt page since the end of July, so I imagine the spriter anon left a while ago

I'm gonna be honest, while I feel like some of the stuff shown in that document is pretty cool, like the post-genocide choice cutscene, or the hug with Martlet, I feel like a lot of that other stuff is just a bit much.
I get that the idea of SoJ is to add stuff the original game was lacking in, but I feel like you can really only add so much to an existing game before it starts to feel like HL2 Overcharged.
Honestly, if you're looking to add that much new content to UTY, you may as well ditch the idea of being an enhancement/QoL mod and just make an overhaul, new routes, endings, etc, take it off the rails.

>>3846015
damn guess I can't add the arcade minigames I had in mind for DRY then

>>3846021
No, you can, I'm just saying there gets to be a point where it's too much in my opinion.
Stapling all that extra stuff into the Wild East section would've been a bit much, having a few minigames here and there in general is fine, the original UTY even had that arcade game in the dunes and that was just fine.

>>3846024
I was joking but I don't see the issue, I felt UTY was lacking a lot of optional content
like there was no reason to add a fast travel system if there is nothing to backtrack for, I was hoping that there would be quests and other stuff in past areas
though I haven't played shades of justice yet so I don't know how saturated the new content is

>>3846025
>I felt UTY was lacking a lot of optional content
Maybe, but UT's original release also had that issue to a certain extent. Aside from the "dates" with Papyrus, Undyne, and Alphys, you can do most of what the pacifist route has to offer in a single run without having to backtrack, and the genocide route has nothing to go back for at all.
UT and UTY are fairly short for RPGs, so them not having a whole lot of things to do in individual runs is a bit of a given, especially since you're meant to play them multiple times to actually see everything. That'd be way more tedious if there was too much more stuff in individual runs.

The dead kid was real and also not dead as of 2021

>>3846054
wrong thread buddy

>>3846055
I don't care you will carry this knowledge.

>>3846054
What is this even referring to?

>>3845768
I have this schizo theory that Riley isn't the same orange human as the one who died to Asgore and he's still living in that cabin by Undertale.
But then again I'm not holding out hope that the devs will follow through with my theory.

>>3846115
THEN WHO WAS ORANGE?

>>3846213
man door hand hook car door

>>3846213
val of course
if anon can actually make his demo and finish the game he will become the de facto orange representative like how clover is for the justice soul

>>3846213
Val. He fits the personality a lot better than Riley. Riley doesn't seem like the type to wear a "manly bandana" with abs on it, nor the type to call his gloves the "tough gloves". He's a bit effeminate, came to Underground during a failed suicide attempt, and wants nothing more than to be left alone. Val came to the Underground because he heard monsters were strong, eats the teeth he knocked out of a monster because he thinks it'll give him their power, and punches bullets.

>>3846015
HL2 overcharged's concept was good, through, you were meant to have a lot of customization options to make your playthrough more unique, but the game being a buggy mess and the devs melting down over people saying its a buggy mess is what brings it down, its not necessarily a bad thing to have more stuff in an UTY mod, it just needs proper polish to not suck.

The idea of a fangame sounds nice, but the scale and commitment to such a thing seems so intimidating, even if its just as short or shorter than Undertale. Wonder if its better for me to just write it down somewhere or eventually forget about it

>>3846403
You could always make a small single fight fangame in an existing engine like Unitale. Or if even that's too much you could write your story as a fic or sprite comic.

https://youtu.be/qvGQsJAB_1M new deltatraveler yellow music has been released

>>3846403
like the other anon said, you can always start with something small and then if you feel like it, make it a bigger fangame
but you don't need to make something as big as UTY either, some fangames like Undertale Promise have a smaller scope something like Deltarune chapter 1 in length

>>3846460
respectfully, who the fuck thought making deltatraveler yellow was a good idea?

>>3846460
Speaking of deltatraveler, if yall havent seen it yet: https://deltatraveler.vyletbunni.com/news/20250916/
Rynogg cancelled deltatraveler yellow, the arena mode, hard mode is getting removed (because of the rewrite stuff), toontown section 7 is getting cancelled, and rynogg tried gutting the mario & luigi section 6 apart but the devs actually stood their ground instead of taking it like cucks so section 6 is still safe.
Basically, the project is gonna be torn to shreds, but on the bright side, we wont have to worry about kanaclover content being influenced by deltatraveler yellow

>>3846469
Did Chapters 3&4 mindbreak Rynogg that much? I already thought it was kind of stupid there was a rewrite at all in response to them, but to change this much?

>>3846460
>>3846469
I know its '>deltatraveler' but I am saddened at the loss of potential new Kanaclover content

>>3846472
turns out that being catastrophically wrong about everything when you've convinced yourself that you have the entirety of Deltarune figured out can cause a bit of uh...mental collapse we'll say.
can't say I sympathize with him though

>>3846467
Conceptually, its not a bad idea. KanaClover adventures across the multiverse would be fun. The problem is RynoGG.

>>3846469
Honestly, I gotta wonder why the game wasn't just cancelled. The lead developer doesn't seem to enjoy working on it very much, moving on to greener pastures might be for the best.

>>3846472
>I already thought it was kind of stupid there was a rewrite at all in response to them
The June status update claims the rewrites were not a result of chapter 3 and 4 story developments. I do agree rewriting because of that would have been stupid

>>3846403
If you've never made a game at all before do NOT set out to make a 10 hour epic experience. Make something short and sweet that you're specifically passionate for. Chances are you'll run out of authentic ideas if you stretch your mind thin enough to cover a multi hour game.

What kind of overarching story is Deltatraveler even building towards at this point?
Is there anything about it worth sticking around for, genuinely?

>>3846482
c'mon anon you know ryno would have made them siblings adopted by roba cuz of the whole "mommy" thing

>>3846564
And?

So like, if Chujin is still a varying degree of racist (YMMV) in DRY, does Ceroba agree with her husband or challenge those views? How does it affect Kanako and her own prejudices?

>>3846579
This picture looks like it’s a magnet for the most annoying people of all time

Kanacloverfags, TCOAALfags, Momrobafag, and “Clover is a stoic badass” fags all combined into one image

I like TCOAAL btw

How important would you consider being able to freely resize the window of a game? I've gotten it working, but since my handling of resize events is buggy and I'm too lazy (unskilled) to fix it, I'm considering only allowing windowed integer scales of 320x240 or the display's available fullscreen resolutions.

>>3846594
Chujin is less racist (he doesn't want to lynch humans on sight), so Ceroba defaults to a passive casual racism, one which she's more than willing to set aside on a case by case basis. She has no problem with Cole for example, even if Chujin does distrust him. Kanako used to just ignorantly repeat the things her father said, until a few calls from concerned teachers got Chujin to begrudgingly teach why saying those things in public isn't appropriate. It turns out even in a rural all monster town racism has limits.

Then Cole arrived. Being Martlet's child, Chujin had to at least be civil when speaking about him, for her sake if nothing else. Kanako somehow ended up making friends with Cole, and that basically killed any serious racism she may have had. She still believes a lot of the stereotypes Chujin taught her, but only casually, and doesn't act actively malicious towards humans.

>>3846596
I'd like to have it but I can live without it.

>>3846595
>Kanacloverfags

>>3846469
>>3846472
And this is why I always wait until the full story is finished before reading extensive fanfic. It all ages horrible when the story goes in a vastly different direction than expected, and the cringe is amplified tenfold when you act like you know whats really going on.

>>3846606
I prefer stories like that. I like and often prefer reading about what the story could've been rather than what the author was actually planning all along. Provided the author is a decent writer, which RynoGG most certainly isn't.

>>3846596
Integer scaling and full-screen is perfectly acceptable to me, plenty of games only do that and it's fine

>>3846558
It was supposed to be a random meme game but rynogg got too ambitious for his own good, so now its just directionless slop, the dev could basically create a section of super hexagon and it wouldnt feel out of place at all, you have no real goals except to go to gaster's bedroom because he wants to, only way that this can be an actual plot is if theres a plot twist where kris went through this adventure just so he could force gaster to remove (you) out of his body or something

new revival's underfell progress
https://gamejolt.com/p/september-2025-w6nwignu

>>3846477
It's for the best, imagine how little kanaclover content there would be if rynogg portrayed them as siblings, and even if not, deltatraveler yellow would still influence the future of kanaclover, and i dont feel confident about that given how sucky rynogg's writing can get.
Remember, utdr fangames getting finished is actually rare as fuck, so whenever something does get finished, people WILL look towards it for inspiration, so you'll want to pray that the good shit is finished before the rest of the slop trying to bank on that "the one (x type) fangame that was finished first" status does

>>3846115
>COWARDley the RACE TRAITOR hid like a little BITCH for years allowing the GENOCIDE of his own species and the deaths of several kids because he was too WEAK to fight Asgore
This theory doesn't paint a good picture of Riley

why is DRY chujin racist?

>>3846908
his parents were from the old country

>>3846657
>if theres a plot twist where kris went through this adventure just so he could force gaster to remove (you) out of his body or something
That's actually one of my biggest issues with Deltatraveler's writing, the game seems to be presenting the situation such that Kris can just remove the soul whenever they want, or whenever they don't want to do something you're trying to make them do, so why don't they just remove the soul literally any time you try to make them do something bad and just pop it back in to keep themselves alive?
The game also establishes that the other characters are aware of the soul and it's nature as a separate entity controlling Kris against their will, so why do Noelle and Susie listen to it during the genocide route if they know that?
It'd be more understandable if the other party members knowing about the soul varied depending on your choices, so then you could either have them stick with Kris because they don't know any better and want to figure out why they're doing this, or have them leave the party and start actively opposing what you're doing (or at the very least not actively help you commit genocide for no reason), but the game just doesn't want to commit to anything.
I think a rewrite honestly isn't a bad idea, but only because the game doesn't seem like it actually had a story planned out from the beginning at all.

I remember seeing someone say that it was implied in DRY that cole must have done something before the story that made chujin tolerate him more

>>3846908
>>3846913
At this point, it could be anything. Maybe he got cucked by a human, maybe he got it from *his* parents, maybe he grew up in a human-centered neighborhood and stumbled upon certain forums, maybe he listened to Beejamin Shapiro on the television, maybe his family owned a once-lucrative human slave labor business before the Civil War, maybe he knows about the Dark Worlds and something about Dark Worlds and Humans could develop into an existential threat to his family

>>3846925
>once-lucrative human slave labor
I know this is a joke, but given the weird power dynamics between humans and monsters in UTDR (although we don't know much about the actual nature of humans and monsters in DR alone yet), I'm not sure slavery would be viable at all on a large scale one way or the other. Humans seem way more physically durable and powerful than monsters, so I doubt it'd be possible for monsters to keep a large population of humans subjugated for too long before an inevitable slave revolt, and monster's magic seems way too varied and hard to physically fight against for humans to keep a large population of them subjugated while actively using them for labor or anything.
I could maybe see some people enslaving their own race in certain contexts, but I don't think it'd be possible to reliably control a large amount of the other race, not without having some huge advantage that would render the practice itself obsolete.

>>3846908
He had a human business partner while working on accomplishing his dream of becoming an inventor.Then things fell through for him catastrophically while they still eventually went well for the human. Because of that he came to believe that the human stole his dream from him, and that by extension humans are inherently scheming and untrustworthy creatures.

His parents were also really racist and he grew up in a different time.

>>3846925
Maybe Chujin is old enough to remember the civil war, and is still mad about the union burning down his farm and a bunch of freed slaves robbing his family for what little they had left.

Though he's Japanese so that's probably not the case.

Maybe he's salty about glorious fox Nipon being forced to modernize by human America.

>>3846813
Would you betray your race for monster pussy?

>>3846942
just look at the current state of humanity and you get your answer

>>3846942
The only way I can betray my race is to kill myself so the monsters have another soul to use, in which case I can't get any monster pussy. So no, I would remain loyal to my race for monster pussy.

>>3846942
I would date a monster if I could, but I wouldn't want mankind to go extinct as a result of it

>>3846942
I don't see why we can't simply coexist.
For monster pussy, of course.

>>3846954
Luckily for you, those things are mutually exclusive. Can't have monster pussy is mankind is extinct, and mankind can't go extinct if you're getting monster pussy.

The Wizard of Oz might be a fun be a fun inspiration for a dark world. Its the other classic "fallen into a fantasy world" story I know of aside from Alice In Wonderland, which Chapter 1 already heavily draws from.

You could have a big dark world boss darkner who's hyped up for the whole chapter, only to be revealed to be a complete fraud right before what you think will be his boss fight, and then what you thought was the chapter schizo becomes the real final boss during an entire extra section of the chapter which takes you by surprise.

You could also have a follow up chapter inspired by Return to Oz where another dark world is made in the same space, except things are very wrong this time around because a very different person made the second dark world.

>>3847026
There really is no end to interesting inspirations to dark worlds derived from fiction. It's almost a shame that Deltarune's narrative arc means there can be only seven chapters of dark worlds, most if not all having a single dark world. Hopefully fangames can pick up the slack in a satisfying way that isn't "Fun Gang meets Mario and Luigi for some reason" or "Just another Undertale crossover."

>>3847033
>Hopefully fangames can pick up the slack in a satisfying way
I think the dark world concept is a bit like Sburb, where the idea itself is so variable and open to interpretation that people will probably end up doing neat stuff with the idea for a while, probably well after DR's all wrapped up.
Granted, making fangames is a lot harder than making webcomics, so there'll almost certainly still be less Deltarune inspired fangames than there are Sburb-ventures, but still, I'd bet we'll see something cool done with the concept of dark worlds outside of DR before too long.

Would Kanako make a good dog?
https://files.catbox.moe/dgbjpl.png

>>3847055
No, foxes make terrible house pets.

>>3847039
>there'll almost certainly still be less Deltarune inspired fangames than there are Sburb-ventures
Now you've got me wondering how well the MSPA format could work for a hypothetical Deltarune fanventure

>>3847064
>>3847039
What are you two talking about?

>>3847072
I was comparing the versatility and potential of the concept of dark worlds as shown in DR to the concept of the game Sburb from the webcomic Homestuck, and how both concepts have room for people to insert their own ideas and interpretations on certain things which has allowed Sburb-ventures to exist as a webcomic format for years after the end of Homestuck, and how that could potentially also indicate that the idea of dark worlds could be used and explored by people long after DR comes to an end.

>>3847055
Azimuth? That you?

I think trying to do a UTY thread this weekend may be difficult due to the 10th anniversary stream that's gonna be happening today and tomorrow.
We may wanna wait until next weekend, but we could still give it a go and see what happens.

>>3847083
We can try one anyways. Worst case scenario it gets jannied or gets bumped off.

>>3847086
Alright, let's see how it goes. Later, in the day anyway.

>>3846942
Wow, Riley does look like a girl, add some eyelashes and he would look more feminine than most UT characters