2.00 Protection of content

[namida]

Final decision: No content protection features. If it's released, it's free to be used (of course, the expectation of respecting authors' wishes still exist; NeoLemmix simply will not try to enforce this in any way, whether intentionally or as a side effect of something else).

Prompted by an IRC discussion, I'd like to ask how people feel about being able to protect their content from use outside of simply playing it.

In the past, NeoLemmix offered an encryption option for custom content. This is no longer usable for content, and the old encryption code is now used only on the savegame file. However, the primary form of distribution for NeoLemmix content now is everything-in-one EXEs, which have a similar ultimate effect of allowing other users to play the content, but not to, say, open the levels in the editor, or use any graphic sets, etc. In some cases, non-release or delayed release of this content has been used; for example with the Lemmings Plus IV graphic sets, where one of them was released for general use before release; another around the time of the game's release, and the last two not being made available until a while later.

By comparison, other engines don't really offer any such equivalent. Lemmix does have the possibility of making an all-in-one EXE, but unlike with NeoLemmix which has the dedicated Flexi Toolkit, it's quite a mission to actually do so, and as such there's only four cases I know of where this has been done - the pre-NeoLemmix versions of Lemmings Plus I, II and II Bonus Pack (which have now been replaced with NeoLemmix versions), and cLemmings Ultimate Edition. Lemmini, SuperLemmini and Lix offer nothing of the sort; any distributed content can be used by anyone in any way they like. (To be fair, someone determined enough could extract the content from a NeoLemmix all-in-one EXE if they really wanted; it's just not as straightforward as in other engines where the file is right there and can be opened with the editor / etc.)

So my question is - do people feel that this is an important feature of NeoLemmix? Or is it mainly used because "that's just what happens when the most common method of distributing content is used", without people really caring too much about this? I ask this because, I absolutely will preserve such a capability in some way in NX2 if there's demand for it, but if people aren't too interested, I probably won't do so.

Keep in mind that any such measures wouldn't be overly hard to defeat, especially given that NX2's source code will be available, so someone technically-capable enough could either examine that to work out what triggers such measures and modify the files to get around it, or alternatively, just produce a modified copy that does not comply with restrictions. But it might be enough of a deterrent for people to think it's not worth bothering, and also, generally speaking, the kind of people who'd be likely to want to bypass such restrictions in order to actually try and use the content are also likely to be the kind of people who wouldn't be able to work out how to do so.

[ccexplore]

I'm curious how your reaction would differ between the two "no" options.  You ask for importance; if a majority of people said they don't plan on using a feature, is the feature still important?

[namida]

It'd probably come down to my thoughts on the reasons given (if any) for not having it, as well as how popular the "Yes" option is. Replies explaining one's thoughts are more useful than poll votes, but since it seems polls get more feedback than replies do (with or without a poll also being present), I can at least get some idea of what the people who don't reply would like. (Case in point - 4 votes so far, yet no replies that state the user's view on the matter.)

[ccexplore]

I also feel like the last "no" option (even though it doesn't look like anyone has picked it yet) should really be separated out into two, one for "it shouldn't exist at all", and another for "I don't care".

I think one reason people aren't expressing much of an opinion may be that in this community, so far we haven't really seen any sort of behaviors that needs content protection to address.  Plagiarism of levels haven't been an issue so far; if anything, we err on the safe side and go out of our way trying to contact the original level authors whenever we want to include their levels into some level packs.  And there have been very few people here that have designed tilesets and such, and it seems whenever they do, so far they've always fully intended and welcomed all others to make use of their work.

I think the strongest use case I have observed (or can extrapolate to) for this so far is the idea of a WIP tileset, where you don't necessarily want to release it right now since you know some parts of it may/will change, but do want to get feedback on it by applying it to actual levels that others can play.  Blocking the ability to easily consume such content is not the only way per se to handle this kind of situation, but it's one possible approach.

[Proxima]

I also feel like the last "no" option (even though it doesn't look like anyone has picked it yet)

Actually, of 4 respondents so far, all have picked this option.

[ccexplore]

My bad, stupid IE to blame, it's not displaying the poll results correctly with two of them end up on same line for different options.   Perhaps now you'd better understand how some of my posts came about, though the general ideas I expressed are still quite valid despite misreading poll results.

[namida]

Okay, I think it's pretty clear that everyone either doesn't care, or explicitly doesn't want, such an option. In that case... no such option will exist.