Wing Commander Universe Trust

Discuss the Wing Commander Series and find the latest information on the Wing Commander Universe privateer mod as well as the standalone mod Wasteland Incident project.
mkruer
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:07 am
Contact:

Wing Commander Universe Trust

Post by mkruer »

I have been thinking about creating a few trusts in order to help organize and centralize the WCU as a whole. A trust is a group of people that work for the benefit of others. Trust member are people who are tier one developers, and/or people who have proven themselves to be reliable during development. (Actually produce something.) I am not designating people at the moment, because I want this open to discussion first. Trust members will be the boards representatives, and what they say or agree upon sticks.

Model Trust
The Model Trust is a group of people responsible for ensuing that only the best, and most accurate models make into the WCU. Their primary responsibility is to weed out all the bad models and remove them, and yes this means getting rid of models that are very poorly done. Model Trust members are also responsible for focusing new model developers to create modes that haven’t been done or models that need to be replaced.

Nominated Members: Mkruer; BradMick

Canon Trust
These are the people responsible for keeping the story in line, and as truthful to the original intent of the Wing Commander series. Their sole purpose is to identify problem in the story trust and/or make suggestions, and find solutions to imposable problems with consistency.

Development Trust
The Development Trust are the people over all responsible for the game design and implementation. They will work with the Cannon trust and the Model trust in order to keep everything moving.

Story Trust
The Story Trust is a group of people who will create (initially) the new stories for WCU.

Audio Trust
Audio Trust members are responsible for vocal consistency and audio quality, as well as acquiring the necessary sounds and dialogue for future stories.

Nominated Members: fizze, klauss, chuck_starchaser
Last edited by mkruer on Wed Apr 12, 2006 1:16 am, edited 2 times in total.
I know you believe you understand what you think I said.
But I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Wing Commander Universe Forum | Wiki
Wing Commander: The Wasteland Incident
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Trust members will be the boards representatives, and what they say or agree upon sticks.
The only point I get a funny feeling about... Every time there are rules layed out about who has authority over who else, it tends to lead to bad things happening: Some people's egos get bloated; other people's egos get hurt. I'd much prefer if arguments dragged a bit longer, but stayed civilized; than when someone attempts to shorten them by some appeal to authority, and things get emotional. Not that I don't believe in the natural form of human organizations; --I'm no anarchist; but precisely because I believe the form of human organizations is a natural phenomenon, and tends to arise by itself, without written rules or external prompts. Just IMHO.
BradMick
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:48 pm
Contact:

Post by BradMick »

in personally watching how this thing has taken shape, i gotta say its a pretty good idea. setting up a specific group of folks who make final decisions and maintain a certain level of qaulity control is a good deal. i would say on a project like this its certainly a 'must' type of thing. The reason why there are issues with art and what not is because (and i've talked and debated long and hard with daniel about this) is because they wanted something to 'get by' or whatever. that's all well and good, but in the grand scheme of things when you keep getting a bunch of stuff which is good enough to 'get by' you don't have a whole lot of anything good. it's also a good idea as well to ensure model accuracy. sure, it may be a pain in the ass to some prospective modeler, but.....that's the way it goes. even in the professional world, you don't do it right, you redo it, and keep redoing it until it is right. just in the realm of models/art (thats my area) i've seen far to many modelers/texturers who have gone for the non accurate add whatever route simply because for them its easier....or they know better. shit, i can't even tell you the amount of times i've had to redo one tiny detail on a piece of concept work for friends, or even the amount of times i redid my very first serious 3D Model (heheheheh, Kruer's a hard ass with specificity on the brain ;)) which was a P64 Ferret model. It's what should be done. Doesn't make the person any less an artist, trying to do perfect recreations is hard work, and most certainly a royal pain in the ass, but in the end very rewarding. It only betters your abilities, its a great way of honing things..but anyway, i'm rambling..shouldn't type when i've only been awake for 30 seconds. i think its a good idea is the short end of it.
LightWave nerd extrodanaire...

"Who need drugs when you got Brad? He's a trip enough already!' - stoner friend of mine...
crouton
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:03 pm

Post by crouton »

I feel like I should point out that it is 'Canon'. :oops:

I'm up for something organizational, not sure exactly which 'trust' that would fall under.

Chuck: Organization cannot exist in a vacuum. It requires recognition to exist - that's why the whole debacle over LOAF vs spiritplumber ended up solving nothing. Everyone just ignored the results and kept moving along as before.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

It solved nothing because there was nothing to solve. It was a textbook case of a power struggle for power's sake. The whole blown out of all reasonable proportion concern with canon is a text book case of people attempting to seize power by claiming that the sky is falling and they are the chosen saviors. That whole saga of evolving thought forms and power hyerarchies at the crius hell hole was what, in fact, existed in a vacuum. The only reality about the WCU project is that every week there are a few new things in the game, and a few bug fixes. That's the work of the --count them with the fingers in half a hand-- developers. All else is the noise of drones. And I'm not naming people, simply because people can have multiple personalities. Someone can be a useless drone 99% of the time, and then once in a while actually produce something good and useful. Anyways, please read one's post before retorting. I never said there should be no recognition. Did I? All I said was that appeal to rank and authority should be a last resort, and it's better if it's not exposed. If someone pm's me and says to me "You are the Audio Generalissimo" I wouldn't give a damn first of all, and I'd never mention it to anyone if I could help it. The same is not true of all the people I know, though; and those can cause much more trouble and pain than the lack of an authority in the given field. I'd rather have no authority at all in a given dept., than some authoritarian mutant ego that excels at nothing but pissing off everyone. But that's just me.
BradMick
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:48 pm
Contact:

Post by BradMick »

well, i don't know about the code department, but i can tell you that in the area of art, the lack of a centralized group of people all working towards the same goal is why the art, frankly, sucks. i can appreciate the time and effort, but if its not good, or if its not even close to what it is claimed to be, its wasted effort. but, thats been said about a thousand times before as well. back in the day Kruer had a good thing going with the WCMDF. it only took what was good, and until it was up to par, it was not accepted.....no matter how badly the artist wanted it to be, or how good the artist thought it was. at some point there has to come a time where someone says 'its awful, sorry....try again.' or else you just keep on getting a profusion of sub-par and mediocre things. someone needs to just be that 'asshole' and fuck trying to spare everyones feelings. i mean, don't be an insane asshole, tact should prevail. but it should be made clear its not acceptable. and to be redone.
LightWave nerd extrodanaire...

"Who need drugs when you got Brad? He's a trip enough already!' - stoner friend of mine...
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Allright, fine Brad, let's just call it a truce and get on with life. I'm still of the opinion that things like rank and authority are like ugly plumbing; necessary perhaps, but better covered up with gyprock or tiles. I prefer the concept of a 'coach', whom you hire to tell you what to do, but if you're not really happy you fire him. Keeps everyone on their toes with regards to empathy, or at least decorum, not just with what should be. Cuts down on the ego wars. That's all I wanted to say. Later.
crouton
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:03 pm

Post by crouton »

Chuck: I definitely try to read everyone's post before I respond.

I like your coach analogy, except for one minor quibble: Coaches who have a sword hanging over their head probably won't make hard decisions. And sometimes a hard decision is what is necessary. Do we keep going with this model or do we cut bait and try again? Do we try to squeeze in this last code update with minor testing or do we keep what's already been tested and wait for the next update? There's a great bumpersticker that says 'Well-behaved women rarely make history." In the same vein, a coach/manager who can't exercise some control will rarely get things done right.

Brad makes a good point about tact. It's one thing to tell someone their artwork sucks; it's an entirely separate matter when you give suggestions on how to make it better.
Sphynx
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:38 pm
Location: Terra adorada
Contact:

Post by Sphynx »

Telling someone their artwork needs improvement and offering help is one thing. But there is a lot of research (one great example, highly read worldwide, is the book "Leadership and Self-Deception" by the Arbinger Group or for other examples see the works of Steven R. Covey. There are many, many more, and the research is very vast) that shows that "jerk" leadership typically leads to dissatisfaction, demoralization, and ultimately worse performance. Someone needs to have an eye for detail, yes, and they need to have the courage to tell others when there are corrections that need to be made, but riding other people, using sarcasm, and being rude will not get you what you want.

It is my opinion is that this is why many fan projects fail: someone ultimately resorts to "jerk" leadership, and the group dissolves. When people act like a jerk, they may think they are helping, but it is ultimately a self-defeating behavior.

People work much better when they are led than when they are pushed.

Medicority does not need to be accepted, but the way correction is given makes all the difference. Once again, I highly recommend "Leadership and Self-Deception." I think, after what happened at crius.net, many of us could benefit from reading it.
BradMick
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:48 pm
Contact:

Post by BradMick »

i'm not talking being an a literal asshole, tell people who's work isn't so great just totally blows. that's VERY detrimental to anyone. pointing out 'well, the guns are a bit smaller on that raptor than they should be, why not try increasing their size by 25% and lets see how that works?' or 'the hull details you've added more detract from the overall look of the craft' you know, things like that. i've had people straight up tell me 'your work sucks ass. quit now'. its not fun. citing examples, and using actual visual frames of reference for the areas that are wrong is much preferred, no doubt. i'm not talking 'your work blows! quit now!!' approaches at all. real bad way to go. there does have to be someone who does, if say the work shows no signs of improvement, just request that that person arrest development on that piece and try with something simpler. i'd say the best way to gauge a skill level is by seeing work done. if the work is.....so/so, give them something easy that is befitting their level, if its mind blowing, give them the hardest thing you can to get done. anyway, i think we're in agreement....i just didn't explain my ideas very well.
LightWave nerd extrodanaire...

"Who need drugs when you got Brad? He's a trip enough already!' - stoner friend of mine...
mkruer
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:07 am
Contact:

Post by mkruer »

BradMick wrote: i've had people straight up tell me 'your work sucks ass. quit now'

That might have been me reguarding your first model LOL. But to Brads Credit, he has improved beyond my skills (unless you are talking about that ultra low poly, then I think I still have the advantage.) If I had to choose anyone for the model trust it would be him. He’s been on the bottom floor and worked his ass off getting to where he is now. He know what needs to be done for a model to work, and has made some great models in the past, and is working on some even now.
I would also nominate myself because I know what works and what is accurate, and also started on the ground floor. However I am reluctant to jump into the Model Trust because I don’t make models any more, or try my damnedest to get someone else to do them. However, this brings another good attribute, of mine which is the patients to work with other to get a model done properly. One of the tougher models was Wasteland Station for WCWI it took over 20 revisions to get it to where it is now, and this was one of my lesser models, but it required a very specific look and feel. In the end I still redid the final version to remove the redundant ploys and clean up the models. but I remember spending hours rendering the station at multiple angles and then using a draw program to flush out details.
I know you believe you understand what you think I said.
But I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Wing Commander Universe Forum | Wiki
Wing Commander: The Wasteland Incident
charlieg
Elite Mercenary
Elite Mercenary
Posts: 1329
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Post by charlieg »

Also Brad has high standards with regards to model accuracy, as well as a great knowledge of (and access to information on) the various eras of WC ships.
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

charlieg wrote:Also Brad has high standards with regards to model accuracy, as well as a great knowledge of (and access to information on) the various eras of WC ships.
I know all that charlieg. And my main beef right at the moment is not about whether to Brad or not to Brad. My main beef is with the fact that 2.5 people are doing 95% of the work, while everybody else is fighting for a piece of the recognition pie. Okay, no, mkruer is really trying to help, but in my opinion this thread is like throwing gasoline on flames that were going down on their own. Now the question of "who has final say?" on this or that is assailing us again... Why can't we all recognize the fact that the work IS getting done, without the constant question of "who has power over whom?"
I heard the arguments of BradMick and crouton. Well they are wrong, but I'm too tired of so many arguments. All I can say at the moment is that in my part of the world, wise people say, "never give power to those who want power". And those two seem to want power.
So, I know a bunch of people are to gang up on me and say "who's going to make the hard descisions when..." Well I say IF and WHEN that happens we'll cross that river when we get there, now could everyone lay off on the power and authority thing?, and over who has 'final say' on what... Thank you.

I agree totally with the original posting, except the one phrase I pointed out. The categories seem right. I like the 'trusts' term idea. And from an organizational point of view, we would all benefit from knowing who's working on what. I posted a question a week ago: 'Who's in charge of the voiceovers and audio?', and I still don't know. I just don't like where it says "and what they say sticks". Well, that's a bit brutal way to deal with a non-problem. It is obvious that the people who are doing most of the work in an area aren't going to be told what to do by a newcomer with an attitude, right? Is it necessary to say so in writing? I don't think so. If I own a bar and you come into my bar, and I'm cordial to you; you don't wonder what would happen if someone tries to steal your wallet while you're talking to me. But if you come into my bar and there are signs that say "pickpockets will be chopped their fingers off", "rapists will be castrated", "anyone caught with a gun will be prosecuted", and so on, would you stay at my bar? I wouldn't.

Some things are better not said or written, or even thought about.
Last edited by chuck_starchaser on Thu Apr 21, 2005 4:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
BradMick
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:48 pm
Contact:

Post by BradMick »

chuck......your penchant for the drama is really annoying man. this conversation has actually been very fruitful, and very mellow comparitively. no ones gone over board or written these long tirades about 'oh god help us all, people want power, VILLIFY THEM!' but you. the process is flowing right smoothly. i'd be doing more modeling work right now if i didn't have 20 bazillion hours of traditional artwork to do for my class finals. i've done a lot of work. why do the tarsus, galaxy, and centurion look so damn good? because i actually had time to model them. why does the drayman look so damn good? i had time to model it (although i haven't had time to finish it). overall, i don't give a damn if i get recognized for it, its whatever. and also, i don't expect someone who doesn't know me and hasn't seen where i've started from and what i've gone through in my struggle to get to where i am today artisticly to fully understand why i treat this subject the way i do.

the deal here is not that its a 'i'm lording over you all!' type deal, its a deal that will be put in place so that should the time ever come where hard decisions have to be made, its covered. everyone knows exactly what will happen and how, no surprises. its not some means of saying 'i'm superior to you!'...and even if someone is out for glory, *shrugs* so what. guess what chuck? those who actually make a mark are not the obscure ones. the ones people remember are those who went out in a blaze of glory, or were thrown into the limelight because of extrodinary acheivments. to accept 'obscurity' is to accept mediocrity....or to accept that one has failed. bah....anyway, not like that matters anyway.

there's a reason why people form teams with people filling specific roles, those people are the bedrock of what goes on, it also allows that person (in whatever area) to groom the guy underneath so that in the event of something happening where the 'head guy' has to bow out, its okay....the next guy in line moves up...so forth and so on. there has to be order, there has to be structure. not just 'everyone goes for it, everyone has eqaul say, and if two people says the piece of crap is great out of this three people team, well...that piece of crap goes in.' an extreme example....but you get the idea.
LightWave nerd extrodanaire...

"Who need drugs when you got Brad? He's a trip enough already!' - stoner friend of mine...
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

But the thing is, most evils are invented by humans as solutions to other evils. I don't say that if a majority of ignorants tries to overrule a minority of wiser ones, that action should not be taken to correct that injustice. But when people say "we must have structures and authority to prevent that from ever happening" that's when I say there's more evil in the solution than in the problem it aims to solve.

Please read my post again. Specially the last paragraph. I'm not saying that, as the owner of the bar, I would stand still and watch as someone picks your pocket. Did I? I simply said, we shouldn't talk about it.
mkruer
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:07 am
Contact:

Post by mkruer »

Chuck
I’m sorry but I have to laugh. Everything is always “the water from the glass will be stole if we answer if the glass is half full or half emptyâ€
I know you believe you understand what you think I said.
But I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Wing Commander Universe Forum | Wiki
Wing Commander: The Wasteland Incident
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Maybe I have the courage to look at phantoms.
You're bloody right about the half full half empty thing. That's just the way it is though. I'm looking at it the way it is.
If you look at Political Science, it's an endless tail chase. Whoever has the power will eventually abuse it; and if nobody does, everybody will. Well, not exactly, but that's the kink of expectation that fuels the endless debate.

But you should pay attention to what I advocate. There's merit in it and nobody seems to want to even look at it. I'm just saying "avoid discussing or publicizing who has final say". A final say rule is a weapon of last resort. It should be, anyways. If I know my stuff in electronics and someone says "transistors distort more than tubes", I don't need to say "I have this degree, or this position, and I say 'no way'! ". I can discuss and explain. And who knows? He might convince me ;-) No, if he becomes a total idiot, then maybe someone else can tell him who I am. Is that too much to ask, mkruer? Matters of who's who, should be obvious, rather than stated or written. That's all I'm saying.
Penta
Trader
Trader
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 2:43 pm

Post by Penta »

A brief, gentle thought.

Such authoritativeness would work great and be essential for art and coding...

But for story, for things like that...

Naaaaaaahhhh.
mkruer
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:07 am
Contact:

Post by mkruer »

chuck_starchaser wrote:Maybe I have the courage to look at phantoms.
Well by definition you are wrong, and phantom does not exits. Simple as that!
chuck_starchaser wrote:You're bloody right about the half full half empty thing. That's just the way it is though. I'm looking at it the way it is.
If you look at Political Science, it's an endless tail chase. Whoever has the power will eventually abuse it; and if nobody does, everybody will. Well, not exactly, but that's the kink of expectation that fuels the endless debate.
If this was 100% true then society would cease to exist.
chuck_starchaser wrote:But you should pay attention to what I advocate. There's merit in it and nobody seems to want to even look at it. I'm just saying "avoid discussing or publicizing who has final say". A final say rule is a weapon of last resort. It should be, anyways. If I know my stuff in electronics and someone says "transistors distort more than tubes", I don't need to say "I have this degree, or this position, and I say 'no way'! ". I can discuss and explain. And who knows? He might convince me ;-).
And this is what I don’t get. If one person says this then yes, you have a valid argument, but if a group say this then your argument is weak, even if you are correct. This is how the REAL world works, its call reality people will make mistakes, science is full of them. If you feel wronged then take it to the forums and garner public support. The Trust is still subject to the overall will of the people.
chuck_starchaser wrote:No, if he becomes a total idiot, then maybe someone else can tell him who I am. Is that too much to ask, mkruer? Matters of who's who, should be obvious, rather than stated or written. That's all I'm saying.
This is untrue. Who's who is NOT obvious unless you have been watching form the sidelines for a long time, and most people visiting this forums are new people who will look for people with status. Reason why I know this is because few people know who I am, and what I do, despite the fact that I have been doing this longer then most people here. The only thing I have is a title, but I just choose to stay out of the public spotlight, and work on things in the background.

A simple truth to life is that if you want to be successful you have to hang with successful people. Its very uncommon for people to bootstrap themselves up from nothing, development is nothing different.
Another simple truth is that all systems are flawed, and all systems will be abused even ones without hierarchy. (as a matter of fact I would argue the people without title can do more damage because they can subvert the system with little consequence, where people with title are more scrutinized.)
Yet the “systemâ€
I know you believe you understand what you think I said.
But I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Wing Commander Universe Forum | Wiki
Wing Commander: The Wasteland Incident
mkruer
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:07 am
Contact:

Post by mkruer »

Penta wrote:A brief, gentle thought.

Such authoritativeness would work great and be essential for art and coding...
But for story, for things like that...
Naaaaaaahhhh.
As for the story aspect, you know what you get when a story is made by committee, right?
I know you believe you understand what you think I said.
But I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Wing Commander Universe Forum | Wiki
Wing Commander: The Wasteland Incident
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

Well, if you accuse me of not trusting any 'systems', I have to admit you are right. I see your arguments, and I think you see mine more than you care to admit.

I'm going to hang my hatchet at this point, but that's because I trust *you* and the *people* in this forum, (for I believe that people with good will can make any system work, even Communism probably); and not because I in any way feel convinced by your 'system' arguments. By the way, maybe you've been watching too many horror movies, but the kinds of ghosts I'm talking about are all too real, and there are two... probably 3, in this sector; and that means trouble's brewing...
chuck_starchaser
Elite
Elite
Posts: 8014
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Post by chuck_starchaser »

mkruer wrote: As for the story aspect, you know what you get when a story is made by committee, right?
Sorry, I have to post again (hope I can retire after this one). Things done "by committee" are traditionally badly executed precisely because the committees rarely get the chance to get to concensus. The management people one day have had a good night the night before and decide "wouldn't it be nice to do this by committee?" so they call a big meeting, but by 3 in the afternoon they get tired of all the argument and then decide "on behalf of the comittee", with an iron fist. Or else because they say they trust a committee, but then plant seeds of power into it, as for who has more say, and so it was never a committee to begin with. The idea and the theory behind the committee model was to let the committe take whatever time it takes to reach *concensus*. This is a concept that has never actually been tried, AFAIK; precisely because there appears to be a quasi concensus that "it could never work, so why try it?", sort of reasoning.
forlarren
Merchant
Merchant
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 4:37 am

Post by forlarren »

chuck_starchaser wrote:...precisely because there appears to be a quasi concensus that "it could never work, so why try it?", sort of reasoning.
So a committee that fails to reach a consensus without interference, would be like thowing a bag of holding into a portable hole?

Hey where did the universe go? Damnit!
mkruer
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:07 am
Contact:

Post by mkruer »

Anyway I guess the next logical step is to take submission for people who would like to be on a trust. You can even nominate people if they are willing. Be specific, I will be doing background checks. I am not going to accept people that I can not get a hold of nor find any information on, i.e. posts on here of the CIC.

Model Trust, I nominate Brad and Myself but I am looking for more people. I want at least one more.
Canon Trust is up in the air.
Development Trust should be Mission programmers
Story Trust We need to figure what story to use WCU:2669, WCU:2683, Other first.
Audio Trust in open as well.
I know you believe you understand what you think I said.
But I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Wing Commander Universe Forum | Wiki
Wing Commander: The Wasteland Incident
Post Reply