Subject:
|
Re: The future of LDraw?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:34:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
20501 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Timothy Gould wrote:
> And I'm honestly not being obtuse here either. I'm ready to change
> my opinion if I understand and agree with what you're saying. I feel I must be
> missing something.
Well, I singled out the header-code not as the problem in itself but as
symptomatic of a shift that's taken place over a period of years. I don't know
how else to say it without sounding petty, and I'm absolutely not singling out
any one person in my criticism.
The Star Trek club demonstrated a farcical obsession with the *process* rather
than with the *purpose.* I admit that I'm not 100% clear what their exact
purpose was (I presume it had something to do with sharing Trek fan-news and the
like), but I'm sure that it wasn't simply to display a letterhead. Yet that's
what occupied the entirety of their quite heated meeting.
The reason I use this as an analogy is because it strikes me as rather similar
to something that LDraw went through not long ago, resulting in a years-long
drought of new part libraries. Whatever the reason, the end result was that
eager users had no access to new parts for a *very* extended period; the purpose
was bogged down by the process.
It didn't help that the only glimmers of life throughout this long delay were
occasional posts about the LSC and who was getting voted into what position.
Again, this isn't to diminish the work of these contributors; it's a comment on
where the priority seemed to be during this time. And when that time passed, I
found my interest in the "official" product all but quenched.
Additionally, the inclusion of official entries straight from LEGO has
compromised the organic, fan-based purity of LDraw. Why would anyone bother
spending weeks authoring a new Bionicle element when the good people @ LEGO can
crank one out on demand from their existing files?
Here IMO is the crux of Tore's question from his OP:
> Where have LDrawers moved? Away from LCad I'm afraid?
I've attempted to give a partial answer to this, based on my own personal
experience and discussions with other people who've formerly been much more
involved in the sharing of MOCs via LDraw, if not in the actual process of part
authoring.
I accept that you don't see my reasons as significant or central, and you're
welcome to reach different conclusions, of course. I can only tell you what I
know.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
| In lugnet.cad, Dave Schuler wrote: --snip-- (...) I think I see a bit better what you were getting at (and what Tore is getting at too which is the same issue I think). I kind of do agree with you both that making new parts is too hard due in part (...) (14 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The future of LDraw?
|
| (...) Possibly so but I'm of the opinion that those that make and share the parts are entitled to some narcissism. And I speak having done minimal part authoring in quite some time (due to laziness) so it's not self-interest at work. --snip-- Your (...) (14 years ago, 20-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)
|
105 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
