• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

Animation export to glTF?

Should ModelConverterX export animations to the glTF format?

  • No

    Votes: 5 5.7%

  • Yes, but only for well known developers

    Votes: 9 10.2%

  • Yes, but only for animations made in ModelConverterX

    Votes: 1 1.1%

  • Yes, but only when the developer has the modeldef.xml sources of all animations

    Votes: 13 14.8%

  • Yes, but I have another idea to prevent piracy (please post below)

    Votes: 4 4.5%

  • Yes, for everybody

    Votes: 56 63.6%
  • Total voters
    88
Status
Not open for further replies.
I was just wondering what to do. I am not a developer..I worked for Piedmont Airlines 50 years ago and all i want to do is have the old Piedmont airplanes..like the martin 404/ dc3/ys11a/727/ FH227...I am not interested in uploading..selling or anything. The textures I have fit only certain model and most of the airplanes were developed by people no longer around or maybe dead..then what. Guess I'll just have to watch whatever crap Asobo throws my way in live traffic... and watch youtube videos of the old planes in days gone past. My airport KINT is a ghost town and Piedmont went the way of the do-do bird and Piedmont got screwed by US Air and American.. Enough said.

Greets Arno..Be Safe...the ramblings of an old man...lol

BobM.
 
Last edited:
This will get you up and running. I successfully converted Milton Shupe’s Mallard as a test.

msfs.touching.cloud

MSFS Legacy Importer - TouchingCloud - Microsoft Flight Simulator! [OFFICIAL MOD PAGE]

This is complex tool for importing Microsoft Flight Simulator X (FSX, 2006) aircraft into Microsoft Flight Simulator (MSFS, 2020). It does apply all required actions for successful import (like files copying, JSON files generation, critical issues fixing, 2D gauges conversion and other useful...
msfs.touching.cloud msfs.touching.cloud
 
Familiar with it.. Is this the latest, greatest.. I am not interested in flying these aircraft...just strictly "ai's" so basic install or full?

Thanks Rick... I will take a look...

Greets
BobM.
 
The link is the home page for the developer, always the most recent build.
 
Thanks Rick but for some reason.. I go thru all that and the planes still don't show up as AI's.. Something recently about MDLX? limited to 13... Maybe AIG will get the ai's up and running in the not too distant future...Sick of all this :)

BobM.
 
AI traffic had never been fully implemented before the end of July update, that added Xbox functionality and so many features were altered, or removed, that it is difficult to asses the updates affect on AI as a whole. Meanwhile, we have "developers" over on the AI Flight Planner thread, that are speculating that Microsoft, or Asobo, or both, removed access to AI functionality for casual developers, specifically to hoard profits.

It seems really premature to draw conclusions about anything beyond coping with the changes and weathering the transition. If I were going to draw a conclusion, it could be that, it seems like you are not the only person experiencing difficulties with AI traffic, right now and I recommend you please stand by.
 
Thanks @=rk=
Standing by..just hope they get this shit fixed before I croak.....then they can take all the time they want...

BobM.
 
Well it is there for simple scenery objects already.

And it also doesn't feel right that I have to determine who can have the full export capability with the license file now, so maybe it will be part of the normal release later. But that should not hurt developers because piracy becomes a lot easier.
 
arno said:
Well it is there for simple scenery objects already.

And it also doesn't feel right that I have to determine who can have the full export capability with the license file now, so maybe it will be part of the normal release later. But that should not hurt developers because piracy becomes a lot easier.
Click to expand...
Hi, Arno!
I don't think it's a good idea to allow full animation export. I already know four companies that use MCX to steal other people's models and use other people's work without permission and approval from the authors. Some of them distribute for their own purposes the appropriated work of others, even without specifying the original authors and openly show and advertise themselves on the forums. They don't give a damn about honor, decency and some kind of pop-up warnings in MCX. With the open GLTF format, import / export of animations will remove all boundaries for thieves altogether.
 
=rk= said:
This is helping, because maybe you are trying to decide on Arno's behalf..?
Click to expand...
The decision was made even before those who need animation and conversion of other people's models without sources came up with a problem and made MCX a master key in their business. All manufacturers of flight simulator engines use a different model and animation format than usual, not only because it makes them special, but also to protect models and their developers from theft of their property, ideas and work.

There can be no other solution at all, because good is good, and evil is evil. And I understand and support the work of Arno, not only in words, but also in deeds, I understand perfectly well what responsibility he takes on and I care whether his tool serves good or evil, a knife can save a life or take it away.

I think he does not want to decide on his own behalf the fate of other people's works, products, lives and projects instead of their developers.

His tool is used for theft and hacking this is a fact, I do not think that it gives him pleasure right now and I do not think that he needs to move the tool in the direction of making theft even easier further.
 
KAI31 said:
The decision was made even before those who need animation and conversion of other people's models without sources came up with a problem and made MCX a master key in their business.
Click to expand...
What you message is not even possible. Arno has expressed discomfort over this entire matter and quite literally, it is none of our business how he conducts his development. His tool is not being used for theft and the fact that you hijack the thread, in order to assert your own unsolicited opinion, is a theft MCX can't prevent.
 
=rk= said:
What you message is not even possible. Arno has expressed discomfort over this entire matter and quite literally, it is none of our business how he conducts his development. His tool is not being used for theft and the fact that you hijack the thread, in order to assert your own unsolicited opinion, is a theft MCX can't prevent.
Click to expand...
Once again, I bring to your attention that it has been recorded and confirmed that MCX is used by some irresponsible people to convert and convert models that do not belong to them without permission and agreement with the authors, and even with the full appropriation or deliberate concealment of other people's copyrights during distribution, and this is more than Theft! I will not indicate the violators here so as not to advertise them once again, but everything that I write has been proven and confirmed by at least five well-known developers, including those who suffered in an open discussion on the pages of several forums. But what can I say, several irresponsible personalities contacted me personally so that I could help convert models, including commercial ones! 'no, and there is no need to ask, you can just take it !!!!'. After that, he refused to help, and received indignation at the bottom of the refusal with arguments like “but we will take it anyway and we don’t care if it’s wrong and someone else’s.” Then I saw these models in third-party games and sims distributed even without attribution.
So you are wrong that this is only my personal and you apparently do not have information about this.
 
=rk= said:
What you message is not even possible. Arno has expressed discomfort over this entire matter and quite literally, it is none of our business how he conducts his development. His tool is not being used for theft and the fact that you hijack the thread, in order to assert your own unsolicited opinion, is a theft MCX can't prevent.
Click to expand...
"Hihack"? "Unsolicited opinion?" Note that this thread is prefaced with a poll on "Should ModelConverterX export animations to the glTF format?" and among the options listed is "Yes, but I have another idea to prevent piracy (please post below)".

So, do you have any ideas on how to prevent piracy? Then let us know.

BTW, I can confirm that MCX has been and is being used for theft, just as Kai says.

--Manfred
 
mjahn said:
So, do you have any ideas on how to prevent piracy? Then let us know.
Click to expand...
I do have solutions for piracy and you will be happy to know they also involve compelling another man to protect your security. There is, what is called the "Flight1 Wrapper" and it is very effective in preventing piracy. A lot of developers avoid partnering with secure publishers, Flight1 is not the only one and instead compel Arno to protect their security, possibly because it is cheaper to complain about piracy, than actually prevent it.

On any occasion you encounter pirated content, you can inform the webmaster. Any reputable site, like Avsim, Simviation, even Rikoo (I know this personally) is obliged to remove and will remove content. I found one of my scenery addons repackaged, in what was arguably a better presentation and uploaded to Rikoo. I contacted the webmaster and he removed it.
Looking back, it probably had been good exposure. His version of my software had been easier to install and he gets a lot of traffic. My software had been free already, so any profit I'd earn, is by virtue of reputation and I would prefer that to be "nice guy," as opposed to "secure developer." If I had it to do all over, I would allow my pirated software to remain on Rikoo.

Sites have different procedures to validate authority, but the basic principal, is that contested content will not be posted. This is important, because it assures an author that content will not be shared during the dispute process.

If we are to think content uploaded to an unsecure Ukrainian site is going to attract pirates that otherwise would have paid for our software, that is a kind of insecure self confidence that Arno's software cannot address, but all of this has all already been discussed ad nauseum.
mjahn said:
Note that this thread is prefaced with a poll on "Should ModelConverterX export animations to the glTF format?"
Click to expand...
My deepest apologies for overlooking this 14 month old poll and heated discussion, for which everybody's positions have been clearly affirmed, but instead attempting to respect Arno's recent message about responsibility. I had not been attempting to suppress opinions, Kai had made his clear in March, but in my senility, I'd presumed the discussion to be settled.
 
KAI31 said:
Once again, I bring to your attention that it has been recorded and confirmed that MCX is used by some irresponsible people to convert and convert models that do not belong to them without permission and agreement with the authors, and even with the full appropriation or deliberate concealment of other people's copyrights during distribution, and this is more than Theft!
Click to expand...
In fact, pencil and paper have been used by thieves, but few would outlaw those tools. In truth, it's not the theft you seem to hate, but the relative ease of theft that MCX might provide. If thefts are already occurring by use of the current version of MCX, Blender, Paint.net, etc... then restricting some aspects of MCX' further development is just dumb. The cow is already out of the barn.

The theft of copyright is illegal and immoral. And the distributors of these stolen products are criminals... as are the collectors, whose appetite fuels the problem. But restricting the development of free tools like Blender, Paint.net or MCX is not a solution. It's the unauthorized distribution that is the problem and the key to it's solution. Handcuffing legitimate tools is not a solution.

99% of unauthorized downloading of aircraft models or airports is done by people that are "collectors". They do not even have time to master these aircraft or 'adopt' these airfields, but simply download them, try them, and move on to the next acquisition. These persons do not have any effect on commercial sales because these "collectors" would never pay for these items in the first place... that's why they download them illegally in order to amass their large collections.

Trying to 'guilt' tool developers is seriously wrong. In the case of MCX, that attempts to restrict knowledge, and impedes the ability of legitimate authors to bring their creations to new formats. This very forum was created to disseminate knowledge by creating tools and sharing the details of processes and file formats used in flight simulation. You yourself have benefitted by this knowledge and the use of this very forum, and the tools available through it. The misuse of MCX by a handful of miscreants is not a logical reason to impede it's use or development.
 
rhumbaflappy said:
In fact, pencil and paper have been used by thieves, but few would outlaw those tools. In truth, it's not the theft you seem to hate, but the relative ease of theft that MCX might provide. If thefts are already occurring by use of the current version of MCX, Blender, Paint.net, etc... then restricting some aspects of MCX' further development is just dumb. The cow is already out of the barn.

The theft of copyright is illegal and immoral. And the distributors of these stolen products are criminals... as are the collectors, whose appetite fuels the problem. But restricting the development of free tools like Blender, Paint.net or MCX is not a solution. It's the unauthorized distribution that is the problem and the key to it's solution. Handcuffing legitimate tools is not a solution.

99% of unauthorized downloading of aircraft models or airports is done by people that are "collectors". They do not even have time to master these aircraft or 'adopt' these airfields, but simply download them, try them, and move on to the next acquisition. These persons do not have any effect on commercial sales because these "collectors" would never pay for these items in the first place... that's why they download them illegally in order to amass their large collections.

Trying to 'guilt' tool developers is seriously wrong. In the case of MCX, that attempts to restrict knowledge, and impedes the ability of legitimate authors to bring their creations to new formats. This very forum was created to disseminate knowledge by creating tools and sharing the details of processes and file formats used in flight simulation. You yourself have benefitted by this knowledge and the use of this very forum, and the tools available through it. The misuse of MCX by a handful of miscreants is not a logical reason to impede it's use or development.
Click to expand...
Here's what you write support theft, I met exactly what you wrote about pencils, paper and a cow, on pirate forums and sites. So you think that stealing is progress. But just keep in mind that the laws of all countries have articles on prosecution for creating tools for hacking and reverse engineering, and accomplices in crimes are punished no less than those committed by criminals. I think a couple of lawsuits from the victims and bringing anyone to justice will sober up and make you really and seriously treat such things.

You write that everyone has the right to profit from other people's projects without problems and decide other people's fates of other people, making a decision not in their favor, but do you have the right to do so? Will this benefit all simmers and progress? I know not! No crime will bring anything good, since it is destruction, not creation. You probably have a door to your house without a lock and the car cannot be locked without an alarm. According to you, all criminals must be released and given full freedom of action. If a crime is committed against you, you will also say that now the cow is gone. Don't you think this is nonsense?

MCX is not included in the SDK and is not software required to operate and create models. When exporting to GLTF, the use of third-party applications is completely unnecessary since all the necessary tools are provided by the MSFS SDK. Also, the SDK provides all the necessary examples of models and animation in the source. This is more than enough for learning, work and progress.

Instead of making the protection the other way around, hacking becomes even easier. Now, if, along with MSX, a tool was provided to protect models from discovery and misuse, then yes, this is exactly what would contribute to progress.

P.S. And if you are already talking about my actions and my use of MSX, then take the trouble to indicate all the facts related to this. I started using MSX only when I received full consent and support from SCS, they themselves provided me with all the available materials for the project. In addition, I did not convert their model, but created a completely new model with animation and everything you need, without this there would be no progress.
 
I do not support theft or consider stealing as progress. Your accusations are ridiculous, as is your stubborn insistence that anyone who opposes your position on this matter is some kind of pirate.

Arno opened this thread to gather community thoughts on including increased support for animation in MCX. The poll is overwhelming in supporting increased animation. Arno is a pretty bright guy. He gets it. He does not need you or I exchanging unnecessary insults or threats of lawsuits. I actually applaud your enthusiasm in this matter, but I believe your reasoning is wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top