I coded an Export for .mdl files.

[evangel76]

I did look everywhere, and I could not find any export .mdl that do export the animation properly to .glTF, so, I spent the week end coding it.

It is a simple executable for the moment, but I am thinking of making a something else with it. I plan to post the source code on GIT. I did it in a mix of C and C++, I call it dirty C++ ;-) (I got inspired by a python code)
The only condition to use the code will be to display a message on the screen when running the conversion. ("Make sure you have the written authorization to export the data of this model")
I only tested it on aircrafts.
What will be your favorite way to import/export?
1) Blender import?
2) 3DSMax import?
3) an executable is good enough? mdl2gltf.exe source destination /options

Please vote for 1, 2, 3 in the comment.

 

[Lagaffe]

I do not understand why to create such program with all problems that Arno tell about in his post.
To help people surely but it is also tool for copyrights violations ? IMO I do not think it was a good Idea but it is only my opinion..

 

[DBushell]

"Make sure you have the written authorization to export the data of this model" is not enough to stop anyone from deconstructing something they have not sought permission to deconstruct.

Its like holding up a ladder while someone else climbs through an upstairs window while you hold up a sign that says. "Promise you won't steal anything".

 

[GaryGB]

Hello:

I would like to see this utility released ASAP, and welcome the opportunity to test it; please post the download URL when ready.

Any / all of the above cited options 1, 2, or 3 would be welcome, although a full set of 3D model I/O file formats and a GUI would be even more useful.


I am interested in converting animated (and static) 'Game Content' to MSFS-2020 from prior / legacy versions of FS2Kx / FSX / P3D in accordance with the MS XBOX 'Game Content' license:

Game Content Usage Rules | Xbox

Find out how you can use things like gameplay footage, screenshots, music, and other elements of our games to make things like machinima, videos, and other cool things.

www.xbox.com

Without 3rd party FS 3D model conversion utilities such as you describe above, prospective use of Arno's MCX for full-featured MSFS glTF 3D animated model output depends on whether / when Arno enables the ability to retain animations during conversion.

Unfortunately, Arno's MCX currently restricts conversion / output of FS MDL-derived animation code into glTF format, IIRC, even with 'Game Content' which has been sanctioned for full use in MSFS under the above cited MS XBOX license ...unless one has a yet-to-be-defined status as a "respected" FS Developer.

For those in the FS Community at large who may not know the 'Secret Handshake' that confers accolades as a "respected" FS Developer and which, IIUC, may bestow elite status as a card-carrying member of the "FS-Illuminati", a separate and independent conversion utility is needed to allow the greater number of MSFS users the option to utilize their legacy FS 'Game Content' as permitted under the above cited MS XBOX License ...without arbitrary restrictions.



PS: IMHO, it is vital to the future of FS Developer (and MSFS in general) that we cease and desist with agonizing over possible misuse of a FS utility for potentially criminal purposes.

Some might say: People kill people, (not sticks, stones, bones, flag poles, fire extinguishers, firearms, pipe bombs, bear spray ...or FS conversion utilities).

AFAIK, the worst that may happen is, one who makes freeware or payware may become indignant that a 3rd party converted a legacy add-on for personal use, that they themselves may not have intended to- or been able to- release in the foreseeable future.

Alternatively, if a FS Developer uses such a FS conversion utility, they may find it easier to quickly convert their own legacy add-on ...before a 3rd party does.


As for Arno's possible apprehension over 'prospective' prosecution (persecution ?), I suggest this extra-curricular reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Lech_Johansen

GaryGB

 

[evangel76]

I am an hopeful person, so, I assume that guns don't kill people, people kill people... That is how it works where I live.
it will be open source, and I think this is right. I am running it quickly through my attorney to make sure it is ok.
If people rip off intellectual property, the owner of the property is free to go after them.
If I don't do it, sooner rather than later, somebody else will do it.
What I saw is a set of people with the capability of doing what I did, and picking up in what case it is ok for them to do it, but not in every condition.
I simply think it should be open source.

Francois

 

[DBushell]

Facilitating the conversion of addon mdls never designed for MSFS is a bad thing - the Community surely wants good MSFS native addons, rather than sub-standard broken ones? Wouldn't you rather developers were building new addons rather than going after people disassembling their products?

 

[leppie]

I simply think it should be open source

Dont overthink it. Just do it.

I did the same for MSFS version of spb2xml. I dont even understand why they added such a silly encoding scheme to text.

GitHub - leppie/spb2xml

Contribute to leppie/spb2xml development by creating an account on GitHub.

github.com

In fact, I believe it better to have something public. If there is a problem with it, then they can send a takedown notice to github, etc. If they are wrong in the takedown, github, etc might even step in to protect it.

 

[Deleted member 1281]

As somebody whose mdls were ripped off repeatedly and uploaded illicitly I object to this strongly. Alerting your lawyers to pirated stuff is clearly hopeless. As DBushell says, what MSFS needs is native models, not inferior portovers.

 

[DragonflightDesign]

Every tool has a possible use as a copyright violator, including the innocent hex editor. That is exactly how I used to create new gauges in FS98 - I hacked the existing files with a hex editor. I've also had photographs ripped off and posted without attribution and have joined a very small and very exclusive club that have been ripped off by Microsoft and had my work published as their own.

It happens. I've stopped worrying about it.

 

[Deleted member 1281]

I see your point and admire your calmness. However, unlike a hex editor, this seems to be a tool that allows any hacker to hack your mdl (that you have spent years in developing) to pieces in a matter of seconds, upload a barely flying caricature of it as user Anonymous, advertise it under YOUR name, and ask and get money for it. "It happens", as you say, but for my part I do worry about it. And I do not think we should encourage the Anons out there by offering them a crowbar. Make that another crowbar.

Cheers, Manfred

 

[arno]

I am interested in converting animated (and static) 'Game Content' to MSFS-2020 from prior / legacy versions of FS2Kx / FSX / P3D in accordance with the MS XBOX 'Game Content' license:

Game Content Usage Rules | Xbox

Find out how you can use things like gameplay footage, screenshots, music, and other elements of our games to make things like machinima, videos, and other cool things.

www.xbox.com

How would that game content license apply to porting over content to MSFS? It applies to using copyrighted material from MS in things like video's and other fan related outputs. But the content you want to part over is not owned by MS, it is owned by the developer who made it originally.

 

[GaryGB]

How would that game content license apply to porting over content to MSFS? It applies to using copyrighted material from MS in things like video's and other fan related outputs. But the content you want to part over is not owned by MS, it is owned by the developer who made it originally.

I believe that interpretation does not adequately represent the intent- or extent- of applicability for the Xbox Game Content Usage Rules.


I also believe it may not be in the best interest of FSDeveloper to tolerate what may prove to be another "thread-lock-baiting" effort by special interests to limit rights of all MSFS end users to exercise their legal options granted by Microsoft ...as stated within the above linked Xbox Game Content Usage Rules:

https://www.xbox.com/en-US/developers/rules

"Microsoft grants you a personal, non-exclusive, non-sublicenseable, non-transferable, revocable, limited license for you to use and display Game Content and to create derivative works based upon Game Content, strictly for your personal, noncommercial (except as specifically provided below) use."

IMHO, the vast majority of MSFS users have no interest in converting content by authors who clearly prohibit such derivation from their proprietary intellectual property, and I think it is likely that even Microsoft might be compelled to agree end users should not be restricted from access to- and use of- such utilities as discussed above, for such purposes as are compliant with the terms of the Xbox Game Content Usage Rules.

Efforts to restrict access to- / use of- such utilities as discussed above 'may' infringe rights of MSFS users under applicable local and international laws.

GaryGB

 

[3DFlightDreams]

I say go for it, Microsofts take control of your project the minute its put in the game. I see no harm as long as you use it for non commercial use. Need more designers out there and they really don't do a very good document on the complete breakdown on things. After all that how I got this far reverse engineering.

evangel76 so set it free... and protect yourself though saying for indented learning purposes only!

Cheers!​

 

[arno]

Hi Gary,

I believe that interpretation does not adequately represent the intent- or extent- of applicability for the Xbox Game Content Usage Rules.


I also believe it may not be in the best interest of FSDeveloper to tolerate what may prove to be another "thread-lock-baiting" effort by special interests to limit rights of all MSFS end users to exercise their legal options granted by Microsoft ...as stated within the above linked Xbox Game Content Usage Rules:

https://www.xbox.com/en-US/developers/rules

"Microsoft grants you a personal, non-exclusive, non-sublicenseable, non-transferable, revocable, limited license for you to use and display Game Content and to create derivative works based upon Game Content, strictly for your personal, noncommercial (except as specifically provided below) use."

Are you serious? That content usage rule does not give us the right to port somebodies work over to MSFS. First of that original content that is being ported was never released under these rules (that might apply to MSFS addons). Besides that converting some addon is not creating derived work, you are actually creating a similar product but for another platform. And the usage rule clearly states that it applies to all content "for which Microsoft owns the copyright, trademark or other intellectual property". This excludes most FS addons, since the copyright of those remains with the developer of the addon. It is clear from reading the rules that this is meant for fan videos, fan apps or those kind of products that include some game content.

I feel it is dangerous to state here that we could use other peoples work based on such rules. I don't think it is in the interest of the developer community to spread the idea that it is OK to just take other peoples work. That's why I did responds to this thread.

IMHO, the vast majority of MSFS users have no interest in converting content by authors who clearly prohibit such derivation from their proprietary intellectual property, and I think it is likely that even Microsoft might be compelled to agree that end users should not be restricted from access to- and use of- such utilities as discussed above, for such purposes as are compliant with the terms of the Xbox Game Content Usage Rules.

Efforts to restrict access to- / use of- such utilities as discussed above 'may' infringe rights of MSFS users under applicable local and international laws.

I am not a lawyer of course, but I have the feeling that the content rules do not give MSFS users the right you are hinting at. And for sure such rules are saying that it is OK to distribute tools that can be used to reverse engineer content. The rules actually exclude reverse engineering.

And don't take me wrong. It is not that I am against tools that can convert content. MCX and some of my other tools do things like that as well. And over the years I have learned a lot from studying the internal formats of FS. In principle I agree that as long as a tool has a genuine purpose for developers, it should be distributed. Else I would not have distributed MCX. It is the classical tale of a hammer that can be used to build a house, but also to break into one. I know that MCX can also be used to steal people's work, but as long as a feature brings a lot of functionalities to real developers as well I am not against distributing them.

Initially it was also my plan to make the glTF export in MCX available to everybody. But after discussing the topic in the community I have decided not to do so, because many developers have convinced me that this is not in the interest of the developer community. One of the main reasons for that is that once you have a model converted from MDL to glTF it because very easy to use it anywhere. You can take it into many different tools and before you know the hard work of developers is being used even outside of the FS world. With earlier MCX functionalities that could only export the animations back to formats like MDL at least the work would stay within the FS world.

I won't mention names here, but I have even had developers argue to me that making a glTF animation export publicly available is like developing a nuclear bomb without any safety mechanism around it. Personally I think that analogy is exaugurated and I don't agree with it. But it is an expression of how some developers think. They spend a lot of time (often years) to work on a model and if somebody could steal it with a few mouse clicks I do understand they feel in such a way. As people making tools we have to keep such things in mind, it is up to us all to make sure that the developer community remains as active as it is. It is not in the benefit of users as well if developers are driven away because they can't protect their hard labor anymore.

I hope this gives some idea of the thoughts and issues that are involved. I still hope that one day we will find a good balance between given developers the tools to do their work and easily convert their own content from older sims to new ones. But on the other hand also protect their work. I still hope to find a way in MCX to make the animation export available to all developers, while still protecting the hard work people put into their addons.

 

[DBushell]

Hi Gary,

The link you provided also states

"Note that we can't give you permission to use games from other publishers, or Game Content where Microsoft doesn't own the intellectual property." MSFS or FSX etc third party addons IP are not owned by Microsoft.

and

• You can't infringe anyone's IP rights in your Item.

Therefore, I would argue that importing an addon from FSX is an infringement of the third party developer's IP.

Reverse engineering someone else's product is generally against most if not all EULAs I've ever read.

 

[GaryGB]

AFAIK, Xbox Game Content Usage Rules cited above refer only to default assets from MS FS titles as defined in the section under:

"What content is covered?"​

My personal interest in- and anticipated use of- legacy MS default FS Game Content would not involve any 3rd party add-ons.

Indeed, compliance with Xbox Game Content Usage Rules cited above requires that one only utilize Game Content "for which Microsoft owns the copyright, trademark or other intellectual property".


AFAIK, "accessing" assets versus 'scanning' files (for malware) or 'viewing' files (for educational purposes) is not addressed here, but how the U.S. Copyright Office defines "Derivative Works" and eligibility for granting of a Copyright with regards to a computer program is intriguing.

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf


And IIUC, both compliance with- and enforcement of- the above Xbox Game Content Usage Rules would require Microsoft to disclose in advance, Game Content "for which Microsoft owns the copyright, trademark or other intellectual property".


Perhaps 3rd party add-on content may be protected if / when Asobo releases a Digital Rights Management (aka "DRM") feature:

[MSFS SDK 0_10_0_0 install path]/Documentation/01-Getting_Started/02-FAQ.html#how-can-i-protect-my-add-ons-from-piracy-aka-drm

"How can I protect my add-ons from piracy (a.k.a. DRM)​

Digital Rights Management (DRM for short) functionality is planned for a future release (please refer to the Roadmap page for details) and applies to the entirety of the package content. Therefore, WebAssembly binaries, HTML code or any other type of content that goes into packages will be protected the same way."


GaryGB

 

[KAI31]

A pointless and harmful waste of time. The product of reverse engineering widely available in relation to 3D models created over the years is a tool that directly harms the creators and owners of models who have spent years creating their creations. Who needs it? First of all, those who want to take advantage of the years of someone else's work by stealing them in their own interests. The owners already have all the means to compile their models and their sources in gLTF with all the edits to animation, textures and everything else that is needed. And what about the models purchased from third-party developers that are under an editorial license and in case of violation of the conditions, the developer using the model for the sim will suffer first of all and at the same time will pay twice to the model manufacturer and lose his many years of hard work. It is not a tool of creation, but a tool of destruction, especially for high-quality modeling and development.

 

[GaryGB]

Hi Gary,

Are you serious?

When the needs of the many exceed the need of the few- or the one- ...Social Engineering must be done.

I am inclined to believe it would be unwise for anyone to take seriously, use of- or development for- a PC-based flight simulator.


Perhaps we might find some affluent but generous benefactors, and have them fund an "Adopt-A-FSDeveloper" program here ?

Alternatively, perhaps "GoFundMe" pages might provide a better yield than PayPal "Donate" links on web pages ?

GaryGB

 

[KAI31]

"Adopt-A-FSDeveloper"? What is this program? What is it for?

 

[Deleted member 1281]

I, too, would like to know that. I think I grasped the "people kill people" thing, and some conjecture about "the vast majority". Speaking of statistics, here is some irrelevant number crunching to lighten the mood a bit:

This was OP's first post in this forum (btw, do we get any feedback from him, too?); of the 4 pro votes voiced in this thread one voter has a credit of 4 contributions to this forum so far, the second has 10, the third has 7, and the fourth has 6,139.

The 5 con voters total 43 + 92 + 464 + 951 + 29,950 posts.