There is an important rule about contributions to OpenSceneryX – we never accept models for unique buildings, for example The Eiffel Tower or The Empire State Building. Why? Because OpenSceneryX is a library for general use across many scenery packages, and objects that are unique would only ever be used in one place in the world. The place for unique buildings is inside that scenery package, not inside a general-purpose library.
So what’s the problem? Well, consider this nice model of an airport terminal just contributed by Nick Ward.
It is a model of a specific terminal building at a specific airport (CYPA). However, most airport building models are based on specific buildings at specific airports – all the hangars, all the offices, all the sheds – it’s just that those buildings can be described as ‘generic’ while a terminal is becoming rather more ‘specific’. So, does the terminal get added to OpenSceneryX?
I don’t really know the answer to this. I think the best way is to make a judgement on an object-by-object basis. In this case, I would say that the terminal is generic enough that you might find quite a lot of buildings around the world looking “quite similar” so there is a justification for adding it. In other cases – let’s say someone contributed a model of the London Stansted airport terminal building – then this would not be accepted because it is not generic. I think there is a bit of a fuzzy line here that may sometimes be difficult to call.
If you have any suggestions or opinions, please post a comment.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Thanks for making an example of me 🙂
Actually it has been pre-genericked*, mainly by removing ‘PRINCE ALBERT’ from the front!
*sorry about that
Hehe, no problem. It is a nice model so it was added anyway. Send us the updated one if you like and I’ll replace the current one.
I think that what can be done is to create a sub directory for non-generic scenery objects. It is a win win situation. Not every scenery maker want to create the same objects as other already done, I mean if I’m working on Paris scenery, I do not always have the time resource to recreate Aifel tower or other known landmarks, so opensceneryx can help here. I’ll be able to create 5 out of 10 scenery objects and use the other 5 from opensceneryx, and we are all happy.
I should say that I do not have any knoledge on building sceneries, it is just a thought.
cheers
I see where you’re coming from, but remember that if someone wants to use a scenery package that uses OpenSceneryX, they must download the whole library. This means that *everyone* will get a copy of the Eiffel Tower, whether they have Paris installed or not. As unique objects such as this tend to be modelled in high detail, it would mean a big download for everyone when a minority of people will ever see the object.
My original post wasn’t really about clearly unique objects such as the Eiffel Tower – IMO this is a clear-cut case of an object that should only ever appear in a single scenery, not a widely-downloaded library of objects.
However, I definitely see your point from an *author’s* point of view – it is important for authors to have a central repository of unique objects to dip into on an object-by-object basis, copying the object into their own scenery. However, this is effectively what X-Plane.org already does in the Download Manager and I don’t really want to step on their toes.
A.