The missed post from JaWoodle

Alan Lau said:
I still don't understand why you writing "None of the NPC Core Mod bandits are able to take cover and switch from ranged to melee based on proximity" proves that I was wrong. What does that factoid have to do with anything I wrote?

I never said or implied that they were stealing NPC Core code. No decent sized video game company would ever try to get away with a stunt like that. Yes I did make an insinuation that TFP might be planning on using (and therefore purchasing) NPC Core when they finally do add that to the game. That insinuation was based on what I remembered seeing in Jawoodle's video, which I very clearly said and still say that I could be misremembering. So far, you are the only person that has said, basically, "No, the bandits shown in Jawoodle's video were not based on the NPC Core Mod", but you haven't provided any proof of that. I would love for someone to show, unequivocally, that I'm right or wrong.

As far as my intent, you don't know me. What you do know about me could fit in a martini glass and still have room left for the olive.
Click to expand...
Sure you do you. Your insinuation was wrong. Your question is answered. You re welcome. Any more questions?

-edit- your words: If I'm correct, it makes me wonder if TFP were embarrassed that after promising bandits for so long, that they just decided to use something some modders created and call it a day. " would love for someone to show, unequivocally, that I'm right or wrong." -> you are making the aquisation/insinuation. Prove you re right. I already know you re wrong, but lets see what you come up with besides insinuation and aquasations.
 
Last edited:
theFlu said:
But in this case, the given sense was a lie. And it would've put the person being lied to in a worse position wrt the legal status of that content.
(slight exaggeration, perhaps; to make a point. Inflamed emotions might fully agree, thou)
Click to expand...
What if they asked but were influenced by the denial to file the DMCA. For example I can imagine myself feeling slighted if someone didn't do something I felt reasonable and might think "well if they don't care about me then forget them" and then simply not care at that point. But before then I may not have made up my mind on the recourse of a denial. So it's again schrodingers cat. The outcome isn't clear until it is as the decision may have been based on the outcome of the request or reply.

I know we are getting into the weeds on this but generally speaking let's just do a flow chart.

Was TFP wrong for asking the content to be edited or removed? Let's say he removed it and that was the end of it. Would anyone feel it was wrong of TFP to ask?

For me I would say no. I think, even if it was an accident. It's reasonable to ask for it to be removed.

Was TFP wrong for filing a DMCA on the video when their request was refused?

For me I would say yes and no. If they did not want the information out there and the person denied the request then the only enforcement available is the strike. That being said I think once you start doing that you lose ground in the perception battle as people associate DMCA with large bad companies. Plus I think the damage was mostly done at that point and would rather pivot to using that as a segway to showcase what may be planned for bandits in a livestream.
 
Alan Lau said:
"No, the bandits shown in Jawoodle's video were not based on the NPC Core Mod", but you haven't provided any proof of that. I would love for someone to show, unequivocally, that I'm right or wrong.
Click to expand...
Only TFP would be able to "proof" that, by giving you access to that internal version; for you to inspect. Guess if they're willing to ;)

Furthermore, it wouldn't matter one iota. You are fully within your rights to privately study and run other people's code. You just can't publish it. Since this was an internal release that wasn't meant for public use, having that code in there wouldn't be a violation of anything.
 
Prisma501 said:
Are you really serious? You know he instigated the review bomb when 2.0 dropped? Positive manner my ■■■. Godcomplex because big list of viewers. He thought he had the power. Turned out he had not. He made a lot of money making vids about 7dtd. No one speaks of that. Only that TFP profited of his videos. No, he makes lots of money by playing a game he did not create. So the benifits go both ways. A partnership. If one party drops his respect the other will drop theirs too. He did this to himself.
Click to expand...
he did not instigate the review bomb. he's been blamed for it, but, he sure did not advocate for it.

The closest analogy I can think of would be: you are blaming him for starting a bar fight when all he did was throw one punch. Everyone else in that bar fight is responsible for their own actions.

I'd add to that many people felt like TFP just was not listening and had not been, for a couple of years. So when someone "big" said something mildly "negative" they let their own repressed opinions fly.
The real cause of the "■■■■ storm", in their opinion, was the people on the receiving end. I agree with them. There have been so many times when a post could have saved them so much BS...and yet they still choose to go silent whenever they ■■■■ something up.

You clearly are just yapping to yap (and that is your right to do so). It's just annoying to be lectured by a ■■■■ with no knowledge of what they are speaking on. Jawoodle is annoyingly upbeat. He loves this game. He has been one of their biggest cheer leaders for a long time.
 
Dark Sun said:
Not going against Woodle, but yeah if I were him I would have removed the video as soon as I was notified of the error on TFP's part. Sure, most of the people have probably already watched it, but you know...
Click to expand...
So you would have ate the financial loss after producing and edititing a video that pays your bills just like that? I dunno.... I can see both sides of this. Fun Pimps could easily have tossed Jawoodle a carrot before hitting him with a stick.. They could have said "WE made a mistake but we don't wannt YOU to PAY for it. Please take down the video and the next major release willl be giving to you three days ahead of everyone else. Or how about we let you do intervews with any staff you want." They chould have OFFERED something for wasting Jawoodles time in shooting, and producing his video. My bad, eat your loss just does not cut it.
Post automatically merged:

meganoth said:
It said "not intended for streamers, and by extension viewers, to see that b205 build with bandits.". The version is specifically named as being the wrong version for streamers as well as viewers. A clear admission of having messed up.
Click to expand...
And they messed up again with no offer to compesate Jawoodle for an already produced video that would have to be pulled. RFP made the mistake TFP should pay for it. At least that seems like common sense to me.
 
Kyoji said:
let's just do a flow chart.
Click to expand...
TFP asking? Fine.
JaWoodle saying yes? Ehh, his right to do so. Would give up income for an unknown amount.
JaWoodle saying no? His right to do so.

JaWoodle trying to negotiate _something_? Within his rights and decently moral.
TFP Ignoring that attempt? Unfriendly, but within their rights, of course.
TFP following up with some proposal for compensation? Would've been nice at that point. Could've made both sides somewhat whole.

TFP responding to the "No" with a DMCA claim? The two shouldn't be related. If you're going to file a DMCA, just do it. Or at least make it clear in your "requests" that you're going to. Otherwise this makes your original "politeness" look bad; kinda can't trust your word if you just force your way anyway after a "friendly chat".

TFP accepting the "No" and kicking Woodle out of the creator program? Fine. Their program.
TFP accepting the "No" and keeping Woodle in? Fine as well, although might cause a bit of a fuss with other creators, favoritism or w/e. Internet personalities are what they are :P
TFP receiving a potential "Yes" and still kicking him out of the program? A little questionable, but the harm is permanent in nature, the resolution can't be complete.

There's probably a few other threads to add, but those are the main ones I guess. 1D flowcharts are a little annoying thou ;)
 
Corwyhn said:
And they messed up again with no offer to compesate Jawoodle for an already produced video that would have to be pulled. RFP made the mistake TFP should pay for it. At least that seems like common sense to me.
Click to expand...
It feels like people are living in fantasy land if they think a developer will compensate someone for a video they want taken down.
 
Corwyhn said:
So you would have ate the financial loss after producing and edititing a video that pays your bills just like that? I dunno.... I can see both sides of this. Fun Pimps could easily have tossed Jawoodle a carrot before hitting him with a stick.. They could have said "WE made a mistake but we don't wannt YOU to PAY for it. Please take down the video and the next major release willl be giving to you three days ahead of everyone else. Or how about we let you do intervews with any staff you want." They chould have OFFERED something for wasting Jawoodles time in shooting, and producing his video. My bad, eat your loss just does not cut it.
Post automatically merged:


And they messed up again with no offer to compesate Jawoodle for an already produced video that would have to be pulled. RFP made the mistake TFP should pay for it. At least that seems like common sense to me.
Click to expand...
What's sensible about compensating someone for committing a petty crime? He had no right to do what he did. If TFP accidentally gave him a real gun instead of what was supposed to be a plastic gun, that doesn't mean he's legally allowed to blast the supermarket with zero ramifications and have all blame placed on TFP.

TFP made two mistakes: Giving him the wrong build and trusting him at all. Now they have to deal with this stupid drama, deal with his malicious community openly defending a criminal no matter what anyone says, and dealing with yet another review bomb. It's clear to me that Jawoodle and his hive mind are not the good guys in this situation. I hope TFP has learned from this and will be lot more careful when dealing with content creators.
 
HammerDano said:
From personal experience, once people are "triggered" they stop being reasonable, There are a lot of triggered people on here regurgitating the same arguments back and forth. Some, I have never seen acting so unreasonably...but, that's what happens when you get triggered...you stop thinking reasonably.
I'm not pretending that I know the exact percentages for the amount of "blame" all parties involved should have to "eat". just that it is some. I do think this got blown out of all proportion and will cost everyone involved far more than it should have.
Post automatically merged:


sorry G...I really am not trying to anger you.
Click to expand...
You didn't anger me. I told you it was this stupid ■■■■ing project that I've been working on. They approved the god■■■■ thing 3 times and kept coming back with something new to change each time.
 
There are a few things that stick out for me. I don't want to hypothesize
but I have to admit, no matter how it is re-explained; that is a sketchy and
questionable situation. I have only gone by what I know now, and what I have
learned from researching, the dev history until now.

Did JaWoodle publish what he found, yes. Follow the psychology of a Content creator,
on Streamer weekend. The program for lack of another visual reminds me of
a dog race, the app is the automated rabbit, and the finish line is time. It creates
a sense of competitiveness during that time vs team building and cross support that
occurs at other times. Reward simplification: finance.

So it becomes who comes first, gets the lion's share mentality. It may not always
be the outcome, but that is what it instigates. I use to open multiple windows,
on that day and compare presentations as soon as they were posted. That is how I learn. It
was a race to find something unique, and be the first to report it. In new york they would be
called scramblers.

Following that thought, first desire is dig hard dig deep, and be the first to the
finish line. Log in dm pull up blocks, entities, and cm Items. The questionable version
205 the intended version 250 series. I can see that being an issue on both sides.

The things that stick out that would raise a flag for me are, The Bandits have been available
since A21 and were not removed until 3.0. I dm and cm often in order to custom edit for myself,
and see what my options are and what has changed. Through out that 3 year span, In F6 scrolling
through the available entities the bandits did not show up, because they did not have xml pointer
targeting their files, and no commented class in entitieclasses.xml. I check bundle sizes to see what
received more change focus just for edification, then look for the changes in game be they overt or
subtle. Example: Faatal has cleaned up and reorganized the dirs and files. A lot. which also makes it
a lot easier to visually compare file size changes per alpha.

But that version did, not only did it have the bandit.bundle file still there, but also had the
Bandits classes activated in the entities classes.xml and was able to bring them up in the spawn menu.

At least the bell spawner works, I did a quasimodo on it, minutes after my first login.
 
4sheetzngeegles said:
There are a few things that stick out for me. I don't want to hypothesize
but I have to admit, no matter how it is re-explained; that is a sketchy and
questionable situation. I have only gone by what I know now, and what I have
learned from researching, the dev history until now.

Did JaWoodle publish what he found, yes. Follow the psychology of a Content creator,
on Streamer weekend. The program for lack of another visual reminds me of
a dog race, the app is the automated rabbit, and the finish line is time. It creates
a sense of competitiveness during that time vs team building and cross support that
occurs at other times. Reward simplification: finance.

So it becomes who comes first, gets the lion's share mentality. It may not always
be the outcome, but that is what it instigates. I use to open multiple windows,
on that day and compare presentations as soon as they were posted. That is how I learn. It
was a race to find something unique, and be the first to report it. In new york they would be
called scramblers.

Following that thought, first desire is dig hard dig deep, and be the first to the
finish line. Log in dm pull up blocks, entities, and cm Items. The questionable version
205 the intended version 250 series. I can see that being an issue on both sides.

The things that stick out that would raise a flag for me are, The Bandits have been available
since A21 and were not removed until 3.0. I dm and cm often in order to custom edit for myself,
and see what my options are and what has changed. Through out that 3 year span, In F6 scrolling
through the available entities the bandits did not show up, because they did not have xml pointer
targeting their files, and no commented class in entitieclasses.xml. I check bundle sizes to see what
received more change focus just for edification, then look for the changes in game be they overt or
subtle. Example: Faatal has cleaned up and reorganized the dirs and files. A lot. which also makes it
a lot easier to visually compare file size changes per alpha.

But that version did, not only did it have the bandit.bundle file still there, but also had the
Bandits classes activated in the entities classes.xml and was able to bring them up in the spawn menu.

At least the bell spawner works, I did a quasimodo on it, minutes after my first login.
Click to expand...
First, I need to ask...is this written in some kind of poem form? Haiku?

Bandits were spawnable back in A16 and I believe possibly as far back as A14.
I don't know when they were removed from the spawn menu, but they were not in A21.
The bandits were still left in the game, but you'd have to rip the assets to see them.
 
Double G said:
First, I need to ask...is this written in some kind of poem form? Haiku?
Click to expand...
Nope not Haiku. I know the original bandits were released back then, I played
with them in my game but changed the faction at the time to not artificially inflate
kill numbers I'm not a PVPer.

If you check the file format as of A21, They were removed from the resource.assets huge
wad file, to the F:\###_7DAYSTODIE2023ARCHIVES\#_2025_VANILLA_VERSIONS\7 Days To Die a21_0_313\Data\Addressables\Standalone\automatic_assets_entities\bandits.bundle which is the
format that they still follow up to and including 3.0 but they were removed for 3.0 update. The
banditprops.bundle is still there.

That same thing you pointed out is a parallel of something I pointed out when BI was first announced.
The format that the game follows is open, as was the original intent. If a person chooses to mod.

Edit: if you are writing about the format. I write short across for people
that may be on a smaller screen. It tends to make it longer, which has been
commented about before. So I broke it into smaller topics or subjects, for an
easier read, an quote response. vs a wall of text.
 
Last edited:
Jost Amman said:
My post was a provocation. People have been attacking TFP because they screwed up.
So what they did is either a Bug Deal... or it's no biggie. Which one?

If it's no biggie then why is everyone saying that TFP is the bad guy?

I see only one honest mistake (that can happen) on the side of TFP, and on the other side a "kid" who doesn't know how to behave in a business context (yes, even if it's the game industry it's still a professional job, or is it not?).
Click to expand...
Honestly, now after going thru the videos again, I really don't know, BUT! This still is in my opinion very badly dealt with (from both sides). As I somewhat said TFP could have came out from this as "the winner" just by saying they made an oopsie and explained they gave Woodle the wrong version and created more hype about the bandits and dealt with him in private. And yes, as I said Woodle could have edited his video, but he didn't (he did request for more time to lawyer up, but wasn't given more time) . I don't know what kind of process editing a youtube video is, but it doesn't sound like an 7.5h days work that requires compensating. Now the outcome is pretty much "us vs they" which looks to be no good for TFP or the 7D2D enthusiast on youtube.

This thing has blown way out of proportion and it takes the focus away from future development. Planning or really going to sue Woodle because of this is in my opinion extremely overkill. The lawyers will be the only ones profiting from this in the end.

To both Woodle and TFP: kiss and make up already.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top