Hard Light Productions Forums

Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: Inquisitor on January 07, 2003, 04:46:50 pm

Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Inquisitor on January 07, 2003, 04:46:50 pm
I am still going round and round with the DivX people.

Short answer, they don;t want anyone having anything to do with video games using DivX.

Since RT's movie code (soon, I promise) is Media Player based, we're safe as a project, because we have done no DivX integration. However, individual mod authors would have ot seek a license. Still looking at that, I really think there is a fundamental disconnect the DivX people have with what we are doing, but, that's gonna take some finagling.

Anywho, I am working it. Use DivX in your projects at your own risk.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Goober5000 on January 07, 2003, 04:56:38 pm
pbhh :rolleyes:

Thanks, Inquisitor. :)
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Nico on January 07, 2003, 04:59:27 pm
only easy legal choice would be intel indeo or radius cinepak then. I have no real pb with that, but it's bigger. I'm not wanna pay for OTT, nor take any risk.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: vyper on January 07, 2003, 05:43:49 pm
This is a disaster I think. We're suddenly looking at much larger movie files sizes than before unless something as good as DivX pops up.
Title: Re: Update on DivX
Post by: ZylonBane on January 07, 2003, 07:39:46 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Inquisitor
However, individual mod authors would have ot seek a license.
First, that would only be the case for commercial efforts.

Second, I doubt the creators of the codec-of-choice for pirating movies are overly concerned about some modders using it for their cutscenes.

Get real, people.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Setekh on January 07, 2003, 07:42:58 pm
That's quite true, and yet... what's the size difference like between DivX and our alternatives? Maybe I'll go do some hunting around for that.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Inquisitor on January 07, 2003, 08:16:57 pm
They were VERY specific Zylon, I pointed that out to the lady I was talking to.

ANY video game content requires a license.

Next stop is the VP of Sales, it's a silly enforcement of their IP, but, that's the case. She made it sound as though they were beginning to pursue people for it.

again, the SCP itself has no responsibility, we just (and haven't even released it) implemented a media player capable of playing nay format the end user has an installed codec for...

I think there is a huge failure to understand what was being requested.

Again, use at your own risk ;)
Title: Re: Re: Update on DivX
Post by: WMCoolmon on January 07, 2003, 11:28:18 pm
Quote
Originally posted by ZylonBane
Second, I doubt the creators of the codec-of-choice for pirating movies are overly concerned about some modders using it for their cutscenes.

That's like saying Adobe won't mind if someone distributed free copies of an all-purpose CD cracking software to use with a freeware game, but also worked for Photoshop.

What's DivX supposed to do about pirates using their codec? :doubt: They might not mind us using it much, but they can still make noises...
Title: Re: Re: Re: Update on DivX
Post by: ZylonBane on January 07, 2003, 11:58:23 pm
Quote
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
That's like saying Adobe won't mind if someone distributed free copies of an all-purpose CD cracking software to use with a freeware game, but also worked for Photoshop.
Urm... that doesn't even come close to making sense. :wtf:

What it IS like, is like saying that Adobe won't mind if you use PSDs to store your freeware game's graphics.

The Divx support page seems fairly clear on this point--
Quote
DivX video is free for personal use. So if you're an individual who wants to use DivX technology for your own personal use, rest assured that you may do so at no cost.

However, if you are a business, or you are an individual or group who wants to use DivX technology for commercial purposes, then you require a commercial use license.
Based on this, only the most quavering paranoiac would think it necessary to license Divx for our purposes.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: IncendiaryLemon on January 08, 2003, 01:25:22 am
I would argue no, it falls between.

 The scp is not a commercial effort but it can not be classified as one individual using Divx for its personal use.

 What they may consider is the rare number of mods which evolve into profitable commercial enterprises.
Title: Re: Re: Re: Re: Update on DivX
Post by: WMCoolmon on January 08, 2003, 01:36:11 am
Quote
Originally posted by ZylonBane
Based on this, only the most quavering paranoiac would think it necessary to license Divx for our purposes.

The support page isn't going to take action against us for integrating code when DivX employees have stated not to. It could be said that only the end-users and the individual developers have the codec, and the codec itself is not a part of the project. If DivX has stated they don't want their codec used in games at all, though, it's entirely up to (their) interpretation whether the current code 'includes' DivX.

They don't have to raise much ruckus at all; if Gamespy hears that relations are strained between DivX and the FSSCP, they could demand that HLP cease providing hosting - or give HLP itself the boot. After all, if DivX is going to take legal action against somebody, it'll be either against Gamespy or THQ. I doubt the community is worth millions.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Zarax on January 08, 2003, 02:20:50 am
Well people, we have two choices about using a video codec.
One can be X-vid (the new open source codec since divx isn't free anymore), but it's still in alpha stages and reliability is not good enough...
The other one is asking Microsoft to give us a free permission to use its Windows Media codecs, wich are as good as divx about video quality, and with much better audio than MP3.
Before arguing it's impossible, please remember they are launching their new format, and they need some publicity.
If we will say that we will put something in the program that states their help and we tell them that they will gain some popularity i think they can give us licensing, maybe with the condition of not spreading the source...
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Fury on January 08, 2003, 02:39:35 am
Quote
Originally posted by vyper
This is a disaster I think. We're suddenly looking at much larger movie files sizes than before unless something as good as DivX pops up.


...xvid...
http://www.xvid.org/
http://xvid.hopto.org/
http://www.roeder.goe.net/%7Ekoepi/

But because I have mentioned xvid so many fringgin' times it's not even funny, you have probably counted it out once and for all. :doubt:
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Ryx on January 08, 2003, 04:26:44 am
If DivX is out, then, I think, XviD is the way to go.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Darkage on January 08, 2003, 04:33:07 am
I agree with Ryx here, Xvid seems the way to go it looks as a promising codec.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Darkage on January 08, 2003, 05:24:18 am
i made a small test anim. with the dvix 5.0.2 codec and the Xvid codec. The divix file size is 983kb and the xvid is 786kb in size. Both are the same animation. I think i like this codec.


Divx Version 5.0.02 (http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/inferno/darkage/planet_test.avi)

Res: 648*480
Size: 983Kb


Xvid (http://www.3dap.com/hlp/hosted/inferno/darkage/planet_test1.avi)

Res: 640*480
Size:768Kb
Title: Re: Re: Re: Re: Update on DivX
Post by: Black Wolf on January 08, 2003, 08:39:15 am
Quote
Originally posted by ZylonBane

The Divx support page seems fairly clear on this point--
Based on this, only the most quavering paranoiac would think it necessary to license Divx for our purposes.


Then the DivX people must be quavering paranoiacs.

When I was talking with them, they maintained their position that using DivX of any form in  a commercial game, even if the parts that included DivX were distributed freely on a commercial game requires a liscence.

An until we hear otherwise, it looks like XVid may be the way to go.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Inquisitor on January 08, 2003, 09:29:24 am
They have classified ALL video games as commercial.

There is an indi filmmaker license that seems more appropriate, but, they have stated, repeatedly, and the licensing page doesn't contradict this, that ALL video game related production is covered under the commercial licensing, and that is a cash thing.

The SCP has little or nothing to worry about, we've not directly integrated DivX technology (technically, the only movie playing code we have is in DX8, and that spawns a media player instance for all intents and purposes), so, they can pursue Microsoft on that one. We'll just say "use another compression."

It's the mod authors that need to be concerned. I really think the right license for this is the Indie Film License, but that requires some more talking to DivX, and I may suggest that people pursue that themselves if I can get no where with it.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: ZylonBane on January 08, 2003, 11:09:30 am
Good grief.

Bear in mind that the commercial-licensing issues that apply to Divx, also apply to ALL commercial codecs... WMV, Indeo, CinePak, QuickTime... all of 'em.

The FS2 source was released with the specific restriction that no commercial products can be based on it. Therefore no FS2_open mods, no matter how wildly successful, can be considered commercial.

Worst-case, this is clearly an "it's better to beg for forgiveness than to ask for permission" situation. As already stated, the SCP is immune from prosecution since they're merely implementing a Media Player frontend. The mod authors are (in paranoid-land) the vulnerable ones, and since the mods are all non-commerical ventures, they have no assets at risk. The worst that can happen is a cease-and-desist letter, and time wasted recompressing the cutscenes into new codecs. But of course this won't happen since it's not commercial use of their codec.

Or, we could just all sit and wait for Ogg Theora (http://www.theora.org/) to get finished.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Setekh on January 09, 2003, 05:01:01 am
Quote
Originally posted by Mr. Fury


...xvid...
http://www.xvid.org/
http://xvid.hopto.org/
http://www.roeder.goe.net/%7Ekoepi/

But because I have mentioned xvid so many fringgin' times it's not even funny, you have probably counted it out once and for all. :doubt:


Quote
ยท  Why should I use XviD?

Well, you don't need to at all. We the developers of XviD are just ordinary people, who happen to enjoy writing code for video compression, so we have no disadvantages (financial or any other) if you choose something else than XviD...

However there are good reasons why you could like to use XviD: We believe that XviD is the best currently available MPEG-4 video codec solution and additionally XviD is free software!


:eek2: These guys are legends! And with Darkage's test... Say, Darkage, just to be sure, could you encode something else? Something that's vastly different in content?
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Zarax on January 09, 2003, 05:29:28 am
Why not implementing an abstract, codec free architecture?
I mean, with the source we can demand on the OS all video and sound execution.
With it, it will possible to execute ANY codec without using them, since they will be played by the OS.
This can be applied not anly for cutscenes, but also for ingame sounds...
Just think at new campaigns with completely new soundsets and musics, now with wave they would be huge, but with a good compression, like the one provided by WMA, you could have the same quality at bitrates ranging from 64 to 128kbps...
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: RandomTiger on January 09, 2003, 06:35:12 am
Quote
Originally posted by Zarax

With it, it will possible to execute ANY codec without using them, since they will be played by the OS.


We have that already.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Darkage on January 09, 2003, 06:42:17 am
Quote
Originally posted by Setekh




:eek2: These guys are legends! And with Darkage's test... Say, Darkage, just to be sure, could you encode something else? Something that's vastly different in content?


I can cook something up. To test a few things and options Xvid provides.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Inquisitor on January 09, 2003, 08:24:19 am
Like RT said, that's kinda what we have, which is why SCP doesn't need to do anythign special, and why I disagree with DivX's stance on the licensing. I don't think the people I talked to "get" technology.

Someone wants to take a swing at this, go for it :)
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Fury on January 10, 2003, 04:11:28 am
Would it be possible to use divx compressed animations to replace current .ani files?
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Setekh on January 10, 2003, 04:23:47 am
Quote
Originally posted by Darkage
I can cook something up. To test a few things and options Xvid provides.


Thanks dude, appreciate it. :nod:
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Sesquipedalian on January 10, 2003, 05:49:58 am
Quote
Originally posted by Mr. Fury
Would it be possible to use divx compressed animations to replace current .ani files?
I'm going to guess not.  FS ani files are just pcx files compiled into frames.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: vyper on January 10, 2003, 08:46:24 am
Quote
Originally posted by Sesquipedalian
I'm going to guess not.  FS ani files are just pcx files compiled into frames.


Indeed because then you would definately have to hard-code support for DivX.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Inquisitor on January 10, 2003, 09:18:07 am
Yup, then we would be in violation of their license :)
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Fury on January 10, 2003, 09:35:22 am
Screw divx! I meant xvid. :D
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Krom on January 10, 2003, 11:54:22 am
You might be forgetting the amount of CPU power it takes to decode some of these newer compression formats.  Encoding isnt the only thing that can go slowly.  I've seen divx5 play back choppy on a 1 GHz Pentium 3 machine.  If you make a computer try to play back sevral small looping movies in these formats you're asking for slowdowns and dropped frames.

-Krom
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Fury on January 10, 2003, 12:06:33 pm
Oh well, there's always mpeg which requires less CPU power but filesizes are larger. Should be better than the format used in FS/FS2 movies though...
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: SG_01 on January 10, 2003, 04:38:08 pm
You can always try the RAD Gaming Tools (http://www.radgametools.com), you know the .bik files and stuff, you can download the gaming tools itself for free, the game-stuff is stuff that needs payment...

The bink files are generaly smaller in video, but require and MP3 Codec for sound

Think about it ;)
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: SKYNET-011 on January 10, 2003, 04:43:55 pm
Target aquired (SG_01)
Satellite beam control FIRE!
(http://members.cox.net/~wmcoolmon/images/welcome.gif)
Flamethrowers are under the seats, exits are to the left and right, and try not to wander in the ducts... if you do and see something with red mean eyes and 5 legs its just Carl, give him your sandwich, back away slowly and you will be OK.

(Not bad for a first try, huh? :D)
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: ZylonBane on January 10, 2003, 09:23:23 pm
Quote
Originally posted by SG_01
You can always try the RAD Gaming Tools (http://www.radgametools.com), you know the .bik files and stuff
No, no, no, no, nooooo! Bink files are huge (and incompatible with Media Player).
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Setekh on January 11, 2003, 12:15:54 am
For fun, I took a video of me practising some basketball skills (I suck :D). :) It's DivX 5.0.2 encoded - if anyone wants to put it into XviD and see how it compares, that'd be great. :)

http://www.3dap.com/hlp/staff/setekh/22_bounces.avi (15.6mb)
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: SG_01 on January 11, 2003, 08:26:21 am
I used Smacker to convert the file and its now 15,688,012 bytes
that is 769524 bytes smaller then the orriginal
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Fetty on January 11, 2003, 09:09:20 am
yeah but smacker is an 256 color codec (wich might explain the smaller filesize :D )

mpg doesnt sound so bad actualy
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Fury on January 11, 2003, 10:15:48 am
Bink is horrible! Far too many players are having problems with bink. So avoid it at all costs!
Bink = Stuttering playback, slow playback, breaking sounds/voices. All that.
Be very, very happy if you haven't had any problems with bink and own numerous games which uses bink.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Nico on January 11, 2003, 11:32:35 am
guess I'm very very happy then :p
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Setekh on January 13, 2003, 05:24:17 am
Can anyone convert this to XviD?
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: vyper on January 13, 2003, 05:26:06 am
Quote
Originally posted by Fetty
yeah but smacker is an 256 color codec (wich might explain the smaller filesize :D )

mpg doesnt sound so bad actualy


Yes the file size is just so practical.... :ick
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Zarax on January 13, 2003, 07:32:40 am
Quote
Originally posted by Setekh
For fun, I took a video of me practising some basketball skills (I suck :D). :) It's DivX 5.0.2 encoded - if anyone wants to put it into XviD and see how it compares, that'd be great. :)

http://www.3dap.com/hlp/staff/setekh/22_bounces.avi (15.6mb)


*takes the video files* *puts it in Windows Media Encoder*
*sets VBR Compression Quality 100%* *
waits a minute*
*result: same quality, file size is: 7.57mb*

Well, i think that is why we should go on Windows Media...
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Darkage on January 13, 2003, 08:45:48 am
Quote
Originally posted by Setekh
Can anyone convert this to XviD?



Hmm...ok;)
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Zarax on January 13, 2003, 09:54:17 am
Ok, i've spent some time on that divx...
With VBR 100% quality compression using Windows Media i have obtained these results (same video quality as original file):

WM7 Codec (Useful for older PCs): 7,66mb

WM8 Codec (Takes a bit more resources): 6,76mb

Source divx video (you can find it on this thread): 15,6 mb

Windows Media Encoder is FREE, and licensing is required only for hardware devices, wich isn't exactly what we are doing here...

I will send the output files to anyone will ask, so that you will see...
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Ryx on January 13, 2003, 10:38:58 am
Is there sound in that DivX?

I couldn't hear anything, but I may be missing some codec.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Ryx on January 13, 2003, 05:42:04 pm
*bump*
--------
A couple days ago, I rendered an ani, which is almost identical to Darkages (:o ).
I rendered out 180 .BMPs and then made an uncompressed .AVI out of them.

I have now compressed them with XviD. I used 2-pass compression, which allows me set an approcimate file size.
 1.5 Mbs version (http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52018631/planet.15mb.avi)

3 Mb version (http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52018631/planet.3mb.avi)

I also made one (not online) with 1-pass Quality and set quality to 100 and the file size after compression was ~6.3 Mb.
Oh, and no sound was used.
Title: Update on DivX
Post by: Nico on January 14, 2003, 07:07:40 am
Quote
Originally posted by Setekh
For fun, I took a video of me practising some basketball skills (I suck :D). :) It's DivX 5.0.2 encoded - if anyone wants to put it into XviD and see how it compares, that'd be great. :)

http://www.3dap.com/hlp/staff/setekh/22_bounces.avi (15.6mb)


(http://www.jeuxvideo.nu/forum/images/smiles/icon_pong.gif)
I just looked at that, you're a damn show-off (http://www.jeuxvideo.nu/forum/images/smiles/icon_ptdr.gif)