Jebediah Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 You guys will hate me for this one, but being the jackass I am, I'm gonna point it out. Here goes. The F-17 was not a modified version of the F-16. The F-17 was this. Note that the F-17 lost out on the Air Force contract to the F-16. Why not just refer to it as the F-16X, if the first thing in its Xenopedia entry is that it's an F-16 tweaked to Xenonaut standards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobbzn Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 What would the F17 have been if aliens invaded in the Xenonauts setting? The game features the Chief Researcher inventing the internet in a non-historical manner. It's not too much of a stretch to assume plane invention happened a little differently too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Because the F-16 is a real aircraft, and so is owned by a major company that can legally demand payment from us if we use it in our game. Same with the guns in the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazz Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 You guys will hate me for this one, but being the jackass I am, I'm gonna point it out. Sorry but that grievous mistake has been brought up before. And back then as well as now it was decided to not correct it but ship the game in it's flawed state of aircraft designations. The F-17 Fan Club has put this on it's agenda for the next annual meeting in a phone booth outside Houston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assoonasitis Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Congratulations, you're a nitpicker but a stupid one. I hate you, but only because you're wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jebediah Posted October 26, 2013 Author Share Posted October 26, 2013 Because the F-16 is a real aircraft, and so is owned by a major company that can legally demand payment from us if we use it in our game. Same with the guns in the game. I thought that may be it, but wouldn't the issue still arise from mentioning it as being an F-16 in the backstory? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gauddlike Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 You guys will hate me for this one, but being the jackass I am, I'm gonna point it out. Here goes.The F-17 was this. Note that the F-17 lost out on the Air Force contract to the F-16. According to the link you posted the aircraft is either designated a YF-17 or an FA18 rather than F-17. That is a similar but different designation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jebediah Posted October 27, 2013 Author Share Posted October 27, 2013 Due to the advanced nature of the YF-17 prototype, it was referred to as both the YF-17 and F-17 in official US military publications; the F/A-18 is a completely different line of aircraft inspired by the design of the F-17. This is the reason why there is no other F-17 in the US Air Force's naming parlance; the title was reserved for the YF-17 Cobra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gauddlike Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 (edited) Then link to the correct documentation because the link you provided doesn't back up the argument you made As you say there is no F-17 so the designation is as safe to use as F-16x for copyright purposes and sounds better so why worry about changing it. *edit* Looks like you are wrong about the F-16x designation by the way. Quick google search picked up an existing use for F-16x so that would be unavailable for use. Edited October 27, 2013 by Gauddlike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 I thought that may be it, but wouldn't the issue still arise from mentioning it as being an F-16 in the backstory? Nope, you can't demand a payment for saying something is similar to or based upon but different from the item in question. It's just when you say an object in-game IS the real-life object in question. Hence why the early versions of Counterstrike had different gun names, even though the guns themselves were clearly recognisable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzzles Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 (edited) Nope, you can't demand a payment for saying something is similar to or based upon but different from the item in question. It's just when you say an object in-game IS the real-life object in question. Hence why the early versions of Counterstrike had different gun names, even though the guns themselves were clearly recognisable. Correction about CS because I've been up since 3am and feel like being a pedant : Early version's (ie, betas) used the real gun names. They went fake for the 1.0 commercial release, hence why the Desert Eagle (aka deagle) is called the "Nighthawk .50c" in the game, the MP5 is called the "KM submachine gun" etc... Edited October 28, 2013 by Buzzles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.