The issue is not with the 2nd pic. it's with the 1st and 3rd.
"...Specifically, if what you uploaded is a sample of a larger pack, the preview image must describe the art you actually uploaded to OGA, and not the additional art that you are advertising."
Thanks, but it's not really the description that's a potential issue (or not only the description). It's fine to advertise your commercial packs, but the previews should show what is actually in the free pack here on OGA. I understand the purpose of having a scene to demonstrate how the asset could be used, but these previews are more deceptive than demonstrative. If the pack doens't include dragons, trees, backgrounds, etc. the preview probably shouldn't have them either. Or at least the preview should make it obvious somehow that those features are not included.
"Your title and preview images must be descriptive of the content you actually uploaded. Specifically, if what you uploaded is a sample of a larger pack, the preview image must describe the art you actually uploaded to OGA, and not the additional art that you are advertising. It is fine to link to the larger pack in your description."
Thanks for understanding, and great asset! I love the vibrancy on the full pack components, too. :)
I like these. You might consider an additional small static preview image showing a single frame of each effect as the first preview image; from the gallery, the non-animated checkerboard doesn't do these justice. :)
@VinnNo.0: well, for the CC0 license it is sufficient, but from what I understand the jam needs credits as if it were essentially CC-BY. That probably doesn't mean you need to do much more than what you've indicated, but I'm guessing it should at least have a URL listed or credits.txt referenced in it so people can find the asset page it came from.
EDIT: maybe I'm overthinking it:
"3) You must credit the Author of the assets used, even if it's not required by the license. (Because this is nice thing to do)"
I assume that means props are sufficient(?) for cc0, though I guess you still could include a URL or credits.txt reference "because this is a nice thing to do". :)
Having clickable links in credits is more of a convenience than a requirement of the license. My entry for last year didn't display the URL for the assets at all, which is actually less in-line with the letter of the license requirements than displaying a non-interactive URL.
It's not about making sure you pronounce all the magic words exactly right to summon the legal-compliance-demon. Just give the player some way to see where the asset came from. click to open webpage, or display url text (clickable or not), or reference to credits file, whatever.
If the framework you're using doesn't make an interactive credits screen easy, just put something like "EpicSong5 by Joth, CC-BY. See credits.txt for more information." That's sufficient and perfectly compliant with the license and jam rules. I know that makes Chaser's job a little harder, but if it's the difference between completely reworking existing assets just to avoid a bureaucratic version of the requirements- or worse- not submitting a jam entry altogether, Chaser's suffering is a risk I'm willing to take. :)
The issue is not with the 2nd pic. it's with the
1st and3rd.are the sprite dimensions an adjustable setting in the particle fx designer?
Thanks, but it's not really the description that's a potential issue (or not only the description). It's fine to advertise your commercial packs, but the previews should show what is actually in the free pack here on OGA. I understand the purpose of having a scene to demonstrate how the asset could be used, but these previews are more deceptive than demonstrative. If the pack doens't include dragons, trees,
backgrounds, etc. the preview probably shouldn't have them either.Or at least the preview should make it obvious somehow that those features are not included.Thanks for understanding, and great asset! I love the vibrancy on the full pack components, too. :)
There's no dragon
or backgroundsin the pack?I like these. You might consider an additional small static preview image showing a single frame of each effect as the first preview image; from the gallery, the non-animated checkerboard doesn't do these justice. :)
@Kuro7070: let me know if these crediting instructions leave any questions unanswered https://opengameart.org/content/faq#q-how-to-credit :)
haha! yes, but it's great because the tileset layout is pretty universally applicable. I like that water!
@VinnNo.0: well, for the CC0 license it is sufficient, but from what I understand the jam needs credits as if it were essentially CC-BY. That probably doesn't mean you need to do much more than what you've indicated, but I'm guessing it should at least have a URL listed or credits.txt referenced in it so people can find the asset page it came from.
EDIT: maybe I'm overthinking it:
I assume that means props are sufficient(?) for cc0, though I guess you still could include a URL or credits.txt reference "because this is a nice thing to do". :)
Having clickable links in credits is more of a convenience than a requirement of the license. My entry for last year didn't display the URL for the assets at all, which is actually less in-line with the letter of the license requirements than displaying a non-interactive URL.
It's not about making sure you pronounce all the magic words exactly right to summon the legal-compliance-demon. Just give the player some way to see where the asset came from. click to open webpage, or display url text (clickable or not), or reference to credits file, whatever.
If the framework you're using doesn't make an interactive credits screen easy, just put something like "EpicSong5 by Joth, CC-BY. See credits.txt for more information." That's sufficient and perfectly compliant with the license and jam rules. I know that makes Chaser's job a little harder, but if it's the difference between completely reworking existing assets just to avoid a bureaucratic version of the requirements- or worse- not submitting a jam entry altogether, Chaser's suffering is a risk I'm willing to take. :)
past bounties ranged from $30 to $70.
Pages