Is it still worth buying the Source Maps?
I now own most of the ProFantasy software products, there are a couple of annuals that I've yet to pick up because they don't have anything that I really needed with any urgency, and a couple of other bits of software that I don't really need at all.
Every time a new voucher pops up in my email (like the 30% Black Friday one that arrived today), I have a flick through the older bits of software, and the one thing that I keep coming back to are the Source Maps - or more specifically, as I already own City Designer - the `Castles` and `Temples, Tombs & Catacombs` source maps.
Both of these products are a couple of generations old now, but the artwork isn't on par with what we get in CC3+ and Perspectives 3. On top of that, we've had a few recent reworks in this years annual: Beaumaris Castle in May 2019, a couple of Ancient Egypt tomb styles in June and August 2019.
I'm wondering whether or not it's still worth picking up the `Castles` and `Temples, Tombs & Catacombs` packs for the additional tools they offer, (e.g. Castle Designer Pro), or whether at this point I should just wait and see what 2020 has to offer.
Every time a new voucher pops up in my email (like the 30% Black Friday one that arrived today), I have a flick through the older bits of software, and the one thing that I keep coming back to are the Source Maps - or more specifically, as I already own City Designer - the `Castles` and `Temples, Tombs & Catacombs` source maps.
Both of these products are a couple of generations old now, but the artwork isn't on par with what we get in CC3+ and Perspectives 3. On top of that, we've had a few recent reworks in this years annual: Beaumaris Castle in May 2019, a couple of Ancient Egypt tomb styles in June and August 2019.
I'm wondering whether or not it's still worth picking up the `Castles` and `Temples, Tombs & Catacombs` packs for the additional tools they offer, (e.g. Castle Designer Pro), or whether at this point I should just wait and see what 2020 has to offer.
Comments
Its a holiday in the U.S, but other people might be around later on.
One thing is seriously annoying, though: In the PDFs, the orientation of the maps change seemingly at random. The PDF has the pages in portrait mode, but most maps are in landscape, so they are either rotated clockwise or counterclockwise. If they could only decide on one orientation and stick to it.
Take the castles guide. Starting on page 16, there is a map of a "Vauban-style Fortress". The first level on page 16 is rotated right, the second on page 17 is rotated left, and the third level on page 18 is again rotated right.
So even pages are rotated right, and odd pages are rotated left. Which makes no sense. Even if have this printed as a book with opposite pages, you'll have to rotate the book round and round! It is completely impractical.
On a side note, Simon, is there a way to unsubscribe to one of your own threads? because the question was actually about whether or not they were still worth buying, and that doesn't seem to be what's being discussed.
Stonehenge type, surrounding area. I took out some of the standing stones, and the stones in the center. Addded some trees.
For anyone confused, it's worth comparing Jim's revised map with the original from the Temples, Tombs & Catacombs Source Maps pack via the examples page. Conveniently, the not-Stonehenge example original opens in an almost identical-sized window (well, it does using Chrome) so you can make an easy side-by-side comparison.
Have to say this looks really good to me, and I just wonder if it might be interesting to use some similarly reworked items from the Source Maps for adding to the Community Atlas?
If you're only inspired by them, like Quenten's map, that's fine, but taking the actual map and make changes, like JimP's, it's not. It is fine for personal use of course, that's part of the intention of the maps, but not for redistributing like in the atlas.
I'm also puzzled as to how this is enforceable, given features such as the TRACE and CONTOURSM commands in CC3+ now. How can anyone "prove" a map such as Jim's - which to my eye involves some substantial changes to the original Source Maps product, while still being based on/in the style of it - hasn't simply been drawn/redrawn by the claimed creator?
Does this also mean that maps which look quite similar to those in the Source Maps, but which don't use them as a basis, also can't be redistributed? For instance, because the map Jim used as his starting point is freely available via the PF website as an image, what's to stop anyone using that PNG image as an import to CC3+, redrawing the map using all the features of CC3+, but without necessarily even having the Source Maps installed, and then redistributing that map as their own work? More importantly, how could you prove it one way or the other to enforce the EULA?
I can understand how items such as symbols or bitmaps can be protected this way under a EULA, but not maps drawn including such features - given that's the basis for projects like the Community Atlas.