A few details:
-15 day project.
-600 USD payment OR personal access to the tool
-You’ll be working with a modern animator concept which will be used in next Mad Studio shooter games.
Feature list :
If accepted, you’ll be handed further information.
Initially, we would go through out all features and end result, you would get to know me and I would get to know you 
WAC3 UI screenshot:
Older WAC2 demo (WAC3 is an upgraded concept from WAC2):
To join, post about it on this thread!
Out of curiosity where are you getting the 15 day figure from?
If you’ve ever read classical planning, you’d know that time is critical to any plan so we could actually start thinking about its success. I’m stating 15 days as my best estimate for efficient daily workflow, based on my experience.
Either way, everything has a purpose, place and time - I want to create a shooter really soon, I want Roblox players to get an epic shooting title 
15 days without pesky things like school.
What is some other info that we would need to be amazingly skilled at? CFrames? Lerp Functions?
Also, do we also need a way to export them to a module script of sorts? This project is starting to seem possible… but not sure yet.
[quote] What is some other info that we would need to be amazingly skilled at? CFrames? Lerp Functions?
Also, do we also need a way to export them to a module script of sorts? This project is starting to seem possible… but not sure yet. [/quote]
The file I’ve included describes all functionality. I’m looking at an end product, with specific features, and there are plenty of ways to make it real.
Actually, WAC3 comes already with a finished playback algo & animation file structure. I could answer any technical aspect of the tool when there would be a choice between two or three.
The reason for me not giving indefinite time is because I need a person who would have what it takes to finish the tool. If you’re not going to plan your actions in time, you’re not going to finish it. Trust me, 6 people failed to do it. So if someone here, on RbxDev, would manage to slice WAC3 into pieces, finish it with constant progress (not working by the last minute), I would look up to that person as someone really mature and experienced, I would recommend him to work at any other company
If you have school you have to plan the project to fit in your daily work. If you’re too busy, you simply have your own priorities and there’s no point in bothering to work on this. It’s perfectly normal that some tasks can only be done by some people.
I will think about this… I have done some of the stuff I would need to tackle (Ex: moving frames, rotate/move tools,etc).
“600 USD payment OR personal access to the tool”
Err… If we coded the thing, wouldn’t we have personal access to it regardless of which payment we chose?
“Err… If we coded the thing, wouldn’t we have personal access to it regardless of which payment we chose?”
Not if you agree to a contract where you give up access / rights to it in return for the $600 payment. I imagine that’s where the other option comes from… if you refuse to give up access to it then there’s not that much that he can do other than not pay you and accept that you have access to it.
[quote] “Err… If we coded the thing, wouldn’t we have personal access to it regardless of which payment we chose?”
Not if you agree to a contract where you give up access / rights to it in return for the $600 payment. I imagine that’s where the other option comes from… if you refuse to give up access to it then there’s not that much that he can do other than not pay you and accept that you have access to it. [/quote]
What. If I wanted access to the tool, why would I keep it for myself and give it to someone else instead of just keeping it for myself. That’s a pretty poor set of payment options he has there.
“why would I keep it for myself and give it to someone else instead of just keeping it for myself.”
Because you got access to an existing code base to work from, and you agreed to take one of those options when accepting that code base? And you don’t want a bad reputation as someone who just breaks the deal after the fact?
“That’s a pretty poor set of payment options he has there.”
I don’t know, but $600 doesn’t seem too far off for what’s probably wanted here. That’s 40 hours @ $15 / hour = 1 week of work, which seems about right for what’s mostly a bunch of UI work + a few engine tweaks given that the playback engine is stated to already exist.
“Because you got access to an existing code base to work from, and you agreed to take one of those options when accepting that code base? And you don’t want a bad reputation as someone who just breaks the deal after the fact?”
No, I’m not talking about stealing it. Since I’m someone who would need an animation plugin as well, my options would be to keep a plugin I 100% made for myself and not give it to anyone else, or make one for someone else and be able to use it. You see the dilemma. It may be favorable to someone else who doesn’t need an animation plugin and wouldn’t benefit from using it in the first place, but if I need an animation plugin as well, there’s no reason for me to make one for someone else if all my reward is is getting to use it.
[quote] “Because you got access to an existing code base to work from, and you agreed to take one of those options when accepting that code base? And you don’t want a bad reputation as someone who just breaks the deal after the fact?”
No, I’m not talking about stealing it. Since I’m someone who would need an animation plugin as well, my options would be to keep a plugin I 100% made for myself and not give it to anyone else, or make one for someone else and be able to use it. You see the dilemma. It may be favorable to someone else who doesn’t need an animation plugin and wouldn’t benefit from using it in the first place, but if I need an animation plugin as well, there’s no reason for me to make one for someone else if all my reward is is getting to use it. [/quote]
The access to the tool would be a form of payment, an option for the scripter. Well, this is my offer. 600$ - that’s what I’m paying for the tool. If you want access to the tool, you’d have to pay for it yourself. I pay for the tool when its done so it would belong to me.
As for, well, still having the source because you’ve worked on it - it’s all a matter of trust, that’s all to it.
If you did give someone the tool couldn’t they just go and redistribute it for free? Idk doesn’t sound like a good idea.
Honestly, selling scripts/tools for use will never work on roblox. As soon as one person has bought it, they can easily redistribute it and no moderation action can be taken against them. You did give it to them. There’s nothing to stop them from giving it away.
You can create the script as a closed-source modulescript, then sell the rights to use it, having a way to detect whether you can use it.
I.e.: selling a license to it and it’ll only work in PlaceId=12345
return {
HasAccess=function(dm)
if dm:IsA('DataModel') and HttpCheckForValidation(dm.PlaceId) then
end;
end;
}local module = require(12345);
if not module.HasAccess(game) then
end;Just some way to implement some sort of security I guess. Makes me want to create a module security system now, because this is obviously vulnerable
I get how a lot of people think it isn’t fair, but think of it like this: If you run a burger restaurant, you don’t get a burger for every one you sell. There is still a supply, and that supply costs money. If you take from that supply it costs you money. I think it’s entirely fair that you don’t get $600 and access to the tool. If you really want the tool, you can make a different version of it or just don’t sell it at all. Reproducible things don’t hold value and wouldn’t be worth $600 in a normal market. It devalues for every person that owns it due to a lessened rarity.
You can create the script as a closed-source modulescript, then sell the rights to use it, having a way to detect whether you can use it.
I.e.: selling a license to it and it’ll only work in PlaceId=12345
return {
HasAccess=function(dm)
if dm:IsA('DataModel') and HttpCheckForValidation(dm.PlaceId) then
end;
end;
}local module = require(12345);
if not module.HasAccess(game) then
end;Just some way to implement some sort of security I guess. Makes me want to create a module security system now, because this is obviously vulnerable[/quote]
If someone has the source to all code in something there’s nothing preventing someone from snipping out all the security. Part of the problem is you need all the source to do anything in roblox, which means the security can be cut out. Even if you wrote an interpreter and got the source from a server, that can be spoofed. The only way I can think of that would seriously stall someone is to write a bytecode interpreter, which probably would have a month or so of work before the interpreter could be manipulated to spit out the source.
Obfuscation is the only security you have, and even then it’s only obfuscated.
NecroBumpist has a pretty nifty bytecode interpreter written up, with which I bet a few tweaks could spit out the instructions, and then translated easily into some kind of readable code.
Anyways, I thought you couldn’t read the source of closed-source modules that you have to request using the assetid to load?