Looks like the FAST controller uses a BeagleBone Black as its external computer, which is also an option for the computer to run the code for a P-ROC. So I wouldn't say this doesn't require an external computer--I'd say its external computer is bolted on. (Which you could also do for a P-ROC of course.)

Ok, after reading through all these pages it seems like that it would be ok for someone to build new game code from scratch that did not use any of the original game's assets. (sound, DMD art, etc.) And it seems they would be allowed to sell that code and that it could be on any platform.

My question is isn't this what Dutch Pinball did with BOP 2.0? If so, why did they have to stop selling it and get a license? Is it because they used the term "Bride of Pinbot" and the character likeness? (i.e. if they had not called it BOP 2.0 and they didn't have the lady robot, it would have been fine?)

Thanks,
Brian

Dunno if this would be a question for a new thread or not, but Rick, it would be awesome if you could publish the technical requirements needed for a platform to be able to license IP from Williams for "2.0" games. I understand that you're talking about a whole solution and stuff, and that FAST has that. That's awesome. But I also know that BOP 2.0 is on P-ROC, and it appears like they got a license too, so that's also great since it shows that you're willing to work with other platforms. (Though since they're not using original dots or audio maybe that's not an equal comparison?)

So from my perspective, I'm a developer wanting to build and sell a "2.0" of a Williams game. I need to decide pretty early on which platform I'm developing it for. Maybe I'll use P-ROC, maybe Ben Heck's system, maybe FAST.. it seems that each will have pros and cons and I'd like to make the decision based on what best fits my needs while also being able to get an IP license from you.

I know before you've said, "Send us a proposal and we'll work with you." But at this point, my proposal is nothing more than one sentence which is like, "I want to build a 2.0 game," so I'm hoping you can help me understand what DRM options the platform needs so I can evaluate them accordingly.

Thanks Rick!
Brian

Hi. I'm somewhat involved in the WPC 2.0 thing as we're making sure the Mission Pinball Framework (MPF) will support these games (and my guess is that 2.0 games referenced here will be running MPF).

I would say months-to-years for a timeframe. Really what we're trying to do is to get everything in place—logistics, hardware, licensing, software—so that these 2.0 games are easy to do. (Well, "easy" being a relative term.) From the software side of things, I'm hoping MPF is ready to go to support this in the first part of next year. March / April is the goal, and based on the progress so far I feel like that's accurate.

The FAST hardware is coming along nicely. I have their boards at my house to develop MPF against (along with the P-ROC), and I know they're in the hands of a few other builders too.

I also know that some folks have started mapping out some plans for some 2.0 games in terms of ideas, rules, upgrades, etc.

All that said, there's no way any 2.0 game (at least "2.0" in the context of what this thread is about, I'm not talking about DP's BOP 2.0 or MMR as those are separate projects) before the second half of 2015. Honestly my estimate would be that everything is up and rolling by mid year, and then people can start creating new games. (And the people who create new games don't have to be original designers. Sure, it could be if they're interested, or really it could be anyone form the community.)

The entire ecosystem we're building will certainly support new machines too. Some people might choose to release all of their game assets (code, dots, audio, etc.) as open source, while other licensing requirements might mean that original dots and audio would have to be "locked" to a particular hardware controller while new dots and audio could be added, and rules and code could be changed. (As you can imagine some of the licensors want to ensure that their licensed elements are not open source, but the code that runs the game logic could be, for example.)

I'll get a blog post together explaining this more, but I want to let you know that (1) we're working like mad on this.. multiple people doing 40 hours a week on top of their actual day jobs, and (2), it's still going to be awhile.

Oh yeah great point Eric! I'll second that.. there's not only one way of doing the "2.0" games.. WPC 2.0 is more like a concept versus a specific product or hardware/software combination. The key is that anyone doing a 2.0-like game has to make sure they have the licensing stuff taken care of and that they can protect the Williams IP as needed, but there's certainly nothing that says it has to be on Mission Pinball Framework.