Railworks core updates!

[nnndoh]

verify game cache doesn't make my game work again, still missing the railworks.exe
i hate steam

[AndyM77]

Nothing wrong with Steam. (User since 2004) - Some antivirus products in the past have quarantined the Railworks.exe, so perhaps disable that temporarily whilst verifying the game cache. Once that's complete see if the .exe exists and if it does re-enable your AV and see if it disappears again.

[nnndoh]

god, what annoying, i have avast virus scanner for a few month's now, never had to disable it to get my exe back
now while the file scanner is deactivated, verifying gamecache89, thought it would work cause it took a bit of time now
it still doesn't work, the only file i can find is "railworks.exe.backup"

[ashgray]

Nothing wrong with Avast either (IMHO), having used it without problem for two years.

If you have a backup of the Railworks.exe file, why not copy and paste it (so you retain your backup), then simply re-name it "Railworks.exe?

Ash

[nnndoh]

still doesn't work
but what if i use the exe file from the beta version? the beta still works and is also updated to 11.0a

[ashgray]

which beta version would that be?

Ash

[jivebunny]

still doesn't work
but what if i use the exe file from the beta version? the beta still works and is also updated to 11.0a

Interesting, I thought everyone in the beta scheme was under a Non-Disclosure Agreement? Were you somehow exempt?

[nnndoh]

beta testing was over a month ago and the update is allready released
and i am not talking about the software , just the exe file, wich , and i allready tried, is not working when copied

[jivebunny]

beta testing was over a month ago and the update is allready released
and i am not talking about the software , just the exe file, wich , and i allready tried, is not working when copied

I hope RSC aren't pursuing those who breach the NDAs... you'd have a hard time convincing a court of law that the .exe isn't part of the software

[Darpor]

Only nnndoh will know what his NDA terms were, although I presume they were the same across the board for those recruited. The fact that a beta is now released does not necessarily release you from speaking about the software, or indeed mentioning you took part, but again, this depends on the what you agreed upon.

The fact is that nowadays, most NDA's are much stricter given the wide scope people have to provide information or views to a much wider audience via the internet. In software houses that I have been involved in, the recent trend has generally been for an NDA to be complete, and nothing shall be disclosed before, during or after any program of development. In the past, before widespread internet, any NDA was less complex and would be more geared to written media, when magazines were much more widespread and were the lifeblood of distribution of hidden information about upcoming releases.

All said, the RSC beta that was done a few weeks ago may well be pretty transparent, and no restriction given on speaking about being involved after the event. More tighter control may be in place about beta processes, the beta forum etc etc.

[FoggyMorning]

I would think (although I don't know the specifics) that the NDA may well have expired (at least in part) given that the software is now in the public domain

[Darpor]

I would think (although I don't know the specifics) that the NDA may well have expired (at least in part) given that the software is now in the public domain

Again, it depends on what you are signing up for. An NDA can be for life (not just for christmas) but can cover many things, for instance, transfer to a rival software house.

[jivebunny]

In software houses that I have been involved in, the recent trend has generally been for an NDA to be complete, and nothing shall be disclosed before, during or after any program of development.

The NDAs I'm asked to sign through work are the same. IIRC the publicly-available NDA which RSC required you to read and agree to when applying to be part of the beta program stated very clearly that you were not to talk about, or even disclose that you were part of, the beta team either before, during or after the event.

Now unless nnndoh's been given a completely different NDA to everyone else, it would seem to be a pretty flagrant breach...

JB

[Darpor]

The NDAs I'm asked to sign through work are the same. IIRC the publicly-available NDA which RSC required you to read and agree to when applying to be part of the beta program stated very clearly that you were not to talk about, or even disclose that you were part of, the beta team either before, during or after the event.

Now unless nnndoh's been given a completely different NDA to everyone else, it would seem to be a pretty flagrant breach...

JB

To be honest, I didn't see the required and read part. However, given that he hasn't provided anything sensitive other than revealing participation on the program, I cannot see any action taken other than being "surplus to requirements" in any future program.

Nothing is excused by that though if you have signed up to what can be regarded as a "complete" NDA.

[jivebunny]

Yeah, I'd imagine minor breaches like this and the dozen or so cases of users posting about the beta on RSC's facebook page will simply result in a prompt sacking from the beta program rather than any legal action. That is of course unless they want to make an example of someone, something which might actually be worth doing considering the number of people who seem to think that accepting a Nondisclosure Agreement is as legally-binding as saying "maybe" to a staff night out...

The breaches on Facebook were beyond belief... where better to openly ignore an NDA than by writing about the beta on the developer's own social media page?