To add a framework search directory, try:

Code:

-F/Library/Frameworks/

Like -framework, it probably needs to be in both LDFLAGS and CFLAGS.

Rather than

Code:

LIB_SDL_image_CFLAGS='-I/Library/Frameworks/SDL_image.framework/Headers'

I believe you're supposed to use

Code:

LIB_SDL_image_CFLAGS='-framework SDL_image'

That missing symbol is from SDL_Image - do you have that installed?

That is quite a coincidence that only those who don't share your opinions are the toxic ones.

I'm pretty sure it's not a coincidence, sadly. I started out relatively neutral on this situation. I was even mildly excited about Star Control: Origins. But then all this stuff happened and, well...

Joking aside yes I can be a bit brash and accusative. Sorry if I came off as toxic. I'll try to be better in the future.

While I am sided with Stardock I don't think it should mean that I'm your "enemy" or anything. I love you guys.
All of you helped me become the UQM modder I am today and the MegaMod wouldn't have existed without you.

I may be confused at how you can side with Stardock, but I guess it's the conclusion you've come to at least for the time being, and with incomplete information I can't really fault you for it too much. An apology and promise to try better means a lot, in any case.

Frankly, from my perspective, the only people in this thread (other than the one who was banned) who seem to be making this discussion toxic and unpleasant are you and Serosis. It strikes me as awfully strange that all three people lean toward Stardock's side rather than P&F's side.

Oh, and I find it ironic that you originally popped into this thread because you spotted someone accusing you of dishonesty without proof (the stealing thing or whatever), yet you don't see the problem with accusing your opponents of dishonesty without proof (paying people to support them while posing as neutral).

I can't believe you seriously believe that using the same name wouldn't be a consideration in determining whether it's copyright infringement. The name is part of the whole, after all. It's not a trademark (despite what you seem to think), it's a part of the expression of what we know to be the Ariloulaleelay. Sure, if you used the name Ariloulaleelay to refer to (for example) a giant mammoth-like species, there's no problem there - it's just the name, no other similarity. But using the name Ariloulaleelay to refer to little green men is an obviously higher degree of similarity. I don't know if it's enough to be considered infringement, but I do think you'd have to be pretty stupid to just dismiss that possibility out of hand.

Is there actually a jury deciding this case in the end, that may be swayed by this stuff?

My understanding is that, when a jury is selected, they specifically try to get people who don't know anything about the case, to avoid bias due to emotional investment. I don't know whether this case would be decided by jury, but if it is, they probably won't be swayed by this stuff.

However, I don't see that they claim to have created every single thing themselves in the first place, and it's uncommon for a creator to claim they did every piece of dirty work. They were in charge of making most of the decisions, wrote most of the story, and were generally trusted with all of creative content by the Accolade staff, much like how a creator employed by a network would be trusted with creating a TV series. Even if they didn't physically make everything themselves, which rarely happens except with indie projects, they are responsible for shaping the original game into what it was, so it still makes sense that they are the original creators of the game.

I think you're fundamentally misunderstanding the relationship between Toys for Bob (aka Paul and Fred) and Accolade. From what I understand, TfB was the game studio, owned by P&F, meaning that P&F had control over creative content not by the grace of Accolade but because they had the top position in the company. Accolade, then, is the publisher, who licensed the game from TfB in order to sell it. It's more a contract between equals rather than an employer-employee type of contract.

This is all non-rigorous and taken from memory, so it's likely wrong in some details, at the very least, but I'm pretty sure that the broad strokes are correct. Of course, I'm not a lawyer.

SomeMost people take it out of hand as an excuse to troll which I think is what the fear was.

FYT

SJW is one of those meaningless insults that reveals you more about the person hurling it than the person it's being hurled against.

This.

@CelticMinstrel
No I'm not here trolling.  I'm calling those who are being Social Justice Warriors and the cult they indoctrinate the trolls.

For someone who claims not to be trolling, you're sure doing an amazing job of trying to convince me that you are trolling.

Granted, the remainder of your post sounds pretty reasonable, but your choice of SJW here is still suspicious.

Pyro411, I don't recall any activity on this forum which could be even loosely seen as SJW-related recently (unless you consider Zanthius' tracts to be SJW, which would be a stretch), let alone SJW-based trolling. I recognize that SJW trolling is a thing, but if you think it's a problem around here, I think your troll-detection and SJW-relatedness routines need to be recalibrated. Bringing it up is muddying the waters. If you have a specific instance of trolling to mention, feel free to do so in an appropriate place, e.g. in response to it, or use the report button on the post. Whether it's SJW-like or not will not be relevant to its treatment as trolling. If you don't actually have any specific posts in mind and just wish to suggest that there sure is a lot of SJW trolling around here without being able to point to any… well, the last user who persisted in doing something a little bit like that ceased to be a user.

In my experience, SJW-related trolling consists of jerks calling people who dislike them or their views SJWs as an insult. I don't recall seeing any self-identified SJWs, let alone ones who engage in trolling. So from that perspective, simply mentioning the term SJW is a good sign that someone is likely a troll.

But no, we got CommanderShepard trying to organize "friendly" review bombs and finding ways to hurt another game because he's butt-hurt over a legal dispute that's not connected to him.

It seems like you're forgetting that I didn't make this dispute up, it's Fred and Paul that raised concerns, possibly warranted. I'm inclined to support them if UQM is attacked, but it seems Stardock is only interested in the SC title, not UQM, so these forums are free to retain the UQM title and make a UQM fan version. Given that F&P have access to UQM, I am wondering why they want to raise a dispute over the SC title, but it could be they don't want conflicting storylines as they've probably spent a lot of time thinking about them.

Excuse me? You've misattributed that quote to me. It was Serosis who said that.

My desire for CommanderShepard to simply STFU is a selfish one.

Oh don't worry, I feel the same about you.

Ah, in that case I wouldn't have a problem with it; if I were playing in HD I'd want the larger resolution anyway.

*sigh* ahh where to start, so the Trolls / Social Justice Warriors / etc have come out of the woodwork even more...

This instantly predisposes me to believe you're the troll. People who speak of "social justice warriors" are usually people who are sick of getting called out on their trash opinions or actions. I can't be certain that you're one of those people, but...

As for Serosis, every time I see you pop into this thread I think, why? If you don't like discussions of the legal situation, why can't you just ignore this thread?

I think personally I'd prefer 640x480; 320x240 is really, really tiny. Do you really need to keep the 320x240 resolution?

Might be interested in trying this sometime, if I can get past the fact that filedropper seems to want cookies in exchange for the download.