ARMA III & Steam WORKSHOP

[gammadust 12]

What is meant by simple is classifiable general behaviours... as opposed to a case for every instance of everything. As in, in the case that absolute means time and space dependent vs. human scale.

The rest of it, I don't know what you're talking about. I believe you are over-complicating what I said.

I was just prompted by the initial logical fallacy of proving a negative as you well pointed out, while disagreeing a supposed relation of that with "science"... despite my over-complicating rambling that followed, the point for the case at hand was indeed the same, ie. modders not having the requirement to prove any wise. Sory if i looked too pendantic, but i do like to part away for more abstract discussions, i let my self carry away. :)

[gammadust 12]

I would like to leave a suggestion mainly to the modders that would not otherwise use SteamWorkshop.

Has an authorship placeholder, to prevent impostors taking the light, release a limited version of the mod to Steamworkshop. As limited as the features you don't want to surrender to valve's terms.

A modeler could limit lod and texture resolution, a mission maker/feature scripter could limit certain functionality (ie config dialog, disallow customization, etc.)

This so far is the best idea i have to deal with valve's current legal grab. It imposes some uncalled action on our part but i rather that than cry later.

[[aps]gnat 28]

You are all making this way too abstract. What it boils down to is this: Dayglow says Valve first has to take someones content and profit from it before addon makers should be cautious, and everyone else says that evidence is either unavailable, or does not matter since they don't want to take the risk of being the first to suffer from it/don't want to sign something that is unreasonable in any case, wether used or not.

Nice summary ;)

Has an authorship placeholder, to prevent impostors taking the light, release a limited version of the mod to Steamworkshop. As limited as the features you don't want to surrender to valve's terms.

A modeler could limit lod and texture resolution, a mission maker/feature scripter could limit certain functionality (ie config dialog, disallow customization, etc.). ....

Crippleware? Why bother? It's easier to just avoid it and not have to make 2 versions. Plus that would just produce bad user experiences.

.... and theres still an interpretation risk that the addon maker is not permitted to update, improve and modify that specific addon because an early release version was placed with SWS already !

I can't see Valve accepting you giving your 3 wheel car to SWS, copy it, add an extra wheel and then call it a "different" car, taking back ownership.

[kireta21 13]

Why would modder do same job twice? Besides Valve's "legal grab" is not as important problem* as weekend modders downloading mod from armaholic, changing it and uploading to Workshop under different name as their own.

Hmm, can ArmA2's .pbo's be password locked or encrypted complete with hash check? Never felt like I need this, but I do remember I couldn't open some mods with standard tools.

* Just don't use Workshop. As simple as it sounds. I mean, WHY would they even use it? What can they possibly gain from using such crude service? Anyone with at least half of brain should be able to figure out how to use in-game mod mannager.

[gammadust 12]

No doubt gnat... it occured to me but hadn't deeply seen what it comes from it. End-user would ultimately be the one more negatively affected by it.

@boota

Not using the workshop is what i intended since knowing about it's license. The problem is the modder in general can't simply ignore it due to it's comparatively expected higher audience, exposure and ease of use. So an impostor stealing work and using Armaholic and others to distribute would have much contained consequences (this putting aside how supervised those platforms are).

I have to admit it is a very precarious non-solution. I really don't know what to think of it.

It is valve that raises the issue, they are the ones leaving modders in the worse of all places possible.

[PuFu 4600]

Hmm, can ArmA2's .pbo's be password locked or encrypted complete with hash check? Never felt like I need this, but I do remember I couldn't open some mods with standard tools.

BI can, modders can't.

btw, you shouldn't be pocking around other people's work :)

@boota

Not using the workshop is what i intended since knowing about it's license. The problem is the modder in general can't simply ignore it due to it's comparatively expected higher audience, exposure and ease of use. So an impostor stealing work and using Armaholic and others to distribute would have much contained consequences (this putting aside how supervised those platforms are).

I am sure one CAN. Especially since there are alternatives.

Between reach and IP, any sane should choose IP.

I have to admit it is a very precarious non-solution. I really don't know what to think of it.

I would say it is a very simple decission in its current form.

It is valve that raises the issue, they are the ones leaving modders in the worse of all places possible.

I am pretty sure valve doesn't think that way.

[max power 21]

I am pretty sure valve doesn't think that way.

Yeah, no doubt that's not their intention. They probably have considered certain situations that they must prevent for Workshop to function properly while minimizing their liability, plus are paving the way for something that may or may not happen in the future: i.e., some mod blows up like counter strike did.

[tremanarch 6]

guys if you really have a good mod idea, they steal it anyway.. warz - dayz..

they dont need the actual files, they need the meta game idea -and of course they wanna know if it is a success (you - we - do the whole work of testing out game ideas in the community and reshaping it to the final popular form - thats the big thing, not the coder that needs 2 weeks to code stuff), they want to built their own bugged copy anyway.

all you made they can see in youtube videos and survey the popularity with their steamworks / steam software.

so what you gonna do? you cant really hide. if you have something good - go fight for it, like dean hall did and is doing. and i am sure he will deliver a such better product!

do you really think big companies need your files to copy mod ideas? what they really need is the knowledge of what do we gamer like and what not.

Edited April 3, 2013 by tremanarch

[max power 21]

guys if you really have a good mod idea, they steal it anyway.. warz - dayz..

they dont need the actual files, they need the meta game idea -and of course they wanna know if it is a success, they want to built their own bugged copy anyway.

Most people who make content for this game don't make fully blow TC mods with a totally different premise / gameplay / etc anyways.

You make a good point tho. We couldn't for so many reasons under this EULA, but what happens if we upload CWR2? And we thought the copyright stuff around OFP was complicated now!

[tremanarch 6]

I really dont know. I see both sides:

on the one hand the modder that doesnt want to have his ideas and credits stolen, and also doesnt want to deal with endless grey legal stuff. ANd also doesnt want to care much about secondary stuff like how to share his mod with others.

but I also see Steam and BIS on the other hand, they want to make the modding parts more easy accessible for "Public" gamers (you know what I mean) - but they dont want to read newspaper like: ArmA the nazi game showing some strange mod with nazi stuff, you know? (or whatever ill stuff random people can come up with - they must secure their platform in every possible case) therefore I guess they must have the right to delete change stuff and dont want to play that risky.

But how can this come together?

Maybe it doesnt. And if BIS wants to attract new gamers with those cool shiny tools, they have to invent their own ACRE / their own ACE and will always be behind, because there will always be that cool mod that is new and shining.

In the long run, BIS could rework the engine. Why not make installing mods even more easy. SO we can install just all mods, they have a file table and stuff that arma itself know which mod requires what other mods, and interferes with what other mods, and the engine should activate / deactivate Mods at runtime automatically according to a open table where modders can input that info about their mods and even update it whenever they like, so we wont have to switch out of the game to join another server. (essentially the same as steamworks but without being steamworks and having that legal stuff going on ;) ). Maybe producing and maintaining such a Modding Platform/Sharing/Using-function inside ArmA independently isnt possible for such a little company?

I for myself dont dislike the actual method using PWS (for server hopping) and manual for my standard server, I am not a great server hopper anyway that plays 20 minutes Dayz, then 30 minutes ACRE tactical. etc.. (i play mostly on our server, and the mods we install we just install - no biggie anyway -and if you like to have more than one "mod-Profile" just make more shortcuts?!

- Buuut the common "gamer-Crowd" is ...... no I dont say it out loud. Maybe its a mistake to attract them? no I must not argue in that direction - any possible attention that BIS games are getting is so well deserved - and the game itself might even be teaching the crowd to be better gamers one day!)

btw. how does BLizzard do it with Starcraft 2 and their maps? There are pretty inventive things going on far from just adding a simple map, its adding new gaming modes, even new graphics. The modding scene there is also pretty active. I am no lawyer but if anyone could have a look into their lega EULA whatever stuff?

Didnt DOTA also come from a single mod in Warcraft and is now a complete stand alone game - alongside LOL wich is kind of the same thing? Did they steal the actual files? Or did they just copy the idea - the meta game - cause they saw how popular it was. I really dont know that - its no rhetorical question.

Edited April 4, 2013 by tremanarch

[gammadust 12]

I am sure one CAN. Especially since there are alternatives.

Between reach and IP, any sane should choose IP.

I was insuficient in my explaining: i am not merely saying the modder can't ignore it because of fear of losing the high reach SWS would provide. I am saying that:

since an impostor will have higher reach than a SWS non-user modder, his IP is in higher danger of being lost. With little to no means to claim it back.

And this is why it makes it harder do take a suitable decision between use or not use SWS. You get in trouble both ways, one is sure trouble the other is just a possibility but very real at that.

I am pretty sure valve doesn't think that way.

Of course. That is what i suspect and saddens me at the same time, since it reveals their apparent neglect for the modders interest, which otoh they feel so cosy with (about 75% cosy)

Look i've listened to Gabe's talk about his vision about this... And i really admit i got captivated by it, but the way it is being lead into practice comes to a really unbalanced deal towards modders. TF2 experience with trading of hats is all fine and dandy, but we're not talking about mere hats here.

EDIT: to add that i may have sounded a bit materialistc back there, but what really worries me on top of it is the IP, someone said in this topic that modders don't earn the monies, they earn credit. It is mostly the latter at stake here.

One thing i would see as a positive step on the part of valve is feel itself more responsible by what is uploaded. Be prompt in action when some thing is reported, have a formalized way of solving IP disputes... etc etc.

They are simply leaving you out in the cold, the way it is working currently.

Edited April 4, 2013 by gammadust
moved edit to new post

[gammadust 12]

For better context, this was Gabe's talk i refered (30 mins in on f2p model, and value and economy creation afterwards, the meat is from 42m forward)

Gabe at 48m05s, after recognizing the real value added by modders:

... as i said before one of the things we have to do is come through this notion of authorship. If i build a texture and somebody builds it into a model, or somebody takes that model and builds it into a level, and/or somebody else sells that level to a customer, whatever revenue share that i should get, depending upon what are the terms that i've provided to other people's (inaudible), all that has to be tracked and accounted for.

So from the get go there is concern in making the platform fair, and i believe this is Jason Holtman's department, but i don't think valve has delved deeper into the subtleties the platform brings.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

I was insuficient in my explaining: i am not merely saying the modder can't ignore it because of fear of losing the high reach SWS would provide. I am saying that:

since an impostor will have higher reach than a SWS non-user modder, his IP is in higher danger of being lost. With little to no means to claim it back.

And this is why it makes it harder do take a suitable decision between use or not use SWS. You get in trouble both ways, one is sure trouble the other is just a possibility but very real at that..

Well I see that just makes the decision easier. I may only be speaking for myself here but reach has never been an issue for me because the motivation has always been about giving back to the community that has always fostered so much creativity. Sure the occasional nod of recognition is nice but I have no doubt the intended recipients of my work know where to find it if they want it.

[seamusgod 1]

guys if you really have a good mod idea, they steal it anyway.. warz - dayz..

they dont need the actual files, they need the meta game idea -and of course they wanna know if it is a success (you - we - do the whole work of testing out game ideas in the community and reshaping it to the final popular form - thats the big thing, not the coder that needs 2 weeks to code stuff), they want to built their own bugged copy anyway.

all you made they can see in youtube videos and survey the popularity with their steamworks / steam software.

so what you gonna do? you cant really hide. if you have something good - go fight for it, like dean hall did and is doing. and i am sure he will deliver a such better product!

do you really think big companies need your files to copy mod ideas? what they really need is the knowledge of what do we gamer like and what not.

i agree, the fear about valve taking your work is unfounded i think. and i don't think they'd risk the negative reputation of taking a modder's work without explicit permission.

but i think the real problem can be seen very easily just by going to some of the workshops, plenty of files uploaded with "wrong" credits. i personally have no problem with credits, maybe it's because i don't release my work, but i can understand how some people, specifically those who spend 10+ hours on a mod, would have a moral or ethical objection to seeing their work appear under someone else's name.

[Messiah 2]

10+ hours on a mod

+10 hours on a mod doesn't even get you off the drawing board. Try a few hundred, if not into the thousands.

[chortles 263]

More specifically, the issue was that any legal CYA for Valve to "take your work" is too much for the modders to accept (this is separate from the uploaders who of course wouldn't have rights to it as far as Valve is concerned either), and the view that Steam Workshop isn't well-moderated unlike community Web sites and has a much wider reach for "non-community" distribution. (This last bit is important since takedowns/bans can limit a mod's spread on community sites by forcing a "stolen mod" to be hosted elsewhere, possibly more obscure.)

[max power 21]

+10 hours on a mod doesn't even get you off the drawing board. Try a few hundred, if not into the thousands.

It's the truth, kids.

[specta3 1]

I hope it does come to the steam workshop hope the mod makers Bis and steam can work it out .Nothing worse than messing around with complicated mods are finding you cant join a number of servers because your missing x y z mod.Anything that gets more people playing the game has to be good for the future of the game and BIS.

[nodunit 397]

+10 hours on a mod doesn't even get you off the drawing board. Try a few hundred, if not into the thousands.

Yep, +10 hours to a whole day is just the thought process and management planning, and if you're smart, fallback plan x.x

I hope it does come to the steam workshop hope the mod makers Bis and steam can work it out .Nothing worse than messing around with complicated mods are finding you cant join a number of servers because your missing x y z mod.Anything that gets more people playing the game has to be good for the future of the game and BIS.

More likely there are going to be "steam watcher" groups formed to keep tabs should the workshop come into the equation, filing mass complaints and black listing any users who upload content without permissions.

Edited April 8, 2013 by NodUnit

[seamusgod 1]

+10 hours on a mod doesn't even get you off the drawing board. Try a few hundred, if not into the thousands.

no, that's be self flattery, and would be bad. the type of mod you're talking about wouldn't be an independent project anyway, it'd be a team effort.

[Binkowski 26]

no, that's be self flattery, and would be bad. the type of mod you're talking about wouldn't be an independent project anyway, it'd be a team effort.

Coming from the same guy who makes false claims and says I'm going "use" my friends models... tsk tsk. Your statement here, is false.

[max power 21]

no, that's be self flattery, and would be bad. the type of mod you're talking about wouldn't be an independent project anyway, it'd be a team effort.

My helicopter was made by me and only me, and it took 1.5 years to complete.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

no, that's be self flattery, and would be bad. the type of mod you're talking about wouldn't be an independent project anyway, it'd be a team effort.

Say what? Even with the kick start from Eric-M and Rock my Mi-24A was still 100's of hrs in the making by myself. Not to metion hundreds of hrs spent over a few years gathering research material. And if I wanted to gloat I'd prefer to talk down the hours and make myself look more efficient.

10 hrs may get you 1 reletively simple map object if you know what your doing and dont run into too many issues.

Your claim sir is preposterous

[STALKERGB 6]

Bit late to this whole discussion but still...

Personally I won't be using Steam Workshop in it's current form if I released anything for Arma 3. Most of the reasons have already been discussed by Rock et al. On top of that though, I don't have a whole lot of time to devote to modding these days. The last thing I'd want is having to waste time trying to get a mod removed from SWS because someone else has uploaded it without my permission.

On top of that, with the current SWS setup, what would happen if you uploaded a model that used part of a BIS sample? Would you be "giving away" their own IP by uploading it?

[Messiah 2]

no, that's be self flattery, and would be bad. the type of mod you're talking about wouldn't be an independent project anyway, it'd be a team effort.

Clueless. I spent 10 hours texturing a wheel, one single wheel, for one model. The Foxhound I'm working on is one year in the making and has only just gotten in game.