ARMA III & Steam WORKSHOP

[johncage 30]

Steam workshop seems to be thriving for Skyrim. Has Valve/Bestheda taken stuff without credit to the mod makers? Or is this the usual fear for fears sake?

yes. see counter strike(jk). but seriously, that's not even a concern.

the real issue, in context of arma 3, is probably lack of regulation. 90 percent of custom content in skyrim(and most bethesda games, and valve games for that matter, are ripped from some other games, often without permission(one exception was witcher 2, which the devs gave permission for use of their content), steamwork does not regulate these transactions nor monitor them.

[ProfTournesol 956]

yes. see counter strike(jk). but seriously, that's not even a concern.

the real issue, in context of arma 3, is probably lack of regulation. 90 percent of custom content in skyrim(and most bethesda games, and valve games for that matter, are ripped from some other games, often without permission(one exception was witcher 2, which the devs gave permission for use of their content), steamwork does not regulate these transactions nor monitor them.

But if BIS does, as Dwarden says...

[rksl-rock 1301]

Isn't there a similar clause in the BI tools like O2? Anything you import using their tools is technically the property of BIS at that point.

No its a myth. Both Marek and Placebo have made clear statements about it previously.

The wording relates to the O2 program and scripts of that program. The only line that affects the use of user made IP is part of clause 3.4 of the O2 license:

(iv) Commercially exploit or allow a 3rd party commercially exploit game content you created using the Software, including but not limited to use by military organizations for computer aided training or commercially released game content;

Basically we cannot commercial exploit anything we make with O2, Visitor etc without a waiver in writing from BIS.

---------- Post added at 19:54 ---------- Previous post was at 19:50 ----------

Either way, they wouldn't do such a thing if the content is created for someone else's game. For starters the people who's game it's a mod for would likely sue them anyway considering the fact there are VERY similar clauses written into mod tools for pretty much everything stating they own the content if you use their tools to import it into the game, just like BIS' tools have.

Please post the section of the BIS EULA that states this.

As usual with the internet, it's much ado about nothing.

I disagree. If you make content then it is important. If you don't then...

[kdjac 19]

Can understand the modders fears on this, but the workshop is quite excellent.

Steam have a decent handle on mods with issues, mostly the games community spot it and its gone very quickly. But thats in the paid sense TF2

Workshop works on a free and sale basis, i think it would stupid of BIS not to take advantage of using this.

Altho horse armour would suck.

[icewindo 29]

yes. see counter strike(jk). but seriously, that's not even a concern.

the real issue, in context of arma 3, is probably lack of regulation. 90 percent of custom content in skyrim(and most bethesda games, and valve games for that matter, are ripped from some other games, often without permission(one exception was witcher 2, which the devs gave permission for use of their content), steamwork does not regulate these transactions nor monitor them.

Abit OT, but was this witcher2 permission posted anywhere officially and is this restricted to skyrim or individual requests? I know about GSC's permission to use stalker assets and I've done so in the past but if CD Project gave a permission, this sounds intriguing to me.

From I gather in this mod I can't see that though, the credits in there sound like a typical ripper work and there's no talk about cd project allowing this:

http://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/5588

--

As for Steam Workshop, I didn't know about that license details. I don't think this would work with BIS without a license change as BIS has their own license details etc. and the Steam license would override some of those details (atleast for the sample models).

Edited March 10, 2013 by Icewindo

[johncage 30]

witcher 2 permission was given by cpdr staff at their own forum. i was there to witness it, but don't remember the address anymore. i think they realized they weren't going to stop anyone from ripping their models.

[BinaryCode64 1]

Deleted

Edited March 15, 2013 by BinaryCode64

[chortles 263]

Can't anyone just go on armaholic and 'steal' (more like 'make a copyright infringement') from there too right?

But I don't remember if I ever signed a EULA for a mod... ever... so its perfectly legal to do that right?

To my knowledge there isn't much of anything at a software level (may vary by the mod) that actually prevents theft, it's simply "deterrent value from risk of being called out, having mod taken down, being deemed persona non grata and a thief" and the concern is that this deterrent capability will not be present should mods end up on Steam Workshop.

[NeMeSiS 11]

To my knowledge there isn't much of anything at a software level (may vary by the mod) that actually prevents theft, it's simply "deterrent value from risk of being called out, having mod taken down, being deemed persona non grata and a thief" and the concern is that this deterrent capability will not be present should mods end up on Steam Workshop.

And of course the fact that when you upload something to steamworks Valve is in theory pretty much allowed to do whatever they want with it(See the license agreement posted here a couple of times), armaholic wont.

[jsmuk 13]

I'm not getting this...

Some mod creators are scared that other people will use parts of a mod for other purposes (possible commercial purposes) that they didn't intend it for?

If that is the case why don't the modders create a end-user license agreement to use the mods? Or is this not possible in steam workshops?

Can't anyone just go on armaholic and 'steal' (more like 'make a copyright infringement') from there too right?

But I don't remember if I ever signed a EULA for a mod... ever... so its perfectly legal to do that right?

My last question is:

Does it really matter? I see modders and open-source programmers as people who find joy in helping and creating something that they care about. Do you want to share that thing you created with everyone OR do you want to share it and get credit for it? Because if you do want credit for it (which is fine) then a EULA is a must.

The problem is that Person A could create something that they do not want on Workshop (for any reason) and then Person B uploads it (or part of it) and valve licence it (as they can do) in the end Person A has had their IP exploited.

Also I heard that the agreement conflicts with the GPL, but I never followed that one up.

[panimala 25]

I'm simply asking is there a history of Valve taking content from people making mods to actually raise this concern? Or is this along the lines of the argument against Steam because they can shut down all your games for no reason if they wish, even though it hasn't ever happened?

You raise a fair point. If Valve would have done anything like this then surely it would have backfired dramatically. But then again I don't see the point nor do I like how the terms are formulated right now.

Despite this I am looking forward towards a solution implementing Steam Workshop so me and my community don't have to use memory leaking mod managers.

[byrgesen 1]

Just stick with Play withSIX & Armaholic tbh. Theres no need for the workshop and it would be a nightmare to add several different mods to your client and starting them at different times, depending on the map. At least the way it is now. You would have to install and uninstall mods all the time or disable and enable them conteniously, (think skyrim) as theres no way to save multible configurations like with Play withSIX or through manual implementation.

Alone that fact makes me not want to use it at all, at least untill the workshop has been changed around to fit arma correctly.

It would also make it ALOT easier to govern "mod theives", if Valve never gets a peice of the modding pie.

[Placebo 29]

What's far more important than what Steamworks will or won't allow is what you as a community and we as a company will or won't allow.

[dayglow 2]

Just stick with Play withSIX & Armaholic tbh. Theres no need for the workshop and it would be a nightmare to add several different mods to your client and starting them at different times, depending on the map. At least the way it is now. You would have to install and uninstall mods all the time or disable and enable them conteniously, (think skyrim) as theres no way to save multible configurations like with Play withSIX or through manual implementation.

Alone that fact makes me not want to use it at all, at least untill the workshop has been changed around to fit arma correctly.

It would also make it ALOT easier to govern "mod theives", if Valve never gets a peice of the modding pie.

Some people have no problem with the added complexity of a different launcher, but I know some people that I play coop with that had enough of a hassle to get combined arms to work through steam that trying to get them to use mods was a nightmare. A simple 1 step process is all that some want. Steam Workshop is the answer for them. It won't be the only source of mods, but it will be the most simple.

[byrgesen 1]

Some people have no problem with the added complexity of a different launcher, but I know some people that I play coop with that had enough of a hassle to get combined arms to work through steam that trying to get them to use mods was a nightmare. A simple 1 step process is all that some want. Steam Workshop is the answer for them. It won't be the only source of mods, but it will be the most simple.

I see your point, but if it has the possibility to hurt the modding community in any way, its a no go tbh. Thats more important then easy acces.

And for your friends it wont help much, unless the workshop is changed around so it can save multible configs or they stick to the same server.

I dont think your friends would like to have to disable or enable mods every single time they launch the game, insted of just having a launcher (SIX) to download all mods and launch em when needed.

Im having abit trouble seeing how workshop is easier then SIX, when it comes to using several mods. Sure if you only ever play on 1 server and they dont change mods alot workshop would proberly work ok.

Its just not good enough to use for arma modding, coz its not costumizable in any way, when it comes to "what to launch". You have to choose addons at every single launch, like with SIX, but in SIX you can find a server without launching the game, therefor saving time and making it alot more flexible.

I believe SIX is better and after 10 mins of looking around, almost as easy to figure out as steam tbh.

Dont get me wrong, i like workshop for tons of other games, but giving valve rights to the mods "just like that", because it has to be a little bit easier, seems like an unfair trade :(

[dayglow 2]

We only really play coop together on our own servers, so yes easy of access is a priority for them. We aren't a hardcore gamer group. We found each other way back in the day flying Il2. One guy gave up because of the hassle of trying to get Stram to run combined ops. We play for a few hours every few weekends, so people aren't going to waste a couple hours trying to figure out mods and setting up different front ends to run them. It's never been a issue for me, but not every person wants to do it. There is a large portion of the potential audience that wants plug and play.

Arma is gaining in popularity and more and more people are noticing it. I'm sure BIS would love to see sales that approach Skyrim on the PC, but for that to happen accessibility has to be easier. I know some of the hardcore diehards here don't like the idea of increased accessibility, but as it gains in popularity it has to happen. I see this attitude in the flight sim community and I see it here. There is some sense of superiority that people seem to get because they can configure the game, master clunky controls, etc. All I know is that my experience with the less hardcore gamers Arma is seen as a niche game because of the complexity in configuring it.

Steam Workshop simply would be the entry level into the world of modding. TES Nexus hasn't gone away because of the Workshop and neither would Six or Amaholic. The Workshop would simply be the gateway into custom gaming and as people explore that world they would find deeper and more complex tools to suite they're needs.

Again, what evidence do we have that valve is going to do anything untoward with a mod? I mean if there is any example is that when a mod is extremely popular it gets the support to become an independent game. I have seen valve support the mod community with their own products and talented modders break into the industry. Why would all of a sudden Arma mods get exploited?

Edited March 11, 2013 by DayGlow

[chortles 263]

This "better because it's inaccessible and makes us feel better for being the select" feels like wanting to feel special. :rolleyes: I think that BI has already been all aboard the "increased accessibility" thread no matter how much the diehards disagree (just see the "Better animations?" thread) though.

Again, DayGlow, the concern seems to generally be IP rights, but again:

What's far more important than what Steamworks will or won't allow is what you as a community and we as a company will or won't allow.

[AmmokK 1]

I would like workshop support as well, at least from the end user part. Makes things much easier.

Addons go where they need to be, no reason to move, copy, whatever your things around.

But a little question about what i read:

Someone "steals" content from a community made addon for use in their own mod and uploads it to Steam Workshop as their own work.

Someone collects a group of addons together (without editing them) and uploads 'his collection' to Steam Workshop

Someone steals models from another commercial game (COD/MOH etc) and uploads it to Steam Workshop as their own work.

So these arguements are brought up against the workshop. But, what does prevent people from doing that if downloaded from any other source as well?

I can go to armaholic, DL some stuff there and make my own collection as well. Don´t see that as a downside of Steams workshop. It´s rather an advantage because if everything is gathered in one place, such things are realised much faster!

[rksl-rock 1301]

I would like workshop support as well, at least from the end user part. Makes things much easier.

Addons go where they need to be, no reason to move, copy, whatever your things around.

Oh its definitely much easier for the end user. No faffing with zip files etc. I dont think anyone is claiming otherwise.

So these arguements are brought up against the workshop. But, what does prevent people from doing that if downloaded from any other source as well?

I can go to armaholic, DL some stuff there and make my own collection as well. Don´t see that as a downside of Steams workshop. It´s rather an advantage because if everything is gathered in one place, such things are realised much faster!

You are missing the point. Its the license that is the main issue.

By uploading anything to Workshop you agree to a license that gives Valve irrevocable permission to do anything they want with that content.

Secondary to that is that if someone who is not the author uploads content to Workshop they are agreeing to something that they do not own and have no legal right to do. You could say it's the online equivalent on you taking my car and giving it to someone else to use. You don't own it. You have no right to lend it to anyone. So the third issue in all of this is how do I get it back?

By uploading to ArmAholic or any other community website the author retains all his rights. And there is a community "rule" that means content like this gets taken down by Site owners and moderators.

If you take a proper look into other Game communities there is a steady stream of cases of "illegal uploading/porting etc of content onto Workshop. For some people it's proving very difficult to get it removed. So its something to be concerned about if you are an addon maker/author that is.

[AmmokK 1]

Hm okay, makes sense.

Yet, another question rises: Why care? You are making addons for everyone for free, you don´t gain anything by it, except some level of worshipping by some, of course. So, let´s say User x stole your work Y. Developer Z thinks "Wow, we should hire that dude, he rocks!". The only thing that will happen is they realise he/she isn´t the real developer and start looking for the real one.

However, this will maybe happen in 0,01% of the cases. In about every other case, someone else gets credit. Sure, it sucks but then again: What is your loss?

Don´t be mad, i just try to understand the issue.

[metalcraze 290]

The main problem with Steam Workshop is not even its EULA but it being utterly useless and the only thing it can be used for is downloading mods from within steam client.

Because

It cannot help you join servers and get their mods (esp. when server owners have their own mod list with mods modified and signed by themselves - which they do for increased security like UO)

It doesn't support mod profiles (so enjoy constantly disabling and enabling mods by hand from within the game to join some server)

It's incapable of installing mods where you want them - get ready for 100 separate mod folders.

[rksl-rock 1301]

Hm okay, makes sense.

Yet, another question rises: Why care? You are making addons for everyone for free, you don´t gain anything by it, except some level of worshipping by some, of course.

I am making addons for me. Not for you. I choose to publish them because I like sharing with mates that I play with. So publishing "officially" is really the only way I get to keep control of my own addons and IP.

And trust me for every second of "worship" you get in this community you get a week's worth of abuse as well.

So, let´s say User x stole your work Y. Developer Z thinks "Wow, we should hire that dude, he rocks!". The only thing that will happen is they realise he/she isn´t the real developer and start looking for the real one.

However, this will maybe happen in 0,01% of the cases. In about every other case, someone else gets credit. Sure, it sucks but then again: What is your loss?

Again you really are missing the point.

For example, consider my RKSL Eurofighter. Originally started in 2009. Its taken hundreds of hours of development. The HUD and MFD setup in the latest version represents over 150 hours of trial and error work to learn the config drawing system. The cockpit in the V3 model already stands me at over 80 hours. The weapons setup and proxy configs, easily over a 100 hours. The point of this is to establish my investment in time and effort. I made it. For someone else to claim it as their own is insulting.

Now when "User X" uploads my addon to Steam Workshop and agrees to their license. They are giving Valve the right to make money from my 1000+ hour long investment without my consent. They can take any model, texture, sound or concept I developed and make money from it without paying me or anyone else. And if the Skyrim community are to be believed without credit. Simply because some pimply little moron in his mother's basement wants to make it easier for his nose picking, mouth breathing kiddie friends to download addons.

His actions would mean I lose the right to protect my hard work and IP. And if that happens I wont be releasing much new content. Nor, I imagine will a number of other teams. Not publicly anyway.

Its been said previously that "If you are worried about IP theft then don't release". Its valid point of view I'll grant you. But that attitude hasn't helped the community. A lot of people have heard that little bit of advice and decided not to publicly release anymore. You may not have noticed, being as you only registered this week, but there are less and less new addons out there now that use genuinely new models and content. But a lot of reskins and old recycled stuff from the last 10 years. Join the right community and you will see a lot of new original content made for just private groups that never see a public release.

People are concerned about this sort of thing even if you aren't. Unchecked it will eventually affect you and this community. Fortunately BIS (See Placebo and Dwarden's comments) are promising to take the same stance with Workshop ( if it is implemented in ArmA3) as they do with the existing community setup.

Don´t be mad, i just try to understand the issue.

LOL and don't be mad if i think you are just trying to bait me. But at least you can't say you don't know where we're coming from.

Edited March 15, 2013 by RKSL-Rock
added a don't

[Zickefoose 1]

I am making addons for me. Not for you. I choose to publish them because I like sharing with mates that I play with. So publishing "officially" is really the only way I get to keep control of my own addons and IP.

And trust me for every second of "worship" you get in this community you get a week's worth of abuse as well.

Again you really are missing the point.

For example, consider my RKSL Eurofighter. Originally started in 2009. Its taken hundreds of hours of development. The HUD and MFD setup in the latest version represents over 150 hours of trial and error work to learn the config drawing system. The cockpit in the V3 model already stands me at over 80 hours. The weapons setup and proxy configs, easily over a 100 hours. The point of this is to establish my investment in time and effort. I made it. For someone else to claim it as their own is insulting.

Now when "User X" uploads my addon to Steam Workshop and agrees to their license. They are giving Valve the right to make money from my 1000+ hour long investment without my consent. They can take any model, texture, sound or concept I developed and make money from it without paying me or anyone else. And if the Skyrim community are to be believed without credit. Simply because some pimply little moron in his mother's basement wants to make it easier for his nose picking, mouth breathing kiddie friends to download addons.

His actions would mean I lose the right to protect my hard work and IP. And if that happens I wont be releasing much new content. Nor, I imagine will a number of other teams. Not publicly anyway.

Its been said previously that "If you are worried about IP theft then don't release". Its valid point of view I'll grant you. But that attitude hasn't helped the community. A lot of people have heard that little bit of advice and decided not to publicly release anymore. You may not have noticed, being as you only registered this week, but there are less and less new addons out there now that use genuinely new models and content. But a lot of reskins and old recycled stuff from the last 10 years. Join the right community and you will see a lot of new original content made for just private groups that never see a public release.

People are concerned about this sort of thing even if you aren't. Unchecked it will eventually affect you and this community. Fortunately BIS (See Placebo and Dwarden's comments) are promising to take the same stance with Workshop ( if it is implemented in ArmA3) as they do with the existing community setup.

LOL and don't be mad if i think you are just trying to bait me. But at least you can't say you know where we're coming from.

Can you please give an example of Steam stealing peoples work? I dont mean one like above. I mean a REAL, LEGIT example of Steam profiting off of a user-made mod. Not a " Well, technically they can do that! ". Has steam stolen or profited from your work before? I'm sorry, but after searching, I cant find anyone who claims Steam workshop has done them wrong.

[rksl-rock 1301]

Can you please give an example of Steam stealing peoples work? I dont mean one like above. I mean a REAL, LEGIT example of Steam profiting off of a user-made mod. Not a " Well, technically they can do that! ". Has steam stolen or profited from your work before? I'm sorry, but after searching, I cant find anyone who claims Steam workshop has done them wrong.

No I can't as I've previously said: "In fairness I have no idea if Valve have ever exploited user uploaded content in that way but we're talking about possibilities here".

However, just like this community the threads that make a lot of these claims seem to vanish pretty quickly which makes posting "proof" difficult. I guess you'd have to talk to Valve's legal team, but i suspect you'd get the "we don't discuss legal issues in public".

A couple of my friends are Skyrim addicts, they are always talking about X made Y that's now in game etc... its all hearsay I admit but it seems to happen often enough to make you wonder doesn't it. Which is why I've previously said :"And if the Skyrim community are to be believed ...". Go have a root through the Skyrim communities. There lots of people that are just as concerned or disgruntled by other users "nicking" content and "uploading out work". Talk to some of the big mod teams and ask them why they choose not to use Steam Workshop. The responses I got when i asked around were largely centered around the license. For new actual content makers its enough of a concern to have a visible trend away from Workshop to sites like Nexus etc.

Regardless of whether Valve has ever used user created content like this, the license allows them to do so if they wish. So I won't use Workshop under that licence. And I think others should be aware of exactly what using that licence really means to their rights. Regardless of the demands of users who do not actually make anything.

[k3lt 3]

"In fairness I have no idea if Valve have ever exploited user uploaded content in that way but we're talking about possibilities here".

Can we move on now?