"Opening up Arma 3 to paid user-made content" - How?

[PuFu 4600]

The arma series has gotten along fine without monetizing the mods. Don't see a need for it.

Following the same logic, humanity has gotten along fine without internet for over 40.000 years...

Some members seem to think modders should remain within the open community,but only on their terms.This is the part that irritates me the most.Not the possibility of a digital marketplace.But that modders would be denied the option to present their work in a commercial way,if,the opportunity presented itself.

Same thing irritates me just as well.

bis "give" the ability to mod "their game".

If a select few modders are annoyed at people feeling they shouldn't "have" to pay for something created by modders , the modders might in their own self entitlement forget, maybe they have forgotten thry were only able to create and express themselves purley on the "free" access and "audience "bis has Granted the modders themselves .

BI is well aware that their francise is alive due to modding and custom content creation (from missions to total modifications). Try to remember when was the last time you have played with the content provided in vanilla (missions included), so you really see this the wrong way. It wasn't a gift (maybe back in OFP it was an intended thing), it is a marketing strategy.

I don't feel BI made me personally any favour really. I am certain though that the sales for any arma game is in part supported by their modding community.

Besides. i doubt modders are annoyed either way (even those vocal here are more than just a "selected few" - just read the entire thread and you'll see the pattern - people who released something and spent time on it are mostly pro, the ones against are the ones who are only playing the content, although don't get me wrong, i only speak for myself, i am by no means speaking for anyone else). I for one am just irritated about the fact that such an idea that BI is willing to pursuit is immediately discredited from the get go by users who believe that every effort made voluntarily by content creators should forever remain free. Not because BI have or haven't implemented a payware method this far.

There was even an interview with Jay IRC, who says that if BF4 would have a modding community, arma would be in deep shit. But since DICE/EA haven't (because DLCs wouldn't sell that well), arma still sells pretty well. Different marketing approaches.

Red Orchestra allows modding afaik, and that is done on an SDK engine (which translates in better tools and documentation). The game doesn't create selling points based on the modding community like arma does.

Again you completely miss the point.

doubtfully

You are not special, I´m not special.

i have never said i am special in regards to any other person spending their free time creating any sort of content released for the public

We are all part of the same community, a community that has existed for a very long time and that would change fundamentally if addons became payware.

why would it change? Again, you consider if there is this option, everything will become payware...

I believe the only people profiting from such a thing would be BIS, (because they would be able to take a cut without doing fuck all for it) STEAM (yes they would get a cut too if this is going through their workshop), and a few high profile modders (How much will be left for the author after BIS and Steam take a cut? Only the addons with a ton of downloads would see any real money), no one else. Therefore it is in my opinion not worth the risk.

BI is already on the winning side, they have been profiting (for the lack of a better word) from their creative part of their community since OFP came out. Steam is also on the winning side, since it takes a cut from every game BI sells via their distribution method, since A2.

Of course I think modders should be able to get paid for their art, but we should explore the voluntary methods first (something that is not done properly).

paid != donation. I have said it before. Donations do not work, at least in the vast majority. The same thing happens here regarding high profile modding groups versus individuals.

If i read bi announcement correctly, i would assume that this paid content would be similar to their DLCs: able to test it out in an editor environment, but limited to the ones that actually bought it during gameplay (be it sp or mp).

Edited April 18, 2015 by PuFu

[I give up 152]

If i read bi announcement correctly, i would assume that this paid content would be similar to their DLCs: able to test it out in an editor environment, but limited to the ones that actually bought it during gameplay (be it sp or mp).

If BIS is going to force me downloading unwanted crap through workshop everytime I open the game, I will become a Dota player, I have no doubts. Sure It has also tons of crap to download and buy, still I have the chance to get my money back through nice prizes given in competition and the game itself is free.

[PuFu 4600]

If BIS is going to force me downloading unwanted crap through workshop everytime I open the game

Are you forced now to download any sort of mission or mods when you open your game? Because i know i'm not.

[Jackal326 1181]

Are you forced now to download any sort of mission or mods when you open your game? Because i know i'm not.

I think he was commenting in relation to the current "try before you buy" method BI currently operate (i.e to try content you'd need to have it downloaded, presumably automatically unless there was to be some sort of "opt in for the free version of this addon" on the store? Again, this is all useless speculation until BI clarify what exactly they have in mind.

[I give up 152]

I am forced to download BIS DLC even when I do not intend to use, BIS said that is going to try the same strategy with user created content through steam workshop.

I know there is alot of excitation due to the millions given by workshop to content creators and lots of people is seeing this a business opportunity, just don't forget that the revenue came from CSGO, TF2 and Dota with pure cosmetics and not from mods or addons that can actually change the gameplay and prevent players of playing together, anxiously waiting to see this in a game like Arma. Maybe I become a modder, I also want to be rich.

[x3kj 1247]

I am forced to download BIS DLC even when I do not intend to use, BIS said that is going to try the same strategy with user created content through steam workshop.

No this wont work. You will only download/ update stuff that you have subscribed to. Otherwise you would have to load several hundred Mbytes every day, if it grows even further then severl Gbytes.

DLC is forced download because it's integral to the vanilla content of the game. Mods are not.

[roshnak 41]

why would it change? Again, you consider if there is this option, everything will become payware...

Why wouldn't it? Even if only some of the higher quality addons went payware, that's still a pretty huge change from everything being free.

just don't forget that the revenue came from CSGO, TF2 and Dota with pure cosmetics

On this note, I would also like to point out that all of these games are either free or cost less than $20, which makes the idea of paying for extra content much more palatable than it would be in a full priced game like Arma.

[nodunit 397]

Why wouldn't it? Even if only some of the higher quality addons went payware, that's still a pretty huge change from everything being free.

On this note, I would also like to point out that all of these games are either free or cost less than $20, which makes the idea of paying for extra content much more palatable than it would be in a full priced game like Arma.

TF2 and CSGO were not free when all this began.

[PuFu 4600]

Why wouldn't it? Even if only some of the higher quality addons went payware, that's still a pretty huge change from everything being free.

Does that mean FUNDAMENTALLY for you?

Does your "huge change" also has a negative connotation?

On this note, I would also like to point out that all of these games are either free or cost less than $20, which makes the idea of paying for extra content much more palatable than it would be in a full priced game like Arma.

but then again, those games don't have "added" content, they have pure cosmetic changes (well TF2 has some changes but they are not game breaking). So you paying for hats and rainbow shitting unicorns, NOT. FOR. CONTENT. (again content also means missions and campaigns, not only addons)

[I give up 152]

Why wouldn't On this note, I would also like to point out that all of these games are either free or cost less than $20, which makes the idea of paying for extra content much more palatable than it would be in a full priced game like Arma.

And because all the items that we buy for those games are coming directly to Steam Inventory, means that we can trade or sell anytime.

Also some other reason (if not the main) is because Steam Marketplace is like a stock market where we can buy, sell and trade. One item that today has a value of 1 buck tomorrow can have 2 or vice versa and in fact some cool business can be made, among those millions users there is always one with willingness to pay the price that we have placed for the listed item or to sell for the price that we have placed in the order for the item we want to buy, even if take a few months. Thats my personal experience with Steam Market.

Anyway, how is going to be with Arma? The items that we buy are coming to our inventory and we can sell or trade whenever we want?

[PuFu 4600]

I am forced to download BIS DLC even when I do not intend to use, BIS said that is going to try the same strategy with user created content through steam workshop.

Have you started using a computer the day before? How could you assume such a ridiculous thing?

I know there is alot of excitation due to the millions given by workshop to content creators and lots of people is seeing this a business opportunity, just don't forget that the revenue came from CSGO, TF2 and Dota with pure cosmetics and not from mods or addons that can actually change the gameplay and prevent players of playing together, anxiously waiting to see this in a game like Arma.

Yes, because ArmA has the same playerbase as CS:GO, Dota2 or TF2....

http://store.steampowered.com/stats/

Maybe I become a modder, I also want to be rich.

No one is stopping you, the tools are available for everyone. But yeah, don't expect to be "rich" out of it

[Tonci87 163]

paid != donation. I have said it before. Donations do not work, at least in the vast majority.

Yes they do not work. But only because they aren´t set up/promoted properly. I think there is a huge potential in donations, if done properly.

[Jackal326 1181]

Yes they do not work. But only because they aren´t set up/promoted properly. I think there is a huge potential in donations, if done properly.

In real-life for charities and such they do work, in gaming and online in general, not so much. The issue of donations (and certain people's expectations regarding them) has come up in the past on these forums. Regardless of how they are setup/implemented, there is a huge difference between optional donations and mandatory payment (note: when I say mandatory I don't mean everyone must pay for content and are forced to do so, I simply mean if you want the content then you have to pay).

[roshnak 41]

TF2 and CSGO were not free when all this began.

That's why I said "free or cost less than $20." The standalone version of TF2 was $19.99 at release and CS:GO costs $14.99.

Does that mean FUNDAMENTALLY for you?

Does your "huge change" also has a negative connotation?

Yeah, for people who bought Arma 3 because they were primarily interested in the modding scene, it's a pretty fundamental change.

And, again, I did not state one way or the other whether that change was positive or negative. Whether or not one considers it negative probably has a lot to do with whether they are looking at potentially gaining money or potentially spending money. It should really not be surprising that people would rather not spend more money if they can help it.

but then again, those games don't have "added" content, they have pure cosmetic changes (well TF2 has some changes but they are not game breaking). So you paying for hats and rainbow shitting unicorns, NOT. FOR. CONTENT. (again content also means missions and campaigns, not only addons)

The thing is, from an average user's perpsective, it doesn't make much difference if the content being added is purely cosmetic or a new weapon or mission or whatever. The money they are being asked to spend is the same, and Arma is significantly more expensive than just about any other game with a community marketplace.

[twisted 128]

looking at amount of replies it seems that some users have a clear interest in the financial possibilities of this and as such are arguing for it very tirelessly. nice to see. but then vested interests are often the most vehemently protected. doesn't always make them right though.

i hope BIS have sense on this topic and see both sides as there are cons and pros for both. they've made some pretty smart decision recently (but not always). So i hope the future of the game and its community is weighed against the option to create an additional income stream how that will change the community in either a big or small way but change will be a result of such a decision as to monetize arma user created content and that's no doubt.

[Macser 776]

I don't think anyone would be surprised by people not wanting to spend money.

It should also not be surpising that modders don't like being taken for granted.

It's also true that people have come here,or bought into the Arma series,for the modding scene.

But the modding scene is not to be confused with people interested in free stuff.Those are two different things.

Modding is an activity.It's a hobby.A craft.Even an art form.Usually not done with the intent to provide free content.That's probably the last thing on a modder's mind when they set out to start a new project.People share what they share for a number of reasons.To show off their skills.To compare their own work with that of others.To share knowledge.To learn and possibly improve the gaming or modding experience.By providing mods,addons,missions and tools.

If support is given to commercialised mods,addons and missions then the wider community will just have to adjust to that.Some people may leave because of it.A lot maybe.I don't know.But I doubt the vast majority of those would've been interested in modding.In any case,I know for a fact there are modders who don't have an interest in selling their work.And would continue to provide it free.

Still.I don't recall seeing any advertisements/commercials stating that the Arma series is a source of free content.There's certainly no suggestion of an all you can eat buffet of goodies,provided by enthusiasts working on their spare time.

Somewhere along the line,people formed this concept themselves,and now see it as part of the purchase price of the game.I don't see any evidence that this was ever an official marketing strategy.

[nodunit 397]

That's why I said "free or cost less than $20." The standalone version of TF2 was $19.99 at release and CS:GO costs $14.99..

Oh, somehow I misread that *facepalm*

[Joe98 92]

Many who have mods or add-ons have a problem. Their mod or add-on is not compatible with another mod or add-on. One or the other has to be deactivated before the player can continue.

If both authors uploaded their mod or add-on to BIS or Steam, then it is plausible that BIS and or Steam could ensure that both mod/addons and compatible with the base game and both are compatible with each other.

And certify that they remain compatible as BIS produce their own DLC's into the future.

If that were the case I would be happy to pay for a mod/add-on that had such a certification.

.

.

[Rydygier 1317]

then it is plausible that BIS and or Steam could ensure that both mod/addons and compatible with the base game

Most likely would permanently block any serious core platform improvement/change. Free or sold, it should be always on the modder's side to keep compatibility with the game, never on devs side to keep game compatible with all the/any mods (absurd).

both are compatible with each other

De facto impossible to ensure, unless all the modders now and in the future would collaborate as a one big conglomerate of content creators coordintating all their work together.

I don't think, it's reasonable thinking to expect such warranty. IMO valid is to sell anything, no matter of compatibility with other sold stuff or game itself, as long potential buyer isn't misled regarding above.

Of course, valid is thinking, many may/will not buy the mod, that potentially may become useless in the future or is useless together with mods, they already possess, while this at least potentially applies to all the mods, thus some will not buy anything because of that. Fair enough, their money, their choice.

Author may declare on his own, so he'll maintain as wide compatibility, as possible, but there's never 100% warranty of that, while compatibility with some other mods may be technically impossible. It's not possible to make a mod, that for 100% will be always compatible with any other possible mod or still working after any possible game change. I think, no sane modder will sell his mod with such utopian certification, and if anyone would, don't believe him.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Rydygier

[Degman 73]

Yes they do not work. But only because they aren´t set up/promoted properly. I think there is a huge potential in donations, if done properly.

Agreed!

Optional, but better presented donations are the best way to solve the problem that the people are talking about here.

I don't want the Arma modding community to turn into capitalist, selfish, ekscentric shithole in which nobody is willing to help each other - just because of the money (competition, prestige, ...).

It's not like everyone who bought the Arma 3 game has extra money in his pocket, nor it is logical to open monetization of user content. There would be:

a) legal issues (someone will pay you for the other people's work or some ports from other games)

b) server issues (every server has different collection, mostly the huge one, with different mods in it - you will pay for all that s*** ? And what if you want to play on other servers too ? Prepare your credit cards and half of your monthly salaries!)

c) the community (I mentioned competition, prestige and bs already)

On other hand, I would support an approach in which the BI Studio would make a better DLC system e.g. the best modders would be in able to make the quality and functional content which would be declared as official Arma 3 DLC. That way we would still have good and free mods to play with, but still those the best would be in able to make some money if they push harder.

[OMAC 254]

On other hand, I would support an approach in which the BI Studio would make a better DLC system e.g. the best modders would be in able to make the quality and functional content which would be declared as official Arma 3 DLC. That way we would still have good and free mods to play with, but still those the best would be in able to make some money if they push harder.

This idea sounds great to me. Such top-tier mods would benefit from having BI QA/QC for quality and compatibility, and the official BI stamp of approval, both of which would generate more sales and happy customers. BI could even enhance such mods, adding their own touch and ideas.

[Macser 776]

A marketplace may or may not happen.I'm not all that interested in that.

What has been interesting and revealing,is seeing the underlying reasons for preventing it.

And getting a little more insight into the relationship between people who create and people who play.

It should be of particular interest to modders,or anyone considering getting into modding.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Maczer

[x3kj 1247]

It should also not be surpising that modders don't like being taken for granted.

The amount of time i have seen "this game will suck but modders will fix it for us" in the past (for arma and many other games that announced modding capability) i found a slightly disturbing trend...

[doveman 7]

The amount of time i have seen "this game will suck but modders will fix it for us" in the past (for arma and many other games that announced modding capability) i found a slightly disturbing trend...

I wouldn't say ArmA sucks but having started with A2 I soon realised that there were a lot of deficiencies with it that were corrected by mods, for which I'm very grateful. I doubt I would have bought A3 if I would have faced having to also buy all the mods I need to fix the deficiencies I knew I could expect to find. So IMHO, the great free modding community is a big part of why people are willing to buy ArmA games. Probably you could say the same for Skyrim, would that have sold as well if there were no mods or people had to buy them?

My other concern is if some people in a clan want to use some weapons or vehicle mods but other members don't care about them or can't afford them, either the mods don't get used or people leave the group. So either mods end up getting used less than now, meaning there's less incentive for modders to put the effort in making them if not many people are using and appreciating their work or players leave the group which slowly reduces the number of people playing ArmA, at least online. I'm quite easily satisfied and pretty much one version of each type of weapon (rifle, MG, SMG) is enough for me as I'm too busy trying not to get shot to worry about what my weapon looks like! So I'd be reluctant to spend anything on weapons packs but other people love having lots of weapons to choose from. If it was just a couple of quid I guess I'd pay that to be able to keep playing but not if it started to add up significantly.

You've also got a potential problem with missions. If mods have to be bought, then a clan either forces everyone to buy certain mods or only vanilla missions are played, which in turn leads to mission makers not using mod content as they want to maximise the number of people who play their missions.

[mcpxxl 2]

Just to say it like our CEO

Take it or leave it

Make your decissions like all other decissions in RL

Most people should not endless discuss pro/cons they just decide stay or leave it

What i have learned all the years, you can discuss here, but it will not have a big impact on BI´s decission --> As seen everyday in Bug Tracker

So again:

Take it or leave it