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

[Werthles 10]

Has there been any official word on this since the link on the first post, nearly 2 years ago? I will complete Hired Guns is there is a donation option. It's just too much work otherwise.

[gammadust 12]

^^

OPREP - Content Licensing

A brief recap first; our DLC packages are produced according to the philosophy of a platform base and premium content on top. We see Arma 3 as a platform for both our and community content.

(...)

So the features are free, but we still need to cover their development costs. Therefore: enter premium content.

emphasis is BI's

I think this is what BI is trying to push, though i may be misinterpreting. They're trying to induce mod authors in the same spirit they've taken with DLCs. Given how cautious this DLC strategy amounts to, i suspect even more caution in regards to user created content. Specially now after the Skyrim experience.

BI has invested a lot in Steam Workshop, so they are definetely pushing for it, but doubts remain in regards to paid-user content.

Also, you may not have a Steam integrated donate option but nothing prevents you from providing one yourself.

Edited May 3, 2015 by gammadust

[Werthles 10]

Thanks,

"3. The most delicate one: we will be eventually looking at how to extend the existing DLC strategy to monetized user content using the Steam Workshop"

This is what I was after (from your link).

[Tonci87 163]

Thanks,

"3. The most delicate one: we will be eventually looking at how to extend the existing DLC strategy to monetized user content using the Steam Workshop"

This is what I was after (from your link).

Yeah and there is no if in that, just how. I imagine Valve has not only approached Bethesda with that idea. But honestly, if they do that with Arma then Arma 3 will have been the last BIS game I bought. Arma as a vanilla game is simply not that great, the mods make it good and many good mods break over time. I won´t take the risk of paying for stuff that has absolutelly no warranty attached to it.

[gammadust 12]

Let's review the balance of powers:

Players/Mod Users - Either they buy user content or they don't

Mod Authors - Either they surrender their creations to Distributor's licensing (Valve's) or they don't

Developer/Publisher - Either they allow the inclusion of their IP in the paid user-made content model or they don't

Distributor - Either they open up their platform for increased user content exposure or they don't

Developer/Publisher and the Distributor are organizations by definition so one can expect these to act accordingly, defending their interests in a cohesive way. If left unchecked they will push to the best benefit they can achieve. Their advantage is the initiative and the ability to set precedent in an organized fashion (their legal departments redact the terms). This does not mean necessarily that their actions are rational and effective as Skyrim experince proved.

What i would like to see is for Mod Authors and Players (which in many cases are one and the same) to better organize themselves if they are to increase their chances of getting a better deal.

The petition which was created in regards to Skyrim was quite one-sided in favour of the player:

(...) Mods should be a free creation. Creations made by people who wish to add to the game so others can also enjoy said creation with the game. (...)

It is debatable if this had the most influence in Valve/Bethesda backtracking. We must remember the troll-mods that appeared in Steam Workshop front pages too. These were spontaneous and atomic reactions instead of organized and collective. They were nevertheless effective, yet binary instead of compromising. But this reveals a division not exacly an alliance.

The stance "we don't want no deal, period" is shortsighted. Players and Mod Authors powers are only overriding to the extent that they are organized. What Skyrim (and remaining games) communities are risking there is that Distributor/Publisher/Developer will charge again attempting to reach the critical mass acceptance point, but this will be done still on their terms. They can count on some of the players to pay and some of the mod authors to surrender. For them it is just a matter of how big the market opens up, while expecting it to grow. They will scale their investment accordingly and reap the profits. While at the same time neglecting the communities' interests behind.

The above logic leads me to think of this almost as an inevitability, hence my preference for finding some sort of compromises before they are able to reach such a point.

We must find an organized negotiating position, instead of an infantile, likely losing bargain.

Edited May 3, 2015 by gammadust
Link

[Tonci87 163]

What I don´t get is this:

Who makes money when Mods are involved and who carries the burden?

Current situation: Dev/Publisher+Distributor make money, players/modders carry the burden because they have to buy the game Mods generally make games more attractive and help increase sales.

Steam Fiasko Situation: Dev/Publisher make lots of money without investing, modders invest most of the work but make little, players carry a double burden because they have to pay for mods while they already bought the game. They are also left with all the risk such as no guaranteed support if a mod breaks.

Now why are the players the ones who carry the burden in both cases but have nothing of the gain? Mods improve sales and make games more attractive for customers. Devs/Publishers earn more money. Shouldn´t they use some of that money to invest in the modders? Why should all the cost and risk be put on the player? I understand the cost, because making content needs some sort of investment, but the risk too?

In my opinion Devs/Publishers should give money to high quality/high profile mods because they are the ones who make money from them.

Edited May 3, 2015 by Tonci87

[x3kj 1247]

Jump to

I understand the cost, because making content needs some sort of investment, but the risk too?

Then whats your suggestion to not having any risks? Other then saying "i want free stuff". If you want lifetime support for a mod, make a contract with a mod author to pay him for a lifetime.

In my opinion Devs/Publishers should give money to high quality/high profile mods because they are the ones who make money from them.

And you are the one benefitting while doing nothing? I don't see why Devs should pay others for your additional fun, just because you bought a product from them.

This is a way for modders who want money to get paid :lookaround:

These are contracts. You are contracted, that means you have to work on this like it's a job, deadline stress included. So unless you happen to be a student with alot of free time, that's not an option.

Edited May 3, 2015 by Fennek

[Tonci87 163]

Jump to

Then whats your suggestion to not having any risks? Other then saying "i want free stuff". If you want lifetime support for a mod, make a contract with a mod author to pay him for a lifetime.

And you are the one benefitting while doing nothing? I don't see why Devs should pay others for your additional fun, just because you bought a product from them.

These are contracts. You are contracted, that means you have to work on this like it's a job, deadline stress included. So unless you happen to be a student with alot of free time, that's not an option.

You live in Germany, so in theory you should know how basic consumer protection works and how it is legally defined. I dont expect lifetime support, but there should be basic warranty and guaranteed support over a specified lenght of time. Otherwise this whole thing is not compatible with EU law and can´t work anyway.

Devs should pay modders because people often buy games because of mods. You can see that with Skyrim, you can see that with GTA, and you can see tha with Arma. Hell Arma 2 shifted what, something between one and two million additional copies because of DayZ?

[enex 11]

Perhaps the modder could only offer price when his mods are working with vannila game?

As soon as it doesn't mod looses ability to sell.

1 year warranty - if mod breaks with vannila game (because modder doesn't work on the project anymore)

and you have bought mod less then a year ago it gets refounded.

Edited May 4, 2015 by enex

[gossamersolid 155]

These are contracts. You are contracted, that means you have to work on this like it's a job, deadline stress included. So unless you happen to be a student with alot of free time, that's not an option.

You must really be out of touch with the world. Deadlines exist in everyday life.

Are you expecting that certain modders can continue to work with the whole "It'll be done when I feel like it", yet somehow expect money?

This community is so fucked if paid modding becomes a thing.

[Tonci87 163]

You must really be out of touch with the world. Deadlines exist in everyday life.

Are you expecting that certain modders can continue to work with the whole "It'll be done when I feel like it", yet somehow expect money?

This community is so fucked if paid modding becomes a thing.

Yeah, somehow he seems to think that modders won´t have any obligations when they start to take money for mods. If you sell a mod and it breaks due to a patch, then you will have a shitload of people DEMANDING that you fix it right now! And they will have every right to do that. If you ask me, that is one hell of a deadline!

[tortuosit 485]

@Rydigier, I read your thoughtful post, but don't you think it is just fine as it was? I think it is (well at least as long as I have no interest to live from mod income):

"the community": The vital community is always a small one. My point is: This is perfectly fine and no reason to regret. A huge amount of players is consumers of mod. Nothing more. This is just normal. We all have tons of games in our Steam library. But how many communities do we actively participate in? 2? 3? I'm just active in ArmA and Chaos Reborn. Thats all. For all other games, I look what's state of the art mods, install them, and do not say thanks or participate in whatever way. Would usually need a forum subscribe etc. etc. - NO! Nobody can afford being active part of numerous communities.

"the vital community": Well some do more, some less, some are lazy, some talented, some have RL obligation, some have wife (even computer game haters like mine) and kids... etc etc. We were all giving and taking. This is fine! And we should be fully aware some "steal" from others, not crediting them, some even make money from this. SO WHAT! We know what can happen.

"the mod users": Yes, they can be unfair at times. But hey we (I also speak as an unimportant modder) should be fully aware things happen. Stand the heat :)

Bringing money into the mod equation: THIS WILL HARM MY GAMING EXPERIENCE. Why?

- I install a game

- Watch out for all those useful mods

- Need 12 mods, 9 now want money!?!?!?!

Using mods especially in longer lasting gaming sessions is already complicated more or less, as you all know... Now I additionally have to decide if it would be worth paying <n>EUR for... <m> mods that lets you control weather? Much more research is nessecary!

NO. I want user made mods being free. I would never ask gamers for money for mods OTOH. If someone needs money, he should seek for another playground and not develop mods. "I have deserved it", "they should show respect in form of money" - this should not spread in gaming communities. If people need money, they are wrong in the mod department. And as I said, it will not pay out after all. The people with real jobs in the industry will have a mild laugh for you.

Edited May 4, 2015 by tortuosit

[x3kj 1247]

You must really be out of touch with the world. Deadlines exist in everyday life.

So you are telling me, that in addition to your job and everyday deadlines, you want to burden yourself with a deadline for your 'freetime hobby', which can take enormous amounts of time? I think you are the one out of touch here, i worked on 2 contracts similar to this (not for BI), i know what i'm talking about.

A contract is a job, an obligation. Which does not work if your free time is not guaranteed. Basic logic.

If you sell a mod and it breaks due to a patch, then you will have a shitload of people DEMANDING that you fix it right now!

Yes people demand that always and they demand a lot. So what? Have you seen how long it takes BIS to fix some bugs?

If you ask me, that is one hell of a deadline!

Contracts have deadlines, because they have a date written in them. Support doesnt have deadlines unless we are talking about End-of-Support deadlines.

You are acting as if mods break every week. When was the last time a mod completely broke?

Yeah, somehow he seems to think that modders won´t have any obligations when they start to take money for mods.

You are missinformed

Edited May 4, 2015 by Fennek

[Rydygier 1303]

but don't you think it is just fine as it was?

There is lacking one thing to make it fine to me - mentioned this few times already. A possibility for the modder to request fair pay for the fruits of his labour, which is a basic demand of fairness and common rule of civilized world: a man deserves a reward for his work. No more, no less. No idea, why modding should be an exception here. Not, that I would recommend to all or even myself to use such freedom or would expect to have enough money from this alone to live. I'm well awared of the traps, limitations and obstacles, this brings. Still who want it - should have such opportunity one way or another. Generosity is great thing, but only if voluntary, not "forced" (not really, modder has freedom to stop modding anytime, but really is that the only alternative we want to give him? Work for free or get lost?). Status quo, you would like to keep, is maintained at the cost of this freedom, which I find unfair. I'm affraid too many used too much to free labour of the modders, kinda like Roman citizens used to rely on slaves. Brute and not accurate comparison, but... They also thought, all will collapse without slavery, that kept running the state's economy, but see now - no slaves (well...), no free labour-based economy and progress is enormous.

That's the one thing. The second is well discussed already state of the modding scene as for shrinking ranks, increasing difficulty, fading motivation, increasing required time and effort. If I would have to earn money for my bills, food etc. on regular basis (which, oddly, wasn't necessary long time), I'm nearly certain, I wouldn't create anything for Arma. Too time- and mind-consuming to do it along with regular job, at least for me. Can't say exactly, but I would guesstimate, it's about several thousands workhours of difference/input during 3,5 years. Per single person. Currently I got some contracts, and all my Arma work stopped completely due to that - all my "productive hours" are taken in the working days, while at weekends/evenings I would like and need to rest, not to work even more, this time on mods. Let's assume, I'm not unique case here. Wouldn't be great, if some talented modder could in the same time get, what he fairly deserves and thanks to that spare few weeks more for modding instead of taking another contracts for living?

- Need 12 mods, 9 now want money!?!?!?!

You now, such a need is redefinable. Nothing better would verify, how many mods you really NEED to play, and which are nice, but in fact expendable. I wouldn't be so worried about the prices though. Too high - no one would pay, then selling misses the point. Mods wouldn't cost more, people would be ready to pay for them. Not for long... So let's say each of said 9 mods average price would be same, as for two chocolate bars. If so, the question, you have to answer for each would be: is it worthy at least two chocolate bars to me or not? If no - what "need" we're talking about? If so - is that really that much for something, you'll enjoy much longer, than some candy?

Also - if mods need to be free, why games itself are worthy of money? What is a real, substancial difference here? The scale and the scope only.

And all this assuming only one, certain model of making mods paid. Who knows, what other solutions are possible.

Edited May 4, 2015 by Rydygier

[Jackal326 1158]

You now, such a need is redefinable. Nothing better would verify, how many mods you really NEED to play, and which are nice, but in fact expendable. I wouldn't be so worried about the prices though. Too high - no one would pay, then selling misses the point. Mods wouldn't cost more, people would be ready to pay for them. Not for long... So let's say each of said 9 mods average price would be same, as for two chocolate bars. If so, the question, you have to answer for each would be: is it worthy at least two chocolate bars to me or not? If no - what "need" we're talking about? If so - is that really that much for something, you'll enjoy much longer, than some candy?

I'm diabetic and I find this analogy offensive[/sarcasm]

[Tonci87 163]

So you are telling me, that in addition to your job and everyday deadlines, you want to burden yourself with a deadline for your 'freetime hobby', which can take enormous amounts of time? I think you are the one out of touch here, i worked on 2 contracts similar to this (not for BI), i know what i'm talking about.

A contract is a job, an obligation. Which does not work if your free time is not guaranteed. Basic logic.

Yes people demand that always and they demand a lot. So what? Have you seen how long it takes BIS to fix some bugs?

Contracts have deadlines, because they have a date written in them. Support doesnt have deadlines unless we are talking about End-of-Support deadlines.

You are acting as if mods break every week. When was the last time a mod completely broke?

You are missinformed

If you expect people to pay for your mod, and for the mods to come, then you have to keep your customers, yes, if you take their money they become your customers, happy!

If you don´t think that way then you are not a person I would like to have a business relationship with. At this point I really have to wonder if you think it´s OK to screw people over....

[koffeinflummi 96]

If you expect people to pay for your mod, and for the mods to come, then you have to keep your customers, yes, if you take their money they become your customers, happy!

If you don´t think that way then you are not a person I would like to have a business relationship with. At this point I really have to wonder if you think it´s OK to screw people over....

Your main point seems to be that modders would need higher quality standards if they want to get paid. How is that not a good thing?

[Tonci87 163]

Your main point seems to be that modders would need higher quality standards if they want to get paid. How is that not a good thing?

No, my main point is that there is nothing that will enforce quality and support standards. There will be scams, just as there are with greenlight and early access, there will be modders who will abandon their mod and go to the next one after they made some money with it

[x3kj 1247]

If you expect people to pay for your mod, and for the mods to come, then you have to keep your customers, yes, if you take their money they become your customers, happy!

And who disputed that? I did not. No need to get all bold and hissy.

No, my main point is that there is nothing that will enforce quality and support standards. There will be scams, just as there are with greenlight and early access, there will be modders who will abandon their mod and go to the next one after they made some money with it

If you buy on promises and not on facts, then that is hardly the systems fault.

[EricJ 727]

You must really be out of touch with the world. Deadlines exist in everyday life.

Are you expecting that certain modders can continue to work with the whole "It'll be done when I feel like it", yet somehow expect money?

This community is so fucked if paid modding becomes a thing.

You've obviously never done contracted work, so we'll leave that alone. The fact is that if a modder goes the paid or not paid route, then he or she sets the deadline, not the customers. That's the case with any paid product and the need to update is only relative to the need to have it complete or reasonably error-free. Ergo, for any non-paid mod, there is no requirement to set a deadline, nor is it the customer's or downloader's responsibility nor "right" to demand a set release date from the seller or author. And if you have some legal authority or actual writ or declaration stating that you have such right (which to my knowledge never existed anyway). If the company or modder gives a date, then that's his or her's expectation the mod will be released given a feeling of readiness for the product, paid for or not. And since I work on a mod continuously it's my responsibility and nobody who uses my mod sets the pace, or the release date for my work.

So when you actually do contracted work then you can make some sort of commentary that those who've done contract work have no touch with the world. Oh and yes, I've done contracted work myself, so I'm probably a little more in touch with professional requirements and needs than say, you who has no idea how contracted work actually functions.

[rübe 127]

No, my main point is that there is nothing that will enforce quality and support standards.

So what?

Do we need a new EU-Norm to specify the "dos and don'ts" of mods now?

People have sold and bought (or traded for) things with a risk attached to them, since the dawn of ages.

And they will continue to do so, until their very last shirt (...or however this fig. of speach translates into english).

Mods can go obsolete any moment of time. Nothing will change that. Business as usual. But this doesn't mean you can't (try to) sell such a thing. Your argument with consumer protection and what not is moot, as long as this stays transparent (i.e. nobody, e.g. the seller, says otherwise by making promises he cant/wont stay up to), and is reflected in the price. Risk usually comes at a discount. :cool:

And I'm certainly not eager to look at a workshop full of weapon-skins for a cent or two, no thanks. But honestly, that's not even a problem in and on itself. Just give me a working filter and I don't care about all the trash I dont see (P.S. anyone else super annoyed at non-existing or wack filter-options everywhere you go...? When will people learn that only a good filter makes a good search... *rant off). I.e. it's a UI-problem, and it's totally solvable. :)

Honestly, the few mods I'd totally buy right now... well, I'd also trust the guys working on them. No questions asked.

Aren't you willing to take that risk (at some price)?

Edited May 5, 2015 by ruebe

[gossamersolid 155]

You've obviously never done contracted work, so we'll leave that alone.

Not sure how you came to that conclusion. Contracted work most definitely requires deadlines. Evidently you've never done contracted work before.

[Tonci87 163]

I´ve done a lot of contracted work and there were always deadlines in place.....

I´m saying that now, players are mostly (with a few immature exeptions) OK if a modder takes his time to update a mod, it´s free after all. When money comes into that, modders will face much more pressure.

[Rydygier 1303]

I think, the point was, in paid modding there aren't such deadlines, as in contracted work - modder may work before release/update as long, as he wish, money or no money, unless he would be stupid/motivated enough to make otherwise promise at transaction. But even such unwise promise never would be a 100% warranty of anything. The source of deadlines aren't impatient mod buyers, who paid already, but superiors/employer, who will pay if work will be done on time. Modder is self-employer unlike eg game industry developer from some studio or contracted freelancer.

When money comes into that, modders will face much more pressure.

Thus IMO $ path would be recommended for more mentally resistant modders, able to keep their steady course despite any such pressure (able to ignore people's "prodding"). For the rest - such pressure will negatively affect the outcome (mod quality) due to generated haste/stress/bad mood. Unless buyers would become wise enough to understand this dependence between peace of mind and work quality.

Edited May 5, 2015 by Rydygier

[BlackBerets 10]

To be honest i applaud this kind of stuff. I remember taking out two years of my life to create a mod for a game which provided a persistent 24/7 role play server with staff active around the clock. Back then when we asked for donations we got a lot of shit for it, but if you really think about it, a group of people spending their time, money and skill should be able to get/ask for support. I'm weary of stuff that -requires- payment to play though, that would chip away at the modding as a phenomenon i believe.