Do donations work for arma modders?

[Rydygier 1302]

If you want to see the project you're interested in to be finished (or to progress faster) you have to donate, seems pretty straightforward to me.

It is. But no extortion there. Extortion assumes constraint involved, and here you're free to choose if donate or not. With such logic every shop or firm "extorts" money from the clients - if you want it - pay us - feel extorted?

Who cares if it takes 2 or 3 years to be finished and fully polished instead of one year or six months?

If no one, no one will donate. Simple and pretty OK to me. Same, as OK is condition, you named "extortion". It's up to modder, on what condition he want or can mod. He's business only. What's wrong with that? Is a modder a slave or servant of the community, that has to work on terms dictated by the community? If something may be called not Ok here, is community members trying to enforce certain slavery "work ethics" on modders - "you're doing, what you like, so shut up, do it faster and gimme.". That's may be an attempt of extortion. Futile, luckilly, but you can guess, how "motivating" this is.

but there's also people that spend some of their time to reach out to you just to say thank you.

Yep. And by this fact I would call each such person exceptional.

I don't know what kind of recognition you'd expect though?

I would not expect anything. And would like community to return that favor. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about me personally. Personally I have no such problem, although its pleasant feeling, to be noticed, granted, at least on short-term. Some may have a problem though, as I heard.

I'm just saying - both observations combined creates kind of demotivating "demanding ingratitude" climate, and then there are voices trying to dictate modders not only, what to do, but also on what terms, so giving away just like that all results of the hard work is the only fair way of sharing, while asking for anything in return is obvious sign of greed. So who in fact is greedy here? One, who wants some kind of tangible payment for sharing effects of his massive work, or one, who demands this work for free "just because"? Is the community the only one entitled to requesting donations - from modders? Because they bought the game? Game they maybe bought, but not modder's work. Some may be pretty annoyed... I'm not, at least so far I want give for free, what I made. But I do understand people that don't want or just can't be longer so charity. And to be honest, community was pretty appreciating in my case - I would probably still don't even have Arma 3 due to its price if not someone, who just gifted it to me just to allow me continuing work for A3. Same was with OA. And IF. There was people ready to fund me even GPU, when mine was broken. I really have no reason to complain. And note, IMHO, their gifts wasn't fruitless. So it's not that, community is so bad. It's only about some voices here and there.

Recognition could be valuable though for people looking for the job. A way to prove, they're valuable "asset" (blah) and to make potential employers notice them. So modding thoretically sometimes may be also career springboard if not career by itself. MANW is one example of such potential opportunity.

What would that fuel be besides donations in your opinion?

Now that's the question. As was said, money (donated or earned otherwise) in proper amount means not only motivation but also more time for modding. Potentially, as expectations coming with money may spoil everything. Truth is, I obviously have no really good answer except possibly well organized system, that could make modding something more than a hobby out of passion. That means money involved in some form. I even don't know, if any such system would do the trick either. It may be highly subjective. If for some experienced modder asked/not asked donations does that trick however - great. Why to criticize? Again - what's wrong with earning money for honest, hard and valuable work, especially when passion is burned out anyway, but you still feel, you have some great stuff to create, and only after that time you learned enough to do it? Another approach, as kju and the other said, is not more fuel, but reducing amount of fuel needed to reach "the orbit" - easier modding, better documantation etc. Why BI should bother? Because Arma lives mainly thanks to the community around modding. I think so at least. And IMO they do bother, maybe only not enough or not in not optimal way, although, unlike the others, I think, initiatives like MANW are step in the right direction.

One thing BTW - passion explains, why someone is doing something. But doesn't explain really, why he is sharing results with the others. So passion is good fuel to make someone progressing in experience, skill and knowledge (and collecting results on the big pile in the basement == HDD dark corners), but IMO doesn't make by itself community enjoying fruits of that passion.

Edited January 16, 2015 by Rydygier

[seba1976 98]

One thing BTW - passion explains, why someone is doing something. But doesn't explain really, why he is sharing results with the others.

The core of the teaching, so to speak. Taboo land. Are you sure you want to know the reason? You already know the reason anyway.

---------- Post added at 09:48 ---------- Previous post was at 09:40 ----------

lol seba, you are so clueless and you would eat your own words if you had any clue what was really going on between kju and alduric and bi...

Grow up (and comb your hair if that's your real picture :)).

[Defunkt 431]

After some consideration I don't think this board is the the right forum for such an enterprise. Dslyecxi does pretty well out of Patreon but you don't see him trying to drum up much support here, the gimme-set are afforded too much say. My suggestion for any person or team who believes they have something valuable and unique to offer mod-wise and want to provide an incentive to users to encourage support;

Setup a public website where people can download your releases for free (as is enshrined in BI's TOS), promote it with single thread/post on this board but don't otherwise post about the work here and grant posting rights on your own forums only to contributors, donors and your modding peers (whose feedback you welcome because it's knowledgeable both technically and in terms of understanding the massive effort involved in creating quality content). Plenty wouldn't like it but they're probably the ones who you don't really want to hear from, let those who're actually invested in your outputs provide feedback on how you spend your creative time.

This would work even better if a single site could be formed from a collective of individuals/teams or a site like Armaholic provided an area within their forums for it.

[Chairborne 2594]

It is. But no extortion there. Extortion assumes constraint involved, and here you're free to choose if donate or not. With such logic every shop or firm "extorts" money from the clients - if you want it - pay us - feel extorted?

And if you don't donate you lose valuable content, following this logic, just like when in business you can't benefit from something if you don't want to buy it. Also many modders now depend on projects such as AiA so if they don't want to scrap everything they will have to either keep the project themselves or hope for someone to step up.

If no one, no one will donate. Simple and pretty OK to me. Same, as OK is condition, you named "extortion". It's up to modder, on what condition he want or can mod. He's business only. What's wrong with that? Is a modder a slave or servant of the community, that has to work on terms dictated by the community? If something may be called not Ok here, is community members trying to enforce certain slavery "work ethics" on modders - "you're doing, what you like, so shut up, do it faster and gimme.". That's may be an attempt of extortion. Futile, luckilly, but you can guess, how "motivating" this is.

I get requests all the time for all sorts of stuff, and i don't really feel there is that level of pressure on me on releasing my mods. Sometimes requests even give me good ideas on what to work next (the Hind came out of this exactly), some other times i just choose to ignore people who harass me and it's over.

I would not expect anything. And would like community to return that favor. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about me personally. Personally I have no such problem, although its pleasant feeling, to be noticed, granted, at least on short-term. Some may have a problem though, as I heard.

I'm just saying - both observations combined creates kind of demotivating "demanding ingratitude" climate, and then there are voices trying to dictate modders not only, what to do, but also on what terms, so giving away just like that all results of the hard work is the only fair way of sharing, while asking for anything in return is obvious sign of greed. So who in fact is greedy here? One, who wants some kind of tangible payment for sharing effects of his massive work, or one, who demands this work for free "just because"? Is the community the only one entitled to requesting donations - from modders? Because they bought the game? Game they maybe bought, but not modder's work. Some may be pretty annoyed... I'm not, at least so far I want give for free, what I made. But I do understand people that don't want or just can't be longer so charity. And to be honest, community was pretty appreciating in my case - I would probably still don't even have Arma 3 due to its price if not someone, who just gifted it to me just to allow me continuing work for A3. Same was with OA. And IF. There was people ready to fund me even GPU, when mine was broken. I really have no reason to complain. And note, IMHO, their gifts wasn't fruitless. So it's not that, community is so bad. It's only about some voices here and there.

Recognition could be valuable though for people looking for the job. A way to prove, they're valuable "asset" (blah) and to make potential employers notice them. So modding thoretically sometimes may be also career springboard if not career by itself. MANW is one example of such potential opportunity.

So what happens when every modder starts asking for donations money to keep developing something? A feature that was once provided free of charge now has to be paid by the community at some level (even if they're still donations). And when this happens, expectations on content and schedules multiply exponentially. If you think it's hard as it is now to ignore all the angry kids, think of what would happen when maybe 1000 people donate you money and you are late on releasing something or you just have to scrap the whole thing (which in the gaming industry nowadays seems to be the faith of the wide majority of releases).

You create expectations even when there's no money involved (just take a look at the WIP modding section and all the "when is it coming out?" posts), when money is involved it's going to get only worse.

One thing BTW - passion explains, why someone is doing something. But doesn't explain really, why he is sharing results with the others.

Because others may like what you do and you provide it at almost no further cost. Plus, you also get the benefit of feedback (bug fixing, suggestions for improvement). For someone like me that doesn't work on military hardware for a living there's always something new to know, even if that is not always doable in game.

Also i find there is a rather high level of cooperation between modders. What if money was involved? You might choose not to share your knowledge with others because that knowledge gives you competitive advantage. As a result we might end up in a situation where knowledge is not only not shared, but also lost when the current generation stops modding and the next one steps in.

[Rydygier 1302]

And if you don't donate you lose valuable content

You don't lose anything. You just don't get something new, you haven't. Just like in the shop - no pay, no stuff. Did you lose all, you didn't buy last time you was on shopping?

Also many modders now depend on projects such as AiA so if they don't want to scrap everything they will have to either keep the project themselves or hope for someone to step up.

True, but that was their free choice to make their work dependent on someone's else work. I still don't see extortion here. There is a choice and a consequence of it, that's all.

Sometimes requests even give me good ideas on what to work next

Indeed. Requests are good thing. But not all modders apparently appreciate insistence. It's not about requestor intention, it's about some feeling, you can have after reading some posts showing user's demanding mindset towards modders work (why they do this, not that, why they don't do B, but only A, why they ask donations or refuse to work instead of charity servitude to our pleasure etc).

So what happens when every modder starts asking for donations money to keep developing something?

Few the best perhaps will be donated, rest will stop their work or reconsider that approach - their choice. But what for "what if-ing"? This could be happening even now, why not, but somehow it isn't.

A feature that was once provided free of charge now has to be paid by the community at some level (even if they're still donations).

It's creator might change his mind. Something wrong in that?

And when this happens, expectations on content and schedules multiply exponentially.

True, noted that earlier. Again - that's consequence of modder's choice. You can say, it's bad idea, requesting donation for continuing work, but you can't prevent that, if modder would like such solution despite such consequences or if has no other choice. It's up to him and no right reason to condemn him for it.

But you're talking about one thing, while I about a bit another. I don't insist, it must by exactly that "donate or we'll not work" model serving well the community. I'm only saying, it's not a heresy to think about modding not as about solely the hobby, like some keep repeating, but sometimes also as for honest way to earn some cash if possible. And to prolong motivation for burned out, but very valuable experienced modders. Finding best way is separate problem. If given method would be not accepted by potential donors, then it will be not chosen as ineffective, so IMO no worries about dying community due to all modders switching to paid work. It would happen already, if it were to happen.

Edited January 16, 2015 by Rydygier

[roshnak 41]

Setup a public website where people can download your releases for free (as is enshrined in BI's TOS), promote it with single thread/post on this board but don't otherwise post about the work here and grant posting rights on your own forums only to contributors, donors and your modding peers (whose feedback you welcome because it's knowledgeable both technically and in terms of understanding the massive effort involved in creating quality content). Plenty wouldn't like it but they're probably the ones who you don't really want to hear from, let those who're actually invested in your outputs provide feedback on how you spend your creative time.

This is a great example of why people would think that getting money involved in modding, even in the form of donations, is a bad idea.

I don't have a problem with donations, but this is a terrible idea. It's the same kind of shady stuff that those Life server owners do - charging people money to be a part of your community and to have their opinions heard.

[Defunkt 431]

This is a great example of why people would think that getting money involved in modding, even in the form of donations, is a bad idea.

I don't have a problem with donations, but this is a terrible idea. It's the same kind of shady stuff that those Life server owners do - charging people money to be a part of your community and to have their opinions heard.

Please explain how it's even remotely similar to selling content made by other modders. Nothing like it and not shady at all.

Who loses out? Nobody's prevented from using the content. It simply limits the noise from people who take and never give back (and often act like the modders owe them something just because they downloaded their mod) while encouraging people to help the modder out if they like that content enough to want to be heard. Wins all round if you ask me.

[roshnak 41]

I explained how it is similar to what Life server owners are doing. I never said it was similar in every way or that it was at all similar to selling other people's content. It is similar to what Life server owners are doing in that it is operating under the guise of openness, while actually granting priveges to users who pay money. Also, limiting noise from people you don't agree with is a good way to create an echo chamber.

The only people who win in your scenario are modders who think they are above criticism, or that people need to pay them money in order for their feedback to be worth considering.

By the way, there is very little real criticism on these forums. Are naive feature requests and people eagerly asking for updates or release dates really so bothersome to you that you feel you need to filter them out by charging people money?

Edited January 17, 2015 by roshnak

[Defunkt 431]

Well like I said, there's going to be plenty of people who wouldn't like it but given the status quo hasn't yielded a sustainable outcome for kju I don't really think he should be too concerned about the opinions of those who want to persist with it.

I think there'd be a lot of people thrilled to see kju find a model that allowed him to continue on with the likes of AiA and IFA3 and quite a few that wouldn't mind spending a few dollars to participate in the development discussion and perhaps get some preview screenshots. Some people have the time to mod, some people's work prevents that but allows them to contribute a little in financial support. Let's not be overly concerned about those who don't want to contribute anything (but who will often bitch as though they had).

[Chairborne 2594]

The community doesn't grow when a group of few elitists stand by themselves and keep valuable knowledge for themselves, and Kju certainly didn't become one of the most popular community members by not helping people for free out of passion.

That knowledge is what would make his work/website profitable, he knows how to do things that others don't (yet).

In the current situation, he can't be worse off (he can't earn less than 0), if he had a stable income of (say) €1000 per month, everytime he helps someone he runs the risk of helping a competitor, thus possibly reducing his income.

Even in the situation where you have your private club and people have to pay to get in, there's no insurance that those who know how to do things will eventually teach the next generation.

If all the big contributors were to follow this, newbies would have an even harder time to start modding, and when those veterans decide to leave Arma all their knowledge is lost.

How can this be good? We all started from somewhere (with very rare exceptions) without having to pay anyone, why should we stick it up to the next generation of modders?

True, but that was their free choice to make their work dependent on someone's else work. I still don't see extortion here. There is a choice and a consequence of it, that's all.

How can they predict that one year from now the mod they need will have to be payed??

If they knew it beforehand they could've chosen differently.

Now if they want their project to move on they are forced to pay or come up with something new and waste time for something that was already done. In any case you are worse off, even if money doesn't come out of your wallet or someone doesn't phisically hurt you otherwise. There you go.

But you're talking about one thing, while I about a bit another. I don't insist, it must by exactly that "donate or we'll not work" model serving well the community. I'm only saying, it's not a heresy to think about modding not as about solely the hobby, like some keep repeating, but sometimes also as for honest way to earn some cash if possible. And to prolong motivation for burned out, but very valuable experienced modders. Finding best way is separate problem. If given method would be not accepted by potential donors, then it will be not chosen as ineffective, so IMO no worries about dying community due to all modders switching to paid work. It would happen already, if it were to happen.

Maybe it hasn't happened because the wide majority of modders is restrained by a moral code and considers this a hobby, compared to those who consider this a possible career.

Who knows, maybe one day Arma will become the next Steam Greenlight, flooded with junk made by wannabe developers and kids throwing away their week loans for "rock simulator".

Edited January 17, 2015 by Chairborne

[10pb 12]

I can't see Arma modding itself ever providing a sustainable income for anyone unless it's paired with either of the two main income sources for gaming: Twitch and YouTube.

YouTube is probably not the best format for modders, but it'd be interesting to see some Arma work streamed on Twitch's relatively new Game Development section (http://www.twitch.tv/directory/game/Game%20Development)

As boring as watching someone debug and write config files might sound, half of the actual gameplay streams on Twitch are mind-numbingly boring anyway, but the creator<->consumer relationship is real, and that's what allows a lot of people to make a good living from it.

Personally I'd rather watch someone create mods than play a game. I'd also be a whole lot more inclined to pay them to do so since modding is actually hard work compared to streaming gameplay.

I'm not saying Arma modders are likely to make an income from Twitch that would rival the top streamers there, but surely it wouldn't result in any less money being earned via donations?

[Rydygier 1302]

How can they predict that one year from now the mod they need will have to be payed??

If you base your work on other modder's work, it's not that hard to predict, so anything may happen like he abandoning his work for any reason. Such things happen, it's nothing surpirising. Particular reason isn't that important. I do not say, they shouldn't. But such risk is pretty obvious and should be taken into account when decision is made.

Now if they want their project to move on they are forced to pay or come up with something new and waste time for something that was already done. In any case you are worse off, even if money doesn't come out of your wallet or someone doesn't phisically hurt you otherwise. There you go.

They aren't FORCED to do anything. And being forced is the clue of extortion. BTW I wouldn't wish to any modder such potential pressure, as when he decides to abandon such project, many decided to rely on.

Maybe it hasn't happened because the wide majority of modders is restrained by a moral code and considers this a hobby

So, could you perhaps name or list that supposed "moral code" supposedly forcing modders to threat their work as a hobby alone? Because I so far see only one actual reason - ostracism, if you dare to try otherwise.

Who knows, maybe one day Arma will become the next Steam Greenlight, flooded with junk made by wannabe developers and kids throwing away their week loans for "rock simulator".

No one knows. You're talking, like the future in this matter is deciding in this discussion. But this or something else will happen or not despite possible conclusion of our conversation. We barely can try to diagnose and analyze trends and situation. And be mentally prepared. Not really shape the future. So I'm saying, trends ARE shifting towards $ across the whole internet (what's interesting, paired with increased amount of free content), modding communities not excluded. Boundary between what's "professional", and what's "indie" probably never was thinner. I would say, it's good thing. Donations, kickstarters, ads, premium, shady "insert a coin" servers, monetizing... People recognized internet as good place for earning the money for work (not always own, sadly...), not worse than regular office or whatever. Or better. And finding new ways to do so, honest and not. It's bigger than our small Arma world.

Edited January 17, 2015 by Rydygier

[ProfTournesol 956]

My own point of view is that instead of wasting 500 000 € in the MANW contest, BIS should have asked the community what it really needed to help and sustain modding. IMHO our community needs a modding community manager such as kju, hired by BIS, that will help develop and document modding tools and resources, paying community members that are involved in developing and documenting those tools and resources.

[EddiePrice 16]

My own point of view is that instead of wasting 500 000 € in the MANW contest, BIS should have asked the community what it really needed to help and sustain modding.

Either that or kept that €500k in the budget for ArmA3 and pay their own developers to make an expansion the community want to see, not that I have any idea about the financial ins and outs of MANW. Anyway I'd say if you're in this for the money, then prepare to be disappointed. Sure donations might help, but don't be disheartened if the number of donations dont match up to what you think your work is worth.

Edited January 17, 2015 by EddiePrice

[fn_Quiksilver 1633]

Either that or kept that €500k in the budget for ArmA3 and pay their own developers to make an expansion the community want to see, not that I have any idea about the financial ins and outs of MANW. Anyway I'd say if you're in this for the money, then prepare to be disappointed. Sure donations might help, but don't be disheartened if the number of donations dont match up to what you think your work is worth.

This is inefficient use of funds.

$500,000 would cover the salary and other expenses of about 8 staff for 1 year, working 40 hrs a week.

What you have in the MANW contest is dozens of people spending literally their entire lives on these project for many months, for free. At the end, BIS can spend a relatively small amount of time and money and cherry pick the good stuff, and integrate that into the game/engine. They are allowed to do this without permission, however this contest got relatively many (compared to otherwise) people spending unknown number of hours on the projects. That is much more efficient use of funds to get others to do the bulk of the work for free.

A few of them will receive a little reward for this, but in general BIS has received much higher number of man-hours-per-$$ than they would had just paid 8 staff for a year.

IMO it was a good decision to run the contest, but think some of the good MP content creators dropped out early due to incredibly annoying bugs in 1.18 to 1.24, so some areas of the contest ended up a little thinner than expected.

[das attorney 857]

It's a nice tax break as well for them I bet.

[Chairborne 2594]

Plus all the debugging made by the community during development of said mods instead of dedicated beta testers. :)

[Jackal326 1158]

This is inefficient use of funds.

$500,000 would cover the salary and other expenses of about 8 staff for 1 year, working 40 hrs a week.

What you have in the MANW contest is dozens of people spending literally their entire lives on these project for many months, for free. At the end, BIS can spend a relatively small amount of time and money and cherry pick the good stuff, and integrate that into the game/engine. They are allowed to do this without permission, however this contest got relatively many (compared to otherwise) people spending unknown number of hours on the projects. That is much more efficient use of funds to get others to do the bulk of the work for free.

A few of them will receive a little reward for this, but in general BIS has received much higher number of man-hours-per-$$ than they would had just paid 8 staff for a year.

IMO it was a good decision to run the contest, but think some of the good MP content creators dropped out early due to incredibly annoying bugs in 1.18 to 1.24, so some areas of the contest ended up a little thinner than expected.

Consider how many of those mods are any good/worth while additions. Consider how many of them were rush jobs just to get in within the deadline. Consider how many of those projects wont be finished because the creators rushed them for the deadline and simply can't be bothered to finish them (or quit releasing anything further because they don't win). Consider those 8 guys, working solidly for a year on an official DLC and compare the standard of the end result to the "standard" of some of the submissions made for the MANW. I'd have rather that money be kept inhouse for BI to work on DLCs rather than some of the half-arsed attempts submitted for MANW.

[roshnak 41]

Consider how many of those mods are any good/worth while additions. Consider how many of them were rush jobs just to get in within the deadline. Consider how many of those projects wont be finished because the creators rushed them for the deadline and simply can't be bothered to finish them (or quit releasing anything further because they don't win). Consider those 8 guys, working solidly for a year on an official DLC and compare the standard of the end result to the "standard" of some of the submissions made for the MANW. I'd have rather that money be kept inhouse for BI to work on DLCs rather than some of the half-arsed attempts submitted for MANW.

Basically, this. What MANW actually resulted in was a bunch of poorly made or rushed addons by people attempting to cash in on the prize, and a bunch of better addons made by people who would have made them anyway. Plus, unlike an expansion or DLC, there is very little return on the investment, unless you think that something that was submitted to MANW was so good that it will cause a substantial number of people who would not otherwise have bought Arma 3 to purchase it just to use the MANW content.

[fabio_chavez 103]

A few of them will receive a little reward for this, but in general BIS has received much higher number of man-hours-per-$$ than they would had just paid 8 staff for a year.

IMO it was a good decision to run the contest.

there may be some truth to it but eventually the amount of extra manhours generated by MANW is a bit hard to tell since people would have been creating mods anyway but lets say MANW was an incentive that created a really significant amount of extra manhours, quantity doesnt equal quality and especially in context to armas plenty of flaws even 1000 modders cant make up for 8 real developers working on the back end and adressing the fundamental problems like GUI, Gamemodes, Performance, Editor & Tools etc in a comprehensive and focused manner. Take Zeus for example, in its current state it consists of a bunch of halfbaked features that miss to really pick up the loose ends of some of the longstanding problems of arma, maybe if they would have had one more guy they would have been able to add something fancy like an arsenal button to the ig menu or a save button or hightech stuff like that... but right now, besides the realtime gamemaster aspect of zeus its just a halfassed 3d editor thrown on top of a crappy antique 2D editor without any mindfull integration. If you have so many construction sites, you can throw as much user generated content at arma3 as you want, it will never cover up the core issues...

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

nice darkhorse, you made that post in multiple threads now, the problem is, it consists of completely false accusations, he didnt ask for "thousands upon thousands" lol wtf... he stated clearly that his primary goal was to make the donations help covering his social security to make sure he can go to a doctor if he get ill while modding, and so that he doesnt starve... aka minimum of sustainability to pursue his modding goals and all of that while scraping a career as a industry professional as whom he would have earned litterally "thousands upon thousands", maybe get you facts straight...

multiple threads? Nope. I haven't been very active in these forums for a while now. You can check my profile page, Fabio. I probably said something when he first announced his Patreon and I saw the goals, because I remember laughing at them, but definitely didn't post in multiple threads, then or now.

As for "false accusations" I believe you need to educate yourself on Kju's "experiment". His hope was to get enough money a month from donations "to make a living from" making a new game mode for ArmA 3. Here in the US those words mean an ABSOLUTE minimum of around $1,000 a month. Except, working minimum wage gets you around that mark, over it if I remember correctly (assuming 40 hours a week, not 32) and you still don't have enough money for the whole month and have to rely on government assistance in the form of "foodstamps". Food, water, electric, (natural gas, if his house uses it), cell phone bill or home phone or both, internet bill, TV bill (if he watches TV), gasoline/petrol for a car (buttloads more expensive than in the US, if he's in Europe. I think Germany? not sure), cigarette money if he smokes, car insurance, health insurance or doctors bills, pet food if applicable, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. Which, if you just say "screw it" when it comes to calculating precisely how much money it takes to cover every single expense and probably have a hundred or couple hundred dollars/euros/whatever left over, comes to "thousands upon thousands".

I don't laugh at the amount Kju needed, I laugh because he hoped to get it from this community. We're all frakking misers, when it counts anyways (I may or may not have been one of the suckers who bought the supporters edition) and that won't change. Only the BF2 and CoD crowd have adopted the "throw money at people" methods. Oh, and people who play The Sims. (Kind of FSX too, but it seems most of the paid stuff there is brilliantly done, and I don't want to insult them by lumping them in with CoD.)

Note to Kju: I've got nothing against you, man. I'm just a very straight-forward person, I don't like bullshit (in general. doesn't apply to this particular situation or you), and I tend to speak plainly and without consideration for people taking offense at my words. I know you've been around a long time, I know you've contributed quite a bit to this community over the years, which is why I was disappointed with this whole thing from the beginning. You know this community. Yet you hoped to get us/it/whatever to pay you (enough to make a living, in your own words) to make a game mode for A3. I don't know why you didn't just apply at BI instead, I assume you have your own reasons, but it's confused me from the start. You clearly stated you had no intention of doing ArmA modding as a hobby anymore when you posted 4 months ago or so. Why draw it out? Did you hope that the threat/statement of your intention to leave the community (essentially. since you said you no longer play, no longer wish to do it as a hobby, and that all your PC time is limited due to injury and must be strictly work) would spark a legion of people to become your employer? I mean, damn, man, that's just silly. Not even stupid, it's just downright silly. Posting the knowledge you gained from your attempt is somewhat useful, probably, but that you made the attempt at all is just sad. We all knew it couldn't be done, you had to have known that yourself. :(

[fn_Quiksilver 1633]

there may be some truth to it but eventually the amount of extra manhours generated by MANW is a bit hard to tell since people would have been creating mods anyway but lets say MANW was an incentive that created a really significant amount of extra manhours, quantity doesnt equal quality and especially in context to armas plenty of flaws even 1000 modders cant make up for 8 real developers working on the back end and adressing the fundamental problems like GUI, Gamemodes, Performance, Editor & Tools etc in a comprehensive and focused manner. Take Zeus for example, in its current state it consists of a bunch of halfbaked features that miss to really pick up the loose ends of some of the longstanding problems of arma, maybe if they would have had one more guy they would have been able to add something fancy like an arsenal button to the ig menu or a save button or hightech stuff like that... but right now, besides the realtime gamemaster aspect of zeus its just a halfassed 3d editor thrown on top of a crappy antique 2D editor without any mindfull integration. If you have so many construction sites, you can throw as much user generated content at arma3 as you want, it will never cover up the core issues...

Hey I think Moricky's Zeus is fine in its current state. There are annoying things that I have reported feedback about, for instance the drawMinefields thread, the silly eagle and silly 'Zeus has ascended' notification.

It also has trouble editing remote vehicles. As one small example:

<vehicle object> setDir (direction);

That is SP code. For MP, you have to account for that vehicle object being owned by another machine. So you have to do this instead:

_v = vehicle;
if (local _v) then {
_v setDir (desired direction)
} else {
[[_v,(desired direction)],'setDir',(owner _v),FALSE] spawn BIS_fnc_MP;
};

Also it is lacking some area tools that MCC makes great use of. For instance, garrisoning a bunch of units is a pain in the ass with Zeus, but simply a click-drag with MCC. Ambience is also hard to manage, as each unit/group has to be manually managed.

But for a simple, easy to understand, easy to use tool for server admins, mission curators, etc ... It is certainly enough to get the job done.

Its actually a great example of something that community modders would have a lot of trouble trying to match. Karel Moricky had all the engine tools available and created a stack of functions and event handlers to support the Curator module. Its a case in point of the difference that one person on the inside can make vs X number on the outside.

[fabio_chavez 103]

@darkhorse, i wonder if you even bothered to read the thread, besides i dont even understand half of what you are saying... BF2/CoD crowd (who is that even supposed to be?) throwing money at people? what? nevermind i dont even care for an elaboration.

---------- Post added at 12:31 ---------- Previous post was at 12:15 ----------

Hey I think Moricky's Zeus is fine in its current state. There are annoying things that I have reported feedback about, for instance the drawMinefields thread, the silly eagle and silly 'Zeus has ascended' notification.

It also has trouble editing remote vehicles....

-The Point i wanted to make is that the problem with Zeus is not what it does but what it NOT does, i would argue that Zeus misses to adress many issues of arma3 that could have been fixed or improved well within the Zeus framework and it would have been a opportunity to fix some longstanding issues for good if they would have simply put some more resources into it. Btw its was not (merely) meant to bash Zeus but rather to take it as an example for a spot where BI could have got greater leverage for its invested resources, but missed the opportunty to do so. MCC Sandbox then has to invest resources to fix the halfa*sed unfinished stuff that could have been invested into innovation. This example could put into question the efficiency of BIs resource management when it comes to the quality of features.

Edited January 18, 2015 by Fabio_Chavez

[inlesco 233]

Speaking of MCC, in some areas, it clearly surpasses Zeus, which is quite surprising on one part, but not so much on the other (BIS has always been a little notorious on half-baked features / gamemodes in-game).

I feel someone should make a fair comparison MCC vs. Zeus. Modding should be held in high regards.

[Chairborne 2594]

MCC has many years of development behind it, Zeus has been published in March last year (if i'm not mistaken).

It was developed by BIS, ok, but coding takes time for everyone. :D