Arma 3 Server monetization

[I give up 152]

I have a doubt.

How this:

"Limiting access to only paying players is allowed"

Match with this:

"Accepting donations is allowed, but to avoid any doubts: not providing donations must not prevent anyone from accessing the content"

Any clarification will be apreciated.

[Jona33 51]

I have a doubt.

How this:

"Limiting access to only paying players is allowed"

Match with this:

"Accepting donations is allowed, but to avoid any doubts: not providing donations must not prevent anyone from accessing the content"

Any clarification will be apreciated.

I believe limiting access to only paying players means that you require approval by Bohemia themselves (and I hope occasional inspections) as opposed to the donations section which you don't require approval for, but you're not allowed to limit anything. So I could donate a fiver to any server I like, but cannot receive anything in return or I can pay a fiver to certain approved servers and be allowed to join.

Obviously BI clarification is best but that's my interpretation.

[I give up 152]

I am sorry, but I do not need BIS approval to limit the access in my server to only paying players. The server is mine.

The point is, if I can limit the access to my server, I can limit also the access for those who do not donate.

Unless I am looking at this in a wrong way, I am not following it.

[Jona33 51]

I am sorry, but I do not need BIS approval to limit the access in my server to only paying players. The server is mine.

The point is, if I can limit the access to my server, I can limit also the access for those who do not donate.

Unless I am looking at this in a wrong way, I am not following it.

You do, because otherwise you're in breach of BIS EULA, you get reported and they shut the server down (in theory). You may pay for the server but it's still their game.

[mobile_medic 43]

I am sorry, but I do not need BIS approval to limit the access in my server to only paying players. The server is mine.

The point is, if I can limit the access to my server, I can limit also the access for those who do not donate.

Unless I am looking at this in a wrong way, I am not following it.

But, the game(s) you run on it are not yours, and you must abide by certain terms laid out by the actual owners of the IP you wish to charge money for.

[I give up 152]

Can you provide me the link where I can read the EULA saying that I cannot have my server private allowing only the access for players that I want to?

Thanks

[Jona33 51]

Can you provide me the link where I can read the EULA saying that I cannot have my server private allowing only the access for players that I want to?

Thanks

http://www.bistudio.com/monetization

From February 1st 2015, anyone is allowed to monetize their Arma 3 server as long as they're registered, approved and listed on http://www.bistudio.com/monetization/approved:

If we feel anyone on the list at http://www.bistudio.com/monetization/approved is exploiting any loopholes or is not acting in the best interests of the Arma 3 community, we will remove them. That will mean they will have to cease this kind of monetization immediately or face legal action.

*EULA may have been the wrong term, but the point stands, charging players to access your server if you are not on the approved list is not allowed. People sending you donations is allowed but there can be no reward for these donations.

You can obviously have a private server simply by putting a password on it, as most communities do. But you can't change people to get the password unless you're on the list.

[terox 316]

Best way to put B.I on the spot and force their hand in this is for all 3rd party content makers to join forces and "Go on strike" so to speak for what, a month.

Sounds a bit drastic, other modding communities in other games have done this and it has proven to be very effective.

B.I have nothing without modders other than an engine and to be perfectly honest, their semi futuristic sci fi content isnt what the milsim side of the community wanted.

[I give up 152]

If I am going to ask for donations I have to keep my server open to public?

Is that what is being said?

[Jona33 51]

If I am going to ask for donations I have to keep my server open to public?

Is that what has being said?

Not necessarily, but the condition for joining the server cannot be a donation. So if you run a private server and only allow certain people to join that's fine, if they send donations that's fine. But saying that donators will receive access or prioritisation over those who haven't donated isn't allowed.

**Obviously this is my interpretation, I don't actually speak for BI (funnily enough)**.

[I give up 152]

So I cant give administration or moderation positions or some other previlege like prioritisation in access to those who contribute to pay the server bills, through donations?

[Jona33 51]

So I cant give administration or moderation positions or some other previlege like prioritisation in access to those who contribute to pay the server bills, through donations?

That's what I would guess.

[I give up 152]

WOW, it's ok charging for items and block server access because of it, but it's not ok to give privileged access to those who help paying the bills. Just WOW.

[Jackal326 1158]

WOW, it's ok charging for items and block server access because of it, but it's not ok to give privileged access to those who help paying the bills. Just WOW.

Go read the thread again.

[das attorney 857]

Best way to put B.I on the spot and force their hand in this is for all 3rd party content makers to join forces and "Go on strike" so to speak for what, a month.

Sounds a bit drastic, other modding communities in other games have done this and it has proven to be very effective.

B.I have nothing without modders other than an engine and to be perfectly honest, their semi futuristic sci fi content isnt what the milsim side of the community wanted.

Hi mate,

I'd be up for this - I haven't really released any content under A3 but working on a big project that I wanted to release soon. Not sure about releasing now under the current climate). I can do my bit though and not log in on these forums and help out with scripting queries. (which I do often) for example tonight:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?188316-Writing-a-function-to-find-available-person-turrets-(FFV-seats)&p=2870483&viewfull=1#post2870483

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?188311-Need-help-for-suppressors-durability-script&p=2870465&viewfull=1#post2870465

It's not that I hold anything against anyone on the forums and want to withhold help but if they were turned into a ghost town for a month or so, then I think that would send a suitable message to Bohemia.

In the long term anyway, I see not much reason to provide scripts and so on if they are to be "borrowed" and used for capital gain. Even in the remote chance I found out someone was using them for $$$ I couldn't really prove they copied it (as they could claim they followed a similar thought process to come up with remarkably similar code).

I'm already done with testing and playing on dev-branch for various reasons, so this could be a good time to get on with other stuff (ie away from the PC lol).

[mihikle 2]

So who will be paid to fulfill the full-time job of going through and checking all the servers?

[Jastreb 69]

I think this is a horrible mistake. A better model for this is a form of limited public server licenses.

To explain it better I will just mention PR mod for BF2 or Arma2, where server files were not available to general public, and thus content and gameplay was preserved. Now since you want to allow this monetization thing, you can do just this, and put these servers in the separate filter from the others. Just to make sure you get it - I am not saying you to limit server files or hosting, just limit those who want to monetize. You will have better control over them in this way, and scene will not turn upside down. For this you may create separate branch of server app and add an option in game UI to filter it and just disable running any mods on these servers, or yet again add the ones allowed to be monetized.

While I do not support this solution at all I can understand it to some point, but at "red apache" thing and "perks" you lost me. So I'm trying to think trough a solution. If its too complicated then disregard.

Edited January 31, 2015 by _MaSSive

[tupolov 520]

Let's not get carried away here, there is a lot of assumption and speculation.

We need BIS to clarify how they plan to enforce this. How can they take down a server? Is there a steam or BE capability here? How can they protect modders content?

Would be good for BIS to clarify here.

Are we going down the road where Modders need to encrypt their content to prevent it being ripped? I.e. BIS allowing creation of EBO. I know this doesn't protect against dumping functions/scripts in game, but does protect some IP.

Can we implement a server check in our content using an extension or in engine mechanism?

[terox 316]

Taking into consideration that

I refer to 3rd party content as

• Scripts
  
• Missions
  
• Mission templates
  
• Addons
  
• Mods
  
• Tutorials
  

a) 3rd party content is one of the main stays off this community and has been the backbone of it for over 12 years

b) Community run servers have been provided free of charge with no expectations of monetary gain from its members for that same length of time

c) 3rd party content has (In the vast majority of cases) always been released in good faith for open use by all

d) 3rd party content has been de pbo'd, and recreated by others often improving on the initial creation or at the very least has allowed others to learn new skills or improve their existing skills

e) Because of the above, 3rd party content has improved over the years and such mods as DayZ, A3 life, AGM, Alive, ACRE & Task Force Radio (And way too many more to mention) have come to life

f) Money has never changed hands for any of it other than totally voluntary donations (Until now)

These are what makes the community a great and long lived community.

Its openness and its contributors and supporters who have done so out of love for the game and the appreciation they get when their content or their servers are used.

I think the following are the main principles that need to be catered for

1) 3rd party content providers should be encouraged to continue creating content (But not through money as this corrupts). This means

..... a) Good tool support and documentation from B.I

..... b) Expectations of credit where credit is due from those who have reworked this content

..... c) Enforcements of their EULA's if they define one

..... d) Appreciation and respect for their efforts by everyone

2) 3rd party contend makers should only expect reward in the form of gratitude and donations and should do what they do because of the satisfaction and gratitude they get from others using it. Their should be no other motivation than that, period.

3) Server owners should be encouraged to continue running servers (But not through money as this corrupts). This means

..... a) Good support and documentation from B.I

..... b) Better tools and support for Mission creation

..... c) Appreciation and respect for their efforts by everyone

4) Server owners should only expect reward in the form of gratitude and donations and should do what they do because of the satisfaction and gratitude they get from others using their servers. Their should be no other motivation than that, period.

By following these principles we should get back to being a very friendly community where all those who work towards creating a great gaming environment do it because they want too, not because of greed, which will inevitably kill us and i for one do not want that.

So PLEASE B.I do not continue down this path, it is the wrong route and will in the long run have a very negative effect on what we have built over the last decade.

I would add one exception to the above..

Exceptional, outstanding quality 3rd party content should wherever it is feasible and the creator sio wishes be added to an official DLC pack turning what would have only been hosted on an addon server into vanilla content.

I doubt there would be any issues here with the 3rd parties concerned to allow B.I to do this and its about time this actually happened.

I would love to see a

Vietnam DLC

WW2 DLC

RHS DLC

etc etc

Edited January 31, 2015 by Terox

[[evo] dan 79]

Taking into consideration that

I refer to 3rd party content as

• Scripts
  
• Missions
  
• Mission templates
  
• Addons
  
• Mods
  
• Tutorials
  

a) 3rd party content is one of the main stays off this community and has been the backbone of it for over 12 years

b) Community run servers have been provided free of charge with no expectations of monetary gain from its members for that same length of time

c) 3rd party content has (In the vast majority of cases) always been released in good faith for open use by all

d) 3rd party content has been de pbo'd, and recreated by others often improving on the initial creation or at the very least has allowed others to learn new skills or improve their existing skills

e) Because of the above, 3rd party content has improved over the years and such mods as DayZ, A3 life, AGM, Alive, ACRE & Task Force Radio (And way too many more to mention) have come to life

f) Money has never changed hands for any of it other than totally voluntary donations (Until now)

These are what makes the community a great and long lived community.

Its openness and its contributors and supporters who have done so out of love for the game and the appreciation they get when their content or their servers are used.

I think the following are the main principles that need to be catered for

1) 3rd party content providers should be encouraged to continue creating content (But not through money as this corrupts). This means

..... a) Good tool support and documentation from B.I

..... b) Expectations of credit where credit is due from those who have reworked this content

..... c) Enforcements of their EULA's if they define one

..... d) Appreciation and respect for their efforts by everyone

2) 3rd party contend makers should only expect reward in the form of gratitude and donations and should do what they do because of the satisfaction and gratitude they get from others using it. Their should be no other motivation than that, period.

3) Server owners should be encouraged to continue running servers (But not through money as this corrupts). This means

..... a) Good support and documentation from B.I

..... b) Better tools and support for Mission creation

..... c) Appreciation and respect for their efforts by everyone

4) Server owners should only expect reward in the form of gratitude and donations and should do what they do because of the satisfaction and gratitude they get from others using their servers. Their should be no other motivation than that, period.

By following these principles we should get back to being a very friendly community where all those who work towards creating a great gaming environment do it because they want too, not because of greed, which will inevitably kill us and i for one do not want that.

So PLEASE B.I do not continue down this path, it is the wrong route and will in the long run have a very negative effect on what we have built over the last decade.

I would add one exception to the above..

Exceptional, outstanding quality 3rd party content should wherever it is feasible and the creator sio wishes be added to an official DLC pack turning what would have only been hosted on an addon server into vanilla content.

I doubt there would be any issues here with the 3rd parties concerned to allow B.I to do this and its about time this actually happened.

I would love to see a

Vietnam DLC

WW2 DLC

RHS DLC

etc etc

+1 to that Terox

[anthariel 165]

I totally agree with Terox and with Tupolov.

Also, if you want to create your own public server, you know that this server will cost you X€ per month so if you do not want to spend some money on your server, then... don't buy it and don't create this server.

For the past 10 years, thousands of server was created by the community, they survive by donations or simply by the kindness of the server admin who pays a server for others and himself where they can play on it.

Now since the Beta of ArmA 3, we can see some server with " Donator Shop " ( the name says everything..) I do not know how it is in the United States or all around the world but here in France, Belgium, Canada and Switzerland, hundreds of server are profiting from this system to earn some money. :mad:

Just an simple calculation :

Take a large server with 90 slots and with ~80 players connected all of the afternoon :

2/8 of these player buy an donator pack to have access to an awesome car pack for the price of 5€ per month.

2/8 of 80 players = 20 players, 20 players x 5€ = 100€ per month.

Of course, a big server haven't only 80 players per day maybe 200 or 250 players.

But yeah, there's a lot of other way to monetize your server, create an trailer of your server and monetize your video on Youtube, add Google Adsense on your website or your forums, explain to your player the difficulties of maintaining an server and ask them a little donation without reward if they like your server. :)

Sorry for my bad English.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Anthariel

[Aeriyn 10]

+1 to Terox. Thanks for voicing out in detail for the rest of us.

[mihikle 2]

Allowing monetized servers is bollocks. If a community needs help to start up, then host your own server on your machine. When you have enough players (if you actually offer something different to everyone else, people will come!), then you can ask for voluntary donations. Allowing monetized servers will destroy communities - I would never join a group I have to pay to be in to play a game I already bought. This policy change is simply BI being too goddamn lazy to enforce their own EULA and stop A3L making money off of their work.

And pay for addons (which IS coming later in the year - I'll keep my several sources anon) will be the end of ArmA 3, and the whole series. It's built on modding. ArmA 2 you could play as a vanilla game because it worked properly, AI died when shot, BI could just about get away with pay for addons on that. ArmA 3 vanilla comparatively is total rubbish. The base game is so poor its unplayable in my view. Now you want to charge for addons? And for the record, this isn't "pay $5 and it goes to the addon maker", this is "We take $1, Steam take $1 and the author gets the remainder". It's total rubbish. How this will do anything other than stop people playing and buying your game is beyond me. If it does come in, I'll stop playing ArmA 3. And I'll do everything I can to ensure no-one I know buys a copy of this game.

BI I hope you do realize you're killing your own game. If A3 Life want to do this kind of thing, then like DayZ, make a separate game. Don't let the rest of the entire community suffer because of a few tools who you can't be bothered going after. I'm in such disgust over your policy for monetized servers and monetized addons, I can't even put it into words properly.

[Jackal326 1158]

...I'm in such disgust over your policy for monetized servers and monetized addons, I can't even put it into words properly.

You did a pretty good job. If what you said about paying for addons is true, did your "anonymous sources" reveal if that was to become compulsory/mandatory (i.e. addon makers are forced to set a price on Steam workshop when publishing), or if it were an optional thing and we could still release addons free of charge via the usual channels (PlayWithSix, Armaholic mirros etc.)? That would truly be a test of "who is making mods to make money" and who actually does it for the love of making something...

2: "12 O'CLOCK, ENEMY Money-Grabbing Whore, 500M"

3: "HOSTILE DOWN!"

[p_siddy 58]

Lets all take a deep breath here.

So far I think the only mistake is the fact that BI haven't really released a lot of information. There is very little detail in what is/isn't allowed, especially surrounding...

do not affect gameplay in any way, is allowed. Cosmetic perks are allowed.

This leaves a lot to speculation, and everyone knows that speculation is often very wrong.

BI need to release a much more in depth guide to what will be allowed, what wont be allowed and what will happen if someone oversteps the line.

For an example, Youtube, https://www.youtube.com/account_monetization

That's a hell of a lot more information there, and that's for making videos.