Jump to content
PuFu

Server monetization program

Monetization program  

204 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you feel that the current monetization program is / was beneficial for the community at large?

    • YES
      27
    • NO
      177
  2. 2. Would you agree with server monetization program

    • YES
      40
    • NO
      164
  3. 3. Would you agree with addon monetization program

    • YES
      54
    • NO
      150


Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, djotacon said:

 

And if the modder dies he is willing to udpate from the afterworld?

 

When you buy a software there's no eternal updates. End of this point.

 

 

What games please? I think this is another example of "fear to nothing"...

 

 

 

Your argument is spurious.  If you are here, you are responsible for at least some "reasonable" amount of time which needs to be well defined and conspicuous.  If you sell something Monday that is patched to oblivion on Tuesday by BIS you had better believe that your customers will be looking for a fix by Wednesday or you are going to see some small claims filings at least or a class action at worst. 

 

Examples of devs and pubs killing modding....

 

Battlefield

Call Of Duty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Delta Hawk said:

There are bad sides to selling mods and BIS has to consider them, regardless of how we may feel.  Ultimately they're going to do what's in their best interests.  The only game I know of that allows selling of mods is Microsoft flight simulator, which probably did more harm than it did good.  If anybody else knows games that allows modders to sell their work please let me know.

 

Good example... premium addons work for FS.  They have for a long time and an entire addon ecosystem sprouted up around the game because if it and still persists to this day.

Bad example... primarily single player experience where a new addon does not fracture the player base.

 

It's already maddeningly difficult to find a good server to play in because the modpack requirements are not palatable.  I cant imagine what it will be like if players have to pick and choose.  ArmA communities will blow up over this.  Sure new ones will rise up.  If you burn down the forest, eventually the trees grow back but unlike mother nature, business (especially entertainment software) do not have the luxury of waiting very long for recovery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, lawndartleo said:

Bad example... primarily single player experience where a new addon does not fracture the player base.

 

Multiplayer games in ArmA are already fractured but it's no big deal because everything is free and simply requires subscribing to the mod that's required by the server and waiting for a few minutes in most cases.  Some servers run quite a few mods.  I can't speak for everyone else but sometimes for me whether I go on a server or not depends on what addons are required.  For example, I have no problems going on a server that requires RHS, CUP or Exile, but then they add 5 small, random mods and that just doesn't appeal to me and then I look for another server.  Now, if I had to pay for those mods, much less the server, I would be more incline to playing on servers that didn't require all the mods.

 

Also, there's a small player base already with some mods, like Unsung and IF.  They're excellent mods but I find it hard to find servers with 5 or more people playing.  Monetizing the servers or mods may shrink that player base even more, which wouldn't be good for either the mod team or the server.

 

I guess my point is monetizing mods, much less servers, may discourage some from playing on certain servers.  Personally I think a donation system would serve both purposes without discouraging players from trying mods or servers.  If Steam had a donation system people can add money through their Steam account and with an easy click of a button donate to a mod their subscribed to or a server they joined.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2017 at 3:55 AM, Varanon said:

 

Ok, small price... you are aware that some servers charge an arm and a leg for their services. We've looked into a lot of servers that were monetizing CUP illegally, and I was taken aback by the amount of money they charge. I've seen servers that literally sell VIP access for 50 to 100 Dollar PER MONTH. If you do the math, that's MUCH MORE than what Arma 3 cost in the first place. So again, there are no upper limits for server monetization in place, so what argument do you want to bring forward to determine that modders have to have an upper limit on payments while server admins are free to charge whatever they want ? 

Regarding royalty payments: Yet again, server admins do not pay any royalty to BIS, but you think that modders should ? Any arguments that support that ? Because I get the idea that most of you who oppose paid mods base your opinions on "feelings".

The current system put in place by BI is unfair,...

Yes, I have a couple of arguments to support that....

 

Modders and Server hosters are not the same! 

 

Hosting a server is something completely different than making an add-on.
Hosting a server cost money every month for the people who host the server. It cost money every month because they choose to host the server EVERY MONTH! It's a continuous service that at least to some degree requires regular attention. (Server bugs, hacking/griefing, server restarts.)

 

Modders on the other hand make something and then they release it to everyone. They don't have to keep making the same mod over and over, they may come back and update it but other than that, you buy it and that's it. Just like how Arma is. Buy it once and you can use it almost however you want. 

 

Hosting a server is a service people pay for every month. It requires input from the host every month or more.

 

Mods or addons are content you buy and use. They don't usually require additional attention from the maker. 

 

For Example: 
Lets say I make an awesome AA-12 shotgun mod so that you could use my AA-12 on any map or in any server that had the mod too...  It took me a total of 5 hours to make the mod and after that I never touched it again...

 

You on the other hand, host a server where you are constantly recruiting new players, fixing bugs, doing admin duties, and paying a company to run your server... Every month you pay a set fee and every month you provide your players with a stable server by doing restarts, kicking trolls ect... This is something you or someone who works for you has to do EVERY MONTH... It's a service you provide. 

 

Why should a mod maker who spent 5 hours working on a mod be entitled to make as much as someone who constantly puts time and money into hosting a server?

 

I never suggested something that would stop modders from potentially making a really good mod and selling it to a million people for ...lets say $30 each... That would make a lot of money for them.

 

I also never suggested there should be anything that would stop a modder from making an awesome mod, selling it for $30, and then starting up and hosting his own server where he charges  $100 a month for a VIP slot. That would also make a lot of money for them.

 

(Royalties again)

If a mod maker wanted to pay for the rights to use the engine and then build their own game, that would be fine for them to charge whatever they wanted. But for someone to use the Arma platform and not have to pay anything back to the company would be kind of crazy on BIS's part. 

 

(Unfairness of current system)

And yes I agree that the current system seems a bit unfair because Servers can charge money for people to play on while also using other people's hard work (mods) 
But like I said before, a modder could still start their own server/ clan and charge for VIP and other junk if they wanted.
Players still make the choice to pay and play on those servers they like best. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, squirrel0311 said:

For Example: 
Lets say I make an awesome AA-12 shotgun mod so that you could use my AA-12 on any map or in any server that had the mod too...  It took me a total of 5 hours to make the mod and after that I never touched it again...

 

Why should a mod maker who spent 5 hours working on a mod be entitled to make as much as someone who constantly puts time and money into hosting a server?. 


You clearly have no concept of how much time goes into making assets, do you?

Quality can takes weeks, even months, there are some people here that have worked on their mods for years, so don't presume to know what we are capable of, nor our skillset, it doesn't help you in your argument. A 5 hour hackjob does not make an "awesome" asset.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to know what you're smoking when you think an "Awesome" weapon mod can be made in 5 hours (try 3 months) or that modding doesn't require any continuous time investment (Apparently you think that mods update themselves when Bohemia releases a patch that breaks things).

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, echoing the above, if the mod's anything more than a hack job or file compilation, the amount of raw man-hours for development STARTS at 5( and that's HELLA lowball) and goes up by a magnitude with every extra asset or aspect the mod takes on. It ignores post-release upkeep(BI patches breaking things is not uncommon), it ignores post-release community relations (comments,suggestions, bug reports), it ignores handling dealing ongoing with licensing violations and non-compliant server ops.It ignores the pre-sunk investment of time and money into having skills,tools and time(e.g, 3D software STARTS around $500, and can take days to get good enough with) to actually do mod work. To suggest it's a one-and-done affair is kind of myopic at best.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, squirrel0311 said:

Modders and Server hosters are not the same! 

In a nutshell, yes they are, both are providing something for others to enjoy and share.period.

The rest of your disingenuous comments towards addon makers are borderline flame bait.

 

Without addon makers servers would be hosting simple vanilla games, and I highly doubt that people want to pay x, y or z to play vanilla games, they are paying for what the contents are providing, not what the server itself is providing, only a complete rich kid fool would spend crazy money to play vanilla Arma3. 

4 hours ago, squirrel0311 said:

Hosting a server cost money every month for the people who host the server

Whose choice is this down to?

 

4 hours ago, squirrel0311 said:

You on the other hand, host a server where you are constantly recruiting new players, fixing bugs, doing admin duties, and paying a company to run your server... Every month you pay a set fee and every month you provide your players with a stable server by doing restarts, kicking trolls ect... This is something you or someone who works for you has to do EVERY MONTH... It's a service you provide

Did anyone force you take on such an enterprise?

Of course nobody bothers fixing bugs in their addons, it's what we do, we make shit that's broken, so we can sit back and laugh.. seriously mate, you have not a scoobie doo with regards to creating addons, you know that lane people keep telling you to stay in?

 

4 hours ago, squirrel0311 said:

Why should a mod maker who spent 5 hours working on a mod be entitled to make as much as someone who constantly puts time and money into hosting a server?

You run a server through choice, same as an addon maker does, unless you're doing it to make money, hence the whole monetization issues with regards to using addons without permission, for profit.

Seriously, you need to take a step back and reread what you wrote, as it's highly inflammatory indeed.

The difference between addon makers and server hosters ?  the former isn't driven by greed and the desire to make as much money off people as possible.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, squirrel0311 said:

 

For Example: 
Lets say I make an awesome AA-12 shotgun mod so that you could use my AA-12 on any map or in any server that had the mod too...  It took me a total of 5 hours to make the mod and after that I never touched it again...

 

You on the other hand, host a server where you are constantly recruiting new players, fixing bugs, doing admin duties, and paying a company to run your server... Every month you pay a set fee and every month you provide your players with a stable server by doing restarts, kicking trolls ect... This is something you or someone who works for you has to do EVERY MONTH... It's a service you provide. 

 

Why should a mod maker who spent 5 hours working on a mod be entitled to make as much as someone who constantly puts time and money into hosting a server?

 

Have you published any addons/mods?

 

It can take thousands of hours to learn and develop the competency to even take on many tasks.

 

I have spent many thousands of hours modding arma, and if I wanted to create assets (weapons, vehicles), I'm sure that is thousands more hours (wouldnt even know where to start with modeling at the moment).

 

I understand hosting successful servers takes a lot of time, effort and man-hours. I do this as well. In fact I'm often arguing with modders that for the end-user, competent server owners are just as important as content creators (many modders try to place themselves above other human components of the end-user experience).

 

but suggesting that learning how to make a quality addon that people want to use, is a trivial process, is asinine.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, toadie2k said:

Yeah, echoing the above, if the mod's anything more than a hack job or file compilation, the amount of raw man-hours for development STARTS at 5( and that's HELLA lowball) and goes up by a magnitude with every extra asset or aspect the mod takes on. It ignores post-release upkeep(BI patches breaking things is not uncommon), it ignores post-release community relations (comments,suggestions, bug reports), it ignores handling dealing ongoing with licensing violations and non-compliant server ops.It ignores the pre-sunk investment of time and money into having skills,tools and time(e.g, 3D software STARTS around $500, and can take days to get good enough with) to actually do mod work. To suggest it's a one-and-done affair is kind of myopic at best.

 

I would say development of any mod that catches people's attention, would start at 500 hours, and average in at ~1500 hours (including the time spent to learn and become competent).

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, squirrel0311 said:

Modders on the other hand make something and then they release it to everyone. They don't have to keep making the same mod over and over, they may come back and update it but other than that, you buy it and that's it. Just like how Arma is. Buy it once and you can use it almost however you want. 

 

I have to pay the license fees for the software I use every month. CUP needs to pay for their servers every month. You cannot just simply oversimplify everything

Addon making also potentially takes MUCH more time than setting up a server. Don't tell me "You have no idea", because yes I have an idea since I ran a game server in the past, I know how much work either side of the aisle is.

 

Quote

And yes I agree that the current system seems a bit unfair because Servers can charge money for people to play on while also using other people's hard work (mods) 
But like I said before, a modder could still start their own server/ clan and charge for VIP and other junk if they wanted.
Players still make the choice to pay and play on those servers they like best. 

 

This argument is bogus. You essentially are saying the system is fair because I could be doing both, host a server and mod. That is a ridiculous notion. That's like saying "don't complain that actors get so much money and you as a nurse don't get it, because you could be acting next to your nurse job. It just doesn't compute.

 

If it were the other way around, and servers could not monetize but addons could, would you propose server hosts to get into modding? I have my doubts.

 

Your "Awesome AA-12" mod, have you *actually* done that? Because, I am fairly confident in making weapons in the meantime but I take an average of about 40 hours to make a weapon from start to finish. You seem to completely underestimate the time required.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, squirrel0311 said:

Why should a mod maker who spent 5 hours working on a mod be entitled to make as much as someone who constantly puts time and money into hosting a server?

 

And i haven't touched A3 (incl. Tools) in the past 6 Months for more then 30min (real playtime is about 5%, Rest is coding.)

TQDpfgx.png

 

5 Hours... pff...

This is just MY time... and i am not the only psycho with some time, in this Thread.

 

P.S. (before i rewrite it again)

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, squirrel0311 said:

ignorant post

if you really don't understand how things work, please don't post at all...

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think also that this method is really unfair.

 

I spent around 400h on Arma 3 tools. My addons have been fairly popular by Life servers and I'm fine with it if they folllow my rules (no repack, ask permission, give credit and maintain a clear credit list in their website).

But unfortunatly, not even 20% of these servers are respecting our work.

 

Today someone brought to my attention that a server was using my modified addon in their modpack (reuploaded and retextured) without even asking.

Filled a report throught BI form... But guess what, it's not their problem if someone is messing with my IP : like i'll hunt for the german admin or check france authorities for a german gaming community (or lets laught a bit, a russian community).

 

It's sickening. I don't even want to work on my addon anymore if I know that 200 greedy server admins will abuse my work to monetize their shitty server when I'm not gaining anything.

 

All of this is unfair.

So I'm for a rework of the BI monetization rules.

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

 

It can take thousands of hours to learn and develop the competency to even take on many tasks.

 

Addons and game modes definitely take thousands of hours - I can agree to that.

If I look at my steam profile, I'm at just above 2000 hours of ArmA 3. I can guarantee that over 1500 of those hours were spent working on GWAR3 or one of my other never finished game modes.

 

If we're talking about cost of providing services as well, let's look at programming. I get paid around $25/hr to program professionally as a part of my job. If we do some real simple math, that attributes to an estimated $37,500 that I "lost out" on for working on my gamemode for free. So let's not compare money when talking about community provided content. I'm sure modellers/texture artists/etc can echo my sentiments.

 

Server hosting is literally the easiest service to provide if we're talking about community provided content (Servers, Addons, Missions all fall into this grouping).

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I have 6,000 hours on my arma tools, which doesn't take into account the development environment outside of ArmA tools, like fighting...uh I meant working with 3ds Max.  And even then professional tools like 3ds Max, Maya, Photoshop, Illustrator, Mudbox or zbrush costs thousands and thousands of dollars.  And not only that, professional training costs thousands and thousands of dollars also including at least two years of schooling.  Sure, you can learn how to do a high poly to low poly tutorial here and there and how to rig a character here and there or even use gimp and blender but personally I feel that's a different approach to video game art.  Even then a lot of online tutorials charge a subscription fee.

 

It's also unethical for a server to charge a fee while at the same time requiring a mod with no royalty payments to the mod maker, whether that royalty is from donations or server charges.  In fact I would feel compelled to stop making mods if servers required my mods and charged a fee with no royalty payment to me.  (Ironically, some servers are using my old ripped models from arma and charging for it, which is why I no longer make mods of a certain genre)  Now that I think about it I hope BIS considers that as monetizing servers with no royalties to mod makers may inadvertently discourage mod makers.  Which, comes back to the idea monetizing servers is a bad idea.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys,

 

I have had a very lengthy conversation with Bohemia's legal department about extending the monetization program. I send a letter to Mr. Španěl (BIS CEO) several weeks ago explaining exactly the influences that the monetization system had on our community.  His stance on monetization is the following (quote):

"I think the next big thing could be opening up Arma 3 to paid user-made content. It’s great to see talented mod-makers pulling off amazing missions, add-ons and mods as free content, but if we manage to find some incentive for the best mod-makers to develop more content,  I think we can raise the bar even higher." this was posted in an interview several years ago. 

 

The above makes clear the CEO's stance on monetization. Us, modders, put thousands of hours into creating new and intuitive content that keep the game alive. I think it's entirely fair for us modders to be able to obtain some kind of compensation. The current monetization guidelines are a good step in the right direction, but it still isn't fair. It takes thousands of hours to make a mod. It takes 10 minutes to setup a server. Yet only the server owners can make money, and with the modders permission he can even make money of the modders work, while the server owner can only pay a modder for the work he does "outside arma".

 

Addon monetization? Our community is already doing this by creating addons that only work on our server, and charging people for access to the server. And Bohemia is entirely fine with us doing so, but with all due respect to the modding community this doesn't seem fair. Relax the ArmA 3 Tools EULA and allow modders to earn a fair share as well. Monetization allowed us to pay industry professionals, experts in coding and modeling in particular, check out some of our videos on youtube and you can see exactly the results of (addon) monetization (e.g. we turned the game into a fire simulator). Make it easier for modders to make a living making mods and you will see more and more quality mods make their way into the arma universe.

 

-Kane

arma3projectlife.com

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very simple.  If you have a paid server then server owners have to pay for any mods you use.  If you server is free to join, then all addons are free to use.  Or am I simplifying it too much ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kremator said:

This is very simple.  If you have a paid server then server owners have to pay for any mods you use.  If you server is free to join, then all addons are free to use.  Or am I simplifying it too much ?

 

Yes, that would be an option. However the current arma 3 tools forbids any commercial use of mods, so doing this would currently be against the ArmA 3 Tools EULA yet I have explained in my previous post how one could bypass this easily :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, daphne said:

Addon monetization? Our community is already doing this by creating addons that only work on our server, and charging people for access to the server. And Bohemia is entirely fine with us doing so, but with all due respect to the modding community this doesn't seem fair. Relax the ArmA 3 Tools EULA and allow modders to earn a fair share as well.

 

If an artist creates artwork outside of ArmA tools nothing stops you from paying royalties or even donating to the artists who makes your content.  The ArmA EULA doesn't apply to donations or the original work made outside of ArmA tools.

 

No offense to people who run servers, but I wouldn't trust the servers to pay royalties to mod makers or content creators as far as I can throw them, which is why it would be best to have Steam or even BIS moderate any monetization.

 

But time will be the judge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, daphne said:

Addon monetization? Our community is already doing this by creating addons that only work on our server, and charging people for access to the server. And Bohemia is entirely fine with us doing so

and that is precisely where the issue lies. If everyone would take that route and put their mode behind a paywall, there would be no modding scene to begin with...

 

Quote

but with all due respect to the modding community this doesn't seem fair. Relax the ArmA 3 Tools EULA and allow modders to earn a fair share as well.

so gracious....
 

Quote

Monetization allowed us to pay industry professionals, experts in coding and modeling in particular, check out some of our videos on youtube and you can see exactly the results of (addon) monetization (e.g. we turned the game into a fire simulator). Make it easier for modders to make a living making mods and you will see more and more quality mods make their way into the arma universe.

no, let's get honest, monetization doesn't allow you to pay industry professionals...it allows you to pay hobbist modders.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

edit 2:

 

after digging a bit deeper about who you are:

1. you are the ones who started this particular petition:

https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/extend-the-arma-3-monetization-permission-and-save

 

stating the followings
a. 

Quote

Developing content is not cheap, our costs are over $5000 per month because our community utilizes professional content creators to create the modpack for our server.

yeah ok, why is it that i do not believe that

 

b. 

Quote

Our development has now been brought to halt, and our development costs are running our savings through. We are now in jeopardy of being put out of business.

so you openly admit that you are trying to run a business, and not a community server...

 

2. your main content developer is the same Jonzie who spammed steam workshop with models of cars that he surely didn't do himself?

lol nice, industry professionals indeed.

 

all in all, i am still for closing up all this server monetization altogether, especially since addon monetization is outside the question until steam figures a way to do that after the skyrim cockup...

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, PuFu said:

edit 2:

 

after digging a bit deeper about who you are:

1. you are the ones who started this particular petition:

https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/extend-the-arma-3-monetization-permission-and-save

 

stating the followings
a. 

yeah ok, why is it that i do not believe that

 

b. 

so you openly admit that you are trying to run a business, and not a community server...

 

2. your main content developer is the same Jonzie who spammed steam workshop with models of cars that he surely didn't do himself?

lol nice, industry professionals indeed.

 

all in all, i am still for closing up all this server monetization altogether, especially since addon monetization is outside the question until steam figures a way to do that after the skyrim cockup...

 

a) You can choose not to believe these costs, our work speaks for itself. Generally assets cost us between 500$ up to 1500$ dollar.

So far we have spend this during this month:

x1XYfVB.png

b) Jonzie is one of our content creators correct, but we do not use any models that infringe anyone's copyright. I am well aware some of his steam workshop content are models created by microsoft, however his content is used under the microsoft agreement http://www.xbox.com/en-us/developers/rules, but it is up to him to deal with any problems regarding his mods on steam workshop, we do not use any of his workshop content.

c) Yes, there is an incorporated business behind our communtiy to protect our intellectual property, bohemia is well aware of this, and this info is also located on our website.

 

The petition shows there is support for content monetization, however the "core community" mainly represented in this forum seem to oppose it. Fair enough.

 

-Kane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, daphne said:

a) You can choose not to believe these costs, our work speaks for itself. Generally assets cost us between 500$ up to 1500$ dollar.

fair enough, read c) for more

 

Quote

b) Jonzie is one of our content creators correct, but we do not use any models that infringe anyone's copyright. I am well aware some of his steam workshop content are models created by microsoft, however his content is used under the microsoft agreement http://www.xbox.com/en-us/developers/rules, but it is up to him to deal with any problems regarding his mods on steam workshop, we do not use any of his workshop content.

it's a matter of perspective rather than using that particular content or not. That agreement you linked prohibits reverse engineering, to signing an agreement for distribution (in this case Steam that directly requires the uploader to hold the IP rights for what he uploads)- and a lot of other clauses.

Yes, it might not be your issue directly, but is part of this discussion - about ripped content, and about half assed done content. how do you know you are not buying some ripped content from him now, that he further modified?

 

Quote

c) Yes, there is an incorporated business behind our communtiy to protect our intellectual property, bohemia is well aware of this, and this info is also located on our website.

that is not the issue that you have a legal form to protect your IP, that is actually really smart of you, and more should do that

 

what i am trying to say is that you don't run a server anymore, you are running a business. And as with all businesses out there that are depended on a 3rd party (in this case BI), you do stand to loose a lot if BI would actually do the right thing and close this server monetization fiasco...

 

And anyone willing to roll 5000$ a month is most likely doing that for a profit and not for "modding" or gaming reasons...

When Dean Hall started dayz, he did that without seeking a commercial gain.

Most people around here don't look for one either, yet there are 3rd parties that take direct advantage of their work

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, PuFu said:

fair enough, read c) for more

 

it's a matter of perspective rather than using that particular content or not. That agreement you linked prohibits reverse engineering, to signing an agreement for distribution (in this case Steam that directly requires the uploader to hold the IP rights for what he uploads)- and a lot of other clauses.

Yes, it might not be your issue directly, but is part of this discussion.

 

that is not the issue that you have a legal form to protect your IP, that is actually really smart of you, and more should do that

 

what i am trying to say is that you don't run a server anymore, you are running a business. And as with all businesses out there that are depended on a 3rd party (in this case BI), you do stand to loose a lot if BI would actually do the right thing and close this server monetization fiasco...

 

And anyone willing to roll 5000$ a month is most likely doing that for a profit and not for "modding" or gaming reasons...

When Dean Hall started dayz, he did that without seeking a commercial gain.

Most people around here don't look for one either, yet there are 3rd parties that take direct advantage of their work

 

 

"you do stand to loose a lot if BI would actually do the right thing and close this server monetization fiasco..."

This is correct, thousands of hours of effort and thousands of dollars that we have put into Arma 3 as a platform would be wasted.

 

edit: Maybe partially, if they get rid of the monetization guidelines we can transfer existing assets over to another engine like Unity/Unreal.

 

"And anyone willing to roll 5000$ a month is most likely doing that for a profit and not for "modding" or gaming reasons"

I could easily make a standalone game if I wanted to make profit, I created a mod because this is the platform that I am passionate about. This engine has way more potential than many people think, although it has it's shortcomings and limitations. Afterall this is the game that introduced me to programming and modding, and I would love to stay and keep developing content for ArmA 3 as a platform. Developers trying to make a living making mods? F*cking outrage, bring out the pitchforks! :) Money is required to cover such a project as ours, I wish this was different and that everyone would work for free. Free and sustainable don't go together.

 

-Kane

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×