Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Community Reputation

201 Excellent


About Hatchet_AS

  • Rank
    Staff Sergeant

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hatchet_AS

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    Hrmmm, must of been this image:
  2. Hatchet_AS

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    Thank you for saying the same thing, twice. (Sigh... move that one to the left column.)
  3. Hatchet_AS

    Server monetization program

    As much as I would like to see BIS to be involved in a 'heavy' QA scenario, I understand that this is not as easily realized as they or we would like it to be. The logistical piece for them as a business could easily be quite profound. Just think about it for a minute, if BIS were to open up monetization of mods ... just what and how would one define the 'standards'? It's pretty asy to apply some very generic baseline standards similar to MANW, where content must be an original contribution and the like. However verification of these things, especially in 'mass' is not as straightforward as you might think. Thus far BIS has been mostly dependent upon the community to police things. And as I mentioned originally this seems like the best option to me as well, because it removes one of the larger, if not the largest logistical piece for them. However, it does in fact make it somewhat of a 'free for all' scenario in submissions. But I don't really see how they could cleanly manage an in depth QA process right now. Which is not to say application of other requirements couldn't help in this aspect. For example, the thought of having to purchase 'a modders license' for monetization doesn't actually sound all that unreasonable to me as a business person. 99% of the time in business, there is an investment before there is any type reward/profit to be made. This as noted by Uro would also likely prevent some of the stupidity associated with these things. Additionally, while a 'contract/agreement' would be nice, I think that's an unlikely scenario. And that is simply because, in the international environment much of that would be mostly unenforceable. And frankly I don't know many companies that enjoy getting into legalities on regular basis anyway. So while I think it is reasonable to have 'standards' relating to baseline functionality (ie.. it doesn't crash the default game, or melt computers), anything beyond that is likely wishful thinking. Granted I'd like to think the good guys in mod making would be more than happy to provide continual support for their wares, if for no other reason than it makes keeping the revenue stream viable. But BIS has little control over whether someone makes something, and that person meets some unfortunate demise. There is nothing to enforce there, and again even if there was, the legal cost and logistics of such ventures probably not worth it. Now, another aspect of this that is rather complicated and would put BIS in an awkward position is pricing. How does one determine the value of a mod? How do you say this item is worth more than that item? How do you place value on a gamemode or finite scripts that produce gameplay value? This is a highly subjective arena. And could create all kinds of grief for BIS if they did anything more than placed flat pricing for x, y, z mod types. Which is about the only scenario I could see being functional if they wanted to address that themselves. It is arguable whether or not leaving that to the modder is more functional. Thusly the end user/purchaser would be the judge of whether or not 'something is worth it'. Would this lead to potential stupidity/? Yes, stupid seemingly abounds these days. But ultimately, neither BIS or a modder is responsible for what someone does with their own money. And speaking on the money topic, while I know Steam sounds like a great way to go with these things. That is also more complicated than it may seem to some. As Steam also has legal standards and requirements. I'm not sure that something like this would be functional in that environment, although it would seem ideal. Firstly, Steam gets a fairly large cut of the pie. And while this is somewhat reasonable considering they manage the point of sale and distribution ... it's still a big cut. Secondly, and this is between Steam and BIS and transfers to the modders is the issue of infringements. That may or may not require an involved QA process for BIS. And as mentioned at the beginning of this post, that is not a simple logistical piece (BIS is short on up-to-speed people in general. there are only so many resources currently.). So that maybe a bridge too far simply due to lack of resources. And again, why I think the community would have to be the gatekeepers here. Additionally anything involving monetary penalization of things is also probably a bridge too far, as that is cost benefit scenario. I don't really see that happening. Which not to say they couldn't limit how monies are paid, whether that be for ease of back office management or as a tool to ensure modder oversight. Anyway, I'm all for it for the reasons I stated originally. But I'm very aware of the many hurdles and pitfalls BIS would be facing in actually doing this. And to that extent, I can totally understand why a more 'hands off' approach would be easier to manage. I could list quite a few more aspects of this that are not as easily sorted as we would hope or some might assume, but this covers most of the larger stuff. Another thought here in thinking about what can be done to make this a more manageable scenario for BIS, is that they could make it a business-to-business system. Wherein those submitting would have to be viable entities themselves. This would help in the legalities, and provide a route for more concise/extensive 'agreements and/or viable contracts'. It would however also alienate some of the younger guys and those without the ability to establish themselves as a business entity. That being said, the producers in the community I think for the most part could sort this. Most are not kids these days as it were. And that on it's face could ensure a great deal of QA. Splash over.
  4. Hatchet_AS

    Server monetization program

    I'll skip the debate part for now. Those that know me, know I side with Monetizing it all. For me it is simply that I believe the artists/coders should have the ability to be rewarded for what they do. You will never stop the thieves, you'll never be able to keep up with it all. But that does not mean it's an unmanageable scenario. If nothing else, the opportunity for artists who often spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars and man hours of their own ... can recoup some of that in doing for everyone else, is worthwhile to me. Does that potentially lead to mass influx of crap in the mix, sure it does (for the record, already tons of crap..). But I think it's very much up to the community to help regulate/sort that. And I would have thought this community amongst them all, could actually do it. At the same time though, the good guys (people who know what they doing, who do things properly, provide quality assets), have additional motivation and reason to do what they do. And who benefits from that? Everyone. Unless your argument is 'you deserve everything for free'. Don't ask me how I feel about that. Anyway, poll is fairly disheartening from my position. Kind of curious how many are actually on dev side of things. Perhaps time to rethink deployment of current projects. As doing for ArmA is a clusterfook to begin with ... and it'll be stolen anyway. Probably better just selling assets elsewhere. I like most I know, don't have any expectations of getting rich off this stuff anyway. Donations never worked, never will. I'd just assume let them sit somewhere and recoup my own investment over time I think. Certainly less pressure/demand that way at the end of the day. Thanks for the post/poll Pufu, was needed and helps me understand where the community here roughly stands. Shot out. **Edit** For the record (forgot i had the RHS tag in the signature), this has zero to do with any affiliation with any group. Just my personal thoughts, and unlike Pufu, I voted yes on all 3 questions. Cheers!
  5. Hatchet_AS

    Operation Blockhead

    Wow, all pro man. Very cool and very useful.
  6. Bunch of damn noobs. (I finally made it back to thread!) Seriously though guys, looking good as always! Keep it up!
  7. Hatchet_AS

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    Like we don't know you want torrents..
  8. Hatchet_AS

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    Yeah ... about that.
  9. Nicely done man, much appreciated and a honorable thing to do. May they live on in the armaverse, forever.
  10. Hatchet_AS

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    I see what he did there ... it must continue now.
  11. Hatchet_AS

    Paul “Bushlurker” Pelosi (1960-2017) Rest in Peace

    Aye, A Legend. Godspeed brother. He was truly a unique individual within the community, and in the world in general. There is nothing I can add that has not already been said, except to say, keep The Legends alive. It's important. Additionally, I'll share this as I haven't seen it yet here, and I think it is something Bushlurker would want to see: (Mondkalb on Discord) Honor the fallen, keep the legends alive, and help make new ones. That is what in no small part what Bushlurker, and many others have done in this community. My regards to all, especially the family and close friends of Paul Pelosi, may he lurk forever within the armaverse and our memories.
  12. All pro. And to the incredible guy, the myth, and The Legend. Cheers, and Godspeed brother. We will remember.