Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sergarr]

Less than 50% piracy rate can still be vastly higher than in most other industries, but yes, I guess that particular part is specifically Russian.

[forsaken1111]

Well shit, if I could just press a button on a quasi-legal site and have a ferrari pop out of my computer I bet car piracy would be pretty high too.

[itisnotlogical]

People have been saying since the 2010s began that there'll be a 3D printer in every home, but I really wonder if physical object piracy will become a thing. It takes even more equipment and technological skill, but people have figured out how to pirate all kinds of media (cartridges, DS cards, arcade boards, so on) over decades.

[Gentlefish]

I'm sorry Neo, but for For Honor, your argument is moot. Everyone will have full access to all characters a week (or two) after those whom payed for the DLC did. In this case, everyone gets everything. Some people just get it first for supporting the game more than the average consumer.

DLC is only a scam when you buy into it and show them that they can get away with Horse Armor and piece out their game for microtransactions (looking at you, EA!). Ubisoft seems to have learned from their mistakes and are trying out a new DLC system for keeping the playerbase together and not splintered like in Call of Duty (Oh, I have DLC 1 but you have DLC 2? GUESS WE CANT PLAY TOGETHER!). And I want them to know I like that and want more like that. So I bought into it this time so maybe in the future I won't have to all the time.

[Jopax]

Seconding Sergarr on the piracy claim here, same deal was in the Balkans too. It was techically illegal but nobody gave a fuck about it, including the law enforcment (except in cases when somebody someone powerful disliked was running it, in which case cops and inspections galore). And it wasn't an issue of convinience or legality but simple buying power. Nobody in their right mind would pay 30 bucks for an original title if they can get the pirated version for 3 bucks, especially if their salary was in the 3-4 hundred dollar range.

It has improved in recent years as standards went up but it's still a shifty area where most people prefer the free route over paying out the ass for something completely optional in life.

[forsaken1111]

People have been saying since the 2010s began that there'll be a 3D printer in every home, but I really wonder if physical object piracy will become a thing. It takes even more equipment and technological skill, but people have figured out how to pirate all kinds of media (cartridges, DS cards, arcade boards, so on) over decades.

Amazon needs to get their shit together and start selling product plans to be printed on Amazon brand printers, for which they also sell the feedstock. Get these damn things to the point they can print simple electronics and it will change the way we shop. You could buy and print toys, dishware designs, etc on demand. They just need to make it simple enough for the masses so all you have to do is pour in pellets and push a button on an app.

[itisnotlogical]

I wouldn't mind having 3D-printed dishware since a lot of the plates you can buy in stores are butt-ugly. 3D printed ceramics are looking pretty good but then any site trying to advertise a 3D printer/service will use their best images.

[Retropunch]

This has derailed pretty seriously into 3D printers and Balkan piracy rings so I'm going to bring it back on track.

I think we can all agree that we're happy to pay a reasonable price for quality - take the Sins of a Solar Empire TC, Star Trek Armada - I'd gladly pay £15 for it. It's great, its a total conversion where they've built all their own models, and it's extremely stable. However, it's one Mod - there's no point using multiple mods or complimentary ones or anything.

My Skyrim game had about 10-15 mods going at the same time.

The problem is that all these mods would have to be sold with a 'at your own risk' - automatic refunds are not going to help unless they're on an unlimited time frame, because in the 200 hours I played skyrim, something could go wrong at any time. A weather mod could end up completely breaking the main quest. Moose armour could end up destroying a main character.

So you'd have to either give out unlimited refunds (which makes things technically free) or only allow super well curated and tested mods to be paid for.

I honestly don't think Valve are dumb enough to just openly try it again with all mods - I think it'll mutate into 3rd party DLC. The problem with this is that we're gonna end up with developers putting even LESS stuff in, as there's an expectation modlc will cover it (which I strongly believe they do with Bethesda games).

[palsch]

I honestly don't think Valve are dumb enough to just openly try it again with all mods - I think it'll mutate into 3rd party DLC. The problem with this is that we're gonna end up with developers putting even LESS stuff in, as there's an expectation modlc will cover it (which I strongly believe they do with Bethesda games).

Sounds like Daybreak Game's Player Studio model. User created cosmetics that are approved are sold in game for a 40% royalty to the creator. A large amount of the purchasable cosmetics are created through the scheme. But we are talking about micro(sic)transaction funded MMOs (Everquest 1/2 and Planetside 2), which are not the same business model as most mod-targetted games. Not to mention that cosmetics are easier to test and clear to include in the game.

[wierd]

No.  Sorry. That model is bullshit.

I dont care how much the developer thinks it is worth, or how entitled to royalties they feel they are.  The effort that goes into many mods rivals the effort the original studio put in, and in some cases greatly exceeds it. It boils down to "We put our flag down first, so pay us forever." 

In my not so honest opinion, that is one of the things that is currently very wrong with the world. Everyone wants to extort from everyone else, and nobody wants to contribute to the public common, even though a thriving public common is what creates culture. You end up with the likes of Disney and pals, who fight tooth and nail to keep works out of the common for centuries, because "MY CREATIVE CONTENT! IT'S MINE! MINE I SAY! YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT BECAUSE I SAID SO!"

I will again (as I participated in round one of this thread) point out, that many of the tools, techniques, and assets used in mods cross proliferate, because the mod community operates (predominantly) on the public commons model. That means work only needs to be done once, and all later comers can gain use of that work, to build better, more elaborate works.

It is only in the "NO! YOU MUST PAY ME *FOREVER AND EVER AND EVER!!*" model that work must be constantly re-done, with conspicuous effort invested to PROVE that it is different from those other works created before (and thus does not violate some 'property right') that you end up with recurring, and exponentially increasing costs in the creative process.

It costs AAA studios so fucking much money, because they are all shouting "MINE MINE MINE!" all the damned time, and so are constantly reinventing the wheel.

And, to head some hotheads off at the pass--  No, I am not saying you should work for free. The method of payment you get just isn't in cash. What you get in exchange for a novel tool, is works created using that tool suddenly appearing in the community.  You give up the fruit of your creativity, and get the fruits of hundreds of other people's creativity in return. Other people will improve your tool, or your asset, and the status of the commons improves. You see this everywhere.

For a pretty high powered example:

What did Linus Torvalds get from making his linux kernel FOSS?

Android phones
Inexpensive home routers
Inexpensive home NAS boxes
Dozens of linux desktop and server distributions
Smart devices of all shapes and sizes
LOTS of software targeted at the platform, for any purpose imaginable.

If you added up the market value of all of those later innovations that are directly tied to his contribution to the common (which he had to protect with the GPL, to KEEP it in the common) it will greatly exceed what even a very skilled business mogul could have spun from it.

You will find that this is true with ANY novel innovation that goes into the common. A rising tide raises all ships.

When somebody decides that they want to raise their ship higher, by pumping out the water into a closed pool, (which is what exclusive licensing, and all that noise equates to metaphorically) you dont get that effect anymore.  It then becomes less about raising one's own boat, it is about assuring the other boats SINK.

So NO. Paid mods are bad. Always.

[Retropunch]

No.  Sorry. That model is bullshit.

I dont care how much the developer thinks it is worth, or how entitled to royalties they feel they are.  The effort that goes into many mods rivals the effort the original studio put in, and in some cases greatly exceeds it.

I think you vastly, vastly underestimate how much effort/man hours goes into something like making Fallout or Skyrim. As an example, roughly 80 people worked for years on Fallout 3, along with legions of QA testers and all the auxiliary staff to bring it to market. They then built the mod kits that modders use to make the mods themselves, which frankly, do most of the work in such cases.

So Sorry. No.

And, to head some hotheads off at the pass--  No, I am not saying you should work for free. The method of payment you get just isn't in cash. What you get in exchange for a novel tool, is works created using that tool suddenly appearing in the community.  You give up the fruit of your creativity, and get the fruits of hundreds of other people's creativity in return. Other people will improve your tool, or your asset, and the status of the commons improves. You see this everywhere.

I get what you're saying - and I do agree that modding should stay free - but it's a bit flower-power. I don't think we should expect people not to want to get recompensed in cold hard cash (which is, like it or not, what people need to survive), and I'm happy to put money towards stuff if I feel they've done a valuable service - what I hate is Valve just doing a horrible cash grab. If Valve really wanted them to be recompensed fairly they'd do things like offer cash prizes (drops in the ocean for them) to most downloaded mods, allow direct donations through Steam and so on.

[Sergarr]

No.  Sorry. That model is bullshit.

I dont care how much the developer thinks it is worth, or how entitled to royalties they feel they are.  The effort that goes into many mods rivals the effort the original studio put in, and in some cases greatly exceeds it. It boils down to "We put our flag down first, so pay us forever." 

The sanctity of private property rights is vitally important for our civilization, and it's quite unsettling to see you disparage them like that.

Also, after seeing many, many failed video game kickstarters, I'd say that you're very wrong on the amount of effort that making a video game requires.

In my not so honest opinion, that is one of the things that is currently very wrong with the world. Everyone wants to extort from everyone else, and nobody wants to contribute to the public common, even though a thriving public common is what creates culture. You end up with the likes of Disney and pals, who fight tooth and nail to keep works out of the common for centuries, because "MY CREATIVE CONTENT! IT'S MINE! MINE I SAY! YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT BECAUSE I SAID SO!"

Public common doesn't create culture, though. Culture is created mostly by rich people bankrolling creators they like, allowing them to work full-time on producing their art. Many now widely known works of art were created because some rich person wanted them created, and they wanted them created for their own pleasure. They do sometimes give those works of art to the public (mostly to museums), but that's usually waaay after they've been created.

I will again (as I participated in round one of this thread) point out, that many of the tools, techniques, and assets used in mods cross proliferate, because the mod community operates (predominantly) on the public commons model. That means work only needs to be done once, and all later comers can gain use of that work, to build better, more elaborate works.

It is only in the "NO! YOU MUST PAY ME *FOREVER AND EVER AND EVER!!*" model that work must be constantly re-done, with conspicuous effort invested to PROVE that it is different from those other works created before (and thus does not violate some 'property right') that you end up with recurring, and exponentially increasing costs in the creative process.

They'll just learn to buy these things off each other, like all normal people in the business already do. It's how our world works.

And, to head some hotheads off at the pass--  No, I am not saying you should work for free. The method of payment you get just isn't in cash. What you get in exchange for a novel tool, is works created using that tool suddenly appearing in the community.  You give up the fruit of your creativity, and get the fruits of hundreds of other people's creativity in return. Other people will improve your tool, or your asset, and the status of the commons improves. You see this everywhere.

Sadly, you can't eat fruits of other people's creativity.

For a pretty high powered example:

What did Linus Torvalds get from making his linux kernel FOSS?

Android phones
Inexpensive home routers
Inexpensive home NAS boxes
Dozens of linux desktop and server distributions
Smart devices of all shapes and sizes
LOTS of software targeted at the platform, for any purpose imaginable.

If you added up the market value of all of those later innovations that are directly tied to his contribution to the common (which he had to protect with the GPL, to KEEP it in the common) it will greatly exceed what even a very skilled business mogul could have spun from it.

I'm fairly sure that if you count in all the work-hours that had to be invested into creating all of that, said "market value" will end up in the negatives.

You will find that this is true with ANY novel innovation that goes into the common. A rising tide raises all ships.

When somebody decides that they want to raise their ship higher, by pumping out the water into a closed pool, (which is what exclusive licensing, and all that noise equates to metaphorically) you dont get that effect anymore.  It then becomes less about raising one's own boat, it is about assuring the other boats SINK.

Metaphorically, people can move between ships, and an amount of water required to raise the ocean level by any meaningful number is so high that you can literally proper ships into orbit.

Meanwhile in reality, nearly all innovations that surround us in the form of various products are commercial, and have been that way for a loooong time. And they're good because they're commercial, because people making them have a real, tangible incentive to make them good.

So NO. Paid mods are bad. Always.

What if the the creator of said paid mod lives off the returns from selling said mod, working on it every day to improve and bugfix it as their product of love? Does that "always" cover the case of leaving such a person unable to do their favorite thing full-time without starving?

[wierd]

On the contrary. I fully understand how long and hard those studios work.  I also know how little they work to shut down a rival work with just as much effort put in, by claiming a property right.

Here's one off the top of my head.

https://www.wired.com/2009/05/square-enix-kills-near-complete-chrono-trigger-fan-project/
(5 years investment by the team, very nice quality product axed, because "MINE MINE MINE!")


Sergarr:

Actual property is scarce. It has a finite availability.
Software is infinitely replicatable. There is no scarcity, other than the creativity. What profit is there to MINIMIZE the creative talent pool, through exclusivity?

[Sergarr]

On the contrary. I fully understand how long and hard those studios work.  I also know how little they work to shut down a rival work with just as much effort put in, by claiming a property right.

Here's one off the top of my head.

https://www.wired.com/2009/05/square-enix-kills-near-complete-chrono-trigger-fan-project/
(5 years investment by the team, very nice quality product axed, because "MINE MINE MINE!")

If they don't defend their property rights, they become automatically transferred to whoever is de-facto using them. They don't really have an option to just let it go.

Also, those people are 10/10 idiots for developing a game straight up based on an existing franchise without a license. Really, really big idiots. Were the exact details of the story that important to them? There are like thousands of different ways they could've made a game that is "basically like Chrono Trigger, but better", without triggering copyright claims. And they went and did so for five years without anyone over there thinking "isn't what we're doing illegal"? Wow.

EDIT:

Sergarr:

Actual property is scarce. It has a finite availability.
Software is infinitely replicatable. There is no scarcity, other than the creativity. What profit is there to MINIMIZE the creative talent pool, through exclusivity?

Because talent doesn't just "pool" together. Talent needs to be fed, talent needs to have a space to live in, talent needs to move around the country. There are many, many things like that, that can be only provided with money, and which are vitally important for people functioning. If you want to cherish said talent, please don't say things equivalent to "only let them work in their free time under the threat of starvation" by saying that they should be absolutely disbarred from receiving payment for their preferred activity.

[Putnam]

The effort that goes into many mods rivals the effort the original studio put in, and in some cases greatly exceeds it.

No.

And, to head some hotheads off at the pass--  No, I am not saying you should work for free. The method of payment you get just isn't in cash. What you get in exchange for a novel tool, is works created using that tool suddenly appearing in the community.  You give up the fruit of your creativity, and get the fruits of hundreds of other people's creativity in return. Other people will improve your tool, or your asset, and the status of the commons improves. You see this everywhere.

That's... a bit hoity-toity, and do mind who this is coming from.

If they don't defend their property rights, they become automatically transferred to whoever is de-facto using them. They don't really have an option to just let it go.

Not true at all; an actual court case has to go through for that, and any reasonable court case would likely see that Chrono Trigger is still on sale in various ways and that Square Enix therefore still holds the copyright.

Also, those people are 10/10 idiots for developing a game straight up based on an existing franchise without a license. Really, really big idiots. Were the exact details of the story that important to them? There are like thousands of different ways they could've made a game that is "basically like Chrono Trigger, but better", without triggering copyright claims. And they went and did so for five years without anyone over there thinking "isn't what we're doing illegal"? Wow.

This is a constant. Have you seen how up in arms people got about AM2R? And they refuse to believe that Nintendo has good reason to not want an improved remake of a game that they are currently selling to be available free in the wild.