Unrealistic expecations on modders.

[dangman4ever]

Actually, its not just me, I'm talking about the whole procedure of submitting mod requests. I have found, much to my utter joy, its a lot easier to get requests filled if I can get a picture of what I want,

Well, duh? Not everyone can visualize what the other is talking about nor are some people that willing to try to go out and understand what the other person is talking about. Also, as I noted earlier, it's also marketing related: Pictures do help people get in the mood to assist with a mod.

 

 

the Enclave uniform thing I wanted is BEAUTIFUL.

You're welcome for that BTW. :D

 

Problem is I can't figure out s*** in Gimp (I'd need a print format instruction manual or a teacher to get it), so I had to go back to a program I do know, MS paint and had to re familiarize myself with how it works. I'm working on requests know and they are looking much better. Unfortunately, I don't think you can modify textures in Paint, so I can't begin to experiment.

There's like many books on GIMP:

http://www.gimp.org/books/

 

There's also numerous tutorials online how to use GIMP. Hell, there's GIMP tutorials right on the Nexus wiki:

http://wiki.tesnexus.com/index.php/Category:GIMP

 

 

This lack of pointing out successful strategies for request submission is a problem.

I'm sorry, what exactly are you on about? There's no guarantee every request will be done.

 

Another is that the things I could probably design a quest, I could imagine all of it, but I can't work the GECK for s*** on the Cell side. I'm actually getting close to competent on the item side. The problem is that I can't make heads or tails of video mods and wikis. Part of this is that when I acquire basic conceptual knowledge, I'm very slow and need to manually cross reference things because literally nothing makes sense. They other, more important thing is that I'm being given recipes and I need to be given unified relationships. Here:http://www.education...rocedural-math/

 

All of the tutorials I have seen do not even attempt to do that. I'm left with a bunch of discombobulated rote facts that make no sense because they aren't integrated into a greater whole that I can make sense of. Like a whole bunch of wiki pages, but with no links to each other for cross reference. And my attempts to find a teacher who can slowly and painfully establish those connections has been for naught.

Then maybe change how you learn? As you have no doubt have figured out, no one has the time to actually teach you the way you want to be teached. If FNV modding is something you truly want to learn about, then learn how to learn differently. Remember that many of the FNV modders here on the Nexus used the same wikis, tutorials, and forum sources you have access to.

 

Though I think you're asking too much of the modding community to try accomodate your learning style. Nor do I think that your attempt to blame the community for your learning style is valid considering that it's YOUR learning style.

 

Maybe try to learn through trial and error? That's how many FNV modders are learning how to mod, myself included.

 

 

As far as I'm concerned, the cardinal sin of anything is re-inventing the wheel. I don't care how a process gets done, because the end result is the only thing that is important. The notion of intellectual property in the modding community is ludicrous because no one is making money off of anything. Stealing in this case can only consist of claiming credit, both implicitly and explicitly. Using someone else's work and documenting it correctly is like quoting a source in a research paper.

As far as I'm concerned, it's a cardinal to disrespect's other people's property/work. You do not have to make money off something in order for it to be considered intellectual property. That's a very flawed line of thought. Regardless of what you call it, you still should not take other people's work and use it without their explicit permission even if you credit them correctly. As stated in the rules forum, people have the right to control the usage of their mods:

http://forums.nexusmods.com/index.php?/topic/771842-copyright-and-you/

Edited October 23, 2013 by dangman4ever

[DogtoothCG]

^Regardless of payment, we all hold our rights to IP, I can't sell mods on the nexus, but I can sell my IP (models, textures, etc) elsewhere. Saying I have no rights to my own IP because it's in a mod for a game is absurd, disrespectful, and offensive. I also high believe that the current policy on usage control is there for that reason. Bethsoft, Obsidian, etc, license assets from various places around the world, they are bound by contract to keep those assets from being redistributed due to IP and copyright laws. Same goes for us as authors, having someone take something that we have spent hours designing, and building, and spraying our hard work out across the multiverse, is disproportionately immoral in comparison to even replicating a design and claiming it as your own.

[charwo]

I don't consider that a relevant thing for mods. No money can be made off mods, in the internet age, any distribution of digital information risks it being pirated. Protecting profits and credits I understand, the desire to 'control' product for its own sake is pathetic. Not that I would brake rules here, but if we're talking in principles, we deal in principles.

 

That said, Dangerman, if you have posted that Enclave bit here on Nexus I owe you an endorsement. May I use the armor I requested? I assure you it will not appear in anything but for a not-for-profit Fallout mod with all credits given. I will honor a no and that will be the end of the matter. And thank you in any case for the info on the books. I hadn't been able to find any locally, but with titles I can begin the search again. And that is awesome.

Edited October 23, 2013 by charwo

[dangman4ever]

....Seriously, dude? Wanting to control how your "product" is used is pathetic? Explain yourself. How does the desire to make sure how a person's assets is used and/or distributed "pathetic"? As nekronom12, I find it offensive as well that you're saying that I have no right or say in how my mod assets or work is used and/or distributed because it apparently appears "pathetic".

 

Also, please get my username right. It is not dangerman. As for your permissions request, read the "Readme" I included with that mod file. Though considering your lack of respect for other's people work and their rights to their work, I'm starting to regret ever making that mod for you.

I don't consider that a relevant thing for mods. No money can be made off mods, in the internet age, any distribution of digital information risks it being pirated. Protecting profits and credits I understand, the desire to 'control' product for its own sake is pathetic. Not that I would brake rules here, but if we're talking in principles, we deal in principles.

 

That said, Dangerman, if you have posted that Enclave bit here on Nexus I owe you an endorsement. May I use the armor I requested? I assure you it will not appear in anything but for a not-for-profit Fallout mod with all credits given. I will honor a no and that will be the end of the matter. And thank you in any case for the info on the books. I hadn't been able to find any locally, but with titles I can begin the search again. And that is awesome.

[charwo]

Explain myself? Very well then: Intellectual Property is no such thing. A copyright is a monopoly granted by governments, in this case implicitly, to protect rights of manufacture and districbution ONLY for the purposes of profit enough to cover the costs of invention and put a little coin in the pocket. No one has a right to do whatever the hell with their creative work. As per US Constitution Article 1 Section 8, which is the part of the system that allows for coppyright (this is but one example of the intellectual justification of copyright):

 

To Promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

 

A copyright exists only for the promotion of the public good, and can only be justified in that way. In fact private property, if this were property, is no sacred cow, no absolute and no end in of itself. The idea of property being something that is enshrined for the benefit of the individual is a morally bankrupt idea, and the existence of property taxes and eminent domain to say nothing of zoning and environmental statues illustrates there are real limits to what one can do with ones property.

 

The idea that one is entitled to 'control' ones work, that one may dispose of the work of one's own brow any which way he chooses, is not a legal justification for anything, although in practice during the term of copyright that is that case. And it sure as spit isn't a moral justification. There are valid reasons to proscribe distribution and I 'because it's my prerogative' is not one of them. And as much as this might make you bristle, it is not a fringe position in principle either among ethicists nor among jurists.

[charwo]

Having had a few hours of sleep, I think I need to restate that the above is my position, my belief, and although I like rigorous debate, I can conceptually respect there is room for debate, and a wide variety of viewpoints. But I believe mine is correct, as I should because if I didn't believe it to be right I should adopt another.

[DogtoothCG]

^

I agree with you on certain aspects; however I would like to reiterate, that not all content for mods pertains to the subject.

 

My work for example, of the images in my gallery, there are very few that have any vanilla content in them (my armors for example). I upload them here, and make things for people, because I think it fits, looks cool, etc. However, they are of my own design, my own hard work, my own IP. As the original content creator, I am well within my rights to distribute these files wherever I see fit, and though there is a certain level of hypocrisy to it, I am within my rights to upload them to websites oriented towards the sale and license of content.

 

Now, imagine, if I uploaded an armor, and stated that I do not give permission to use the files on any site other than the nexus, and I than stumbled upon those files on a for-profit website. I would be furious. Not only is that infringing on my wishes and intents, but than it crosses over into something far more morally objectionable, they are making cold hard cash, off of something I invested my own time into. I am not receiving any compensation for the work that I do here, monetarily or otherwise; for someone to bypass my wishes as the content creator is bad enough, but for someone to begin distributing my file for profit brings about a whole new level of anger.

 

However, on your topic, mods themselves. Yes, it is against the site rules and EULA to charge for mods, and rightfully so. The intellectual property and therein the right to sale, does not pertain to mods, simply stated, because they use unlicensed assets. The modder does not license the engine, nor any assets included in game files upon purchase of the game, they are licensed use of the game in its purchased state and allowed the ability to legally modify and distribute modifications as long as they do not infringe on the rights of the developer, publisher, or the IP holders of any content licensed in the game. Hence the nexus does not allow mods such as Morrowblivion, or TTW. This is not because of some idiotic tissy fit on behalf of the developer, but because they license a variety of content from a variety of creators and are bound by contract to keep that content out of other games.

 

So yes, a mod developer holds IP over the story, told only with the limited permission to redistribute modifications to game files. Any content created by the author, whether it be art, design, story, or programming, is what it really comes down to.

 

A mod that simply modifies the 9mm pistol to do an incredible amount of damage. That, I do not see as IP, I do however respect the wishes of the author.

A mod that adds game functions through complex scripting and design. I would not dare tread on the toes of the author by redistributing, the design and hard work put into those functions is wholly proprietary.

A mod that adds an enormous storyline but relies on naught but vanilla assets. I would not redistribute due to it being the vehicle in which the author is telling his story, his IP.

A mod that adds nothing but an 8kb model and texture that doesn't look too great. I would not redistribute, the model and textures are the IP of the author unless it is based on an existing design.

A mod that adds a variety of high quality handmade art, be it models, textures, animations, or sounds. I would not redistribute, these all fall under the authors IP.

 

As an artist, a freelance artist at that, I take these things quite seriously. If I am commissioned to create an asset by an individual, or a group, I will generally include a statement in the contract that alludes to the fact that I am Licensing them the use of my assets, unless I am employed by them, or they are purchasing the rights to my intellectual property. That way, I retain my rights as the developer to edit, reproduce, and distribute my IP as I see fit.

 

If I am commissioned to produce an asset, under contract, and they are purchasing the IP, than that asset will never see the light of the internet, as I am bound by contract not to distribute it.

If I am employed, or otherwise under contract, or NDA, I will not distribute, reproduce, copy, or even distribute images of that asset, as that would entail a breach of contract.

 

My heads for example. I do not claim them to be my IP, the models are vanilla (albeit heavily edited), the textures are scratch, and the design is held under copyright law by Bethesda. While the high polygon models that I made are my property, I would not sell them due to the fact that they are based on an existing design (humans from an iconic piece of fallout art, and ghouls from v13 concepts). I am also bound by EULA and license to do everything in my power to keep those designs from being sold for-profit. I doubt that I would be slapped with a lawsuit for breach of contract, but nonetheless, I would be furious if I discovered that someone, somewhere, was distributing my hard work for profit. Also, considering this is the internet, it would be heinously difficult to convince the thief to remove the files, and regardless, the damage would be done, someone, somewhere, would by that time have procured those assets.

 

cheers,

Payton

[charwo]

You and I aren't in disagreement about policy here. I don't have to like the rules to play by them. I do wish Bethesda would release asset packs that people could link to (and buy for a couple of bucks through things like Steam), and that way I could play a mod where all the Brahmin are replaced by cows and MMM could include not only iguanas, but deer as well (FO3 is in the mid Atlantic).

 

My complaint, in original, is not about ownership, but how to build a mod, to make all the assets yourself is ludicrous, when those assets already exists or could be simply modified from other sources. This allows a modder to get into the meat of a mod, which is design and play. I am however thinking in terms of assets and tile sets, not whole weapons or levels or such. That may be a fundamental difference in scope. If for instance I wanted to borrow the 'Angel City' Set from the author of the Librarian, you bet your butt I'd ask for permission even if I could take freely.

 

What I'm actually getting at is that someone like me thinks in the grandest scope: overhauls. I'd like nothing more than to replace Rivet City as it stands with the USS Abraham Lincoln. Why? Because I wouldn't muddle whether Rivet City was an active aircraft Carrier in 2077, take off the planes, and people would know a late 20th century carrier was a museum piece. For a place like Freeside, I'd want it to look more like a bustling third world slum, with fruit carts and book dealers, and dens of inequity chalked full of slavged and cleaned up crap. Make Freeside worthy of 'Trader's Life.' I need top think more about looking at Nat Geo pictures of third world markets and where to put the assets than to think about building laundry lines, and carts salvaged from the backs of cars like Fallout, or building the pre-war restored assets so the city looked filled and on the way back up, and not like a barely inhabited suburb of Mogadishu.

 

I should be spending time studying what a failed state and rebuilding failed state looks like in terms of clothes, and food and economy, and how that factors in with Hoover Dam proving constant cheap power and the replicator vending machines of the pre-war (The Sierra Madre were the most versatile, by according to Elijah, this self assembly mechanism was a common old world convenience. which in turn explains the Vending machines still having drinks in them: they are still assembling them). I should be thinking about how goods get in and out, things like that. I can tell you one thing, the Kings need to be a LOT heavier armed than they are to be the local warlords. They have to act as the cops anyplace they rule the roost.

 

It is morally speaking one thing to create a total ripoff of something else, and to take pre-existing ideas and fling them in totally new and novel directions. Not only should people not have to reinvent the wheel, they shouldn't reinvent the wheel for kicks.

[dangman4ever]

...I'm getting a serious sense of entitlement coming from you. That you're somehow entitled to use a person's work as you see fit without any permission or say so. That the community is somehow to blame for your inability to learn how to mod. That you're somehow above the hard work required for a fantastic mod. That what other modders have gone through in creating mods don't apply to you. I don't mean to attack you but that's the general feeling I'm getting from your written statements.

Some of the top mods here on the Nexus are mods where a single person did at least 80% to 90% of the work. Mods likes AWOP, Willow, the New Vegas Bounties I and II mods are examples of that. In regards to the mod creator of the last two mods I mentioned, for the most part, he's working by himself on the Firebase Zulu, a very expansive mod that's practically a DLC in its own right. With that said, yes some of those top mods also include assets from other people. You know how those assets got included? Because those modders actually asked for permission or asked for their help.

So I reject the notion that you're above doing the nitty gritty and hard work required for a mod. I also reject the notion that you have to build all of the mod assets when a request for permission or help is a few clicks and types away. I will agree that it is easier to use someone else's work. But laziness and unimagination does not trump using other's work without their permission as you see fit in a public mod.

We definitely have a different set of morals in regards to other people's work. However, the difference is that my morals in regards to other people's work are what currently being enforced now here at the Nexus.

[charwo]

Entitlement? Not at all! If I get my modding off the ground, and I in tend to do something, I fully want others to build upon the things I bring to the table. The notion that one can see farther by standing on the shoulders of giants is a well established principle in other circles, I don't see why it should be different among modders. What exists exists by the common good, and only is justified in the expansion of the common good, in this case, better mod experiences. There's a synergy that comes from this remixing and sampling and building upon that should not be ignored or downplayed. And one should not confuse laziness versus efficiency: one only has so much energy to promote to one's pursuits, and using any responsible shortcut to achieve greater excellence per unit of energy isn't selfish, it is the means by which the great whole is more gloriously illuminated. See: everything Issac Newton ever wrote. Different field, same principle.

 

As for the policies, although I believe they are wrongheaded, they are what they are. I am speaking in principles alone, and never pretended to something more concrete.