Starfield Community Patch: DP Split for October

[mcguffin]

I just saw the thread:
It's ok for me to donate to charity (Ukraine, Doctors Without Boarders...)

[JaeDL]

Edited my post from the Discord:

Some fixes are heavy hitters that could have earned a lot of DP on their own and a % going to mod authors was always part of the description, so I don't think that should be changed. (I have contributed nothing, just putting in my two cents. I know if I had contributed, I wouldn't want to speak up about maintaining the DP share, so trying to speak for any others who might be reluctant.)

I want to repeat that point. For months now, including prior to release, the description has stated that DP would be distributed to mod authors who contributed to the project. If for no other reason than being good to your word, this should not be changed.  The current contributors do not speak for all future contributors, or else this is not a community project, but a "team" exactly the same as past unofficial patches.

I love charities. I love that the CURRENT main contributors are so generous. But will they be around forever? Will future modders be so generous, or we will we end up in a situation like Skyrim where it takes 14 'fixes' mods before you can really start modding? I want everyone to be MOST incentivized to include their fixes in SFCP because I care about the overall game, and it's long-term health, as well as the convenience for the end user.  This project will be competing with paid mods in a few months. Every DLC will require another new explosion of effort by the community to fix things. 

I also think of the modders from poorer nations to whom a share of this sum would be more meaningful. 

Its impossible to expect this to be perfect, but I think as long as a good faith effort is made to make the distributions fair, that's as much as anyone can ask. Perhaps it could get a major reshuffling/retooling of the way DPs are handed out scheduled yearly to give a chance to change it up if better ideas arise in the future, without feeling the need to tweak it every five minutes. 

That might also make it easier for newer mods to get a reasonable percent (I'm sure some great modders will move on from Starfield; other great modders will rise), rather than trying to update it every time a new mod is updated. Of course now it sounds like I'm suggesting 'recency' become a factor, and maybe it should to encourage people to keep working (and to continue sharing newer fixes as DLC/expansions come out, rather than inconveniencing users by keeping essential fixes as separate mods), but that's just an example of how this is quite complex and might need reasonable iteration over time.

If DP is turned off or turned straight to donations, we also risk causing users to harass mod authors who want the DP.

A thousand posts of "This should be submitted to the Starfield Community Project!!!" when the mod author doesn't wish to will make someone who was working on a game in their spare time appear greedy.

[Argonil]

I think that distributing DP is going to be way too complicated. For an example, while I can't speak for the community, I can imagine that a big reason why people will download the patch would be to get my skill fixes. That doesn't only pertain to the early version where the skill fixes were added, it will attract users for all releases going forwards. The community patch's DP awards will presumably grow over time, but if you only get a cut of the DP from the version or month that your changes were added in, what about the builds that were so early and short-lived that they didn't have time to earn much DP? Do those contributors just not get anything for their fixes? Does that mean I should've waited with adding my fixes until the patch earns more DP rather than adding them in the early 0.0.2 build? That doesn't seem right. Should I get a cut of all future DP from the mod? Then how would you determine the cut?