On console mods, theft and Bethesda.net

[Arthmoor]

In response to post #39475335. #39485650, #39485850, #39486400 are all replies on the same post.

icecreamassassin wrote: When I heard about all of Bethesda's forward movement into mod management with their hosting framework I immediately became a bit paranoid about what degree of control they were going to want on content and where it is posted.

This article is good because it does point out a very large ineptitude on Bethesda's part, one which was clearly illustrated in the paid modding fiasco; they have a bad case of the rose colored glasses. Meaning that everything they see is rosy and perfect. They do not plan their actions based on the lowest common denominator. As a pen and paper RPG designer myself, the one key thing of design that I always have to look at is, "How will people try and break and exploit the system within the confines of the rules". Bethesda clearly does not consider the fact that a large percentage of users are opportunistic little pricks. They need to plan for those people first and foremost and try and build towards their vision while dealing with the eventuality of people exploiting the system.

One key thing to keep in mind is that any mod which uses SKSE (and most large mods do) will probably never work on console, so implementing some SKSE can easily prevent a mod from being used on console. That said I have no problems per say with consoles getting mods; I think it's cool, but the cruz of the problem here is that Bethesda is stepping in and trying to push things that way while not doing anything to ensure it goers smoothly and that people are secure and property is represented fairly.

Bottom line, Bethesda has NEVER understood the modding community and frankly I don't think even respects it, their actions sure don't show it. It's because of the modding community that Skyrim is even still relevant. Robbin said it in his article; FO4's interest started to wane and so they rushed the CK to the rescue. They have always had a bad history of "release now fix later" mentality and frankly I think leave it to us to largely fix ourselves. It's just a bummer deal

Arthmoor wrote:

One key thing to keep in mind is that any mod which uses SKSE (and most large mods do)

I keep seeing this one tossed around very casually. I'd personally like to see some kind of solid stats to back that up since IMO it's not something that's apparent with the stuff in my own load order.

Nexus has a requirements system that lets people specify SKSE as a required component. I wonder how hard it would be to pull actual numbers from that to get some idea of what percentage of mods actually require it?

Kraynic wrote: I know that in my load order there are some that don't require it, but they lack (or have limited) configuration choices without SKSE. I don't suppose anyone playing on a console that has never experienced the mod would know what they were missing.

Ansler wrote: Well saying "most" mods require SKSE may or may not be correct. But a lot of the popular scripted mods use the MCM which is part of SkyUI which requires SKSE. So it may not be listed as a direct requirement, but SKSE is still involved. In fact, if you go to the SkyUI page on the Nexus and hit that "required" button on the actions bar you can see a massive list of mods under "Files That Require This File" and as a result all those mods also require SKSE.

Yes, but that's by no means a "massive" list, nor does it qualify for "most mods". There are over 47,000 mods here. The list requiring SkyUI is barely a blip compared to that.

If we had some way to get at the underlying numbers of stuff that has SKSE listed, then we could get a better picture.

[DPnavpoc]

If a mod author does not want his/her mod going to consoles, they could make it somehow dependent on F4SE. I have a few TB's of space on my computer so if you mod authors want to make your mods over 2gb, I will be ok with it. Just spit balling here. :)

 

Edited June 18, 2016 by DPnavpoc

[Kraynic]

In response to post #39498570. #39512850, #39513220, #39514275, #39514365, #39514775, #39514790, #39518690, #39518820, #39519085, #39519310, #39519400, #39519465, #39519585 are all replies on the same post.

bigdeano89 wrote: Sigh, the ignorant comments coming from some folks here is unbelieveable, to the point that I think you must either be children or trolls to have this mindset. Most of these people even admit to "not reading the whole article" but somehow their insight has to be more valuable than the damn article you are commenting on.

Heres the gist, shrunk down into a smaller size so you can understand. Mod authors DO own their mods, Bethesda and Zenimax own the LICENSE to it (and thats ONLY if made with the creation kit. If they make them by any other means, Zenimax dont own anything). That license does NOT extend to users. That does NOT give anyone the right to take and upload the mods without permission from the authors, END.OF.STORY.

No more of this BS "I own the game, I can do what I want", no, you cant, and you are childish or a troll if you believe thats true.

Brabbit1987 wrote: I am of the argument that, while I don't agree with mods being stolen, I think it's better to make it less of a big deal, because it's only making the situation worse.

Remember what the music industry did back when piracy was rather new? There are always going to be people who do not respect your wishes. Also, in many cases, it's not even someone who is trying to be disrespectful, it's just someone who enjoys your content and wants to share it with others.

Now, you can do what the music industry did and try your best to prevent piracy. Or you can accept that there is very little you can do to stop it entirely and it's probably best to just embrace it and work along with it, rather than against it. If this trend continues with mods on consoles, you can be sure .. eventually we will come to a point where trying to stop your mod from being uploaded will just be impossible unless you don't mind spending most of your time doing take downs.

Again, it's not that I agree with people stealing mods, I just think it's going to come to a point where .. it will be too much work to try and prevent it.

boomerizer wrote: And in my case, I feel the same way Brabbit. Although, it's more because its digital media. Once you upload it to the internet, you sort of lose ownership. You know, its not like you're actually losing anything. And the 'thief' really isn't gaining anything. In fact the only people that benefit from this, are the people that download the mods to their game.

My god, what a travesty! Oh, what a world where people are actually enjoying something on a platform that isn't a PC! *gasp*

Like I've said, repeatedly, if the thief is actually trying to claim ownership (or worse, trying to encourage donation or payment of some sort), yeah, I'd have a problem too. But if its a direct copy/paste upload? C'mon, what the flip are you really losing out on?

BuffHamster wrote: @boomerizer: Apathy, ... awesome. I have some Insurance policies I can sell to you, oh and this bridge I found somewhere near Brooklyn NY.
Accept it, "Buyer Beware" and all that.
You bought a shoddy used car with no warranty? Too bad, accept it.
Oh my, you purchased some food items that have been recalled due to Salmonella contamination? Ah well, you still have that Insurance policy I sold you? Never mind, food poisoning is not covered.
Imitation brand electronics burned your house down? Ah, too bad, that's not covered. Accept it, no, ... embrace it.

My take? Mod Authors have the legal right to be advocates for themselves and the legal right to petition their grievances as loudly as possible, ... accept it.

doomy19 wrote: @Brabbit1987 You're right, it will be too much work to try and prevent it, so the mod authors will do the most simple thing they can, which is to stop making mods because the enjoyment of doing so has been eclipsed by the problems involved. And who benefits from that? Nobody. This is the reality that the community members here understand and the new console people and Bethesda don't, that there is no way to win if everyone isn't respecting the ones creating the content.

boomerizer wrote: Wrong Again. Because now you're bringing money into it. Now I'm at a loss. Because so far, everyone arguing against this mod theft like its genuine piracy, keeps using analogies that bring in money. Currency.

There is no currency in the modding community beyond ego. Beyond namesake.

And if it isn't that, then it's anti-console types. Neither of which are valid, in my opinion.

One is ego stroking, the other is elitism. Both are insanely selfish, which defeats the purpose of the sharing of your mods.

Sharing.

Huh.

Maybe somebody forgot the definition of sharing.

I mean, if you don't want to spread the love, maybe you shouldn't mod. Sounds like you're doing it for the wrong reasons. Looking for some glory? Maybe hoping you make such a great mod that Bethesda (or whoevers game you're modding) hires you?

If I made mods, I'd be flattered if it were being redistributed. That meant I did a good thing. That'd mean that people liked what I made.

And, as I've said before, and something that people seem to be forgetting, or not paying attention to:

If the person redistributing it were claiming it as their own, outright-- not just failing to credit, but saying it is THEIRS and THEIRS alone, yeah, I WOULD have a problem. But the fact of the matter is that most "stolen" mods out there, are merely redistributed, without credit or permission.

And I'm sorry, but that is not nefarious. That's not genuine theft. That is not worth the fuss that everyone here is making it out to be. That is simply redistribution. Nobody is losing out on credit/recognition. Nobody is losing money. Nobody is gaining money.

So please, tell me again. Whats the f*#@ing problem?

Brabbit1987 wrote: @doomy19
If that is all their mods are worth to them, than that is on them. They can stop developing mods if they so wish. You know, some people may care at first, but everything moves on and people will simply forget.

Worrying about a mod you made, which you released entirely free, being uploaded in a place where people can download it entirely for free .. is just stressful. It's easier to really not care. It's not exactly the biggest deal in the world.

I am not new to theft either. I am an artist and a game developer, started off a long time ago as a mod developer myself.

It was something I enjoyed, and I expect the same to be true of current mod developers. Anyone can take your mod and upload it anywhere, and there is very little you can do to stop it. So why stress about it at all?

If you are worried about giving support, than just make it clear you only give support for those who get their copy from an official source. If you have a problem with my mod, and you got it from a place I did not upload it, then tough, no support for you.

There are ways to deal with these things without making yourself stressed out.

bigdeano89 wrote: Boomerizer, Dark0ne already stated that it IS piracy, whether it makes money or not is irrelevant, its the intellectual property of the mod author, and no one else. You dont seem to want to read ANYTHING anyone says to you do you? Yes, I have noticed your constant posts trying to defend it. You are exactly the kind of person im talking about.

Brabbit1987 wrote: @bigdeano89

If we are to consider this piracy .. than a lot of things also are piracy that are widely accepted. Let's say you see a drawing that is pretty awesome on deviantart and want to show your friends and share it on facebook. That would then also be considered piracy .. would it not?

You didn't get the authors permission to repost it on facebook .. right?

boomerizer wrote: I only consider it theft, piracy, or whatever /wrong/ in regards to mods when

1) Credit is being attributed to the Thief.

Beyond that, I count the redistribution with or without credit under Fair Use. Specifically, with Credit, but on console mods with limited description character limit, I'm going to also count without proper credit.

To me, that is all it is.

Brabbit1987 wrote: @boomerizer

Well technically it's not fair use, redistributing is against the law whether or not credit is or is not given.
The issue is, copyright laws seem to be so outdated and not used correctly these days that no one knows what is and isn't allowed. No one actually follows them.

If we followed all copyright laws, things would be very different on the internet. That share button that exists on articles, art sites, or what have you .. would not exist. You wouldn't be able to turn your favorite games into wallpaper for your computer. You wouldn't be able to own a fan made website. Technically even the nexus site is breaking a lot of copyright laws.

The reason no one gets sued or gets in trouble is because the companies learned a long time ago, it's more beneficial for them to allow these things and it just is a waste of time to try and prevent it.

There are some companies though who are pretty bad still. Nintendo is one of them.

Kraynic wrote: @Brabbit I did a quick google search for "deviant art permissions". There is a LOT of info there that talks about how things get to that point. That site and how it gets used is a lot different than here, but if you haven't read their own policies on theft, infringement, etc, then you should.

boomerizer wrote: You're right, it is more beneficial. Which is why it blows my mind authors are so gung-ho with this "issue".

s#*!, I love runnin around the wasteland with Captain America's shield. Wish it were at the very least throwable and retrievable, in the way tomahawks were in New Vegas.

Brabbit1987 wrote: @Kraynic

Not sure what their policies has anything to do with what I said.

Their policies deal with whether it is ok to copy things from their site. It is pretty relevant, since it can vary from page to page in the site.

[MarchinBunny]

In response to post #39498570. #39512850, #39513220, #39514275, #39514365, #39514775, #39514790, #39518690, #39518820, #39519085, #39519310, #39519400, #39519465, #39519585, #39519975 are all replies on the same post.

bigdeano89 wrote: Sigh, the ignorant comments coming from some folks here is unbelieveable, to the point that I think you must either be children or trolls to have this mindset. Most of these people even admit to "not reading the whole article" but somehow their insight has to be more valuable than the damn article you are commenting on.

Heres the gist, shrunk down into a smaller size so you can understand. Mod authors DO own their mods, Bethesda and Zenimax own the LICENSE to it (and thats ONLY if made with the creation kit. If they make them by any other means, Zenimax dont own anything). That license does NOT extend to users. That does NOT give anyone the right to take and upload the mods without permission from the authors, END.OF.STORY.

No more of this BS "I own the game, I can do what I want", no, you cant, and you are childish or a troll if you believe thats true.

Brabbit1987 wrote: I am of the argument that, while I don't agree with mods being stolen, I think it's better to make it less of a big deal, because it's only making the situation worse.

Remember what the music industry did back when piracy was rather new? There are always going to be people who do not respect your wishes. Also, in many cases, it's not even someone who is trying to be disrespectful, it's just someone who enjoys your content and wants to share it with others.

Now, you can do what the music industry did and try your best to prevent piracy. Or you can accept that there is very little you can do to stop it entirely and it's probably best to just embrace it and work along with it, rather than against it. If this trend continues with mods on consoles, you can be sure .. eventually we will come to a point where trying to stop your mod from being uploaded will just be impossible unless you don't mind spending most of your time doing take downs.

Again, it's not that I agree with people stealing mods, I just think it's going to come to a point where .. it will be too much work to try and prevent it.

boomerizer wrote: And in my case, I feel the same way Brabbit. Although, it's more because its digital media. Once you upload it to the internet, you sort of lose ownership. You know, its not like you're actually losing anything. And the 'thief' really isn't gaining anything. In fact the only people that benefit from this, are the people that download the mods to their game.

My god, what a travesty! Oh, what a world where people are actually enjoying something on a platform that isn't a PC! *gasp*

Like I've said, repeatedly, if the thief is actually trying to claim ownership (or worse, trying to encourage donation or payment of some sort), yeah, I'd have a problem too. But if its a direct copy/paste upload? C'mon, what the flip are you really losing out on?

BuffHamster wrote: @boomerizer: Apathy, ... awesome. I have some Insurance policies I can sell to you, oh and this bridge I found somewhere near Brooklyn NY.
Accept it, "Buyer Beware" and all that.
You bought a shoddy used car with no warranty? Too bad, accept it.
Oh my, you purchased some food items that have been recalled due to Salmonella contamination? Ah well, you still have that Insurance policy I sold you? Never mind, food poisoning is not covered.
Imitation brand electronics burned your house down? Ah, too bad, that's not covered. Accept it, no, ... embrace it.

My take? Mod Authors have the legal right to be advocates for themselves and the legal right to petition their grievances as loudly as possible, ... accept it.

doomy19 wrote: @Brabbit1987 You're right, it will be too much work to try and prevent it, so the mod authors will do the most simple thing they can, which is to stop making mods because the enjoyment of doing so has been eclipsed by the problems involved. And who benefits from that? Nobody. This is the reality that the community members here understand and the new console people and Bethesda don't, that there is no way to win if everyone isn't respecting the ones creating the content.

boomerizer wrote: Wrong Again. Because now you're bringing money into it. Now I'm at a loss. Because so far, everyone arguing against this mod theft like its genuine piracy, keeps using analogies that bring in money. Currency.

There is no currency in the modding community beyond ego. Beyond namesake.

And if it isn't that, then it's anti-console types. Neither of which are valid, in my opinion.

One is ego stroking, the other is elitism. Both are insanely selfish, which defeats the purpose of the sharing of your mods.

Sharing.

Huh.

Maybe somebody forgot the definition of sharing.

I mean, if you don't want to spread the love, maybe you shouldn't mod. Sounds like you're doing it for the wrong reasons. Looking for some glory? Maybe hoping you make such a great mod that Bethesda (or whoevers game you're modding) hires you?

If I made mods, I'd be flattered if it were being redistributed. That meant I did a good thing. That'd mean that people liked what I made.

And, as I've said before, and something that people seem to be forgetting, or not paying attention to:

If the person redistributing it were claiming it as their own, outright-- not just failing to credit, but saying it is THEIRS and THEIRS alone, yeah, I WOULD have a problem. But the fact of the matter is that most "stolen" mods out there, are merely redistributed, without credit or permission.

And I'm sorry, but that is not nefarious. That's not genuine theft. That is not worth the fuss that everyone here is making it out to be. That is simply redistribution. Nobody is losing out on credit/recognition. Nobody is losing money. Nobody is gaining money.

So please, tell me again. Whats the f*#@ing problem?

Brabbit1987 wrote: @doomy19
If that is all their mods are worth to them, than that is on them. They can stop developing mods if they so wish. You know, some people may care at first, but everything moves on and people will simply forget.

Worrying about a mod you made, which you released entirely free, being uploaded in a place where people can download it entirely for free .. is just stressful. It's easier to really not care. It's not exactly the biggest deal in the world.

I am not new to theft either. I am an artist and a game developer, started off a long time ago as a mod developer myself.

It was something I enjoyed, and I expect the same to be true of current mod developers. Anyone can take your mod and upload it anywhere, and there is very little you can do to stop it. So why stress about it at all?

If you are worried about giving support, than just make it clear you only give support for those who get their copy from an official source. If you have a problem with my mod, and you got it from a place I did not upload it, then tough, no support for you.

There are ways to deal with these things without making yourself stressed out.

bigdeano89 wrote: Boomerizer, Dark0ne already stated that it IS piracy, whether it makes money or not is irrelevant, its the intellectual property of the mod author, and no one else. You dont seem to want to read ANYTHING anyone says to you do you? Yes, I have noticed your constant posts trying to defend it. You are exactly the kind of person im talking about.

Brabbit1987 wrote: @bigdeano89

If we are to consider this piracy .. than a lot of things also are piracy that are widely accepted. Let's say you see a drawing that is pretty awesome on deviantart and want to show your friends and share it on facebook. That would then also be considered piracy .. would it not?

You didn't get the authors permission to repost it on facebook .. right?

boomerizer wrote: I only consider it theft, piracy, or whatever /wrong/ in regards to mods when

1) Credit is being attributed to the Thief.

Beyond that, I count the redistribution with or without credit under Fair Use. Specifically, with Credit, but on console mods with limited description character limit, I'm going to also count without proper credit.

To me, that is all it is.

Brabbit1987 wrote: @boomerizer

Well technically it's not fair use, redistributing is against the law whether or not credit is or is not given.
The issue is, copyright laws seem to be so outdated and not used correctly these days that no one knows what is and isn't allowed. No one actually follows them.

If we followed all copyright laws, things would be very different on the internet. That share button that exists on articles, art sites, or what have you .. would not exist. You wouldn't be able to turn your favorite games into wallpaper for your computer. You wouldn't be able to own a fan made website. Technically even the nexus site is breaking a lot of copyright laws.

The reason no one gets sued or gets in trouble is because the companies learned a long time ago, it's more beneficial for them to allow these things and it just is a waste of time to try and prevent it.

There are some companies though who are pretty bad still. Nintendo is one of them.

Kraynic wrote: @Brabbit I did a quick google search for "deviant art permissions". There is a LOT of info there that talks about how things get to that point. That site and how it gets used is a lot different than here, but if you haven't read their own policies on theft, infringement, etc, then you should.

boomerizer wrote: You're right, it is more beneficial. Which is why it blows my mind authors are so gung-ho with this "issue".

s#*!, I love runnin around the wasteland with Captain America's shield. Wish it were at the very least throwable and retrievable, in the way tomahawks were in New Vegas.

Brabbit1987 wrote: @Kraynic

Not sure what their policies has anything to do with what I said.

Kraynic wrote: Their policies deal with whether it is ok to copy things from their site. It is pretty relevant, since it can vary from page to page in the site.

@Kraynic

That isn't how copyright works. For example, if a site has a policy saying you are allowed to download or copy anything from their site, and it contains pirated games, that doesn't mean it's ok to do.

Sites don't determine what is or isn't allowed. The laws do that.

Edit: Copying anything that doesn't belong to you, under pretty much every single circumstance imaginable is against copyright no matter where you do it. Course, I am mostly talking about NA laws, Edited June 18, 2016 by Brabbit1987

[lamer7643]

I am not a mod author but a supporter. First I just want to say thank you to the mod authors for the excellent stuff that is available and for the time you put into it. I completely agree with this post, and after reading some of the responses it is obvious there are a lot of younger "give me give me give me i deserve everything" people. It is a very controversial topic and I can see the frustration from the authors. In the world of documentation it is called plagiarism. In other circles it is pretty close to copyright infringement although I'm aware there is no such copyright that exists on the mods, and in the general common sense circle it is called STEALING.

 

But unfortunately we live in a world where everything is instant gratification and no thought to the people who make it possible to enjoy these works. It's always these people ( those who like to take other peoples works and pass them off as their own) who ruin it for everyone else and eventually for themselves as well ; either because the modding will become commercial or their will be some stricter enforcement of the content. But again I express my thanks to the authors and the operators of this site for the availability of everything.

Edited June 18, 2016 by lamer7643

[TritonRM]

In response to post #39485330. #39488480, #39488735, #39490310, #39491875, #39495320, #39496320, #39497760, #39499120, #39503090, #39507295 are all replies on the same post.

MrJoseCuervo wrote: I urge modders to keep their console brothers in mind when they make mods. Make sure your mods are in good working order and safe for them to use. We don't want any consoles getting damaged due to poor modding.

alanlwilcox wrote: How can a PC modder EVER make a mod safe for console gaming? There are no tools for a console game as said in an earlier post. Consoles are a new world that only Bethesda may know enough about to mod for them. I would think that consoles would be at great risk and will blame these modders for problems caused by pirated mods.

A_name wrote: There are 0 tools for a modder to troubleshoot on a console. And frankly asking a modder to buy 2 consoles just to test his mods is ridiculous anyway.

Maybe we should encourage the thieves or pirates to do the testing?
I am pretty damn sure a handful of modders would be glad to outsource this to them.
If they ask first of course.

chinagreenelvis wrote: AFAIK there shouldn't be any difference. Console mod problems will come from the the same source as PC mod problems: load order. It's not like you can write a mod that will physically destroy a console.

CrazyIvan12 wrote: ...and the troll/asshole, emboldened by this statement, set out to create a mod designed to do just that.

But in all seriousness, the biggest problem would be troubleshooting. People (including me) don't use consoles ever, and as a result, they have no way to bug test. I personally think, if the modder is the "won't upload to bethsda.net" type, if they can work something out with a console user to troubleshoot the mod, that they should think about uploading to bethesda

arn13 wrote: It's already quite difficult enough making sure your mod even works on the PC. My "Populated Wasteland" mod worked perfectly fine for me, but a lot of users reported problems on their end and I simply had no idea what could be causing it. If I'm not experiencing the same problems, how else can I troubleshoot it?

Now imagine if I had to do that for consoles too. That's just too much of a headache to even bother with.

UlanX wrote: I play this on PC, my husband on PS4 so I personally don't have an issue with mods for consoles. I understand very well why some people prefer consoles and there are games I prefer to play (or can only play on console). I don't go in for the whole "PC Master Race" nonsense. If I want to play a Final Fantasy game on Playstation, I damn well will. I won't suddenly be overcome with shame because "oh my god, a console!". That said I love my PC to bits and play several single player and MMO's with it. These divisions are artificial and created out of a need to be part of an "in-group".

That said, I can see how modding for consoles may be a bit more time consuming, beyond the need as some have pointed out, to own both the console and a PC to create the mods. I can currently make a mod on PC and test it straight away without having to faff around transferring it to console, testing it, switching back to PC to troubleshoot etc

jguerr73 wrote: yes you can

WiIIPWN4KFC wrote: @chinagreenelvis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Di6Te-plqlY

So yeah, you're kind of wrong about not being able to destroy consoles with mods.

rypofalem wrote: You guys are missing MrJoseCuervo's sarcasm. He is halfheartedly suggesting that modders put malicious code into their mod that does nothing for PC users but does something undesirable for consoles.

This way, if the mod was stolen and put on the console site, everyone who used the illegal copy would have something bad happen. (be it a simple game crash or perhaps something more serious like bricking the console)

This, of course, is a terrible idea because(among other reasons) it punishes even innocent people who don't realize it's a pirated copy.

boomerizer wrote: @rypofalem; you're absolutely right within that last sentence.

"This, of course, is a terrible idea because(among other reasons) it punishes even innocent people who don't realize it's a pirated copy. "

I've been using mods for years, and still don't know more than a couple modders by name. In fact the only one I can name off the top of my head is Azar due to all the hair mods I've used for Skyrim-- and downloaded on the xbox now. Although I'll be honest; I can't even verify that Azar was the uploader of the console version. What I can verify, is that I don't care one way or the other-- Azar was in the title which was credit enough for me.

http://i.imgur.com/svNKG7i.jpg You sure that bricking video wasn't fake?

[acidzebra]

Does anyone disagree that _in principle_ an author should be able to determine how his/her work is used? That an author should rightfully retain some level of control over his/her work? That it is not right for someone to take an author's work and pass it of as his own? I really hope these are things most people can agree on.

 

Now it is also true that _de facto_ the internet and very nature of digital information make it very hard to actually exercise said control. But authors still release their work on the internet, for free, for people to enjoy. You should appreciate that.

 

Community happens when authors express certain wishes about their work and those wishes are respected and observed by the rest of the community - you know, when people respect each other in general? Otherwise, what you have is just a bunch of leeches and not a community at all. You will likely lose a lot of potential mods in a situation like that, as authors feel disrespected and unappreciated and will stop sharing.

 

Personal views: I've set my mods (where possible) to the most liberal permissions. Take them, remix them, reupload them, share alike, port them when skyrim remaster comes out, go nuts. I'm not offering technical support on any of it, you're on your own. Don't have a console, don't care. It'd be nice if you mention me somewhere if you do something with the mods, but I don't even care all that much tbh. But some mod authors feel differently. And while you may disagree with their views (I personally think it's a fool's errand to try and control stuff you put on the internet for free), if you appreciate their works and want to see more, you should probably respect their wishes, or they will stop contributing, and I'd rather lose a bunch of non-contributing leeches with big mouths than people who produce neat things for free.

[rlilewis]

Well I'm a part of the so called "endemic problem within the PC gaming community". Why is it that ever since Oblivion the user interface has been getting worse and worse? Could it be that they're designing it for the console controllers and not bothering to create a dedicated interface for the mouse/keyboard? They still want full price on PC though of course - where's that FOV slider eh Bethesda?

 

So not only are we getting lazy ports but now we're supposed to be creating mods for the consoles like good little PC serfs. Yeah no thanks. You'll have to excuse me if I don't want to join hands with console gamers, singing kumbaya in praise for how they've dumbed down every genre thanks to their horrible clown controls and 30fps "cinematic" experience potato boxes.

 

[MarchinBunny]

In response to post #39520310.

acidzebra wrote:

Does anyone disagree that _in principle_ an author should be able to determine how his/her work is used? That an author should rightfully retain some level of control over his/her work? That it is not right for someone to take an author's work an pass it of as his own?

 

Now it is also true that _de facto_ the internet and very nature of digital information make it very hard to actually exercise said control. But authors still release their work on the internet, for free, for people to enjoy.

 

Community happens when authors express certain wishes about their work and those wishes are respected and observed by the rest of the community - you know, when people respect each other in general? Otherwise, what you have is just a bunch of leeches and not a community at all. You will likely lose a lot of potential mods in a situation like that, as authors feel disrespected and unappreciated and will stop sharing.

 

Personal views: I've set my mods (where possible) to the most liberal permissions. Take them, remix them, reupload them, share alike, go nuts. I'm not offering technical support on any of it, you're on you're own. Don't have a console, don't care. It'd be nice if you mention me somewhere if you do something with the mods, but I don't even care all that much tbh. But some mod authors feel differently. And while you may disagree with their views (I personally think it's a fool's errand to try and control stuff you put on the internet for free), if you appreciate their works and want to see more, you should probably respect their wishes, or they will stop contributing, and I'd rather lose a bunch of non-contributing leeches with big mouths than people who produce neat things for free.

Great post and 100% agree. Especially with your personal views. I also think it's a bit of a fools errand. A losing battle if you will.

I do feel people should respect their wishes though regardless, but we all know how well that has been going.

[zanity]

It speaks VOLUMES that Nexus very INTENTIONALLY excludes an MIT licence option for mods posted here- ie.,

 

6: I give permission for anyone to use my mod in any way they wish - no credit required.

 

Why is the MIT like option missing. Because Nexus (as much of the rant shows) is about TELLING people how to think and act- rather than giving users TRUE freedom within reason. It is apparent Nexus thinks modding should be a GAME, where people are more interseted in power-plays and the search for 'fame' over simply helping to boost a community.

 

Bethesda doesn't repsect this site NOT just because the Nexus is comptetition- but because Beth is American, and Yanks understand the fundamental concepts of OPEN-SOURCE development. The open-source softwre movement could NEVER have originated in Britain, and that is a very sad fact.

 

If Nexus really wanted to move forward, it should introduce a promted development open-source licence ENCOURAGING mod sharing WITHOUT the need for explicit author permissions. Most open-source licenses are INHERITED, of course, which solves the 'problem' or 'abuse'.

 

Moving to one or more open-source licences for mods hosted here would eliminate most of the problems currently seen with console mods. I know this. Beth knows this. The controllers of Nexus know this. So why hasn't this happened? The answer is not a happy one.

 

PS the CLAIM that console modding is just like PC modding is so disingeneous, I cannot believe anyone makes it with a straight face. While 'difficult' language may be deployed by people arguing the issue- it is a FACT that the console owners themselves DEFINE consoles as a LOCKED platform where user rights are minimum, and third-party code and data subject to the most severe controls.

 

We are seeing mods on the consoles today NOT because Sony and Microsoft have changed their stance, but because MS is in a VERY diffcult market position given the much greater success of the PS4,and is therefore willing to do things in the SHORT TERM for market gain it most certainly will NOT allow in the long term. And by doing so, MS currently obliges Sony to follow suit. Both Sony and MS are currently more interested in the successful launches of their new console updates.

 

BUT both Sony and MS expect Beth to VERY QUICKLY convert mods into more paid, heavily curated DLC- and Beth has promised exactly this with its new iDTech engine that will be the basis of new moddable open-world games after the re-release of Skyrim. You see, neither MS nor Sony believe free user-created mods belong on consoles - even if they bend this principle for a LITTLE time in the midst of deadly competition between the two.

 

Beth's current lack of enthusiasm with 'fixing' console modding has everything do do with the fact that Beth knows that mods on the existing, ancient, obsolete engine is a can of worms not worth the time, effort or money to fix. The new iDTech engine is built from the ground up to support curated mods that Beth has 100% distribution control over- and it is THESE mods that Beth is preparing to support properly.

 

The Apple app-store is Beth's model.

 

PPS the statement that the use of a tool allows the tool maker to control items made by a tool using a EULA is so wrong in law, it is literally unbelievable that anyone is still promoting this NONSENSE. Beth ONLY gets to share distribution rights over your mod if your mod contains BETH IP, regardless of what tools you used to make the mod. No so-called license gets to alter this FACT.

 

And evn if BETH holds a distribution right because your mod contains Beth IP, both your permission AND Beth's is required to publicly distribute the mod. Beth alone CANNOT ever distribute your mod, or give others the right to do the same, unless you give them IMPLIED permission by doing something like uploading it to Beth.net.