OT observation: I have to say, Insane, you have a <i>lot</i> more patience with ad hominem attacks than I would've been able to muster. My respect.
It feels a little like piling up on Temphage at this point, but I can't resist replying since this topic is pretty near and dear to my heart right now. Let's subdivide the arguments here:
<b>Audience Success vs. Compensation</b>
This is actually a rather knotty question: What is fair pay for a product that was created unasked and which may not be distributed any other way than through the prospective buyer? (Which is the only thing the various EULAs can ensure, BTW: Your intellectual ownership to the map would be upheld in any court in the western world.) At the end of the day, the individual mapper has a simple choice: Take money for something you already spent a lot of time on with no expectation of compensation, or don't. From that perspective, any amount of money is going to be a lot of money.
Is that <i>fair</i>? Good question. The relationship between content creator and publisher rarely is, from the perspective of the content creator. (Yeah, that's what Valve or UWE are in this context: Publishers.) This huge differential of compensation and consumer success is an issue game developers have been fighting with since they began to exist. I know Charlie is trying to level the playing field a bit here - both by self-publishing NS2 and by offering fair and scalable terms to his mappers. But at the end, any aggregator (publisher) is going to live off the added value. The content creator is <i>never</i> going to see the whole of the profit derived from his product. If you disagree with that notion, I suggest you stay clear off any media industry.
Fortunately, there is more than money to the mix!
<b>Forms of Compensation</b>
The games industry does not run on money alone. The responses in this thread already indicate this, but the best example to this may be Charlie himself: Here's a guy who quit a well-paying job in a game developer to live off of his savings and the donations of fans to tinker with a pet project, and then spent more time trying to make this project work as a start-up. Nobody with purely financial motivations would've gone that way - and Charlie is not the only guy who did this by a long shot.
There are several aims you may have when creating game content. I'm aware of four: Financial motives, self-actualization, reputation, and social capital. None of them is more or less valid than the other, or will exist alone.
The first two are going to be self-evident: Some do it for the money, others do it for the art, most do it for both.
Reputation and social capital are a bit trickier. Game development rests on expertise - on very specialized creative knowledge and abilities. This stuff is immaterial and inherent to the experts - I can't see by looking at you whether you're a good mapper. So why should I trust you to be? Because you can show me examples of your work. Even better - you can show me examples of your work's success. That's why portfolios are so important to people inside the industry. I know it worked for me: I spent two and a half years working for Charlie as a <i>very</i> cost-efficient producer. (I did it for free.) I'm 25 now, and had a job interview for a (well-paying) junior leadership position with one of Germany's three biggest developers last wednesday. I'm the youngest applicant. Guess why they invited me. In the long run, I expect this won't be as valuable to me as knowing Charlie, Max and all the other people I met through working on NS, though. Not only because they're great people, but because some of them are going to make it big in this industry. That's not only trust in their competences, that's also statistics; a lot of people worked on NS. If they need a producer, maybe they'll remember me fondly - which is the way this industry works. We're a happy, incestous little bunch. That social capital is something making it extremely advisable to get in touch with others, and that's often easiest by working with them.
All of those can be good reasons for you to take a low-paying (or pro bono) project on occasion. Can. Maybe, you still don't want to play by these rules. But consider that these are the rules of the games industry, and plan your career choices accordingly.
<!--quoteo(post=1740889:date=Nov 27 2009, 06:16 PM:name=Fortune)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Fortune @ Nov 27 2009, 06:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1740889"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->they can keep the money, credits alone would be worthwhile.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1741397:date=Nov 29 2009, 06:26 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Chris0132 @ Nov 29 2009, 06:26 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741397"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Either you map because you like it, in which case you will probably want to do it anyway, and maybe get a job doing it if you can in which case you will do it for the experience until you do.
Alternatively you do it for money, in which case you should <i>get a job doing it</i> not demand random companies pay for it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Seeing as how this argument appears to have turned to OPPOSITION of NS2 community mappers getting anything at all, I'll say I still don't get it. As was agreed earlier, Valve throws in community maps and advertises them everywhere, this in turn gets them sales - a not insignificant number of them. When I do a map for Dystopia or NS1, there's no sales, so it's not like I should expect anything. But why should working as a freelance mapper provide no slice of the pie? Do freelance reporters work for free? They're not staff employees, so whenever they sell an article to the New York Times, the editor reviews it, says it's worthy, and throws them a wad of cash.
What Nem0 is talking about is a paid job in the industry - but you don't need any past experience to produce the results of a good map - you simply play the map. Again, this is the difference between a freelance writer and a staff writer - a staff writer is paid more, because they expect consistent results. The freelance writer they don't really know (though assumedly their name gets known) and work with on a per-article basis.
So <i>where the hell is the distinction</i>. Are you saying NS2 isn't a product of love because Flayra has the balls to demand we pay for it? I hope you're warming up uTorrent right now. Why does NS2 deserve a pricetag, but a map they are interested in does not? For that matter, why does KFS deserve to be paid either?
It's safe to say most people love what they do, which is why they do it. Why should that change whether you get paid for your works or not? As the point of UWE paying mappers is a moot one as it's revealed that they will, why such staunch opposition to this? You clearly all hate the ###### out of me because I dare even bring this up, so why not direct your ire at UWE themselves for even DREAMING to do such an unspeakable thing? Clearly they're on board with me on this one.
Either map because you get enjoyment out of it (and expect no compensation in return), OR; dont map at all.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Hope you're planning to pirate NS2 then. Inarguably producing an iPhone app generally requires a lot less work than the entire process of making a map. But it's fair to ask for $1 for the app, but nothing for the map? The people working at indy game companies or producing iPhone apps probably aren't 'industry veterans' either - they still deserve money for their product!
<!--quoteo(post=1741443:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741443"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'll say I still don't get it. As was agreed earlier, Valve throws in community maps and advertises them everywhere, this in turn gets them sales - a not insignificant number of them. When I do a map for Dystopia or NS1, there's no sales, so it's not like I should expect anything. But why should working as a freelance mapper provide no slice of the pie? Do freelance reporters work for free? They're not staff employees, so whenever they sell an article to the New York Times, the editor reviews it, says it's worthy, and throws them a wad of cash.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You started out, in your first post, by noting that Valve's community mappers get paid for officially published content, so I frankly don't see the connection to your example. Still, I have seen quite a number of arrangements where freelance journalists would receive reduced (or no) pay for covering events they attended on the editor's bill, which isn't incomparable to the free provision of editing tools (which otherwise fetch quite a price). In both cases, there will be people who see it as a beneficial arrangement due to experience / networking gains.
<!--quoteo(post=1741443:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741443"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What Nem0 is talking about is a paid job in the industry - but you don't need any past experience to produce the results of a good map - you simply play the map. Again, this is the difference between a freelance writer and a staff writer - a staff writer is paid more, because they expect consistent results. The freelance writer they don't really know (though assumedly their name gets known) and work with on a per-article basis.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> First, I was talking about a perspective on a job in the industry, which is a motivation of many mappers I meet. Second, yes, it's easy to just run through a work sample and establish that the arrangement of vertices and textures is functional, maybe even pretty. It's damn hard to determine that it is conductive to the game, that the level <i>designer</i> managed to internalize the game's mechanics and to create a suitable environment. This is what seperates someone like KFS from someone like myself, by the way. A fully playtested, validated and shipped level on a commercial product makes a broader statement about the map's design - and also about your work discipline. It is a more valuable reputation gain, plain and simple. Let me also note that level design has rarely been outsourced in digital game production so far. There is a trend towards such design outsourcing, at the top level of experienced externalized designers, but generally, even freelance level designers will be with a project in a longer-term contractual arrangement, simply because consistent results are what you need with your levels.
<!--quoteo(post=1741443:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741443"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's safe to say most people love what they do, which is why they do it. Why should that change whether you get paid for your works or not?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> As I noted, it's a business realty that jobs a lot of people are passionate about will be paid less, because people will enter them with motivations aside from money.
<!--quoteo(post=1741443:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741443"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As the point of UWE paying mappers is a moot one as it's revealed that they will, why such staunch opposition to this? You clearly all hate the ###### out of me because I dare even bring this up, so why not direct your ire at UWE themselves for even DREAMING to do such an unspeakable thing? Clearly they're on board with me on this one.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Nobody is out to get you. Calm down.
Strictly speaking, Nem0, the editor tools weren't free :)
If you want to map, by all means, map. I too will be working with Spark just for the fun of it once I get on a computer capable of running it.
However if we back up, the original point was that I find it morally questionable for UWE to ship the game with a criminally depressing number of maps and was then to rely on the COMMUNITY to do the job of making maps for them. As it was unknown to me at that time that they would buy up maps to make official, I still think it's a valid point, which is why I brought up TF2 - they have the resources to produce more maps, and yet only shipped the game with.. six? Most of which were terrible anyway.
Strictly speaking, the onus of morality on paying for maps isn't on the mapper to demand payment for the map, but on the publisher to provide something fair for it.
Strictly speaking, it is my understanding that they are. They're just made available to pre-orderers of the game in advance of the general public. Also, I was replying to your statements about Valve Software.
EpidemicDark Force GorgeJoin Date: 2003-06-29Member: 17781Members
edited November 2009
<!--quoteo(post=1740899:date=Nov 27 2009, 06:35 AM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 27 2009, 06:35 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1740899"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I have absolutely no interest in what <b>you</b> want. I have no use whatsoever for a design portfolio. And what's more, you can still get paid and put that in there, derp. If they're paying you for it, you can twist that to sound way more impressive than: Gave free stuff to whoever would take it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If people dont want to create the maps for free, you have a choice not to let valve use your map. It's that simple. Valve doesnt have to compensate, because maps will get made anyway and they will be allowed for inclusion anyway. Why on earth would they pay then? Are you arguing Valve has some sort of moral obligation? Oh dear, it doesnt work like that in business. You pay to get something done, if something gets done anyway, you don't pay, it's that simple.
If Charlie, in an effort to insure that some pretty awesome maps get made, decide to announce compensation, as he has. It's either because it would be cheaper than to hire professional mappers directly or it would allow the diverse community to turn up a variety of maps, with an increased incentive to make good maps because of the compensation, that would ultimately improve the quality of the maps that gets included.
<!--quoteo(post=1741459:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:44 PM:name=Epidemic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Epidemic @ Nov 29 2009, 01:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741459"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Are you arguing Valve has some sort of moral obligation? Oh dear, it doesnt work like that in business.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And thus, the difference between a company who charges $5 for horse armor, and a company whose flagship product they ship for $40 because they honestly felt it wasn't worth the 'normal' price of a full game (NOT UWE).
Temphage, could you please explain more clearly what you want? What you are currently citing as a problem has been already addressed months ago.
You are saying that "When I do a map for Dystopia or NS1, there's no sales, so it's not like I should expect anything. But why should working as a freelance mapper provide no slice of the pie? Do freelance reporters work for free? They're not staff employees, so whenever they sell an article to the New York Times, the editor reviews it, says it's worthy, and throws them a wad of cash.". Essentially, wanting that UWE paid for the maps you create.
They are going to do that.
Do you want every single map created ever for NS2 to "bought" by UWE, instead of their current idea of paying for the good quality ones?
No one is in opposition to getting paid, most of us just place more value on having a shipped map than a quick cash in. But has been stated long a go, UWE will compensate us for any maps they deem awesome and want to use, maybe it means a quick buck for you but it means a very rare and great opportunity for the majority of people on here.
What's kind of funny though is that your up in arms over being paid a lot for a map you could possibly make that UWE would want to buy, yet we don't even know how much they'll give us in return. If they stated a price, like $10 per map, I'd understand what you're arguing about, but we don't know yet. It's perfectly possible they'd compensate us for an amount you'd be happy with, as possible as UWE deciding not to buy any maps at all.
<!--quoteo(post=1741457:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->However if we back up<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> By which I assume that my points are accepted? ;)
<!--quoteo(post=1741457:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->the original point was that I find it morally questionable for UWE to ship the game with a criminally depressing number of maps<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Which is - as you correctly put it - an opinion. Frankly, I'm grateful for small level selections because I'm a relatively casual player and can not internalize the eight to ten maps you find more reasonable. Either way, I don't see anything criminal and / or depressing about it.
<!--quoteo(post=1741457:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->and was then to rely on the COMMUNITY to do the job of making maps for them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Which now doesn't seem to be the main thrust of your argument anymore, as it was all through the last four pages. Suddenly, the whole payment thing is secondary to...
<!--quoteo(post=1741457:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->they have the resources to produce more maps, and yet only shipped the game with.. six? Most of which were terrible anyway.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Which, again, is an opinion. If you feel the amount of maps for a product is too little, that's a valid criticism. If you decide against buying a game because of it, that's a reasonable decision. If you do buy the game and then complain about the selection, I guess it didn't break the deal ;)
<!--quoteo(post=1741457:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Strictly speaking, the onus of morality on paying for maps isn't on the mapper to demand payment for the map, but on the publisher to provide something fair for it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> And I hope I have shown that this fair compensation can be something aside from money - though I don't know of a case of the firms discussed herein where money did not flow for such transactions.
RE: TF2, according to something somewhere (probably in-game commentary), they noticed that games may ship with a dozen or more maps, but only five or six ever end up getting played the most - so they directed their focus on making just those five or six maps. I'm not alone when I say that of the six maps, only two were decent. Granary and Well played completely identical to each other making them almost the same map. 2Fort was a gimmick, Hydro was badly balanced, and Dustbowl just got old. The only great map there was Gravelpit. Opinion sure, but you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thought all the maps the game shipped with were 5-star quality that would all become the de_dust of TF2.
NS2 is aiming for 15-20 minute rounds which is going to hurt when you only have four maps.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Temphage, could you please explain more clearly what you want? What you are currently citing as a problem has been already addressed months ago.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You act like I'm the only one posting in this thread - more so responding to the people who are suggesting any payment is bad with idiocy like 'if you like what you do you should be happy to do it for free'.
Temphage, I mean no offense to you. I just don't understand what you are trying to achieve.
The other people who had questionable stances like, "if you like what you do you should be happy to do it for free", I can see where they are coming from. Where they are coming from, in my opinion, isn't that great of a place.
I already said my snarky comments earlier in the thread. I just want to know what you want. Your last post seems to indicate that you want more official maps?
-Someone made the point earlier that games like Goldeneye shipped with 10-20 levels and that it's disappointing that games today only ship with 5-10, tops. I would just like to point out that due to the graphic restrictions of those earlier games (games we all now have difficulty getting into because of the old old graphics) the level geometry, clutter and overall design needed to be really simplistic. Games these days that we all celebrate as having such beautiful graphics and newer more innovative game mechanics require an amazing amount of time for a developer to create. Time = money. To make all these immersive levels that are both really fun to play AND graphically beautiful takes a lot more time and effort to create a polished playable level then it did 10 years ago.
"It used to be a task that could easily be done by a single Level Designer, just opening up the editor, start cutting blocks and brushes, add some textures, drop a few lights and you had a level. Some of the levels that shipped with UT were in near-final form after just a day of work." Cedric Fiorentino - Level Designer for Unreal Tournament
-Temphage is presenting a moral argument about a publisher benefiting from cheep or free labor. I don't know about anyone else here, but I have a full time 40-ish hour a week job. I don't need to expect to be compensated from a game publisher for a level that I made of my own volition with NO GUARANTEE OF PAYMENT to eat tomorrow. That's why I work at a deli and make enough money to get by for the time being. I'm considering starting a NS2 map project NOT for the money (because that would be, frankly, idiotic) but for the education and resume. I was an Oblivion modder. I never got a dime for it. What I DID get was a hell of a lot of learning I wouldn't have gotten if they didn't offer a Construction Set.
When it comes to any creative industry there is a lot more onos on the individual to prove their skills to an employer. If you want to talk about economics, let's talk about supply and demand.
Supply: Thousands and thousands of creative people that think they should get paid for being creative.
Demand: A small amount of creative people with the skills necessary for a particular job.
Economically, they HAVE to be choosey...
The fact is when it comes to any job that is artistic or creative, there are always going to be more people that want the job rather than are qualified to have it. Enthusiasm isn't enough. You have to PROVE that you can do it. That's what building a resume is all about.
I'm a art college graduate that works in a grocery store. It's ultimately up to me to go out and get that job and an employer isn't going to just hand me one saying "Well we really have no idea of your talent or ability, but here! Have a regular paycheck anyway!"
<!--quoteo(post=1741472:date=Nov 29 2009, 09:34 AM:name=Sirot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sirot @ Nov 29 2009, 09:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741472"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Temphage, I mean no offense to you. I just don't understand what you are trying to achieve.
The other people who had questionable stances like, "if you like what you do you should be happy to do it for free", I can see where they are coming from. Where they are coming from, in my opinion, isn't that great of a place.
I already said my snarky comments earlier in the thread. I just want to know what you want. Your last post seems to indicate that you want more official maps?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah, I'm having trouble understanding your point, Temph. Should NS2 just not support custom maps at all or something, because then the developers will be making money off of other peoples' work? I bought NS2 100% on the strength of NS1, which was developed in party by a bunch of people who aren't seeing a dime from NS2. Does this make it wrong to sell NS2 for money at all?
'If we make something for NS2 that they'll profit from, we should be paid in full for it, companies exploit people and do not pay a lot of money'
'Not all of us care about being paid, we do it for fun or other rewards, such as future investment'
'How dare you tell me I shouldn't be paid! (???) People who do this for anything else than money are being exploited and are idiots!'
The best bit about is that it's been confirmed countless time you'll get your 'compensation', why should it matter to you if we don't care about money? There's no vote, no majority decider on what will happen. You'll get the compensation regardless.
No game seriously "relies" on the modding community to finish their game. Nobody makes sales RELYING on free voluntary labor. If they don't have a game that's worth $20 on release, then they don't get word of mouth, they don't get good reviews.......they don't get enough money to keep their start-up afloat for another game. Almost every start up game studio out there collapses after their first release because their game didn't sell enough. Why would UWE or any other developer rely on such a fickle and unreliable bunch (the public) to finish their game?
Economics - Supply and Demand
If people demanded a large amount of badly designed and no-polish levels, the industry would provide. Just look at the way EA has been running their thing. Why do you need a Maddon game EVERY YEAR! Because people keep buying them. If people are happy with 4 polished and well designed levels, then poeple will keep buying their product.
I personally am more concerned with quality more than quantity.
Portal was a really short game. But I still count it as one of the best in the last 10 years.
As far as the Valve question. I've played a lot of TF2, I have Steam adverts pop up on my computer, and I read/listen to a decent amount of game news/journalism. Where does this idea that TF2 is making sales off the backs of community maps coming from? Until you mentioned it, I had no idea that they even included community content in those patches. What I DID hear/read about was all the original class updates, additional maps and game mechanics that were ADDED to the game post release. Seems to me that they were making all those additional sales the good ol' fashion way: Offering a quality product.
PS Temphage: Your opinion of TF2 maps is just that, your opinion. Many of us out there enjoyed the hell out of maps like Gold Rush, Well, Dustbowl, Granery, etc. Also......the game is priced at $20. That is HALF the price of what is considered "cheap" from a consumer point of view.
I never thought about that with valve... and i got a mixed feeling, its nice for the mappers to get their map included.... but do they get anything ? .... mhhh I wonder.
You're also talking about patches that add content. Goldrush and other maps are included in that discussion. The other maps I mentioned WERE in the original release.
<!--quoteo(post=1740874:date=Nov 27 2009, 11:59 AM:name=Dalzig)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dalzig @ Nov 27 2009, 11:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1740874"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Charlie has stated that if they incorporate any community maps into the game officially, the creator(s) will be compensated...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
By compensated do you mean paid money? Or some other meaning..
It would be immoral if the company was forcing people to make maps without compensation.
It would be immoral if the company promised to pay a mapper for their maps and then didn't follow through.
But so long as the mapper is willing to have their map used for whatever compensation the company offers (be it none, be it use of the editor, be it official credit in the published version, be it other forms of compensation) and the company fulfills that, then it's not immoral.
After all, it's up to each individual to determine if the terms of the deal are right for them. That's the essence of capitalism.
Claiming "It shouldn't be like this" is essentially you saying that you know better than these individuals what the best deal is for them.
So no, releasing a product and relying on the community for good maps isn't immoral. Risky, perhaps.. but not immoral.
<!--quoteo(post=1741491:date=Nov 29 2009, 11:11 AM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 11:11 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741491"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I said what it SHIPPED with, s0n, not what it has now that you bought it last week.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> So you're saying NS2 should ship with more maps, but you don't want them made by community members? Unfortunately, UWE doesn't have the kind of money it takes to hire a bunch of level designers, so that's not really going to happen.
<!--quoteo(post=1741509:date=Nov 29 2009, 06:53 PM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TychoCelchuuu @ Nov 29 2009, 06:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741509"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So you're saying NS2 should ship with more maps, but you don't want them made by community members? Unfortunately, UWE doesn't have the kind of money it takes to hire a bunch of level designers, so that's not really going to happen.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
with there budget i care more about the game then the amount of maps. If they where to use the budget they have to have more maps, that will result in other stuff beeing discarded/removed/changed etc. Again, i rather see a very good game, even if it has a few maps.
Comments
Either map because you get enjoyment out of it (and expect no compensation in return), OR; dont map at all.
It feels a little like piling up on Temphage at this point, but I can't resist replying since this topic is pretty near and dear to my heart right now. Let's subdivide the arguments here:
<b>Audience Success vs. Compensation</b>
This is actually a rather knotty question: What is fair pay for a product that was created unasked and which may not be distributed any other way than through the prospective buyer? (Which is the only thing the various EULAs can ensure, BTW: Your intellectual ownership to the map would be upheld in any court in the western world.) At the end of the day, the individual mapper has a simple choice: Take money for something you already spent a lot of time on with no expectation of compensation, or don't. From that perspective, any amount of money is going to be a lot of money.
Is that <i>fair</i>? Good question. The relationship between content creator and publisher rarely is, from the perspective of the content creator. (Yeah, that's what Valve or UWE are in this context: Publishers.) This huge differential of compensation and consumer success is an issue game developers have been fighting with since they began to exist. I know Charlie is trying to level the playing field a bit here - both by self-publishing NS2 and by offering fair and scalable terms to his mappers. But at the end, any aggregator (publisher) is going to live off the added value. The content creator is <i>never</i> going to see the whole of the profit derived from his product. If you disagree with that notion, I suggest you stay clear off any media industry.
Fortunately, there is more than money to the mix!
<b>Forms of Compensation</b>
The games industry does not run on money alone. The responses in this thread already indicate this, but the best example to this may be Charlie himself: Here's a guy who quit a well-paying job in a game developer to live off of his savings and the donations of fans to tinker with a pet project, and then spent more time trying to make this project work as a start-up. Nobody with purely financial motivations would've gone that way - and Charlie is not the only guy who did this by a long shot.
There are several aims you may have when creating game content. I'm aware of four: Financial motives, self-actualization, reputation, and social capital. None of them is more or less valid than the other, or will exist alone.
The first two are going to be self-evident: Some do it for the money, others do it for the art, most do it for both.
Reputation and social capital are a bit trickier.
Game development rests on expertise - on very specialized creative knowledge and abilities. This stuff is immaterial and inherent to the experts - I can't see by looking at you whether you're a good mapper. So why should I trust you to be? Because you can show me examples of your work. Even better - you can show me examples of your work's success. That's why portfolios are so important to people inside the industry. I know it worked for me: I spent two and a half years working for Charlie as a <i>very</i> cost-efficient producer. (I did it for free.) I'm 25 now, and had a job interview for a (well-paying) junior leadership position with one of Germany's three biggest developers last wednesday. I'm the youngest applicant. Guess why they invited me.
In the long run, I expect this won't be as valuable to me as knowing Charlie, Max and all the other people I met through working on NS, though. Not only because they're great people, but because some of them are going to make it big in this industry. That's not only trust in their competences, that's also statistics; a lot of people worked on NS. If they need a producer, maybe they'll remember me fondly - which is the way this industry works. We're a happy, incestous little bunch. That social capital is something making it extremely advisable to get in touch with others, and that's often easiest by working with them.
All of those can be good reasons for you to take a low-paying (or pro bono) project on occasion. Can. Maybe, you still don't want to play by these rules. But consider that these are the rules of the games industry, and plan your career choices accordingly.
And we have a winner.
[/thread]
edit: holycrap welcome back nem
Alternatively you do it for money, in which case you should <i>get a job doing it</i> not demand random companies pay for it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Seeing as how this argument appears to have turned to OPPOSITION of NS2 community mappers getting anything at all, I'll say I still don't get it. As was agreed earlier, Valve throws in community maps and advertises them everywhere, this in turn gets them sales - a not insignificant number of them. When I do a map for Dystopia or NS1, there's no sales, so it's not like I should expect anything. But why should working as a freelance mapper provide no slice of the pie? Do freelance reporters work for free? They're not staff employees, so whenever they sell an article to the New York Times, the editor reviews it, says it's worthy, and throws them a wad of cash.
What Nem0 is talking about is a paid job in the industry - but you don't need any past experience to produce the results of a good map - you simply play the map. Again, this is the difference between a freelance writer and a staff writer - a staff writer is paid more, because they expect consistent results. The freelance writer they don't really know (though assumedly their name gets known) and work with on a per-article basis.
So <i>where the hell is the distinction</i>. Are you saying NS2 isn't a product of love because Flayra has the balls to demand we pay for it? I hope you're warming up uTorrent right now. Why does NS2 deserve a pricetag, but a map they are interested in does not? For that matter, why does KFS deserve to be paid either?
It's safe to say most people love what they do, which is why they do it. Why should that change whether you get paid for your works or not? As the point of UWE paying mappers is a moot one as it's revealed that they will, why such staunch opposition to this? You clearly all hate the ###### out of me because I dare even bring this up, so why not direct your ire at UWE themselves for even DREAMING to do such an unspeakable thing? Clearly they're on board with me on this one.
Either map because you get enjoyment out of it (and expect no compensation in return), OR; dont map at all.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hope you're planning to pirate NS2 then. Inarguably producing an iPhone app generally requires a lot less work than the entire process of making a map. But it's fair to ask for $1 for the app, but nothing for the map? The people working at indy game companies or producing iPhone apps probably aren't 'industry veterans' either - they still deserve money for their product!
From my reading, the consensus is that reputation gain exceeds monetary gain in importance for a lot of people. Opposition to payment? Maybe a few people who'd prefer an 'artisté'-approach, but I don't think they're in any kind of majority.
<!--quoteo(post=1741443:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741443"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'll say I still don't get it. As was agreed earlier, Valve throws in community maps and advertises them everywhere, this in turn gets them sales - a not insignificant number of them. When I do a map for Dystopia or NS1, there's no sales, so it's not like I should expect anything. But why should working as a freelance mapper provide no slice of the pie? Do freelance reporters work for free? They're not staff employees, so whenever they sell an article to the New York Times, the editor reviews it, says it's worthy, and throws them a wad of cash.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You started out, in your first post, by noting that Valve's community mappers get paid for officially published content, so I frankly don't see the connection to your example.
Still, I have seen quite a number of arrangements where freelance journalists would receive reduced (or no) pay for covering events they attended on the editor's bill, which isn't incomparable to the free provision of editing tools (which otherwise fetch quite a price). In both cases, there will be people who see it as a beneficial arrangement due to experience / networking gains.
<!--quoteo(post=1741443:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741443"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What Nem0 is talking about is a paid job in the industry - but you don't need any past experience to produce the results of a good map - you simply play the map. Again, this is the difference between a freelance writer and a staff writer - a staff writer is paid more, because they expect consistent results. The freelance writer they don't really know (though assumedly their name gets known) and work with on a per-article basis.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First, I was talking about a perspective on a job in the industry, which is a motivation of many mappers I meet.
Second, yes, it's easy to just run through a work sample and establish that the arrangement of vertices and textures is functional, maybe even pretty. It's damn hard to determine that it is conductive to the game, that the level <i>designer</i> managed to internalize the game's mechanics and to create a suitable environment. This is what seperates someone like KFS from someone like myself, by the way. A fully playtested, validated and shipped level on a commercial product makes a broader statement about the map's design - and also about your work discipline. It is a more valuable reputation gain, plain and simple. Let me also note that level design has rarely been outsourced in digital game production so far. There is a trend towards such design outsourcing, at the top level of experienced externalized designers, but generally, even freelance level designers will be with a project in a longer-term contractual arrangement, simply because consistent results are what you need with your levels.
<!--quoteo(post=1741443:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741443"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's safe to say most people love what they do, which is why they do it. Why should that change whether you get paid for your works or not?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As I noted, it's a business realty that jobs a lot of people are passionate about will be paid less, because people will enter them with motivations aside from money.
<!--quoteo(post=1741443:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741443"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As the point of UWE paying mappers is a moot one as it's revealed that they will, why such staunch opposition to this? You clearly all hate the ###### out of me because I dare even bring this up, so why not direct your ire at UWE themselves for even DREAMING to do such an unspeakable thing? Clearly they're on board with me on this one.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nobody is out to get you. Calm down.
If you want to map, by all means, map. I too will be working with Spark just for the fun of it once I get on a computer capable of running it.
However if we back up, the original point was that I find it morally questionable for UWE to ship the game with a criminally depressing number of maps and was then to rely on the COMMUNITY to do the job of making maps for them. As it was unknown to me at that time that they would buy up maps to make official, I still think it's a valid point, which is why I brought up TF2 - they have the resources to produce more maps, and yet only shipped the game with.. six? Most of which were terrible anyway.
Strictly speaking, the onus of morality on paying for maps isn't on the mapper to demand payment for the map, but on the publisher to provide something fair for it.
If people dont want to create the maps for free, you have a choice not to let valve use your map. It's that simple. Valve doesnt have to compensate, because maps will get made anyway and they will be allowed for inclusion anyway. Why on earth would they pay then? Are you arguing Valve has some sort of moral obligation? Oh dear, it doesnt work like that in business. You pay to get something done, if something gets done anyway, you don't pay, it's that simple.
If Charlie, in an effort to insure that some pretty awesome maps get made, decide to announce compensation, as he has. It's either because it would be cheaper than to hire professional mappers directly or it would allow the diverse community to turn up a variety of maps, with an increased incentive to make good maps because of the compensation, that would ultimately improve the quality of the maps that gets included.
(And let me note that that's more than I'll get out of them and their "No dedicated production staff"-policy. Grumble.)
And thus, the difference between a company who charges $5 for horse armor, and a company whose flagship product they ship for $40 because they honestly felt it wasn't worth the 'normal' price of a full game (NOT UWE).
Hey let's do it this way: compensate map makers the same way music artists are paid - every time your map is played, you get royalties!
And at the end of each round, players vote for the next map.
:-)
You are saying that "When I do a map for Dystopia or NS1, there's no sales, so it's not like I should expect anything. But why should working as a freelance mapper provide no slice of the pie? Do freelance reporters work for free? They're not staff employees, so whenever they sell an article to the New York Times, the editor reviews it, says it's worthy, and throws them a wad of cash.". Essentially, wanting that UWE paid for the maps you create.
They are going to do that.
Do you want every single map created ever for NS2 to "bought" by UWE, instead of their current idea of paying for the good quality ones?
What's kind of funny though is that your up in arms over being paid a lot for a map you could possibly make that UWE would want to buy, yet we don't even know how much they'll give us in return. If they stated a price, like $10 per map, I'd understand what you're arguing about, but we don't know yet. It's perfectly possible they'd compensate us for an amount you'd be happy with, as possible as UWE deciding not to buy any maps at all.
By which I assume that my points are accepted? ;)
<!--quoteo(post=1741457:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->the original point was that I find it morally questionable for UWE to ship the game with a criminally depressing number of maps<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which is - as you correctly put it - an opinion. Frankly, I'm grateful for small level selections because I'm a relatively casual player and can not internalize the eight to ten maps you find more reasonable. Either way, I don't see anything criminal and / or depressing about it.
<!--quoteo(post=1741457:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->and was then to rely on the COMMUNITY to do the job of making maps for them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which now doesn't seem to be the main thrust of your argument anymore, as it was all through the last four pages. Suddenly, the whole payment thing is secondary to...
<!--quoteo(post=1741457:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->they have the resources to produce more maps, and yet only shipped the game with.. six? Most of which were terrible anyway.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which, again, is an opinion. If you feel the amount of maps for a product is too little, that's a valid criticism. If you decide against buying a game because of it, that's a reasonable decision. If you do buy the game and then complain about the selection, I guess it didn't break the deal ;)
<!--quoteo(post=1741457:date=Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM:name=Temphage)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Temphage @ Nov 29 2009, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1741457"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Strictly speaking, the onus of morality on paying for maps isn't on the mapper to demand payment for the map, but on the publisher to provide something fair for it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And I hope I have shown that this fair compensation can be something aside from money - though I don't know of a case of the firms discussed herein where money did not flow for such transactions.
NS2 is aiming for 15-20 minute rounds which is going to hurt when you only have four maps.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Temphage, could you please explain more clearly what you want? What you are currently citing as a problem has been already addressed months ago.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You act like I'm the only one posting in this thread - more so responding to the people who are suggesting any payment is bad with idiocy like 'if you like what you do you should be happy to do it for free'.
The other people who had questionable stances like, "if you like what you do you should be happy to do it for free", I can see where they are coming from. Where they are coming from, in my opinion, isn't that great of a place.
I already said my snarky comments earlier in the thread. I just want to know what you want. Your last post seems to indicate that you want more official maps?
-Someone made the point earlier that games like Goldeneye shipped with 10-20 levels and that it's disappointing that games today only ship with 5-10, tops. I would just like to point out that due to the graphic restrictions of those earlier games (games we all now have difficulty getting into because of the old old graphics) the level geometry, clutter and overall design needed to be really simplistic. Games these days that we all celebrate as having such beautiful graphics and newer more innovative game mechanics require an amazing amount of time for a developer to create. Time = money. To make all these immersive levels that are both really fun to play AND graphically beautiful takes a lot more time and effort to create a polished playable level then it did 10 years ago.
"It used to be a task that could easily be done by a single Level Designer, just opening up the editor, start cutting blocks and brushes, add some textures, drop a few lights and you had a level. Some of the levels that shipped with UT were in near-final form after just a day of work." Cedric Fiorentino - Level Designer for Unreal Tournament
-Temphage is presenting a moral argument about a publisher benefiting from cheep or free labor. I don't know about anyone else here, but I have a full time 40-ish hour a week job. I don't need to expect to be compensated from a game publisher for a level that I made of my own volition with NO GUARANTEE OF PAYMENT to eat tomorrow. That's why I work at a deli and make enough money to get by for the time being. I'm considering starting a NS2 map project NOT for the money (because that would be, frankly, idiotic) but for the education and resume. I was an Oblivion modder. I never got a dime for it. What I DID get was a hell of a lot of learning I wouldn't have gotten if they didn't offer a Construction Set.
When it comes to any creative industry there is a lot more onos on the individual to prove their skills to an employer. If you want to talk about economics, let's talk about supply and demand.
Supply: Thousands and thousands of creative people that think they should get paid for being creative.
Demand: A small amount of creative people with the skills necessary for a particular job.
Economically, they HAVE to be choosey...
The fact is when it comes to any job that is artistic or creative, there are always going to be more people that want the job rather than are qualified to have it. Enthusiasm isn't enough. You have to PROVE that you can do it. That's what building a resume is all about.
I'm a art college graduate that works in a grocery store. It's ultimately up to me to go out and get that job and an employer isn't going to just hand me one saying "Well we really have no idea of your talent or ability, but here! Have a regular paycheck anyway!"
The other people who had questionable stances like, "if you like what you do you should be happy to do it for free", I can see where they are coming from. Where they are coming from, in my opinion, isn't that great of a place.
I already said my snarky comments earlier in the thread. I just want to know what you want. Your last post seems to indicate that you want more official maps?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, I'm having trouble understanding your point, Temph. Should NS2 just not support custom maps at all or something, because then the developers will be making money off of other peoples' work? I bought NS2 100% on the strength of NS1, which was developed in party by a bunch of people who aren't seeing a dime from NS2. Does this make it wrong to sell NS2 for money at all?
'If we make something for NS2 that they'll profit from, we should be paid in full for it, companies exploit people and do not pay a lot of money'
'Not all of us care about being paid, we do it for fun or other rewards, such as future investment'
'How dare you tell me I shouldn't be paid! (???) People who do this for anything else than money are being exploited and are idiots!'
The best bit about is that it's been confirmed countless time you'll get your 'compensation', why should it matter to you if we don't care about money? There's no vote, no majority decider on what will happen. You'll get the compensation regardless.
No game seriously "relies" on the modding community to finish their game. Nobody makes sales RELYING on free voluntary labor. If they don't have a game that's worth $20 on release, then they don't get word of mouth, they don't get good reviews.......they don't get enough money to keep their start-up afloat for another game. Almost every start up game studio out there collapses after their first release because their game didn't sell enough. Why would UWE or any other developer rely on such a fickle and unreliable bunch (the public) to finish their game?
Economics - Supply and Demand
If people demanded a large amount of badly designed and no-polish levels, the industry would provide. Just look at the way EA has been running their thing. Why do you need a Maddon game EVERY YEAR! Because people keep buying them. If people are happy with 4 polished and well designed levels, then poeple will keep buying their product.
I personally am more concerned with quality more than quantity.
Portal was a really short game. But I still count it as one of the best in the last 10 years.
As far as the Valve question. I've played a lot of TF2, I have Steam adverts pop up on my computer, and I read/listen to a decent amount of game news/journalism. Where does this idea that TF2 is making sales off the backs of community maps coming from? Until you mentioned it, I had no idea that they even included community content in those patches. What I DID hear/read about was all the original class updates, additional maps and game mechanics that were ADDED to the game post release. Seems to me that they were making all those additional sales the good ol' fashion way: Offering a quality product.
PS Temphage: Your opinion of TF2 maps is just that, your opinion. Many of us out there enjoyed the hell out of maps like Gold Rush, Well, Dustbowl, Granery, etc. Also......the game is priced at $20. That is HALF the price of what is considered "cheap" from a consumer point of view.
Fair game, "son."
You shouldn't of commented.
By compensated do you mean paid money? Or some other meaning..
It would be immoral if the company was forcing people to make maps without compensation.
It would be immoral if the company promised to pay a mapper for their maps and then didn't follow through.
But so long as the mapper is willing to have their map used for whatever compensation the company offers (be it none, be it use of the editor, be it official credit in the published version, be it other forms of compensation) and the company fulfills that, then it's not immoral.
After all, it's up to each individual to determine if the terms of the deal are right for them. That's the essence of capitalism.
Claiming "It shouldn't be like this" is essentially you saying that you know better than these individuals what the best deal is for them.
So no, releasing a product and relying on the community for good maps isn't immoral.
Risky, perhaps.. but not immoral.
So you're saying NS2 should ship with more maps, but you don't want them made by community members? Unfortunately, UWE doesn't have the kind of money it takes to hire a bunch of level designers, so that's not really going to happen.
with there budget i care more about the game then the amount of maps. If they where to use the budget they have to have more maps, that will result in other stuff beeing discarded/removed/changed etc. Again, i rather see a very good game, even if it has a few maps.