If you were really "respecting" the NDA, you wouldnt be even be discussing the fact that your in the beta. And yes, I know your "allowed" to say that much, but saying your in beta just so you can say that you cant say anything else serves no purpose other than looking for attention.
Eh.. he's probably just crazy frustrated being in these conversations and not being able to say what he knows.
He probably wouldn't be able to get very high government security clearance.
Mhm. Yes.. it is. You can't play it for free. You need to pay the STO subscription fees in order to play it.
So yes... Cryptic is selling our UGC content right alongside all the content they've made.
No. They're selling the game. The Foundry is a feature of the game. they ARE NOT saying 'to play STO, you MUST create at least one mission a month.'; it's a OPTIONAL FEATURE . People are free to use the Foundry tools or not. It's not 'extra purchasable content'; it's 'extra optional content'. There's a big difference.
No. They're selling the game. The Foundry is a feature of the game. they ARE NOT saying 'to play STO, you MUST create at least one mission a month.'; it's a OPTIONAL FEATURE . People are free to use the Foundry tools or not. It's not 'extra purchasable content'; it's 'extra optional content'. There's a big difference.
Although I dont really like the idea of rewarding UGC authors, I dont really agree with your argument either. The same could be said of pretty much anything other than strict PvE. You dont have to craft, you dont have to PvP, you dont have to do STFs, you dont have to do anything other than exploration. However, those are all features of the game. A game is the sum total of its parts, and therefore when you sell a game you sell everything that makes up that game.
No. They're selling the game. The Foundry is a feature of the game. they ARE NOT saying 'to play STO, you MUST create at least one mission a month.'; it's a OPTIONAL FEATURE . People are free to use the Foundry tools or not. It's not 'extra purchasable content'; it's 'extra optional content'. There's a big difference.
Erm.. I'm talking about playing the UGC, not using the tools.
In order to play the content players author, you need to give Cryptic money. Therefor Cryptic is profiting on our contributions through the UGC system.
No, I'm respecting the terms of the NDA. I cannot share anything too specific.
I can't for example, tell you if Cryptic brought their A-Game or if the Foundry represents Awesomesauce. I can't comment whether those statements are true (or not).
However, as Stormshade posted in another thread, the tools will be reaching a wider audience in the coming weeks. Then you can determine if the tools are OMGWTFBBQsauce or not.
UGC was around long before CoH, and there is plenty of precedence for the authors of it getting reimbursed when a company is making profit on the distribution of the content. I refer you to retail packs of maps for games like Duke Nukem 3D in the 90s. The people who made the maps were offered, for example, $120 per map included in the pack. I'm sure the offer varied from game to game and from pack to pack. $120/map is just what I have first-hand experience with.
And while we might not be making content exclusively for the game, we are making content for the game. So is Cryptic. And our part is obviously small. We aren't making art assets or code or mechanics. We're just making storylines, mission instructions, and dialogue. But that is something. It's a cog in the larger machine that Cryptic makes a profit on.
That's not even remotely the same thing. What we're talking about are MMOs. Games buying up fan-made mods/maps to include in content releases being directly sold would naturally warrant reimbursement. We're talking about an MMO which provides tools to make missions. As long as the missions aren't being sold via microtransactions, they are not directly making money on the missions that you make. They're making subscription money for the service as a whole, not for individual pieces of the service.
I agree that if they were to take a mission you made and put up for people to play for free, and then took it down from that free to play part and tried to sell it for a direct profit, you should probably be entitled to monetary compensation. Not that that means you'll get anything. Ultimately, you waive your rights away to such things when they put clauses in their ToS and EULA and you agree to them before logging in to play the game.
And as far as I know, barring some little known MMO that I've never heard of (quite possible), CoH was the first MMO to do UGC. They set the precedent for specific things like this, not Duke Nukem. No monetary compensation. If you don't want the devs "profiting off of your hard work," the answer is simple: don't do the work. Don't use the UGC feature and you won't have any problems with "dev exploitation". Because ultimately, you get nothing. Get over it.
That's not even remotely the same thing. What we're talking about are MMOs. Games buying up fan-made mods/maps to include in content releases being directly sold would naturally warrant reimbursement. We're talking about an MMO which provides tools to make missions. As long as the missions aren't being sold via microtransactions, they are not directly making money on the missions that you make. They're making subscription money for the service as a whole, not for individual pieces of the service.
As Nagus said above:
A game is the sum total of its parts, and therefore when you sell a game you sell everything that makes up that game.
That means that what we make in the UGC system that goes on to be playable by subscribers is a part of the product Cryptic is selling and making profit on.
Whether they're sold in the C-Store or as part of the sum total of the game, Cryptic is getting money for it. The challenge is in quantifying how much our missions contribute to that sum total, which you can do by monitoring how much time is spent playing them.
Take a look here. I've run through a sample of the math to determine the potential value-add of a single mission and how the value of the reward scales proportionately.
As a potential Foundry user, I think the issue will boil down to what I agree to when I actually see the EULA for the tools.
I am not outraged about unethical behavior because a few round reasons have been hammered into some hexagonal rationales. There are many unremunerative activities that I voluntarily perform (many for people and organizations that profit from my help/effort), but they are controlled by my willingness.
By the way, the hookers drank all the beer and then demanded breakfast. I really need reimbursement.
I believe, if anything, that if a mission is of quality to the point where it is popular enough, gets enough plays, features, what have you, that the person who made it would be awarded some total of points. So, if they continue to make popular missions then they continue to get awarded a proportionally appropriate amount of points (proportionally to factors such as popularity or number of plays perhaps?).
Having a system such as this only benefits everyone. Having points as a reward encourages people to develop missions or improve on their ability to make missions. Having more quality missions in the game is great for everyone who wants something more to do. Giving out Cryptic Points to people who make said missions would be incredibly cheap for the studio and essentially be piece-work pay. Since digital items are unlimited, the only loss to Cryptic would be a small (I believe) decrease in people purchasing points directly. I also believe that this small decrease in direct point transactions would be much outweighed by increased player activity to play said user created missions; many of the players of said missions probably wont be making missions of their own so they would still be inclined to purchase points directly during their playtime. And since new missions encourages continued or prolonged gameplay, and even new players in general, active players would increase overall and you'd have that many more players considering the possibility of buying points.
You could likely even have it give out 1 CP per unique character playthrough to the author. If it's really popular, or popular enough, they'll reach a few hundred or a couple thousand CP per each quality mission they create sheerly by it's popularity and amount of plays. One could say 'but then CP would just be farmed on extremely short missions where you kill one enemy' well, no. Let's say the author has a second account with 24 character slots. He'd have to log in and out, go to the location, and play through it all 24 times (even if its short) for just 24 CP. Any author would be hard pressed to get the community at large to play it simply for his sake. And since it would not be what you would call a 'quality' mission, its rating would be low (certainly it would never be featured) and it would rarely get played. There are other kinds of requirements you could place upon earning CP from a mission but this is just the basic concept I think would work.
That means that what we make in the UGC system that goes on to be playable by subscribers is a part of the product Cryptic is selling and making profit on.
Whether they're sold in the C-Store or as part of the sum total of the game, Cryptic is getting money for it. The challenge is in quantifying how much our missions contribute to that sum total, which you can do by monitoring how much time is spent playing them.
Take a look here. I've run through a sample of the math to determine the potential value-add of a single mission and how the value of the reward scales proportionately.
Still a moot point. Not that it's even a good one. It goes without saying that there may be some additional cashflow as a result of adding the ability to make UGC (not necessarily from any particular UGC missions themselves). Point is, there is nothing that entitles you to see some form of reimbursement as a result of any of it.
Like I already said, if you don't want them potentially benefiting from or stealing your work, don't submit any. They aren't going to bow to some unreasonable demand for reimbursement when they have absolutely nothing to gain from it and, in the case of C-Store points being used as potential "rewards," everything to lose ("everything" being, namely, money). They have no reason to do this and no obligation to do this, legal, ethical, or otherwise. It's not going to happen.
And if you think I don't know what I'm talking about in regards to UGC, or that I don't understand your argument, I do. I've worked for a tiny "MMO" (not really massive in any regard) for years, as a hobby. I manage and have created content for one of their "classic" servers. They do not pay me. They do not even provide me with free assistance. In fact, if I wanted more dev tools such as a separate server to test things on for them to profit off of, I'd have to pay them for that server. If I wasn't a lifetime subscriber, I'd have to pay them for a subscription for my account. If my server wasn't classic, I'd have to pay them for a Gold or VIP account to work on a private server and generate content that would ultimately bring money to them and not to me. I know what it's like feeling like your content is being used to profit others and you see nothing from it, in fact, you actually pay to continue making it.
But in reality, you're paying for it because they've gotten you to do so! It's their game. If you don't want to make content "for them" and pay them to have the pleasure of doing it, then go make your own game.
I doubt that I'm about to say anything that folks haven't figured out, but I just can't help myself.
Everyone, meet brick wall. You're wasting your time talking to brick wall. Brick wall is not ever going to change it's mind, ever. I would like to respectfully recommend that you stop beating your head against brick wall. It never helps, you just end up with a headache.
To Rikaelus, aka brick wall. Cryptic is not going to pay people for writing UGC missions. Period. It isn't going to happen, and worse, I believe that you know this. They may offer the occasional in-game bonus to some people that make excellent missions for contests, but due to overly complex California laws regarding contests they may not too. Either way, it ain't going to happen. You want to get paid or reimbursed by Cryptic? Send them your resume.
Anyway, I'm going to enjoy making missions in the Foundry. The fact that it will be fun will be my reimbursement.
Hey, be nice. Rikaelus is making solid, logical arguments; attempting to discredit him via ad hominem attacks contributes nothing to the discussion.
I think Rikaelus is right: Cryptic is about to begin profiting off the (voluntary) labor of its customers. If they really care about doing the right thing, then they should compensate content creators in some way. Cryptic Points would be a convenient method of doing that, and if they used CP, then from a practical point of view the compensation would cost Cryptic very little.
Is it going to happen? Heck, I don't know. But if Cryptic wants to be seen as a company which embraces new ideas and does the right thing even when it costs money, I think the choice is pretty clear.
Hey, be nice. Rikaelus is making solid, logical arguments; attempting to discredit him via ad hominem attacks contributes nothing to the discussion.
I think Rikaelus is right: Cryptic is about to begin profiting off the (voluntary) labor of its customers. If they really care about doing the right thing, then they should compensate content creators in some way. Cryptic Points would be a convenient method of doing that, and if they used CP, then from a practical point of view the compensation would cost Cryptic very little.
Is it going to happen? Heck, I don't know. But if Cryptic wants to be seen as a company which embraces new ideas and does the right thing even when it costs money, I think the choice is pretty clear.
Or, they can use a similar method to CoH. If you really are that awesome at making custom content, you get a job.
Hey, be nice. Rikaelus is making solid, logical arguments; attempting to discredit him via ad hominem attacks contributes nothing to the discussion.
I think Rikaelus is right: Cryptic is about to begin profiting off the (voluntary) labor of its customers. If they really care about doing the right thing, then they should compensate content creators in some way. Cryptic Points would be a convenient method of doing that, and if they used CP, then from a practical point of view the compensation would cost Cryptic very little.
Is it going to happen? Heck, I don't know. But if Cryptic wants to be seen as a company which embraces new ideas and does the right thing even when it costs money, I think the choice is pretty clear.
Thanks, Sherp. It's nice to get a little backup. I formalized my proposal and sent it to dstahl, though I have no idea how likely it is he'll even see it. I imagine he gets spammed pretty brutally from folks on the forums.
After defending the idea in two separate threads I'm giving up fighting the fight here for now. I wouldn't mind people arguing the mechanics and logic of my system, but so far it's all amounted to people just saying the system shouldn't exist... which just doesn't make any sense given it benefits all parties and couldn't negatively affect them. It's futile to keep the fight going here.
I might eventually make a thread in the UGC based on my formalized proposal but.. eh.. haven't decided on that yet.
some guy in Texas with a $139 tricorder replica won't be crafting our weekly episodes on a Mountain Dew fueled fanfic spree
those of us who possibly fit this description know that the fun is in writing the fanfic, and sitting back while it is enjoyed by other fans. I wouldn't need any reimbursement.
There's been talk about integrating a type of "featured episode" for community authored episodes as well. Were this to happen, the "featured community authored episode" would most likely get bumped to the top of the ratings list, and have a special icon next to it in the search results page for the duration that it is featured.
You would still need to search for a community authored episode, and you would start the episode the same way you would any other community authored episode.
However, as far as I know it's only something we're thinking about doing, and plans have yet to move beyond that point yet. What do you guys think of something like that?
Thanks,
Stormshade
this is a MUST! lol. I think it would help out in many ways. And if there is a lot of content it will help promote stuff especially if people feel a bit overwhelmed and dont know where to start. So have a feaured episode a good place to start. Or just a great way for the people just looking for good content to find some, realy quick. In the end it might encourage people to look further after they have completed it...
Oh and btw, if cryptic chose to reward someone great what a bonus. But actually trying to (effectively) "CHARGE" them? Surely not. I mean UGC (as much as it may fill the content gap) is a tool for players IF they wisjh to use it..to majke creations of thier own. It's a toolset like on any other game, as such it is a bonus..a "feature" something extra added to the game for our benefit. So any reward would not be owed but given out of good will. I think most people will be just happy they can finally create "that " star trek episode they havwe always wanted :P
Hey, be nice. Rikaelus is making solid, logical arguments; attempting to discredit him via ad hominem attacks contributes nothing to the discussion.
I think Rikaelus is right: Cryptic is about to begin profiting off the (voluntary) labor of its customers. If they really care about doing the right thing, then they should compensate content creators in some way. Cryptic Points would be a convenient method of doing that, and if they used CP, then from a practical point of view the compensation would cost Cryptic very little.
Is it going to happen? Heck, I don't know. But if Cryptic wants to be seen as a company which embraces new ideas and does the right thing even when it costs money, I think the choice is pretty clear.
I think the choice is pretty clear too. It's pretty clear that people want more content in this game, and UGC and the weeklies are trying to provide that. If people want even more Cryptic made content...it's going to take some time, and probably more staff. Well, how do you get more staff? Monies. So if Cryptic pays players for UGC and loses money on the CStore...I think you see the conclusion here.
I don't want rewards because I'd much rather have that money SPENT ON THE GAME. UGC is certainly going to help this game out, but it's not going to save it by any means. We still have a ways to go.
I think the choice is pretty clear too. It's pretty clear that people want more content in this game, and UGC and the weeklies are trying to provide that. If people want even more Cryptic made content...it's going to take some time, and probably more staff. Well, how do you get more staff? Monies. So if Cryptic pays players for UGC and loses money on the CStore...I think you see the conclusion here.
I don't want rewards because I'd much rather have that money SPENT ON THE GAME. UGC is certainly going to help this game out, but it's not going to save it by any means. We still have a ways to go.
They only lose money if the author:
a) Makes really good missions and
b) The author would have purchased C-Store points to begin with
For instance... I don't intend to ever buy C-Store points. If Cryptic rewarded me with them, they're not losing anything. And if you check my math you'd realize their missions would have to provide a lot of gameplay for others to lead to a notable amount of C-Store points. Cryptic gains far more than it potentially loses, if it actually loses anything at all.
Edit: Frak. Seems I'm still posting. I blame boredom. :mad:
Edit 2: The system also allows Cryptic full control over the reward ratio, in case they feel it's costing them too much
For instance... I don't intend to ever buy C-Store points. If Cryptic rewarded me with them, they're not losing anything.
This argument is akin to saying it's okay to illegally pirate games and music because you weren't going to buy them anyways. Not that I'm saying there's anything "illegal' with what you're proposing, but just because you would never buy C-points doesn't mean others wouldn't have. It's a logical fallacy to assume that just because you wouldn't be costing them any money because you don't buy their points to begin with that they wouldn't lose any money on others who would. They certainly would.
I can's see Cryptic ever reimbursing UGC creators, period. If it's in-game rewards, the threat of exploitation is too great. C-Points, free months, or other items that have monetary value could/would cause legal issues for Cryptic and potential tax issues for the player.
If I created content for Cryptic, and they awarded me 2000 C-Points (which has a set value of $25) wouldn't that be taxable income? Would Cryptic, in fact, be my employer? Do I now need a W-2 from them? Am I entitled to Healthcare benefits?
This argument is akin to saying it's okay to illegally pirate games and music because you weren't going to buy them anyways. Not that I'm saying there's anything "illegal' with what you're proposing, but just because you would never buy C-points doesn't mean others wouldn't have. It's a logical fallacy to assume that just because you wouldn't be costing them any money because you don't buy their points to begin with that they wouldn't lose any money on others who would. They certainly would.
I'm sorry but this is completely wrong. You would be correct if we were talking about stealing points by breaking into their systems. We are not. I've known countless people who enter contests to win things they'd like to have but never would've bought on their own (and believe me they had the means by which to do so). They're not stealing. We're talking about being awarded points proportionately to the quality (popularity) of a mission. It's a reward, not a theft. It's no different from all of those fundraisers you get while in school. "Sell this many chocolate bars and you get this many points from which to choose amongst our prizes" it's exactly the same thing we're talking about. Except, the fund raising (by stimulating player retention and activity, further enticing the welfare and spending on the game) is all going straight to cryptic.
it would be nice if Cryptic rewared some of the good ugc authors over the long run, but I wouldn't expect anything like c-store points or lifetimes or anything. Creating the missions is fun. For me, it's part of the game, not work. It allows me to tell a story and add my own perspective to Trek lore in a very small way. And, I get to share that with others.
That is what is rewarding. If there was some kind of adsense attached to it, we'd see spam go through the roof.
I'm sorry but this is completely wrong. You would be correct if we were talking about stealing points by breaking into their systems. We are not. I've known countless people who enter contests to win things they'd like to have but never would've bought on their own (and believe me they had the means by which to do so). They're not stealing. We're talking about being awarded points proportionately to the quality (popularity) of a mission. It's a reward, not a theft. It's no different from all of those fundraisers you get while in school. "Sell this many chocolate bars and you get this many points from which to choose amongst our prizes" it's exactly the same thing we're talking about. Except, the fund raising (by stimulating player retention and activity, further enticing the welfare and spending on the game) is all going straight to cryptic.
Maybe you should have read my post beyond the first sentence before commenting. Point I was making is that while they could (possibly) "reward" people for making "good" missions, they would have no incentive to do so, and giving C-Points as a reward would be detrimental to their profit margins. It's not like a fundraiser. You are not going out, selling content to people. You're making content, and whether people play it or not, there would be no market research to support any claim that people are subscribing specifically to play the missions made by a particular fan. Ergo, the only metric that could be used for measuring how "good" a mission is, outside of the devs personally playing every single mission that is made (not going to happen) is the number of times said mission has been played. Ultimately, this would lead to the Foundry becoming more of a popularity contest for C-Store points than a genuine channel of creativity.
Bottom line is, most people will be satisfied, even happy, to get the Foundry, and the ability to make their own missions. They do not require, nor expect, any sort of "reward" except, perhaps, recognition of their achievements (which is being discussed). It therefore becomes, simply put, "bad business" to consider the idea of rewarding people with points that possess a cash-value when the vast majority will be satisfied, even thrilled to make missions, without the possibility of any such rewards.
UGC should just really be about fans writing content for fans for fun, not expecting something for it.
It should strictly be for entertainment only all around.
I do not expect anything for contributing to the UGC even if I was lucky enough to make high marks, simply knowing people are running my stuff and are taking something away from it in some way has its own rewards.
If I was worried about making a little extra for my work / work that constantly got high ratings, then I would probably consider halting my UGC projects and then look at trying to get a hold of a publisher or an application for the company to become a hired employee.
If we can make an arguement that players should be compensated for their work to some extent, then I am sure an arguement could be made that you you should probably pay Cryptic for the UGC tools as a paid expansion or something.
You are being compensated already by getting the tools to make your work happen for free and that you are not paying anything to be able to publish your work either provided that it passes the guideline adherence test.
So in a sense that is money you get to keep, the arguement kind of being you are in a sense being compensated to some extent already by not paying them for these extras, it all just depends on what angle you look at it from.
Let us not forget the rating system abuse possibilities that could potentially go on to insure that some people's work never drop in ratings.
For example: Credits for ratings.
The bigger the prize, the bigger the possibility of rating system abuses.
I am not saying this will happen, but again, I am not seeing assurances that it cannot happen either.
I think it is really getting into something that should be left up for contests if you want cash or c-points to be involved.
Yes, c-points are considered currency imo, they cannot make money if they are just giving them away.
So in a sense, they are giving you something they could have made money on.
I think a writing contest of some sort every other month or something of that nature is prob a more likely scenario and probably a better way to handle something like giving players a little treat for their work above what they are already doing.
If your work wins the contest it makes it into the game after a certain point and you get a prize of some kind.
I think a writing contest of some sort every other month or something of that nature is prob a more likely scenario and probably a better way to handle something like giving players a little treat for their work above what they are already doing.
If your work wins the contest it makes it into the game after a certain point and you get a prize of some kind.
Contests in general would be something fun to have more often. The last one we had was... what? Name the ships? I can't recall any official contests since then. The last free point giveaway was the survey at launch; again that's been a while. Though, I hear they're doing a design a ship contest for the NCC-1701-E successor.
They only lose money if the author:
a) Makes really good missions and
b) The author would have purchased C-Store points to begin with
For instance... I don't intend to ever buy C-Store points. If Cryptic rewarded me with them, they're not losing anything. And if you check my math you'd realize their missions would have to provide a lot of gameplay for others to lead to a notable amount of C-Store points. Cryptic gains far more than it potentially loses, if it actually loses anything at all.
Edit: Frak. Seems I'm still posting. I blame boredom. :mad:
Edit 2: The system also allows Cryptic full control over the reward ratio, in case they feel it's costing them too much
My friend, you are the exception to the rule. Just look at how many Exclesiors/Galaxy-Xs/various uniforms/costumes are used by players in the game. Most players make use of the CSTore, I am no exception.
My friend, you are the exception to the rule. Just look at how many Exclesiors/Galaxy-Xs/various uniforms/costumes are used by players in the game. Most players make use of the CSTore, I am no exception.
Actually, you have no more idea than he does how many people really use the C-store out of the overall playerbase. Sure, I see plenty of the C-store ships, but I see even more regular ships.
Comments
Eh.. he's probably just crazy frustrated being in these conversations and not being able to say what he knows.
He probably wouldn't be able to get very high government security clearance.
No. They're selling the game. The Foundry is a feature of the game. they ARE NOT saying 'to play STO, you MUST create at least one mission a month.'; it's a OPTIONAL FEATURE . People are free to use the Foundry tools or not. It's not 'extra purchasable content'; it's 'extra optional content'. There's a big difference.
Although I dont really like the idea of rewarding UGC authors, I dont really agree with your argument either. The same could be said of pretty much anything other than strict PvE. You dont have to craft, you dont have to PvP, you dont have to do STFs, you dont have to do anything other than exploration. However, those are all features of the game. A game is the sum total of its parts, and therefore when you sell a game you sell everything that makes up that game.
If "thats all" you were saying, then why isnt that all you said?
Erm.. I'm talking about playing the UGC, not using the tools.
In order to play the content players author, you need to give Cryptic money. Therefor Cryptic is profiting on our contributions through the UGC system.
>
I was kidding
That's not even remotely the same thing. What we're talking about are MMOs. Games buying up fan-made mods/maps to include in content releases being directly sold would naturally warrant reimbursement. We're talking about an MMO which provides tools to make missions. As long as the missions aren't being sold via microtransactions, they are not directly making money on the missions that you make. They're making subscription money for the service as a whole, not for individual pieces of the service.
I agree that if they were to take a mission you made and put up for people to play for free, and then took it down from that free to play part and tried to sell it for a direct profit, you should probably be entitled to monetary compensation. Not that that means you'll get anything. Ultimately, you waive your rights away to such things when they put clauses in their ToS and EULA and you agree to them before logging in to play the game.
And as far as I know, barring some little known MMO that I've never heard of (quite possible), CoH was the first MMO to do UGC. They set the precedent for specific things like this, not Duke Nukem. No monetary compensation. If you don't want the devs "profiting off of your hard work," the answer is simple: don't do the work. Don't use the UGC feature and you won't have any problems with "dev exploitation". Because ultimately, you get nothing. Get over it.
As Nagus said above:
That means that what we make in the UGC system that goes on to be playable by subscribers is a part of the product Cryptic is selling and making profit on.
Whether they're sold in the C-Store or as part of the sum total of the game, Cryptic is getting money for it. The challenge is in quantifying how much our missions contribute to that sum total, which you can do by monitoring how much time is spent playing them.
Take a look here. I've run through a sample of the math to determine the potential value-add of a single mission and how the value of the reward scales proportionately.
I am not outraged about unethical behavior because a few round reasons have been hammered into some hexagonal rationales. There are many unremunerative activities that I voluntarily perform (many for people and organizations that profit from my help/effort), but they are controlled by my willingness.
By the way, the hookers drank all the beer and then demanded breakfast. I really need reimbursement.
Having a system such as this only benefits everyone. Having points as a reward encourages people to develop missions or improve on their ability to make missions. Having more quality missions in the game is great for everyone who wants something more to do. Giving out Cryptic Points to people who make said missions would be incredibly cheap for the studio and essentially be piece-work pay. Since digital items are unlimited, the only loss to Cryptic would be a small (I believe) decrease in people purchasing points directly. I also believe that this small decrease in direct point transactions would be much outweighed by increased player activity to play said user created missions; many of the players of said missions probably wont be making missions of their own so they would still be inclined to purchase points directly during their playtime. And since new missions encourages continued or prolonged gameplay, and even new players in general, active players would increase overall and you'd have that many more players considering the possibility of buying points.
You could likely even have it give out 1 CP per unique character playthrough to the author. If it's really popular, or popular enough, they'll reach a few hundred or a couple thousand CP per each quality mission they create sheerly by it's popularity and amount of plays. One could say 'but then CP would just be farmed on extremely short missions where you kill one enemy' well, no. Let's say the author has a second account with 24 character slots. He'd have to log in and out, go to the location, and play through it all 24 times (even if its short) for just 24 CP. Any author would be hard pressed to get the community at large to play it simply for his sake. And since it would not be what you would call a 'quality' mission, its rating would be low (certainly it would never be featured) and it would rarely get played. There are other kinds of requirements you could place upon earning CP from a mission but this is just the basic concept I think would work.
Still a moot point. Not that it's even a good one. It goes without saying that there may be some additional cashflow as a result of adding the ability to make UGC (not necessarily from any particular UGC missions themselves). Point is, there is nothing that entitles you to see some form of reimbursement as a result of any of it.
Like I already said, if you don't want them potentially benefiting from or stealing your work, don't submit any. They aren't going to bow to some unreasonable demand for reimbursement when they have absolutely nothing to gain from it and, in the case of C-Store points being used as potential "rewards," everything to lose ("everything" being, namely, money). They have no reason to do this and no obligation to do this, legal, ethical, or otherwise. It's not going to happen.
And if you think I don't know what I'm talking about in regards to UGC, or that I don't understand your argument, I do. I've worked for a tiny "MMO" (not really massive in any regard) for years, as a hobby. I manage and have created content for one of their "classic" servers. They do not pay me. They do not even provide me with free assistance. In fact, if I wanted more dev tools such as a separate server to test things on for them to profit off of, I'd have to pay them for that server. If I wasn't a lifetime subscriber, I'd have to pay them for a subscription for my account. If my server wasn't classic, I'd have to pay them for a Gold or VIP account to work on a private server and generate content that would ultimately bring money to them and not to me. I know what it's like feeling like your content is being used to profit others and you see nothing from it, in fact, you actually pay to continue making it.
But in reality, you're paying for it because they've gotten you to do so! It's their game. If you don't want to make content "for them" and pay them to have the pleasure of doing it, then go make your own game.
Thats awesome.
Hey, be nice. Rikaelus is making solid, logical arguments; attempting to discredit him via ad hominem attacks contributes nothing to the discussion.
I think Rikaelus is right: Cryptic is about to begin profiting off the (voluntary) labor of its customers. If they really care about doing the right thing, then they should compensate content creators in some way. Cryptic Points would be a convenient method of doing that, and if they used CP, then from a practical point of view the compensation would cost Cryptic very little.
Is it going to happen? Heck, I don't know. But if Cryptic wants to be seen as a company which embraces new ideas and does the right thing even when it costs money, I think the choice is pretty clear.
Or, they can use a similar method to CoH. If you really are that awesome at making custom content, you get a job.
Thanks, Sherp. It's nice to get a little backup. I formalized my proposal and sent it to dstahl, though I have no idea how likely it is he'll even see it. I imagine he gets spammed pretty brutally from folks on the forums.
After defending the idea in two separate threads I'm giving up fighting the fight here for now. I wouldn't mind people arguing the mechanics and logic of my system, but so far it's all amounted to people just saying the system shouldn't exist... which just doesn't make any sense given it benefits all parties and couldn't negatively affect them. It's futile to keep the fight going here.
I might eventually make a thread in the UGC based on my formalized proposal but.. eh.. haven't decided on that yet.
this is a MUST! lol. I think it would help out in many ways. And if there is a lot of content it will help promote stuff especially if people feel a bit overwhelmed and dont know where to start. So have a feaured episode a good place to start. Or just a great way for the people just looking for good content to find some, realy quick. In the end it might encourage people to look further after they have completed it...
Oh and btw, if cryptic chose to reward someone great what a bonus. But actually trying to (effectively) "CHARGE" them? Surely not. I mean UGC (as much as it may fill the content gap) is a tool for players IF they wisjh to use it..to majke creations of thier own. It's a toolset like on any other game, as such it is a bonus..a "feature" something extra added to the game for our benefit. So any reward would not be owed but given out of good will. I think most people will be just happy they can finally create "that " star trek episode they havwe always wanted :P
I think the choice is pretty clear too. It's pretty clear that people want more content in this game, and UGC and the weeklies are trying to provide that. If people want even more Cryptic made content...it's going to take some time, and probably more staff. Well, how do you get more staff? Monies. So if Cryptic pays players for UGC and loses money on the CStore...I think you see the conclusion here.
I don't want rewards because I'd much rather have that money SPENT ON THE GAME. UGC is certainly going to help this game out, but it's not going to save it by any means. We still have a ways to go.
They only lose money if the author:
a) Makes really good missions and
b) The author would have purchased C-Store points to begin with
For instance... I don't intend to ever buy C-Store points. If Cryptic rewarded me with them, they're not losing anything. And if you check my math you'd realize their missions would have to provide a lot of gameplay for others to lead to a notable amount of C-Store points. Cryptic gains far more than it potentially loses, if it actually loses anything at all.
Edit: Frak. Seems I'm still posting. I blame boredom. :mad:
Edit 2: The system also allows Cryptic full control over the reward ratio, in case they feel it's costing them too much
This argument is akin to saying it's okay to illegally pirate games and music because you weren't going to buy them anyways. Not that I'm saying there's anything "illegal' with what you're proposing, but just because you would never buy C-points doesn't mean others wouldn't have. It's a logical fallacy to assume that just because you wouldn't be costing them any money because you don't buy their points to begin with that they wouldn't lose any money on others who would. They certainly would.
If I created content for Cryptic, and they awarded me 2000 C-Points (which has a set value of $25) wouldn't that be taxable income? Would Cryptic, in fact, be my employer? Do I now need a W-2 from them? Am I entitled to Healthcare benefits?
I'm sorry but this is completely wrong. You would be correct if we were talking about stealing points by breaking into their systems. We are not. I've known countless people who enter contests to win things they'd like to have but never would've bought on their own (and believe me they had the means by which to do so). They're not stealing. We're talking about being awarded points proportionately to the quality (popularity) of a mission. It's a reward, not a theft. It's no different from all of those fundraisers you get while in school. "Sell this many chocolate bars and you get this many points from which to choose amongst our prizes" it's exactly the same thing we're talking about. Except, the fund raising (by stimulating player retention and activity, further enticing the welfare and spending on the game) is all going straight to cryptic.
That is what is rewarding. If there was some kind of adsense attached to it, we'd see spam go through the roof.
Maybe you should have read my post beyond the first sentence before commenting. Point I was making is that while they could (possibly) "reward" people for making "good" missions, they would have no incentive to do so, and giving C-Points as a reward would be detrimental to their profit margins. It's not like a fundraiser. You are not going out, selling content to people. You're making content, and whether people play it or not, there would be no market research to support any claim that people are subscribing specifically to play the missions made by a particular fan. Ergo, the only metric that could be used for measuring how "good" a mission is, outside of the devs personally playing every single mission that is made (not going to happen) is the number of times said mission has been played. Ultimately, this would lead to the Foundry becoming more of a popularity contest for C-Store points than a genuine channel of creativity.
Bottom line is, most people will be satisfied, even happy, to get the Foundry, and the ability to make their own missions. They do not require, nor expect, any sort of "reward" except, perhaps, recognition of their achievements (which is being discussed). It therefore becomes, simply put, "bad business" to consider the idea of rewarding people with points that possess a cash-value when the vast majority will be satisfied, even thrilled to make missions, without the possibility of any such rewards.
It should strictly be for entertainment only all around.
I do not expect anything for contributing to the UGC even if I was lucky enough to make high marks, simply knowing people are running my stuff and are taking something away from it in some way has its own rewards.
If I was worried about making a little extra for my work / work that constantly got high ratings, then I would probably consider halting my UGC projects and then look at trying to get a hold of a publisher or an application for the company to become a hired employee.
If we can make an arguement that players should be compensated for their work to some extent, then I am sure an arguement could be made that you you should probably pay Cryptic for the UGC tools as a paid expansion or something.
You are being compensated already by getting the tools to make your work happen for free and that you are not paying anything to be able to publish your work either provided that it passes the guideline adherence test.
So in a sense that is money you get to keep, the arguement kind of being you are in a sense being compensated to some extent already by not paying them for these extras, it all just depends on what angle you look at it from.
Let us not forget the rating system abuse possibilities that could potentially go on to insure that some people's work never drop in ratings.
For example: Credits for ratings.
The bigger the prize, the bigger the possibility of rating system abuses.
I am not saying this will happen, but again, I am not seeing assurances that it cannot happen either.
I think it is really getting into something that should be left up for contests if you want cash or c-points to be involved.
Yes, c-points are considered currency imo, they cannot make money if they are just giving them away.
So in a sense, they are giving you something they could have made money on.
I think a writing contest of some sort every other month or something of that nature is prob a more likely scenario and probably a better way to handle something like giving players a little treat for their work above what they are already doing.
If your work wins the contest it makes it into the game after a certain point and you get a prize of some kind.
Contests in general would be something fun to have more often. The last one we had was... what? Name the ships? I can't recall any official contests since then. The last free point giveaway was the survey at launch; again that's been a while. Though, I hear they're doing a design a ship contest for the NCC-1701-E successor.
My friend, you are the exception to the rule. Just look at how many Exclesiors/Galaxy-Xs/various uniforms/costumes are used by players in the game. Most players make use of the CSTore, I am no exception.
Actually, you have no more idea than he does how many people really use the C-store out of the overall playerbase. Sure, I see plenty of the C-store ships, but I see even more regular ships.