Can we get the modding etc forum area back?

[CmdrDunsail]

I did say etc.. meaning modding/offtopic etc I get that atm I'm coming across short and I possibly shouldn't be communicating given at the moment I'm very sore, pain killered and lacking sleep I'm not meaning to come across as a grumpy A-hole Dunsail.. i'm not but the problem I see is this HBS wants us to keep the community together, we've asked again and again about the modding and as i pointed out been told it's ok, the first time I posted anything on modding the beta not meaning to again cause offence you were 'I don't think your allowed to do this' until I posted again in the Q&A and went 'Are we allowed' and got told again Yes.

If I come across as.. argumentive it's because it seems like we constantly get told by the head of HBS go 'mod the game' and then err you might not be allowed by mods on the forums and that gets confusing, plus while yes we have discord, we have reddit and the like we don't want to split the community up mate, we love the community I like the work you've done helping us these past 2 years, I like the helpful way we all tend to be even when some of us are like me short and grumpy

Anywya I've asked most we can get is no.. and again sorry if i'm coming across grumpy not meaning too mate nothing but respect for you as you know.

No worries, and I hope the physical challenges you're dealing with are soon eased if possible. I realize my engagement might come across as contrary although I've fought this fight for you already behind the scenes, and myself had to come to understand some of the subtleties involved for both HBS and from PDX's perspective.

Right now, I suggest any modding discussion continue in the main forum section (while maintaining shared documentation elsewhere, like your wiki), and you keep a single thread which tracks all the other modding discussion threads, then once the official moderators are active here (I'm just sort of an honorary remnant lingering to help out while I can still eke out a bit of time to do so), ask them casually to pin that one BT Modding Discussion reference thread. If you force HBS or PDX for official answers, then you risk getting official rulings within their contractual and legal boundaries. Many things on official forums everywhere operate on the basis of "overlooked until it becomes a problem and isn't okay any more".

If the volume of modding discussion in the main Battletech discussion forum become problematic, then the moderators here would have to address it at that time, and see what PDX can do then.

There will be some growing pains, but that's always the case on the road to a mature and engaged community

 

[44th MAC|Bonsai]

Patience? Us? Don't see that happening. It has been like fullscale escalation all over the place regarding this move (and I feel like I was part of this, which might have been an overreaction.) People's patience seems to being fully spent on waiting for the game, so bringing up patience regarding other things is tough

But yes. You are right. Let's take a step back and see how things turn out. Maybe give them some nudge on occasion, but relax a bit.

 

[Jamey]

I don't think HBS will shut down non-problematic (from a legal standpoint) modding discussion here, but I'm not yet familiar enough with PDX's management of these issues to say whether it'll be problematic here or not. I do think to offset these problems, the Battletech modding community should establish a central community clearinghouse that isn't managed by companies with restrictions of their own.

I’ve never heard of Paradox shutting down a mod thread, just moving it to the appropriate subforum (or locking a thread and telling people to register their game to get access to it). I’m sure it happens, but only for standard forum infractions, not because it’s a mod.

In general, the Paradox dev studio games are wide open for modding. They include mods from IPs such as Game of Thrones, Star Trek, and Lord of the Rings. Paradox not only allows, but encourages mods. I have seen streams of the Paradox Devs playing mods and they have someone employed whose sole job it is to work with the modding community to add more modding support in their games.

The HBS situation is different because of the licensing agreement that gives permission to make the game. I’m sure that will constrain things, but as far as I have seen, Paradox has always been very supportive of modding.

 

[CmdrDunsail]

Patience? Us? Don't see that happening. It has been like fullscale escalation all over the place regarding this move (and I feel like I was part of this, which might have been an overreaction.) People's patience seems to being fully spent on waiting for the game, so bringing up patience regarding other things is tough

But yes. You are right. Let's take a step back and see how things turn out. Maybe give them some nudge on occasion, but relax a bit.

I'll say this... these are formative days. No need to take a step back from the goodly effort. Just...avoid any and all implication of being manipulative about it. Like the topic title of this thread, or bandwagoning, or any form of misrepresentation of the facts. Especially when it comes to the topic of modding someone else's work, moreso when that "someone else" is a game company. Modders should come across as forthright as possible to maintain good relations with the folks developing the core game, even if the game devs can't provide support in an official capacity. There's a lot they can turn a blind eye to if it's not shoved in their face.

When it comes to manipulations, Mitch from HBS doesn't respect such things, and from what I've seen of PDX, they may actively respond negatively to people pulling manipulative shenanigans to get their own way, which ruins the opportunity for others who are forthright in respectfully expressing their opinions and preferences.

Keep up the good fight, respectfully. And publicly work within the boundaries the devs themselves have, so you don't have to do more work to work around them, and so there aren't consequences which screw everyone on all sides

 

[CmdrDunsail]

I’ve never heard of Paradox shutting down a mod thread, just moving it to the appropriate subforum (or locking a thread and telling people to register their game to get access to it). I’m sure it happens, but only for standard forum infractions, not because it’s a mod.

In general, the Paradox dev studio games are wide open for modding. They include mods from IPs such as Game of Thrones, Star Trek, and Lord of the Rings. Paradox not only allows, but encourages mods. I have seen streams of the Paradox Devs playing mods and they have someone employed whose sole job it is to work with the modding community to add more modding support in their games.

The HBS situation is different because of the licensing agreement that gives permission to make the game. I’m sure that will constrain things, but as far as I have seen, Paradox has always been very supportive of modding.

That's good to hear. To note, HBS has also livestreamed playing mods of their Shadowrun games, though it came with an editor for just such purposes. As you've recognized, Battletech, due to its IP and contractual licensing issues, is a unique case in the game world. Only Shadowrun comes close to having similar issues, but even then Battletech's has always been more controversial.

I look forward to a healthy and flourishing modding community for Battletech, without it becoming a controversial nightmare for HBS or PDX, because if it did, we may not get "in success" expansions and sequels, or they may not be as modding-friendly as this game will be. An ounce of informed prevention (expectation management), benefits us all in the long run, though I understand not everyone likes to hear about it.

 

[Jamey]

I look forward to a healthy and flourishing modding community for Battletech, without it becoming a controversial nightmare for HBS or PDX, because if it did, we may not get "in success" expansions and sequels, or they may not be as modding-friendly as this game will be. An ounce of informed prevention (expectation management), benefits us all in the long run, though I understand not everyone likes to hear about it.

I couldn’t agree with this more.

 

[Tnarien]

I did say etc.. meaning modding/offtopic etc I get that atm I'm coming across short and I possibly shouldn't be communicating given at the moment I'm very sore, pain killered and lacking sleep I'm not meaning to come across as a grumpy A-hole Dunsail.. i'm not but the problem I see is this HBS wants us to keep the community together, we've asked again and again about the modding and as i pointed out been told it's ok, the first time I posted anything on modding the beta not meaning to again cause offence you were 'I don't think your allowed to do this' until I posted again in the Q&A and went 'Are we allowed' and got told again Yes.

If I come across as.. argumentive it's because it seems like we constantly get told by the head of HBS go 'mod the game' and then err you might not be allowed by mods on the forums and that gets confusing, plus while yes we have discord, we have reddit and the like we don't want to split the community up mate, we love the community I like the work you've done helping us these past 2 years, I like the helpful way we all tend to be even when some of us are like me short and grumpy

Anywya I've asked most we can get is no.. and again sorry if i'm coming across grumpy not meaning too mate nothing but respect for you as you know.

There is definitely mixed messaging going on right now. It's more than a little aggravating.

 

[CmdrDunsail]

There is definitely mixed messaging going on right now. It's more than a little aggravating.

It's not mixed messaging, but it is nuanced. They can't make it simple, because it's not simple for them.

HBS doesn't own the Battletech IP, different parts of it belongs to Microsoft and Topps, with some elements belonging to or controlled by other 3rd parties. They don't own the rights to the battlemech designs. Those belong to PGI. Some of the game code is 3rd party licensed software they don't have the right allow other people to crack or mod, like the Unity file blobs.

HBS isn't going out of their way to obfuscate game files. HBS also isn't going out of their way to support modding.

What this means is, any files that are encrypted or obfuscated by the licensed tools they use, like Unity, they cannot give permission to modify. They also cannot grant rights to modify content they don't own, like the battlemech designs.

However, a lot of their in-house developed configuration and other files that otherwise might've been protected if they were trying to actively prevent modding won't be encrypted or obfuscated, and HBS is okay with the modding community modifying them so long as it doesn't result in a legal quandry for HBS.

They won't create a game editor or release modding tools, which they gave good reasons for, having previously done it for Shadowrun. (Though we might get a event editor, not the same thing.)

They won't host a modding forum because they could be held responsible from a legal sense for supporting modding if they do. They also won't tell people to stop modding, or to not discuss modding, so long as it doesn't present a legal quandry for them.

They show, from a personal perspective, that they appreciate what modders do, and on a personal level will express that support.

As a company, they'll say you can modify the un-protected configuration files, not the protected files. But, they don't "support" such efforts. No dev-provided tools to aid in the modding (modding community will have to create their own tools), no official dev wiki with modding support info...etc.

There are some things modders might do that would create a legal quandry for HBS, which is why they cannot actively "support modding", which they know some modders (and possibly their licensors) would mean to crack the encrypted files, breach copyright, or misrepresent their game by inserting inappropriate content and misrepresent HBS's work.

They also have to be wary of a wide variety of laws in different countries. So, by not officially supporting modding, but not officially going out of their way to stop reasonable modding that doesn't cause a legal problem for them, it allows the rest of us to have some more fun with the game they developed.

Again, it's not mixed messaging. It's nuanced due to circumstances.

That being said, what a person modifies for their own personal use isn't an issue. And, if you're not disseminating 3rd party content HBS doesn't have the right to authorize distribution of, then you're okay too. For example, we can modify and share the .json configuration files, but HBS can't support the graphic modification of importing battlemech designs which aren't already in their game because they don't have the license or ownership to do so, despite the fact this is an obvious thing modders will do for their own enjoyment.

Does this make more sense?

 

[Brother Diogenes]

I suppose it's like saying that, from a legal sense, they're not allowed to give us permission to take their car out for a spin, but they are allowed to leave the keys in the ignition and walk away. Whatever we decide to do with it is entirely our responsibility and shouldn't involve them directly. Is that a decent comparison?

 

[CmdrDunsail]

I suppose it's like saying that, from a legal sense, they're not allowed to give us permission to take their car out for a spin, but they are allowed to leave the keys in the ignition and walk away. Whatever we decide to do with it is entirely our responsibility and shouldn't involve them directly. Is that a decent comparison?

I wish it were, but no. Again, it's not simple, it's nuanced.

There isn't a simple analogy that covers everything that I've come across, because for the devs it's not a simple legal situation.

 

[Jamey]

What I hear here is: Neither HBS not Paradox right now wants to have the lawyers decide things. Let’s please keep it that way.

 

[44th MAC|Bonsai]

However nuanced it is, I really am glad and thankful HBS chose a way that makes modding easily accessible, even if officially unsupported. I've already spent a fair amount of hours messing with the files, and I plan on continuing to do so when the game is released - as long as I don't cause any legal problems for HBS. They have earned my trust and respect as developers, no need to cause trouble. Think we can live with some limitations on the official forums, there will be possibilites to discuss things that have no place here.

 

[CmdrDunsail]

What I hear here is: Neither HBS not Paradox right now wants to have the lawyers decide things. Let’s please keep it that way.

To the best of my understanding, this is wholly accurate.

 

[shadojak]

@CmdrDunsail can't even enjoy his retirement from being a moderator.

(...but you're doing a bang up job as the voice of moderation, I for one am thankful for your continued presence)

 

[Brother Diogenes]

Yikes. I didn't pay attention to the modding discussion much during the beta except for some experimental tinkering, so these issues are new to me... though I'm sure I can guess as to part of the cause.

If it's this much of a mess though, it seems a small price to pay to host the modding elsewhere and just include links here.

 

[CmdrDunsail]

@CmdrDunsail can't even enjoy his retirement from being a moderator.

(...but you're doing a bang up job as the voice of moderation, I for one am thankful for your continued presence)

Lol, thanks. <o

I'd be sharing my perspective as a community member without this honorary moderator tag. As a community member I want to help the community as much as I can while I still can. (Dunt dunt duuuuunnnnn...ominous statement) Before my work life overtakes all my free time.

The forum here it seems was set up a week before HBS had officially planned, so I'm just glad I can pitch in until more of their ducks are lined up to help out.

 

[CmdrDunsail]

Yikes. I didn't pay attention to the modding discussion much during the beta except for some experimental tinkering, so these issues are new to me... though I'm sure I can guess as to part of the cause.

If it's this much of a mess though, it seems a small price to pay to host the modding elsewhere and just include links here.

While what you can guess at is likely a small part of it, it's mostly normal business risk stuff in the face of a very abnormal IP ownership and licensing situation that's occurred since FASA sold off some of their IP rights, which would exist even if "those people" causing problems for the BT devs weren't around, because multiple companies control different elements of the IP that HBS is licensing, and the game code isn't all their own due to using a 3rd party game engine platform and possibly other 3rd party code tools. <o

I'm just glad after all these years that this Battletech game is possible at all...

 

[TheHolySpork]

Agreed. I liked the layout of the old forums, but let see how this develops. I just wish we could use custom avatars. :/

 

[44th MAC|Bonsai]

I'm just glad after all these years that this Battletech game is possible at all...

So am I I actually played MC2 today, because I am in desperate need of big stompy robots! It is so great HBS brings back BT. Yeah, I know, there is MWO, but while I enjoyed MW4mercs multiplayer back in the days, I prefer campaign play.

 

[Havamal]

It's not mixed messaging, but it is nuanced. They can't make it simple, because it's not simple for them.

HBS doesn't own the Battletech IP, different parts of it belongs to Microsoft and Topps, with some elements belonging to or controlled by other 3rd parties. They don't own the rights to the battlemech designs. Those belong to PGI. Some of the game code is 3rd party licensed software they don't have the right allow other people to crack or mod, like the Unity file blobs.

HBS isn't going out of their way to obfuscate game files. HBS also isn't going out of their way to support modding.

What this means is, any files that are encrypted or obfuscated by the licensed tools they use, like Unity, they cannot give permission to modify. They also cannot grant rights to modify content they don't own, like the battlemech designs.

However, a lot of their in-house developed configuration and other files that otherwise might've been protected if they were trying to actively prevent modding won't be encrypted or obfuscated, and HBS is okay with the modding community modifying them so long as it doesn't result in a legal quandry for HBS.

They won't create a game editor or release modding tools, which they gave good reasons for, having previously done it for Shadowrun. (Though we might get a event editor, not the same thing.)

They won't host a modding forum because they could be held responsible from a legal sense for supporting modding if they do. They also won't tell people to stop modding, or to not discuss modding, so long as it doesn't present a legal quandry for them.

They show, from a personal perspective, that they appreciate what modders do, and on a personal level will express that support.

As a company, they'll say you can modify the un-protected configuration files, not the protected files. But, they don't "support" such efforts. No dev-provided tools to aid in the modding (modding community will have to create their own tools), no official dev wiki with modding support info...etc.

There are some things modders might do that would create a legal quandry for HBS, which is why they cannot actively "support modding", which they know some modders (and possibly their licensors) would mean to crack the encrypted files, breach copyright, or misrepresent their game by inserting inappropriate content and misrepresent HBS's work.

They also have to be wary of a wide variety of laws in different countries. So, by not officially supporting modding, but not officially going out of their way to stop reasonable modding that doesn't cause a legal problem for them, it allows the rest of us to have some more fun with the game they developed.

Again, it's not mixed messaging. It's nuanced due to circumstances.

That being said, what a person modifies for their own personal use isn't an issue. And, if you're not disseminating 3rd party content HBS doesn't have the right to authorize distribution of, then you're okay too. For example, we can modify and share the .json configuration files, but HBS can't support the graphic modification of importing battlemech designs which aren't already in their game because they don't have the license or ownership to do so, despite the fact this is an obvious thing modders will do for their own enjoyment.

Does this make more sense?

Thank you for the detailed breakdown Cmdr.