Reason behind making User Modifications Sub-Forum Private

[LodovicoAriosto]

"I don't really understand the issue"

If there is less modding activity, people may get disappointed by the "special benefit" they got and would rather prefer to have what they had before as a standard feature.

 

[SorelusImperion]

How about allowing mods to present/represent themselves within a single locked post/thread in the general forum so that people can get a general idea of what could be expected while downloads and detailed discussions would remain restricted to the subforum ? Given that Paradox games have often have their subforums.

 

[P-51]

I don't really understand the issue since most people posting in this thread like you have full access.

But for games that we do not own we cannot see the mod section. As members we have no idea what is going on in our own community because we aren't allowed to access forums that were traditionally part of the community. For example I don't own Sengoku and don't know if I want to get it either. Perhaps there are mods out there that would make the game worth buying for me, but since I don't have access to view which mods are available I will never know. And besides that, someone mentioned this earlier and I think it is worth restating: you are exploiting modders by turning their mods into part of the product that you are trying to sell. These people aren't getting paid by Paradox to make mods and shouldn't be advertised as part of a Paradox game. Especially for a company that has traditionally been so close to their community and customers, it is very surprising to see them decide to do something so unethical.

 

[flame7926]

I don't really understand the issue since most people posting in this thread like you have full access.

As that other person said, we dont have all the games, and a big factor in a purchase of a game is what mods are available. Which we cant see with this limit.

 

[Lor Dric]

I thought you bought a game for the games content. This approach is much better than invasive DRM is it not?

 

[Comrade Chaos]

I thought you bought a game for the games content. This approach is much better than invasive DRM is it not?

And content can be the moddability of the engine. Maybe you have heard of Arma 2. Almost the entire player base is built around user-made addons and mods. Sure the vanilla game is good, but the user content such as ACE (Even more realism for a mil-sim) are what makes it worth buying.

 

[LodovicoAriosto]

I thought you bought a game for the games content.

Content of vanilla games is not satisfactory for possibly growing number of people. That is why 1. they want to see part of the advertised product (mods) before they buy and 2. one of the reasons why PI tries to make advantage of that by making them part of the product, though not visible to potential customers.

This approach is much better than invasive DRM is it not?

Since when we need to choose between limited forum access and DRM? Oh yes, its been days now. Years before that, no DRM and open mod subforums access could live peacefully together. Why not now? People here ask about the reason and so far have not been given one apart from mantra called empty DRM threats. "You don't like something which was recently introduced? Get used to it because otherwise there will be DRM..." Come on, no response at all is better than this.

If the focus groups conclusion was that this change will make people buy more, then I understand it, although I think it will hurt modding, is unfair to modders who work for free and possibly backfire in lower sales to people who consider mods to be essential for full experience, i. e. reason for buying.

A system of previews available to anyone could be a good step IMO. Don't make mods available but give people knowledge about their existence. A very good suggestion a few posts above! Of course it's still unfriendly to modding compared to the previous standard but it's a good compromise.

And content can be the moddability of the engine. Maybe you have heard of Arma 2. Almost the entire player base is built around user-made addons and mods. Sure the vanilla game is good, but the user content such as ACE (Even more realism for a mil-sim) are what makes it worth buying.

ArmA 2 - an excellent example! The community rights are expanding, not shrinking there.

 

[Titan79]

But for games that we do not own we cannot see the mod section. As members we have no idea what is going on in our own community because we aren't allowed to access forums that were traditionally part of the community. For example I don't own Sengoku and don't know if I want to get it either. Perhaps there are mods out there that would make the game worth buying for me, but since I don't have access to view which mods are available I will never know.

As that other person said, we dont have all the games, and a big factor in a purchase of a game is what mods are available. Which we cant see with this limit.

Same goes for me, especially with Sengoku and CK2.

I'm very interested in both games but a decisive factor for me would be being able to see the current state of available mods :sad: (well, especially for Sengoku, given that CK2 has just been released. And no - simply reading user reviews or comments, while surely useful, is not enough/not the same).

 

[Castellon]

But for games that we do not own we cannot see the mod section. As members we have no idea what is going on in our own community because we aren't allowed to access forums that were traditionally part of the community. For example I don't own Sengoku and don't know if I want to get it either. Perhaps there are mods out there that would make the game worth buying for me, but since I don't have access to view which mods are available I will never know. And besides that, someone mentioned this earlier and I think it is worth restating: you are exploiting modders by turning their mods into part of the product that you are trying to sell. These people aren't getting paid by Paradox to make mods and shouldn't be advertised as part of a Paradox game. Especially for a company that has traditionally been so close to their community and customers, it is very surprising to see them decide to do something so unethical.

Sorry I have to call you out on your use of "unethical" By not allowing people to view user mods BEFORE they buy, you could say we are explicitly doing the opposite of what you claim, we are not making it part of the advertised product.

 

[Castellon]

"I don't really understand the issue"

If there is less modding activity, people may get disappointed by the "special benefit" they got and would rather prefer to have what they had before as a standard feature.

Since only people that already own the game can create mods or have a use for them, how is people that do not own the game, not being able to view discussions on them, going to lead to less modding activity.
If the game is a good base and is easy to mod with powerful modding tools, this is what leads to users making great mods.

 

[flame7926]

Since only people that already own the game can create mods or have a use for them, how is people that do not own the game, not being able to view discussions on them, going to lead to less modding activity.
If the game is a good base and is easy to mod with powerful modding tools, this is what leads to users making great mods.

Because people who would buy the game for its potential ability to mod, or people who would use mods don't know if there are good ones there, so they don't buy the game. Mods interest more people to get the game that are interested in modding. Those people then mod the game. Making more mods. If those people cant view the ones currently there, they will be less likely to buy the game.

 

[P-51]

Sorry I have to call you out on your use of "unethical" By not allowing people to view user mods BEFORE they buy, you could say we are explicitly doing the opposite of what you claim, we are not making it part of the advertised product.

This comment suggests the opposite.

Our policy is to reward people that buy our games with additional benefits like access to specialty user mods forum

You have admitted that it is your intent to use the work of modders, who are in no way affiliated with Paradox, as a feature to sell your game.

 

[s1234567890m]

This comment suggests the opposite.



You have admitted that it is your intent to use the work of modders, who are in no way affiliated with Paradox, as a feature to sell your game.

If that were true then the mod forums would be free for all

 

[flame7926]

If that were true then the mod forums would be free for all

That doesn't make any sense. If you are making people pay for something that contains content, in this case mods, then that is a feature to sell the game. I don't have a problem with them doing that, as there is no reason to use a mod if you dont have the game, but you should still be able to view the thread. And I think I remember reading that any mods are their property anyway.

 

[s1234567890m]

That doesn't make any sense. If you are making people pay for something that contains content, in this case mods, then that is a feature to sell the game. I don't have a problem with them doing that, as there is no reason to use a mod if you dont have the game, but you should still be able to view the thread. And I think I remember reading that any mods are their property anyway.

.
in refernce to the guy i quoted. if they were using mods to push sales it would make sense for them to be free for all increasing thrbreadth of the game....

IIRC mods arent limited to paradox forums . several mods have external forums have people tried searching for them?

 

[Jolt]

I think the rest of the thread has done that.

This is enough for me with the condescending and snarky replies.

"The rest of the thread" is a collection of speculations (Which, as the word refers to, doesn't answer anything) by fellow players and customers whose opinions have as much weight as myself.

The only thing "the rest of the thread" has that may answer my question, is a bit where you talked about not wanting to punish people who bought your games with invasive DRM, and wanting to reward them with access to sub-forums for the respective game, which is a feature that has existed in these forums ever since I first came here. So it's not so much rewarding Sengoku or CK2 customers with something new or unique, but rather that they don't get their viewing privileges removed as part of this new policy.
Regardless of that, what it might be infered by your "Either this or DRM" analogy, is that this measure was indeed taken as a further protection against pirates. As I said in my previous post, I find that a odd anti-piracy strategy, as I doubt that: Pirates would pirate any Paradox game with the main intention of playing the User Mods; Pirates who have pirated the game and like it, would buy the game due to blocked access to the User Mods; Pirates will not pirate the most recent Paradox games due to the User Mods sub-forum being blocked off.
Whereas, prospective customers willing to spend money on a video game would be much more cautious over which game they actually buy, and being able to see the User Mods and how developed the modding community for the game is, would convince some of the prospective customers of the "added value" of the game/product.

That's why I made this thread. Out of simple intelectual curiosity for the reasons why the company chose to take this decision. It's why I read the Wester Front, and pay much more attention to what Shams and Susana write than to what Johan or Darkrenown write in these forums. And the comtempt and condescension to which you have replied to me (Considering me a pirate, no doubt), Castellon, is frankly disrespectful and appalling. I would have expected a much better attitude from a Paradox Forum Manager. I guess from now on, if I have questions regarding company decisions on forum matters, I will get a better chance of being replied to in good faith and honesty if I email Mr. Wester himself.

 

[s1234567890m]

So you give more creedan e to 'marketting' then a high honcho?

 

[Lor Dric]

"I guess from now on, if I have questions regarding company decisions on forum matters, I will get a better chance of being replied to in good faith and honesty if I email Mr. Wester himself."

I think the Paradox Forum Manager would know more about the Forum decisions than Mr. Wester would. You were told the reason, but continue to argue.

 

[Castellon]

This is enough for me with the condescending and snarky replies.

"The rest of the thread" is a collection of speculations (Which, as the word refers to, doesn't answer anything) by fellow players and customers whose opinions have as much weight as myself.

The only thing "the rest of the thread" has that may answer my question, is a bit where you talked about not wanting to punish people who bought your games with invasive DRM, and wanting to reward them with access to sub-forums for the respective game, which is a feature that has existed in these forums ever since I first came here. So it's not so much rewarding Sengoku or CK2 customers with something new or unique, but rather that they don't get their viewing privileges removed as part of this new policy.
Regardless of that, what it might be infered by your "Either this or DRM" analogy, is that this measure was indeed taken as a further protection against pirates. As I said in my previous post, I find that a odd anti-piracy strategy, as I doubt that: Pirates would pirate any Paradox game with the main intention of playing the User Mods; Pirates who have pirated the game and like it, would buy the game due to blocked access to the User Mods; Pirates will not pirate the most recent Paradox games due to the User Mods sub-forum being blocked off.
Whereas, prospective customers willing to spend money on a video game would be much more cautious over which game they actually buy, and being able to see the User Mods and how developed the modding community for the game is, would convince some of the prospective customers of the "added value" of the game/product.

That's why I made this thread. Out of simple intelectual curiosity for the reasons why the company chose to take this decision. It's why I read the Wester Front, and pay much more attention to what Shams and Susana write than to what Johan or Darkrenown write in these forums. And the comtempt and condescension to which you have replied to me (Considering me a pirate, no doubt), Castellon, is frankly disrespectful and appalling. I would have expected a much better attitude from a Paradox Forum Manager. I guess from now on, if I have questions regarding company decisions on forum matters, I will get a better chance of being replied to in good faith and honesty if I email Mr. Wester himself.

I never claimed you were a pirate, I don't know where your hostility is coming from, You have been told the answer, I have said it, others have said it, you just do not want to hear it because you do not like the policy. I am sorry that you do not like it.

... as I doubt that: Pirates would pirate any Paradox game with the main intention of playing the User Mods ...

And yet this is exactly what you tell me many people buy the game for. That seams like a contradiction to me.

 

[Castellon]

Sorry I have to call you out on your use of "unethical" By not allowing people to view user mods BEFORE they buy, you could say we are explicitly doing the opposite of what you claim, we are not making it part of the advertised product.

This comment suggests the opposite.

Our policy is to reward people that buy our games with additional benefits like access to specialty user mods forum

You have admitted that it is your intent to use the work of modders, who are in no way affiliated with Paradox, as a feature to sell your game.

That is twisting what I said to give it a meaning it does not have.
Giving someone a place to plan and work with others and a platform to distribute that fan work is not the same as using that work, the tool and resource of the forum are the feature not the work itself.