A mod cannot be effectively promoted outside these forums if it cannot be downloaded outside these forums. As mentioned, no reputable news source will link to a paywall for a mod's download.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
How's that? You need the game to play the mod anyway, so you can just as well register here. I assume we can post screens, describe mechanisms, link lets-plays and whatever else we think is appropriate to promote it. It's just the downloads that are restricted.
Pirates will find the mod/game anyway, regardless of any policy.
Do mods work with a demo version of EU4? If yes, that's the only way I can see it being truly detrimental to mod's promotion, as you cannot test it on free (demo) version if we cannot provide download outside these forums.
I really am not seeing why you keep saying that.
I have already said make a website they can link to, have some screen shots, have testimonials of current users, have a change list. All you cannot do is have user interaction or a download link. You can link to your thread or sub-forum here for those two things.
Then whatever press is doing an article on you can link to the website.
Although I would say that it would be disingenuous of the journalist to say "we will not review your product because the link is to your sub-forum since it is a "paywall" " where as to use the product legally that they are reviewing it would not be a paywall as you would have a code included with the game, and there is no way to pay just for the code or access.
Mean while they would happily link to other commercial sites that bombard people with ads. But that is just me. A matter of perspective I suppose.
Actually, it's ridiculously hard to get a copy of most mods if you only have a pirated version of the game. Don't ask me how I know that.
Being able to have such a site without a download/user interaction does alleviate the issue some, but the thing is that that generally either costs money to set up, or is plastered with ads. ModDB is neither, but sadly breaks the current overly restrictive rules. If you know of any decent alternatives I'd love to hear about them.
"Mean while they would happily link to other commercial sites that bombard people with ads. But that is just me. A matter of perspective I suppose."
What they care about is whether their readers can readily access the content. They cannot readily access the mod forum even if they do own the game, as they'll have to go register, and then register their game. It's tedious at best.
It's ridiculously easy to get a copy of most major mods as long as you've got some clue where to look.Actually, it's ridiculously hard to get a copy of most mods if youonly have a pirated version of the gamehaven't registered your copy of the game. Don't ask me how I know that.
Less popular mods might be somewhat hard to get a hold of though.
(Quote edited with strikethrough to make clear this discussion has nothing to do with piracy)
Last edited:
A reminder that discussion of Piracy in any form, it methods or means, is prohibited on this site.
I thought using mods had nothing to do with piracy, since the rules do allow distributing mods externally as long as they're not also distributed on these forums?
I've edited my post above slightly to make it clear the discussion is not related to piracy, just to the restrictive nature of this forum.
And now you are just trying to troll me,
(Also note though that I did not quote your post as the one that was discussing piracy)
srry, i'll not mention it then.
what I meant was that *if* the mod isn't distributed on a third party site and if you can't access the appropriate user modifications sub forum for whatever reason, it's almost impossible to get the mod
or that was my experience anyway
meneth, were you thinking of mods which don't have external sites and which aren't victoria II mods? (the victoria II user modifications sub forum is open to the public atm afaik). if so, i guess i just didn't know where to look
what I meant was that *if* the mod isn't distributed on a third party site and if you can't access the appropriate user modifications sub forum for whatever reason, it's almost impossible to get the mod
or that was my experience anyway
meneth, were you thinking of mods which don't have external sites and which aren't victoria II mods? (the victoria II user modifications sub forum is open to the public atm afaik). if so, i guess i just didn't know where to look
My apologies for misunderstanding your post.And now you are just trying to troll me,
(Also note though that I did not quote your post as the one that was discussing piracy)
All major mods for CKII, EU4, HoI3, and Vic2 are pretty easy to get a hold of if you know where to look (though for the latter two anyone can access the mod forums anyway). Since nearly all of them are distributed via MediaFire, people with access to the forums end up posting the links outside the forums.
Last edited:
Doesn't that apply for every game before something like Senguko?
I have to assume you mean that it is indeed open.
The user mod forums are open to the public for Vic2, HoI3, EU3, and EU:Rome.
Yep, that's what I meant. Poor wording on my side. The forums are open but you can't view and download attachments unless you have the game registered.
.png){kind=avatar}
You know I did see forums where you could see all its content, but unless you registered you could not access the download links. Maybe PI can do that to their forums. Let people see the Mod section, browse through the threads, but have to register their game in able for the forum to let them see the download links?
This might be possible if we can organize the hosting aspect first, then it would operate similar to the way I think the workshop works, which is you can view the workshop but not download things hosted on it unless you own the game? Not entirely sure about that as I seam to have gotten conflicting reports with some people saying you can DL though.
Anyway if they are straight attachments I could definitely restrict it even with the current software. Will have to speak with development to make sure we retain this capability in the new software. That way it leaves the option open if we get the hosting worked out. The thing is it is probably more import to them to restrict posting though, Although we could further refine that by sub-forum..
If only attachments were not as restrictive as they are now. 10 MB is not even funny. Bandwidth and hosting capabilities are the problem.
Yes The attachment system is not designed for hosting large scale user mods, which is why I mentioned we would need to organize the hosting aspect first.
This is a great idea re: viewing but now download. I would encourage you though to allow non-game owners to post - perhaps with a moderator required to 'approve' the post before it appears? I really do think it's important for non-owners to be able to actually ask someone a specific question. I'll personally volunteer myself as a 'post-approval mod' if it comes to that
I do think it's that important. Maybe have a 'post limit' for non-owners - say, 3 posts per day or something like that. You use vBulletin, right? I'm pretty sure it handles that.