Are we only allowed to sell addons and boosterpacks via gamersgate or is it also possible to get a license to use the code or parts of it as a basis for a completely new game, perhaps even only partly in the same genre and distibuted via an other company then paradox as publisher, so we would have nothing to do with Paradox and its games without paying money to you for the rights to use the source for whatever game we want and for developer support?
-
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.
- Status
Johan has said you have to sign a NDA, thus having the right to publish any part of the code under any other publisher than paradox is AFAIK illegal. So no, that you won't be able to do.Kaiserludi said:
However, creating new games by using a part of the code as basis is likely to be okay. But again, they must be published under p-dox, remember the NDA:
Kaiserludi said:
They way I would see this working is that you can do whatever you want with the source except distribute it without gamersgate.
Gamersgate publishes a lot of stuff from various genres so don't be worried about that part of it its not strategy only.
As far as I know, Johan did not say, that there is definetly no possibility to make a contract only for source-code and developer support without any publishing or distribution commitments like only to distribute via gamersgate, did he?
Normally signing a NDA only means agreeing on not to tell business secrets like source code to any third person without explicit permition of the owner of these work. NDAs have nothing to do with distribution contracts.
So perhaps, it could be possible, not to distribute via Paradox if the price, we pay for this right is lucrative enough for Paradox.
Sure gamersgate is not only for strategy titles, but only to sell a product on gamersgate means, to reach only a part of the potential buyers. All the offline-clients, still buying their game in the supermarket you can not reach that way. In addition finding a publisher financing a professional development would ne much more easier if this publiher would have the right to freely decide on its ways of distribution.
Normally signing a NDA only means agreeing on not to tell business secrets like source code to any third person without explicit permition of the owner of these work. NDAs have nothing to do with distribution contracts.
So perhaps, it could be possible, not to distribute via Paradox if the price, we pay for this right is lucrative enough for Paradox.
Sure gamersgate is not only for strategy titles, but only to sell a product on gamersgate means, to reach only a part of the potential buyers. All the offline-clients, still buying their game in the supermarket you can not reach that way. In addition finding a publisher financing a professional development would ne much more easier if this publiher would have the right to freely decide on its ways of distribution.
You will have to sign a NDA and a contract to get acces to the codes. And then you would have to sell it over gamesgate which is 100% owned by paradox.Johan said:
Signing a NDA&contract with paradox and then sell it over their site while giving money to someone else is hardly a likely possibility.
My idea was, to sign the NDA and the contract and perhaps later sign an additional contract with Paradox to get their permition on selling the game via non-Paradox-channels in exchange for money from us to Paradox. So Paradox would not get money per game we sell via gamersgate but get money for every game we sell via our own distribution chanels or via the ones from our partners perhaps in addition to one fixed amount for the license and the developer support (in case we only sell very less games). Would be a similar way to licensing a game-engine.
I think Paradox wants to have full control of what will be sold with their logo on it. It is logical for quality control.
Whilst I do like the idea of this, I have some fears.
First, this is a very innovative approach, letting modders officially have access to the source code is something I've personally never heard of (but it probably has happened). It is an excellent plan to improve upon already great games and perhaps breath new life into them. If the modders must sign a NDA in order to access the source code that is alright as well, although I still don't know how they are going to decide who gets to view it and who not. An NDA is a powerful thing but if this was opened to many people, then I can't help to think that the source code may be leaked, and it only takes one person for ireperable damage to be done. A tighter leash can be put on the modders by limiting the number of people involved but then people may be left out.
Although I am very bad at C++ I still have a basic knowledge of it. If I were to request the source code, would I be allowed to view it, knowing that I can almost certainly not develop a mod for any game? If I wasn't allowed to see it, then I would be sad, but if I did then many people can have access to it, creating less security.
The thing I don't like most of all though is the mixing of money/profits with this. I more than understand that paradox has to make money. It is a company, it exists principally to make money. But I don't like paying modders. It dosen't feel right. IMHO you can't have it both ways. You cannot ask the community to make things for you for profit. It would create an uneasy dynamic between developer and modder. Paradox would still make money off free releases, I predict. Having improvements to older games would rejuvinate their sales and if they had to be compatible with the expansion packs to the various games, then people would buy them even more.
I think that if paradox were to release its source code, be it to a select few or to anyone who wants, their output must be downloadable for free. So, you run the risk of individuals getting the source code and compiling the games themselves or whatever but most people can't do that and it would probably be easier to get a torrent or something. I'm sorry for being cynical, but I just can't imagine this going as Paradox intends unless they loosen everything or tighten everything. Maybe Sweden is too progressive even for me. I hope it works, I really do, thats why I voted in favour, but I hope more than that that this doesn't distance me from paradox even more than EU3 did or as I suspect EU:R will.
First, this is a very innovative approach, letting modders officially have access to the source code is something I've personally never heard of (but it probably has happened). It is an excellent plan to improve upon already great games and perhaps breath new life into them. If the modders must sign a NDA in order to access the source code that is alright as well, although I still don't know how they are going to decide who gets to view it and who not. An NDA is a powerful thing but if this was opened to many people, then I can't help to think that the source code may be leaked, and it only takes one person for ireperable damage to be done. A tighter leash can be put on the modders by limiting the number of people involved but then people may be left out.
Although I am very bad at C++ I still have a basic knowledge of it. If I were to request the source code, would I be allowed to view it, knowing that I can almost certainly not develop a mod for any game? If I wasn't allowed to see it, then I would be sad, but if I did then many people can have access to it, creating less security.
The thing I don't like most of all though is the mixing of money/profits with this. I more than understand that paradox has to make money. It is a company, it exists principally to make money. But I don't like paying modders. It dosen't feel right. IMHO you can't have it both ways. You cannot ask the community to make things for you for profit. It would create an uneasy dynamic between developer and modder. Paradox would still make money off free releases, I predict. Having improvements to older games would rejuvinate their sales and if they had to be compatible with the expansion packs to the various games, then people would buy them even more.
I think that if paradox were to release its source code, be it to a select few or to anyone who wants, their output must be downloadable for free. So, you run the risk of individuals getting the source code and compiling the games themselves or whatever but most people can't do that and it would probably be easier to get a torrent or something. I'm sorry for being cynical, but I just can't imagine this going as Paradox intends unless they loosen everything or tighten everything. Maybe Sweden is too progressive even for me. I hope it works, I really do, thats why I voted in favour, but I hope more than that that this doesn't distance me from paradox even more than EU3 did or as I suspect EU:R will.
Yeah, out of this reason it would be logical that the second contract I spoke of would only be signed by them, if the developer reaches a certain level of quality. That could mainly be done over the license price. No one would pay several thousands, tenthousands or even hundredthousands of dollars for a license, if he isn't quite sure about the quality of his development team and the game are high enough to refinance the license fees with the sellings.YodaMaster said:
moreover Paradox would not have to have their logo on the game, if they do not want and can demand on the developer to pass their quality control, if he wants to use a "powered by Paradox" logo for the game.
Kaiserludi said:
That post , as are the 3 before it , is only pure speculation as best; more certainly pure affabulation / wet dreams.
Johan stated cleary, at least for me who is a non english native, how Paradox will proceed , and what will be the various step.
How on God earth, can you speak about selling outside Gamers gate, or other stupidity? Please go the first ten post, read the 3 made by Johann. Just read them kiddos, will you! And stop to take your dreams (wet dream?) for a potential reality.
The goal is not to allow some few people able to line up some thousands of $ to get the source and make your own games; but the goal is increase the life of existing and already ageing (Aged) products. In layman language, as it seems no one of you is able to understand it, it mean we will get HOI 1, EU 1, source,, and up to use to improve the existing, fix the remaining and unfixable problems, and then Paradox will provide us with a selling plateform. The goal is to improve the reliability of Paragox games, their life, while removing the cost of maintening a huge for that; because at that point the things that can be fixed are quite specific, mostly it will be things that a part of the fans asked for years, the very same things the opposite parts of the fans beg Paradox to never implement.
by the way,can we only sell our games via gamerrsgate or can we also distribute them freely via gamersgate or paradox
ericB said:
I doubt EU 1 will be in those "ancient games", 'cause Johan has made a post in the Victoria forum that redirects here, which very probably means that Victoria will be one of those games. As EU2 is even more ancient than Victoria, I think it will be included too. IMO, the games will be HOI 1, Victoria, maybe CK and EU2.
From Johann, first post in this vote :
We're thinking about an releasing the sourcecode of a few older games to people with programming knowledge, and an interest in the games. You would get the opportunity to make your own expansion/boosterpack of our games, which you could then sell through gamersgate and earn money on your work. We would provide a forum for those involved, where you can communicate and get support.
We see this as an excellent opportunity to increase the life of the products and for our fans who improve the games to earn some extra money. Of course you would have to sign NDA's and a contract for it.
end of the quote
Anything else, is , was, and will be only speculations or misinformations.
We're thinking about an releasing the sourcecode of a few older games to people with programming knowledge, and an interest in the games. You would get the opportunity to make your own expansion/boosterpack of our games, which you could then sell through gamersgate and earn money on your work. We would provide a forum for those involved, where you can communicate and get support.
We see this as an excellent opportunity to increase the life of the products and for our fans who improve the games to earn some extra money. Of course you would have to sign NDA's and a contract for it.
end of the quote
Anything else, is , was, and will be only speculations or misinformations.
EU II = 2002
HOI 1 = 2003
CK = 2004
HOI II = 2006
For other games , as they are not distribuate in my place I do not know exactly when they were released.
One point, All those games use the same core engine/programming, so it could be (pure specualtion/wet dream of mine) older = older than EU III. Older can be games using the 'first generation' programming.
But is speculation, maybe affabulation ... let see
HOI 1 = 2003
CK = 2004
HOI II = 2006
For other games , as they are not distribuate in my place I do not know exactly when they were released.
One point, All those games use the same core engine/programming, so it could be (pure specualtion/wet dream of mine) older = older than EU III. Older can be games using the 'first generation' programming.
But is speculation, maybe affabulation ... let see
Jayavarman said:
Well I live in Thailand, so I suppose it take a bit of time to have them here lol.
in 2001, still Paradox was a small firm, not with the amount of people, amount of buyers. So distribution was an issue in S.E.A.
- Status