I do hope, that this helps with some of the issues, and like makes it a friendlier place, like funcom having to step in like this to add this in, I’m guessing this isn’t just because of Tot Custom but other issues within the past couple of years. The Pippigate sitaution and other issues that have come up.
So like at the end of the day, like, these guide lines I think will at least help with things. I certainly hope they will, I do think they need to be more clarified with examples and exceptions though.
I don’t really agree with this. Conan Exiles is Funcom’s property and they get to absolutely decide how its used by 3rd Parties.
My biggest beef is how we’re supposed to interact with others. The EULA’s that govern the devkit and the steam workshop pretty much indicate we’re not to use our mods to attack people, and I’m fine with that.
But this new document indicates that we have to be nice outside the devkit. What I say to a player outside the devkit and outside the game is my business. If I want to tell a player to go pound sand because well whatever reason on a discord server I run, then that’s between them, myself, and discord.
Which I can say I’m going to continue with what I am doing in that regard. I’m technically in violation of about 9 points out of 10 on this document lol. I don’t really see this as something they intend to enforce. I have a lot of respect for Ignasi, but he kinda wasted his time here truth be told.
People regularly being banned with no idea why, and can’t get any straight answers when asked. If mods are handled in the same way as official servers, then modders have a dark future ahead.
I don’t doubt that. I’m not saying the community managers never do anything. Note that I said “the way they used to”. I remember the times when they were much more engaged with the player community. Those were the times when the playerbase actually had a community rather than just being a bunch of people yelling at Funcom and at each other all the time.
Pretty much, yes. I expect the same for the mods, but on a different scale.
The future is probably not that dark.
My prediction is that you can expect the same handling, but much fewer incidents. There are many official servers and many players on them and the vast majority of those players don’t actually give a shіt about rules. Also, players have an incentive to report other players.
The modding scene is different, I think. Fewer people, to start with. I also expect there will be fewer modders reporting other modders.
You did note that I stated I was speaking broadly, right?
In any case, no, they don’t. Not generally anyway. If I buy a car, it’s not the manufacturers concern how I use it. If I want to take the doors off or replace the wheels with tank tracks or drive it into a trash compacter, that’s all on me. They’ve got nothing to do with it.
And yes, I’m aware that there’s still people out there who will try to hold the manufacturer responsible regardless. They are wrong to do so.
But wait, since you are using the devkit then you are associated with the company, therefore it is their business how you behave outside of the devkit and they absolutely get to decide what you can say or do.
See how that works?
So where do you want to draw the line of responsibility?
“This new document” has the same weight as a bag of popcorn on the moon. Unlike EULA, it’s not legally binding in any way. Even EULA’s have limits, e.g. they can’t take away a freedom guaranteed by a law, but this? This is a “code of conduct” and should be treated as such.
In context of Conan Exiles, as we’ve learned from a previous example, a “code of conduct” is little more than a CYA measure for Funcom.
So what are some possible consequences of telling your user to pound sand on a Discord server you run? The user might get pissy and send an e-mail to the address provided in this document. Then Funcom might decide to do something about it. And then your mod might get pulled from Steam workshop, in which case you might have to distribute it via an alternate route, because users can use non-Steam mods.
That’s a lot of “ifs” and “mights” and “coulds”.
Of course not. Does anyone here honestly believe they published something that will heap more work onto their plates? That makes no sense at all.
Don’t shoot the messenger. It’s his job to communicate this stuff
I’m going to assume ignorance since by your own admission you are not in a certain discord (according to a comment you made in another thread). But replace every Might in the quoted statement with Did.
And the consequences was that someone had their mod suspended off the workshop. They had to contact Valve, who told them to contact Funcom, who had them send an email, who scheduled a voice call, which then got the whole thing sent to a board to review.
Now that was reviewed in favor of said modder and he was ruled to have the suspension lifted. But I can only imagine the stress, headache, and work that went into that, that I imagine most modders here wouldn’t want to go through.
Creating a hostile environment in one’s discord, and ignoring other modders are some of the things that the mod author in question was accused of by others in our community, which led to the actions taken by Funcom. And its because of the review by said board is what led to the creation of this Code of Conduct. As I said, it was a waste of time because they could simply stat out of the community drama that happens outside these forums.
Trust me, I’m sure the one who made the message already knows my opinion. And to be fair to him, he handled the mod ban situation as well as I figured he would.
But this whole thing reeks of…
Seen that way too many times, and probably won’t be the last.
yeah i understand the caveat of “the way they used to” being used. i wasn’t around back then so i don’t have the frame of reference that you have. i was just making the point that, in this instance, funcom staff and modders were in contact and discussing this issue within minutes of it being posted. wasn’t trying to disprove your point or intentionally take it out of context.
Is it Funcom’s fault if I were to somehow create a mod that destroys the Windows system files on my computer? I used the devkit to do it, so it must be their fault, right? And thus they are responsible for any repair or replacement costs?
Or lets go with something less destructive. It’s Funcom’s responsibility if I create a mod that gives everyone a swastika tattoo on their forehead. By your standard, the simple act of using the devkit to do it means Funcom is liable for any offense that may cause.
I would rather put the onus on the person than the association. Just the fact that someone used the devkit is not enough. If the file is hosted on a platform Funcom has some control over, then Funcom would have some degree of responsibility to curate that content. But only within the context of what’s hosted on that platform. They should not be held responsible for someone making bad content and hosting it on some obscure website Funcom has no control over just because that person used the devkit to do it.
Nonetheless, I do recognize that people do try to hold companies responsible anyway, which is why I believe there’s a line in most EULAs somewhere that specifically states that the company is not responsible for misuse of their product. It’s something that should go without saying, but you know…lawyers.
Anyway, as far as this code of conduct is concerned, I’m pretty much in agreement with @CodeMage on it. At the end of the day, it’s just a flimsy bit of digital paper they can use to hide their butt crack when someone decides to make a fuss about a mod or mod author.
Before this turns into some pointless debate thread, I urge the people who do not have at least a published mod or the slightest intention to even make one to behave… or… go find their bicycle
Thanks!
As far as the rules above go, we had a constructive discussion with FCStorm and they’re open to take on some feedback, which may or may not result in the reviewing of how this code of conduct has been worded to make it seem less like a “blank cheque” or excuse Funcom can randomly use against modders… and to also safeguard modders from users trying to weaponize this ruleset.
This is a strawman. I’ve said nothing about Funcom’s responsibility or liabilities.
This is what I said:
Which is why the line I mentioned is drawn at the devkit. They have complete control (physical as in they can limit what I can do) and intellectual (what I can use it for). Using your car analogy from earlier, yes I can load up the Unreal Engine 4.15 and make a pak file to do whatever I wish and host it wherever (within the limits of what Epic allows). But using the devkit is akin to using the manufacturers factory and tools to mod my car. They get to decide how the facilities and tools are used.
But if I’m a local mechanic with my own facilities and own tools, I can treat my clients in any manner I wish. The car manufacturers don’t get a say on that.
When using the devkit, we’re not using our own tools and properties.
Besides I think most people are in agreement that trying to police activities outside is futile. And playing nice with our subscribers is a ridiculous rule. The first advice of any new modder after they get a functioning mod controller is to disable steam comments. I think even Funcom devs have even (unofficially) suggested this. Which is in violation of:
You’re right about my general level of ignorance when it comes to the modding community, but I did gather all of that from following all this drama and from certain private conversations with other people.
I know that what I outlined happened once and led to this CoC document. What I was trying to say is that I believe that:
You need the circumstances to align properly for that to ever be repeated.
It’s not in Funcom’s interest to keep repeating this, because it’s additional work and waste of resources for them.
If it ends up repeating, this CoC serves to cover their assets and they can point the torches-and-pitchfork crowd to it.
I hope that made my meaning less jumbled
Sorry, I guess I’m slightly bitter
If it sounded like I was jumping down your throat, I apologize.
Too late
Honest question: does it really matter? Ask @Kikigirl if her main problem with the Official Server ToC is the wording of it and how that wording seems to people? Or is it how it’s enforced and how the enforcement is handled?
People like me who are criticizing Funcom for, well, not giving enough fecal matter, aren’t complaining about their words. We’re complaining about their actions and about the outcomes of their actions.
I can sit here and pick apart every word, and while I do have issues with the delivery of that communication, the real problem is how they enforce. I’m not going to be diplomatic here, it is atrocious.
I have read the new Modding Code of Conduct. I am not a modder, probably will never be one and don’t know the intricacies of the community so I can’t speak on it. With me knowing next to nothing with all this, I can still see why you’re all debating it
Can’t blame me for trying just noticed the new activity hehe.
That remains to be seen. I will hold off on any predictions and keep an open mind. Some need multiple shots to get it right not one or two… but maybe even ten… And if I’m always blinded by the past, I might not notice the changes in the present…
Actually, you did. When you say Funcom has the authority to dictate how a tool is used, that implies they have the responsibility for that use as well. Someone uses a tool to do something bad and the tool maker doesn’t step in to stop them, the tool maker by default endorses and supports whatever that bad thing was. That’s pretty much the foundation that you’re building your argument on.
Note that I’m not saying there isn’t precedent for such attribution of responsibility. I’m just saying such attribution is morally wrong.
That’s why I said this modder’s code of conduct has a sour taste to it. Other than a few details in the wording and questionable enforcement, it’s fine in a community context where Funcom has, for lack of a better term, jurisdictional control. On the broader stage it’s just meaningless posturing.
Most implementations of such conduct goes right out the window. A smooth transition should be welcomed. The rest is just letting the past go… (to a point) under the eyes of lexical authority.
