Private Server Monetisation Policy

Currently Viewing (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Karling

Recruit
WBNWVCWF&S
Best answers
0
Doktor von Pig said:
Callum_TaleWorlds said:
Server Owners

You are not allowed to:
• Restrict access to gameplay features
• Sell any form of in-game content, cosmetic or otherwise (items, perks, skins etc.) via payment or donation rewards
oh boy

OWO whats this!?!?!

five euro for a boarlet what a ripoff when you can get the full boar at the same price

 

Karling

Recruit
WBNWVCWF&S
Best answers
0
ah what a shame I am glad that this game won't be plagued by freeloaders trying to gain capital off of taleworld's blood, sweat, and tears.  :party:
 

Kingsman

Regular
Best answers
0
While I see this as a shot in the foot to taleworlds as I can only see it stunting server growth and not increasing it I am happy as the owner of "Calradia Roleplay" to adhere to these new regulations.

 

Doktor von Pig

Recruit
WBWF&SNWVC
Best answers
0
Alloo said:
A good step in the right direction, thank you.

EDIT:  I am happy as the partial owner of "Mount and Blade: Roleplay" to adhere to these new regulations.
Good to hear you guys already removed the "Tomato soup" item you'd reward donators with.
 

domipoppe

Squire
WBNWWF&SVC
Best answers
0
The server-side modification scripts we rent basically cover the costs we need as in providing the service to customers worldwide.
We have several kinds of scripts like a non-apache version and an apache version. Apache scripts cost us resources like traffic and disc space.
Non-Apache scripts cost us traffic as well for checking their validity and providing a download over our network. Also, the support we provide is included in that rate.
Not to forget our highly developed admin panel which costs traffic, resources and time to extend/protect. Also, that rent-method opens us possibilities to constantly extend the scripts for players and customers.

Why is that not allowed anymore? Or did I misunderstood? Owners can charge to access the servers but scripters can't sell/rent their customizations which provide the server owners with tons of features? I mean several hosters around the world offer custom panels, scripts etc. with games and can charge for it.

Or does it only focus the "script only" product as in PWSS for example? But I can increase the cost of the server if some guy uses PWSS cause it uses more resources?
 

Golden Kingdom

Recruit
Best answers
0
Your policy is pretty fair, however I think you will run into some issues verifying creator IDs. You probably should give a two week to one month grace period to new servers who claim to have gained permission to use assets on a third party forum, to demonstrate that in an approved way.

You really need to explain the process by which permissions to use something on a server can be removed. Particularly to protect against revenge revocation.

US law, allows third parties to charge for in game modifications and has done so for a long time. I don't personally believe that its right to charge for most things, but people may make a mod and charge to play it multiplayer or some variation thereof. This seems to violate your terms. I don't know if the courts would allow your terms to supersede the law. Also, these cases have made it to the US appeals courts with the copywrite holders of both the original and derivative works winning; which is likely to push any attempt to enforce it to the US Supreme Court.

Some clarification on these points would be appreciated. But otherwise you have what seems to be a very fair policy.
 

TommyBristol

Regular
WBNWVC
Best answers
0
It's surprising how ill informed people in this topic are about the time, effort and money that private server owners, developers and server hosts put into running servers...


You're praising TW for trying to stop people "gaining capital off of taleworld's blood, sweat, and tears", yet evidently you don't understand what blood, sweat and tears goes into developing the servers / mods too. To an extent, it's the work of the people mentioned above that keep M&B alive and fresh, which does in turn bring some new customers to TW. Furthermore, in some cases it has been individuals in the community that have come to resolve major (potentially game breaking) issues that TW didn't seem to care about, for example the chat sanitation.


Frankly, this policy that is described by forum moderators as relatively "liberal" compared to what TW originally suggested makes me fear for the future survival / stability of certain aspects of the community. I fully support their being a policy and I fully support a policy trying to prevent pay to win, however, I do not support one that goes to such extremes that potentially will make server owners have to pay for the server themselves in addition to the work that goes into managing it. I fully agree with Kingsman that this is going to be a "shot in the foot" for TW.
 

Duh

Duke
M&BWB
Best answers
0
Golden Kingdom said:
Your policy is pretty fair, however I think you will run into some issues verifying creator IDs. You probably should give a two week to one month grace period to new servers who claim to have gained permission to use assets on a third party forum, to demonstrate that in an approved way.

You really need to explain the process by which permissions to use something on a server can be removed. Particularly to protect against revenge revocation.
For rough reference you can have a look at this guide over here: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,374313.0.html

It is far from certain that TW will adopt it - as is - for their own policing, but it's better than nothing :razz:

Golden Kingdom said:
US law, allows third parties to charge for in game modifications and has done so for a long time. I don't personally believe that its right to charge for most things, but people may make a mod and charge to play it multiplayer or some variation thereof. This seems to violate your terms. I don't know if the courts would allow your terms to supersede the law. Also, these cases have made it to the US appeals courts with the copywrite holders of both the original and derivative works winning; which is likely to push any attempt to enforce it to the US Supreme Court.
This only becomes a problem if the law was to also grant them a right to be listed on the game's master server. TW isn't taking down their servers. They are simply not listing them in their own services.
 
Best answers
0
Duh said:
Golden Kingdom said:
US law, allows third parties to charge for in game modifications and has done so for a long time. I don't personally believe that its right to charge for most things, but people may make a mod and charge to play it multiplayer or some variation thereof. This seems to violate your terms. I don't know if the courts would allow your terms to supersede the law. Also, these cases have made it to the US appeals courts with the copywrite holders of both the original and derivative works winning; which is likely to push any attempt to enforce it to the US Supreme Court.
This only becomes a problem if the law was to also grant them a right to be listed on the game's master server. TW isn't taking down their servers. They are simply not listing them in their own services.
In that case I think it should be possible for players to join directly by IP address like with many other games such as Minecraft. By unlisting them from the master list, you are denying them complete access.
 

Duh

Duke
M&BWB
Best answers
0
Captain Conner said:
Duh said:
Golden Kingdom said:
US law, allows third parties to charge for in game modifications and has done so for a long time. I don't personally believe that its right to charge for most things, but people may make a mod and charge to play it multiplayer or some variation thereof. This seems to violate your terms. I don't know if the courts would allow your terms to supersede the law. Also, these cases have made it to the US appeals courts with the copywrite holders of both the original and derivative works winning; which is likely to push any attempt to enforce it to the US Supreme Court.
This only becomes a problem if the law was to also grant them a right to be listed on the game's master server. TW isn't taking down their servers. They are simply not listing them in their own services.
In that case I think it should be possible for players to join directly by IP address like with many other games such as Minecraft. By unlisting them from the master list, you are denying them complete access.
This too would have to be specified as a "right" by law before it is relevant - I would think. But given the lack of ToS (and lack of [my] legal knowledge) I have no idea where a court case would go.
 

domipoppe

Squire
WBNWWF&SVC
Best answers
0
I need some exact clarification and yes/no to this please.

Custom Work
Can I still charge people to custom script for them?

Server costs
Scripts with backends which require SQL, PHP, Disk Space, Apache etc. cost resources like Traffic, RAM, CPU and disk space. Can I increase the price if someone uses such scripts cause it personally costs me more? If not: I really don't get it. Why not adjust the price for more costs?.

Make a difference between "equal"
I need to offer custom scripts as in a finalized product to improve my selling rate of servers for free? It says it's equal, but where is it. A Napoleonic Wars server is not a Persistent World server. A Native server is not an NW server. Native requires less resources than NW. All NW servers or PW servers have the same amount of custom scripts to choose between (at us).  But they are not equal. So I can make PW (Native) and PW (Custom) or NW (Native) and NW (Custom) with different prices cause they cost me differently. My custom PW version requires more resources so it should be more expensive than normal PW. Everyone can get this but they need to pay a bit more cause it's just more expensive for me.

Custom Scripts as a paid addon
Should be allowed because those custom scripts were made in hours and are constantly extended and bug-fixed. They bring a custom panel with it which uses resources a lot. Also, the custom scripts increase the CPU Usage by ~10% of Warband. I also want to say those add-ons require me much time to develop and in the end to support. In the end: higher costs for me so why I can't charge for a custom made addon?

Set-Up Costs
Can I charge set-up fees to set-up my custom scripts with the panel? In fact, they take me time to set-up which somehow needs to be paid. Why invest time if no profit (same as game development: why should I make a game with no outcome?).

Dead-Line
The latest date is weird equal to my PWSS rent method. So I guess I have to let the PWSS licenses leak till paid day 0. This might go a bit over your dead-line. What to do?

Modules
Do I have to ask all module creators to host their module? Even tho it will be hard cause users can install mods on their own with FTP etc.

Custom work as a one-time addon fee
Can I offer for example PW scripts like my PWSS which deliver scripts and panel as an addon which you pay once? Like you pay some amount of money once, to receive the add-on for an unlimited time to your service. This one-time fee will cover statistic average costs and set-up costs.
 

Kingsman

Regular
Best answers
0
Personally I don't see why this happened it worked just fine before but if it needs to be done i'd suggest easing up a bit, perhaps allowing cosmetic items or some minor incentives that don't give players advantages as all this can do is help improve a server which brings more people and hence more sales for TW and explaining this policy in a bit more detail.

Also my entire server depends on me hiring coders to make me new code and sort bugs and technical issues am I still allowed to do this if people aren't allowed to "Sell Code"
 

VVyrd

Knight
WBWF&SM&B
Best answers
0
Kingsman said:
Personally I don't see why this happened it worked just fine before but if it needs to be done i'd suggest easing up a bit, perhaps allowing cosmetic items or some minor incentives that don't give players advantages as all this can do is help improve a server which brings more people and hence more sales for TW and explaining this policy in a bit more detail.

Also my entire server depends on me hiring coders to make me new code and sort bugs and technical issues am I still allowed to do this if people aren't allowed to "Sell Code"
lmfao




I just hope this carries on to Bannerlord. I'll buy every of my close friends a copy, season pass included, just out of this.
 

Dejan

Community Manager
WBNWVCM&B
Best answers
0
Hello,

First of all, I wish to thank you for posting the new policy and committing yourself to enforcing it in all the necessary ways. We've waited for this to happen for quite a while so that we can form our own donation scheme (PW Phoenix). As we've changed our own donation scheme a few months back we have no issues with the current policy.

We don't entirely agree with it though. I've posted my original points here: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,373916.msg8920795.html#msg8920795

Why am I as a server owner allowed to charge people to access my server but I am not allowed to charge people for example to buy a straw hat in-game?

We've had this discussion on the TW modding discord. The first reply was "if you charge everyone its fine if you charge only select people, its discrimination" but that's not the case. If I charge somebody for in-game items I am charging everyone for in-game items, not only the select few.

But anyways let's just assume that "No pay to win" is covered by that which I agree with. People should not be able to buy in-game items. It just seems hilarious to me that I can completely deny somebody access to the server if he doesn't pay and in that way deny him the experience that was guaranteed to him when he bought the game but I can't sell a straw hat in-game.

Why are cosmetics forbidden?
I can list you a dozen games where cosmetics are "a thing". Arguably, they are provided by the company that made the game in the first place but that doesn't influence this case in a big way. Cosmetics in no way influence the gameplay. Server owners as explained in my original post need to provide incentives for donations. I believe that cosmetics should be a part of that. There's no "pay to win" if this was allowed. If somebody is willing to give a certain amount of money for a nice looking straw hat and in that way support the server then he should be allowed to do so. How this would be controlled and enforced was already explained in my original post.

I would kindly ask you to explain the points in the new policy furthermore though:
•  Offer out-of-game rewards - I presume this means forum tags, hall of fame, etc. What about things that refer to gameplay? For example:
[list type=decimal]
[*]Access to player statistics (KDA, weapons,...)
[*]Access to forum mini-games that use in-game money
[/list]

Since in-game custom titles are allowed, would something like in-game global messages triggered by the server in exchange for a donation be allowed or not?

William
 

Alloo

Sergeant
Best answers
0
A Welcomed change to the unregulated somalian waters that MB multiplayer has become.
 

Vissy

Baron
WBNW
Best answers
0
Kingsman said:
While I see this as a shot in the foot to taleworlds as I can only see it stunting server growth and not increasing it I am happy as the owner of "Calradia Roleplay" to adhere to these new regulations.

More like going to try and figure out a way to maintain monetization while still barely sticking to the rules.  :lol: