When I joined this forum these rules were non-existant or atleast not as strict, why the sudden change?
- 1
-
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.
Nothing sudden about it, the fact you think it is, is proof that this thread was needed. They have been the rules for at least the last 7 PDS releases.
Most are in the forum terms of service, or in the spirit of how the forum is designed(ie you need to have registered the game to see this forum).
But since they had never been formalized and posted in the modding forum, it led to problems in the past when User made mods broke one of them and we had to step in.
This is simply an attempt to be transparent and have everyone on the same playing field and the same page.
Most are in the forum terms of service, or in the spirit of how the forum is designed(ie you need to have registered the game to see this forum).
But since they had never been formalized and posted in the modding forum, it led to problems in the past when User made mods broke one of them and we had to step in.
This is simply an attempt to be transparent and have everyone on the same playing field and the same page.
.png){kind=avatar}
what about other games ? say, CK2 ?
on hosting place.
-is a personal server a valid place ?
-is a personal cloud service like dropbox a valid place ?
on hosting place.
-is a personal server a valid place ?
-is a personal cloud service like dropbox a valid place ?
About rule 7, since the CKII converter to EUIV is a CKII DLC how would one block someone who does not own the converter from using? I am asking because I am considering a mod that uses the GFX from the converter for the reformed pagans.
Not going to do anything if you want to host on DB or your own, as long as you are not charging for it or breaking any of the other rules, I think file share site is best, I know I would be hesitant to DL anything from someones DB or personal server, but that is me. File share site links tend to outlast personal links as well since if you move on you have little interest in maintaining it.
You would need to run by Kallocain exactly what you have in mind as it sounds like you want to use assets from CKII in your EUIV mod.
I will say the same thing as I did to the others in the event you are granted permission make sure you state that in the first post of any thread about your mod, so as to avoid Moderators giving you issue.
I have reading this rules on a french forum...
And i came here to talk about 4°.
I'm not supprised that somepeople already react to that point.
And I'm not here to argue more.
Just to say :
1. That's illegal rule.
2. I will ask for remove it...
3. If you don't see the point, maybe we should do petitions, or goes to law.
Nothing with "Intellectual property" can be change by a "rule" for making mod on a game.
Especialy for that game ! Where mod can be "historical research" or others things like that.
Edit : let's see an exemple.
If I make a great mod, very large and big. People can use my work to create commercial map outside EU4 things. or others things...
Paradox can use my work to create a DLC, an extension or EU5... And sell it, without any retribution for my work.
With this rules, a mod should ask "consent" for use others mods work... but if you use that work for anyothers use ? That's a deny of common law, and you can't do that !
And i came here to talk about 4°.
I'm not supprised that somepeople already react to that point.
And I'm not here to argue more.
Just to say :
1. That's illegal rule.
2. I will ask for remove it...
3. If you don't see the point, maybe we should do petitions, or goes to law.
Nothing with "Intellectual property" can be change by a "rule" for making mod on a game.
Especialy for that game ! Where mod can be "historical research" or others things like that.
Edit : let's see an exemple.
If I make a great mod, very large and big. People can use my work to create commercial map outside EU4 things. or others things...
Paradox can use my work to create a DLC, an extension or EU5... And sell it, without any retribution for my work.
With this rules, a mod should ask "consent" for use others mods work... but if you use that work for anyothers use ? That's a deny of common law, and you can't do that !
Last edited:
- 1
I have already stated our position, and that I will not engage in a legal debate, and that the rule stands.
Rules may not change the law in your nation, but they do control what happens on our Chanels.
I'd be interested to know why you've never done this for CK2 mods, a policy which always seems to have conflicted with rule 1.
Also with regards to rule 7 I'm not sure I understand why any use of DLC must make it a requirement to play a mod. Take the AGoT mod for example, it uses much DLC content such as portrait packs, Old Gods, and soon the Republic. You have to buy the DLC to use it in the mod, but it doesnt stop you using the base mod without it. Would this be in contravention of rule 7 if done in EU4?
Not sure I understand what you mean with the first part about not doing it with CK2, Just realized you may be confusing external forum and Internal forum(a sub-forum of our user mod forum), you cannot have the first, but can apply for the second.
If the Mod has additional content which uses stuff from a DLC that you can only access if you have that DLC, then that is exactly what the rule says. IE that is the only way it is acceptable to use the DLC content.
Ah ok that makes sense, thanks for the clarification.
I was under the impression that applying for a sub-forum for a CK2 mod was not possible, is it possible?
Same rules that apply here apply there.
When CK2 was first launched we had severe restrictions on creating new forums, due to software issues, with the first phase of HAL (Our new custom access shell) having been implemented a few months ago, I have eased that restriction somewhat and when phase 2 has been implemented we should be completely back to normal.
How does applying for a sub-forum work exactly? Should I just pop off a message to you for example?
"Once your Mod has grown to the point where you feel you need more than one thread to discuss it, you can ask a Moderator that your main thread be stuck to the top of the forum and can use the first post of that thread to act as an index to the other related threads of your Mod.
Once you feel You have too many threads and posts to manage in that way, you can ask a Moderator to sponsor your mod and apply to an Administrator for your own sub forum."
Just to clear it up in my mind, do you mind if I use an example from CKII? Not accusing them of breaking any rules of course, the same rules probably don't apply, but just as a case study to see if the same could happen for an EUIV mod?
So, the Elder Kings mod has a thread in the CKII mods forum here. If I want to download the mod installer (which is clearly the one they want you to download) it directs me to this ModDB page. If you look at the main Elder Kings page on ModDB it is clearly updated by the mod's creators; it has screenshots, news, ratings, comments etc...: it's not just a file sharing site. Having this page is clearly a benefit for the mod, it gets a lot more coverage and people viewing it; it was featured in PC Gamer for example. That article clearly links to the ModDB page and not the Paradox forums. In fact it also links to the Elder Kings' own mod forums, which I didn't even know existed until I went onto it just now.
So if I made a mod for EUIV and did exactly the same things then my mod would be in breach of a couple of these rules (even aside from the obvious Elder Scrolls copyright stuff), at my count Rule 1 (external forum), Rule 2 (if ModDB doesn't just count as a file-sharing website but a website in its own right) and Rule 10 (should be exclusive to this forum/Steam). Again, I must stress I'm not trying to accuse the Elder Scrolls team of anything, I have no idea about the Crusader Kings modding rules. It's just an example.
The problem is that the Elder Kings mod, and I think the Games of Thrones one that I recall being featured on other sites (and also has a ModDB page), are I think big draws for the game of Crusader Kings. These mods are incredibly popular, you can see on the ModDB pages the Elder Kings mod has had nearly 220,000 visits and the Game of Thrones nearly 770,000. I obviously don't have access to Paradox's statistics, but I would be very surprised if these two mods weren't the deciding factors for more than hundreds of people to buy Crusader Kings (and especially its DLC) just to play them. Because they saw them on ModDB, because they read about them on gaming news sites like PCGamer. I understand completely why these rules are what they are, you want to have everything restricted behind the key-wall to stop pirates using the mods, but I feel if you enforce them strictly then all the EUIV mods will just be hidden here and could never reach the same levels of popularity as those CKII ones.
So, the Elder Kings mod has a thread in the CKII mods forum here. If I want to download the mod installer (which is clearly the one they want you to download) it directs me to this ModDB page. If you look at the main Elder Kings page on ModDB it is clearly updated by the mod's creators; it has screenshots, news, ratings, comments etc...: it's not just a file sharing site. Having this page is clearly a benefit for the mod, it gets a lot more coverage and people viewing it; it was featured in PC Gamer for example. That article clearly links to the ModDB page and not the Paradox forums. In fact it also links to the Elder Kings' own mod forums, which I didn't even know existed until I went onto it just now.
So if I made a mod for EUIV and did exactly the same things then my mod would be in breach of a couple of these rules (even aside from the obvious Elder Scrolls copyright stuff), at my count Rule 1 (external forum), Rule 2 (if ModDB doesn't just count as a file-sharing website but a website in its own right) and Rule 10 (should be exclusive to this forum/Steam). Again, I must stress I'm not trying to accuse the Elder Scrolls team of anything, I have no idea about the Crusader Kings modding rules. It's just an example.
The problem is that the Elder Kings mod, and I think the Games of Thrones one that I recall being featured on other sites (and also has a ModDB page), are I think big draws for the game of Crusader Kings. These mods are incredibly popular, you can see on the ModDB pages the Elder Kings mod has had nearly 220,000 visits and the Game of Thrones nearly 770,000. I obviously don't have access to Paradox's statistics, but I would be very surprised if these two mods weren't the deciding factors for more than hundreds of people to buy Crusader Kings (and especially its DLC) just to play them. Because they saw them on ModDB, because they read about them on gaming news sites like PCGamer. I understand completely why these rules are what they are, you want to have everything restricted behind the key-wall to stop pirates using the mods, but I feel if you enforce them strictly then all the EUIV mods will just be hidden here and could never reach the same levels of popularity as those CKII ones.
- 1
To be clear I checked and no one will admit to running that account, so it is not ours, not official ...
I would be careful about believing what these third party sites say, they can create an account named God and post stuff in it, does not mean God is really talking to you.
No comment on on the rest of my post? On how things like ModDB, external hosting and websites were clearly of a huge benefit to the CKII modding scene, so banning them for EUIV seems incredibly ill-conceived? Is it a Steam requirement, or is it just a new policy that there might be a chance to revert?
On a totally different tangent, how binding are these rules being written on this forum? What I mean to say is, someone could quite legitimately buy the game, create a mod for it, distribute it, create their own forums for it and host it on ModDB all without reading these rules. If they're not in the Terms and Conditions they never signed up to them, and visiting this forum is completely optional. They could even host it on Steam Workshop too to get that publicity. Why should they get the benefit of external sites, potential publicity in magazines like PCGamer and in general much more freedom when mods posted on the official site do not?
- 1
These rules are for Mods that want any mention on this site. If you choose not to participate here at all, we are not going to be petty and remove your mod from steam workshop as well, as long as it does not violate our other rules. Also I will mention that most of the press that write about these types of games will be a member here, even if they decide not to participate. We also have no issue if someone wants to write an article extolling the virtues of your mod.
Would it be allowable to send a copy of the mod to a member of the press before it is released to the general public?