We have been dancing with issue since Custom Content creators have appeared. Even back in the early days the "Entitled" crowd had issues with Custom Content getting reimbursed for the hard work. These folks are making your better so be thankful or wait years for EA to do half the job.
Entitled?? You know who is acting entitled...content creators who think they deserve to be paid for doing a job they learned from a free tutorial and use free programs to alter a game's assets that they don't own. That's entitlement.
It wouldn't be problem if they released their works on a timely manner, but a lot of them simply aren't. The greed has gotten out of hand, I've seen people charging the same amount for sims 2 content. Some of the teirs are highly insane, the over saturation of patreon in sims community has gotten worse..everyone who immediately learns blender jumps to patreon for hand outs. Some of them are even doxxing people and making threats to others if they share/reupload their works else were or with other simmers, because it's on sites like adfly that is highly unsafe cause of viruses. I'm almost certain in EA's Eula it's stated that no one needs permission or compensation to use someone else's UGC. Most people do leave credit though. Another thing most of these cc creators absolutely are using free programs or programs that they have cracked in order to create this...it's widely known that they do cause some of programs they use to make items like hair, is not free. Cinema4d and maya aren't cheap but they find ways to get these programs for free.
[img][/img]
Lol i honestly side eye the buyers of this stuff more than the creators. Who out here paying 100 dollars for sims clothes and items when the internet is full of free stuff???!!!!!!! I literally have thousands of cc for free. And if there wasn't free stuff I still would not be tossing out hundreds for this stuff🤣🤣🤣
Unless you are well off with money to burn and not a care in the world it's definitely very strange on the buyers part. It doesn't really seem like a rip off if people are willing to pay that. ... hopefully it's not the same people crying that a kit is too expensive for 5 dollars 😂😂
yeah it's crazy, i can't imagine paying that at all..I Personally do see it as a rip off/scam people if people are willing to pay..then hey.
We have been dancing with issue since Custom Content creators have appeared. Even back in the early days the "Entitled" crowd had issues with Custom Content getting reimbursed for the hard work. These folks are making your better so be thankful or wait years for EA to do half the job.
Entitled?? You know who is acting entitled...content creators who think they deserve to be paid for doing a job they learned from a free tutorial and use free programs to alter a game's assets that they don't own. That's entitlement.
It wouldn't be problem if they released their works on a timely manner, but a lot of them simply aren't. The greed has gotten out of hand, I've seen people charging the same amount for sims 2 content. Some of the teirs are highly insane, the over saturation of patreon in sims community has gotten worse..everyone who immediately learns blender jumps to patreon for hand outs. Some of them are even doxxing people and making threats to others if they share/reupload their works else were or with other simmers, because it's on sites like adfly that is highly unsafe cause of viruses. I'm almost certain in EA's Eula it's stated that no one needs permission or compensation to use someone else's UGC. Most people do leave credit though. Another thing most of these cc creators absolutely are using free programs or programs that they have cracked in order to create this...it's widely known that they do cause some of programs they use to make items like hair, is not free. Cinema4d and maya aren't cheap but they find ways to get these programs for free.
[img][/img]
Lol i honestly side eye the buyers of this stuff more than the creators. Who out here paying 100 dollars for sims clothes and items when the internet is full of free stuff???!!!!!!! I literally have thousands of cc for free. And if there wasn't free stuff I still would not be tossing out hundreds for this stuff🤣🤣🤣
Unless you are well off with money to burn and not a care in the world it's definitely very strange on the buyers part. It doesn't really seem like a rip off if people are willing to pay that. ... hopefully it's not the same people crying that a kit is too expensive for 5 dollars 😂😂
The problem is that it's usually not people who are well off that buy stuff like this. It's usually people who got a little extra money and are being frivolous in the moment.
And they prey upon people that aren't tech savvy. It's like...how awesome of someone to put together a mods folder you just drop in and don't have to scour the internet and figure out where things go. In this case, it's all there for you. But they don't realize that with each pack, you will need to update everything. Now they're out $100 for useless stuff or a broken game.
What happens if the CC/Mods in the Mods folder they've ripped people off for sold break the game in a future patch and need updating?
Will they be checking the 30GB CC works after each patch? Will they be updating other people's content if the original creator, who provided it for free, doesn't update it?
I only really use food CC (and only started a month or so ago), so I don't have much experience in that particular area, but there's a certain modder who doesn't really release their mods to the public. Said modder has had their new mod behind a paywall since December 2019. The mods they HAVE release are, apparently, ridden with bugs and haven't been updated in months.
I have no issue with modders keeping their work behind a paywall for a few weeks. When it becomes months or even years, then it's arguably an issue.
Why shouldn't people monetize their content? I don't ask an artist to commission a drawing of my favorite character from a movie/game/book and then demand it to be free because the character isn't "theirs". The original creator doesn't have the means to create the content I want, so I'll pay for it out of pocket.
Unless EA/Maxis is going to start giving me the fantasy/historical/alpha content I want and deserve, I will continue to have no problems with paying an artist to make my dreams come true. lol
Like SJM? Like Kpop? Like Greek Mythology?
☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Follow me on the gallery ☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Origin ID: Missmagoo2
Ｏ(≧▽≦)Ｏ
(I work with CC so make sure you check that box to see my "hidden" content!)
I don't understand why people bother with the content that is locked behind paywalls - just download the content that is free or early access - it's usually of better quality and is updated in a more timely manner as opposed to the paywall content. It absolutely boggles the mind that people think it's okay to hide content behind a perpetual paywall - it's not their game and it's super greedy and scammy.
There's a HUGE difference between closed paywall and early access - if the content you make is of great quality and becomes popular, then a 2 week early access period is MORE than enough to get some well deserved coin for the work. I can see that for certain creators that a smaller time period of early access might be justified, but truth be told I respect creators a lot more if they don't have a mandatory pay system on their patreon - I'll support them if I use their content a lot and I think the quality is high enough. That's all there is to it.
Especially for modders that make big mods that give players a lot of gameplay expansion and fixes, the patreon early access serves as a kind of quality testing and support for the mod aswell, so paying for that is definitely justfied - as long as it's early access that is.
It's very rare that any mod or content that is locked behind a paywall is high quality enough to be worth it, because the creator doesn't have an incentive to keep improving and fixing things. And even if they start out with quality, it's just not worth the extra work for them once they get those patrons rolling in. The rule of early access only does not only protect EA but the modding community as a whole and ofcourse the simmers so they don't get scammed.
Post edited by Aine on
Allons-y!
---> Afterlife Game Pack Idea - improved ghosts, cemeteries and funerals, psychics, new skills, new career and more! <---
Why shouldn't people monetize their content? I don't ask an artist to commission a drawing of my favorite character from a movie/game/book and then demand it to be free because the character isn't "theirs". The original creator doesn't have the means to create the content I want, so I'll pay for it out of pocket.
Unless EA/Maxis is going to start giving me the fantasy/historical/alpha content I want and deserve, I will continue to have no problems with paying an artist to make my dreams come true. lol
Because EA is the artist for the game so they have the legal rights to it. It is like trying to copy an artists work and sell the work at an artist's studio and call it your own. There are copyright laws in the US to protect EA's work. Honestly think artists can make more money making emotes on Twitch than making Sims content.
“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
Why shouldn't people monetize their content? I don't ask an artist to commission a drawing of my favorite character from a movie/game/book and then demand it to be free because the character isn't "theirs". The original creator doesn't have the means to create the content I want, so I'll pay for it out of pocket.
Unless EA/Maxis is going to start giving me the fantasy/historical/alpha content I want and deserve, I will continue to have no problems with paying an artist to make my dreams come true. lol
Because EA is the artist for the game so they have the legal rights to it. It is like trying to copy an artists work and sell the work at an artist's studio and call it your own. There are copyright laws in the US to protect EA's work. Honestly think artists can make more money making emotes on Twitch than making Sims content.
Yes, EA has the artistic rights to their own meshes and the items already in-game. However, I'm talking about the stuff not in-game. I'm not a Maxis-match CC user, so maybe alpha seems a bit different in my mind, but the only thing similar in alpha is the in-game sizing. The CC creators make their own meshes, use their own blending, learn the techniques on their own, etc. I'd say that the content can be considered "fair use".
Now, mods that use Maxis meshes, change the coding of the game, etc can be considered copyrighted by EA and should not be monetized.
Like SJM? Like Kpop? Like Greek Mythology?
☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Follow me on the gallery ☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Origin ID: Missmagoo2
Ｏ(≧▽≦)Ｏ
(I work with CC so make sure you check that box to see my "hidden" content!)
Why shouldn't people monetize their content? I don't ask an artist to commission a drawing of my favorite character from a movie/game/book and then demand it to be free because the character isn't "theirs". The original creator doesn't have the means to create the content I want, so I'll pay for it out of pocket.
Unless EA/Maxis is going to start giving me the fantasy/historical/alpha content I want and deserve, I will continue to have no problems with paying an artist to make my dreams come true. lol
Because EA is the artist for the game so they have the legal rights to it. It is like trying to copy an artists work and sell the work at an artist's studio and call it your own. There are copyright laws in the US to protect EA's work. Honestly think artists can make more money making emotes on Twitch than making Sims content.
Yes, EA has the artistic rights to their own meshes and the items already in-game. However, I'm talking about the stuff not in-game. I'm not a Maxis-match CC user, so maybe alpha seems a bit different in my mind, but the only thing similar in alpha is the in-game sizing. The CC creators make their own meshes, use their own blending, learn the techniques on their own, etc. I'd say that the content can be considered "fair use".
Now, mods that use Maxis meshes, change the coding of the game, etc can be considered copyrighted by EA and should not be monetized.
Why it is good to read the fine print before installing any of the Sims 4 software:
"F. Your Contributions. In exchange for use of the Software, and to the extent
that your contributions through use of the Software give rise to any copyright
interest, you hereby grant EA an exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, fully
transferable and sub-licensable worldwide right and license to use your
contributions in any way and for any purpose in connection with the Software
and related goods and services including the rights to reproduce, copy, adapt,
modify, perform, display, publish, broadcast, transmit, or otherwise
communicate to the public by any means whether now known or unknown
and distribute your contributions without any further notice or compensation to
you of any kind for the whole. If the duration of the granted right cannot be
perpetual in accordance with the laws of your country of residence, the term
of the grant shall be the maximum duration of protection granted to
intellectual property rights by the laws of your country of residence or any
international conventions. You further agree that you will not assert any
moral rights with respect to your contributions as licensed to EA herein. The
license grant to EA survives any termination of this License. "
"When you contribute UGC, you grant to EA, its licensors and licensees a non-exclusive, perpetual, transferable, worldwide, sublicensable license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works, publicly perform, publicly display or otherwise transmit and communicate the UGC, or any portion of it, in any manner or form and in any medium or forum, whether now known or later devised, without notice, payment or attribution of any kind to you or any third party. You also grant to all other users who can access and use your UGC on an EA Service the right to use, copy, modify, display, perform, create derivative works from, and otherwise communicate and distribute your UGC on or through the relevant EA Service without further notice, attribution or compensation to you."
So at any point and time EA can take any content alpha or not and sell it as their own. Is it fair? That is subjective. But good advice for anyone to read their legal rights before signing or agreeing to anything. I do know Gaiaonline has a lot more artist freedom for content creators which is probably why some of the SimGurus started their art shops there. Thankfully a CC artist got hired on recently and will get compensated working for EA now.
“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
Why shouldn't people monetize their content? I don't ask an artist to commission a drawing of my favorite character from a movie/game/book and then demand it to be free because the character isn't "theirs". The original creator doesn't have the means to create the content I want, so I'll pay for it out of pocket.
Unless EA/Maxis is going to start giving me the fantasy/historical/alpha content I want and deserve, I will continue to have no problems with paying an artist to make my dreams come true. lol
Because EA is the artist for the game so they have the legal rights to it. It is like trying to copy an artists work and sell the work at an artist's studio and call it your own. There are copyright laws in the US to protect EA's work. Honestly think artists can make more money making emotes on Twitch than making Sims content.
Yes, EA has the artistic rights to their own meshes and the items already in-game. However, I'm talking about the stuff not in-game. I'm not a Maxis-match CC user, so maybe alpha seems a bit different in my mind, but the only thing similar in alpha is the in-game sizing. The CC creators make their own meshes, use their own blending, learn the techniques on their own, etc. I'd say that the content can be considered "fair use".
Now, mods that use Maxis meshes, change the coding of the game, etc can be considered copyrighted by EA and should not be monetized.
Alpha creators use the same system as anyone else. Extract an EA mesh from the game, override it in free software called blender. Add in normal and bump maps and copy a texture from the internet. It's not complicated and the only difference is the texture used.
Why shouldn't people monetize their content? I don't ask an artist to commission a drawing of my favorite character from a movie/game/book and then demand it to be free because the character isn't "theirs". The original creator doesn't have the means to create the content I want, so I'll pay for it out of pocket.
Unless EA/Maxis is going to start giving me the fantasy/historical/alpha content I want and deserve, I will continue to have no problems with paying an artist to make my dreams come true. lol
Because EA is the artist for the game so they have the legal rights to it. It is like trying to copy an artists work and sell the work at an artist's studio and call it your own. There are copyright laws in the US to protect EA's work. Honestly think artists can make more money making emotes on Twitch than making Sims content.
Yes, EA has the artistic rights to their own meshes and the items already in-game. However, I'm talking about the stuff not in-game. I'm not a Maxis-match CC user, so maybe alpha seems a bit different in my mind, but the only thing similar in alpha is the in-game sizing. The CC creators make their own meshes, use their own blending, learn the techniques on their own, etc. I'd say that the content can be considered "fair use".
Now, mods that use Maxis meshes, change the coding of the game, etc can be considered copyrighted by EA and should not be monetized.
Why it is good to read the fine print before installing any of the Sims 4 software:
"F. Your Contributions. In exchange for use of the Software, and to the extent
that your contributions through use of the Software give rise to any copyright
interest, you hereby grant EA an exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, fully
transferable and sub-licensable worldwide right and license to use your
contributions in any way and for any purpose in connection with the Software
and related goods and services including the rights to reproduce, copy, adapt,
modify, perform, display, publish, broadcast, transmit, or otherwise
communicate to the public by any means whether now known or unknown
and distribute your contributions without any further notice or compensation to
you of any kind for the whole. If the duration of the granted right cannot be
perpetual in accordance with the laws of your country of residence, the term
of the grant shall be the maximum duration of protection granted to
intellectual property rights by the laws of your country of residence or any
international conventions. You further agree that you will not assert any
moral rights with respect to your contributions as licensed to EA herein. The
license grant to EA survives any termination of this License. "
"When you contribute UGC, you grant to EA, its licensors and licensees a non-exclusive, perpetual, transferable, worldwide, sublicensable license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works, publicly perform, publicly display or otherwise transmit and communicate the UGC, or any portion of it, in any manner or form and in any medium or forum, whether now known or later devised, without notice, payment or attribution of any kind to you or any third party. You also grant to all other users who can access and use your UGC on an EA Service the right to use, copy, modify, display, perform, create derivative works from, and otherwise communicate and distribute your UGC on or through the relevant EA Service without further notice, attribution or compensation to you."
So at any point and time EA can take any content alpha or not and sell it as their own. Is it fair? That is subjective. But good advice for anyone to read their legal rights before signing or agreeing to anything. I do know Gaiaonline has a lot more artist freedom for content creators which is probably why some of the SimGurus started their art shops there. Thankfully a CC artist got hired on recently and will get compensated working for EA now.
Again, yes they do state in legal documents that they could claim it as their own, if they so choose, but if they try to claim certain CC, it might not hold up if EA had no part in the creation. Now what they could probably do is ask for a percentage of profits since they run the platform the CC is used on.
CC is a grey area to me and I think to EA as well, which is why they're not cracking down on it.
Like SJM? Like Kpop? Like Greek Mythology?
☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Follow me on the gallery ☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Origin ID: Missmagoo2
Ｏ(≧▽≦)Ｏ
(I work with CC so make sure you check that box to see my "hidden" content!)
I generally don't want to pass judgment on the people doing the permanent exclusives thing cause it's small potatoes money and well, the system a lot of us are living under is pretty, um... (trying to avoid language that's gonna get me in trouble for disallowed topics here)... it's ruthless about you needing money for essential things, put it that way.
What they are doing is probably illegal from the sound of things, in terms of EA TOS, but I am not EA corporation, so the more important question to me is whether it's ethical. And I do find the point someone brought up about MTX interesting in that sense. Some people may be falling prey to the same psychological vulnerabilities that come with MTX in a game like this itself and if so, then it's unethical to be preying on them in that way with permanent exclusivity. But that seems like a shaky argument because there is no apparatus with which these creators are forcing people to grapple with the choice of buying their content simply because they play the game.
Anyway, I'd be curious to know if there are people who have had experiences with compulsively spending a lot of money on such exclusives and then regretting it later. There are always stories like that with MTX systems within a video game, but I'm wondering if the same kind of thing could apply to something outside of the game (but still loosely connected to it). It seems like it'd be hard to spend anywhere near the same amount or with the same level of addictive consistency as those MTX markets are designed to support.
Again, yes they do state in legal documents that they could claim it as their own, if they so choose, but if they try to claim certain CC, it might not hold up if EA had no part in the creation. Now what they could probably do is ask for a percentage of profits since they run the platform the CC is used on.
CC is a grey area to me and I think to EA as well, which is why they're not cracking down on it.
Honestly why I was glad the CC creators being featured was in a patch this year and not in a kit because I would be bothered if they sold their content for money. There has been some CC that is similar to EA creations with some of the hairs before I know and those were in paid packs.
“Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it.” –Helen Keller
I'm just going to throw this out there...I wonder if EA doesn't have some kind of "interest" in Patreon. EA has made little or no effort to enforce their own rules. I have heard the explanation that it is just to hard for them to chase every creator on Patreon, but I'm not buying it. There are a few ways that EA could enforce those rules. What I think, is that EA is letting Patreon run. Why? Because what it's doing is getting the Sims community used to the "micro" transaction model. I don't know if any of you still go to TSR for CC. TSR is operating like Patreon now. CC is for VIP (paid) release first, then released to the public a month later. I'm guessing that one of these days, any CC or mods etc that a player wants for their Sims game is gonna cost them. Think about the millions of players paying for CC and/or mods for their game. We are talking BIG bucks. I'm done.
“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect).”
― Mark Twain
The sense of entitlement in this community over these people's work is jaw-dropping.
It fascinates me that during the height of Sims 2/3, expecting money for content you make with programs which are free to download and use, was highly frowned upon.
Now you're entitled when you assume that content will be released for free at some point.
Very few people are paying for programs they use to make CC and mods; the most likely being for Photoshop and Milkshape, although Gimp and Blender do an equally good job and are both free.
My point is, when you're paying for mods and CC, you're paying for the time only that the creator took. 10 years ago, this was seen as a hobby - now it appears to be a source of income.
My point here is that no, it's not entitlement to assume that CC will actually be released for free at some point. We all pay for packs and many agree that packs can be overpriced. It seems astounding to me that it's mainstream now to have to pay for fan-made CC.
It fascinates me that during the height of Sims 2/3, expecting money for content you make with programs which are free to download and use, was highly frowned upon.
Now you're entitled when you assume that content will be released for free at some point.
Very few people are paying for programs they use to make CC and mods; the most likely being for Photoshop and Milkshape, although Gimp and Blender do an equally good job and are both free.
My point is, when you're paying for mods and CC, you're paying for the time only that the creator took. 10 years ago, this was seen as a hobby - now it appears to be a source of income.
My point here is that no, it's not entitlement to assume that CC will actually be released for free at some point. We all pay for packs and many agree that packs can be overpriced. It seems astounding to me that it's mainstream now to have to pay for fan-made CC.
Just my two cents, for what it's worth.
Personally, I don't think either group is acting "entitled," but I think people should keep in mind that a lot of modding in general is probably done by students and retirees (or others in a similar type of position, I don't want to try to name them all) where they can more justify spending time on modding and seeing no money in return. Which is a direct result of the kind of system they live under (whether their needs will get met, whether they'll have food, water, and shelter, without bringing in significant amounts of money on a regular basis).
What might look like entitlement or greed to some is probably just trying to make a living to survive. (This does not apply to corporations, I'm talking about individual modders.)
Part of the reason I'm saying this is because people who have only ever used mods (not made any), or people who are in a comfortable position in terms of money and security, need to keep in mind that a lot of the existence of modding and the work that does get done is possible for certain people for a certain window of time and then it becomes increasingly less feasible if it's not bringing anything in.
Things have gotten worse in this way in some countries since the time of Sims 2/3, so it is no surprise to me that the interest in recouping the time spent has gone up.
I for one want mods to be free, I would prefer it if games like this were free in general and made on a volunteered basis instead of out of obligation to get basic needs met, but until/unless the systems and priorities of them are changed, people are going to be pressured in directions they wouldn't even consider otherwise.
I'm just going to throw this out there...I wonder if EA doesn't have some kind of "interest" in Patreon. EA has made little or no effort to enforce their own rules. I have heard the explanation that it is just to hard for them to chase every creator on Patreon, but I'm not buying it. There are a few ways that EA could enforce those rules. What I think, is that EA is letting Patreon run. Why? Because what it's doing is getting the Sims community used to the "micro" transaction model. I don't know if any of you still go to TSR for CC. TSR is operating like Patreon now. CC is for VIP (paid) release first, then released to the public a month later. I'm guessing that one of these days, any CC or mods etc that a player wants for their Sims game is gonna cost them. Think about the millions of players paying for CC and/or mods for their game. We are talking BIG bucks. I'm done.
I think it might be a bit of a stretch to assume it's because EA wants us to get used to micro-transactions. Honestly, I think the only people who do care are high up on the EA totem poll and they don't have enough staff underneath them who actually do care.
Devs who work on the game don't get paid enough to care. Gurus don't get paid enough to care. I am not getting paid, so I don't care.
The Sims game relies heavily on mods and CC content - whether it's a "put your book away mod", alpha CC, or MCCC. If EA starts putting up a fight against what the CC/mod community have deemed worthy of their money, then there might be backlash.
Like SJM? Like Kpop? Like Greek Mythology?
☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Follow me on the gallery ☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Origin ID: Missmagoo2
Ｏ(≧▽≦)Ｏ
(I work with CC so make sure you check that box to see my "hidden" content!)
Comments
yeah it's crazy, i can't imagine paying that at all..I Personally do see it as a rip off/scam people if people are willing to pay..then hey.
The problem is that it's usually not people who are well off that buy stuff like this. It's usually people who got a little extra money and are being frivolous in the moment.
And they prey upon people that aren't tech savvy. It's like...how awesome of someone to put together a mods folder you just drop in and don't have to scour the internet and figure out where things go. In this case, it's all there for you. But they don't realize that with each pack, you will need to update everything. Now they're out $100 for useless stuff or a broken game.
Will they be checking the 30GB CC works after each patch? Will they be updating other people's content if the original creator, who provided it for free, doesn't update it?
Edit - @Mstybl95 whoops! Great minds...
I have no issue with modders keeping their work behind a paywall for a few weeks. When it becomes months or even years, then it's arguably an issue.
Unless EA/Maxis is going to start giving me the fantasy/historical/alpha content I want and deserve, I will continue to have no problems with paying an artist to make my dreams come true. lol
☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Follow me on the gallery ☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Origin ID: Missmagoo2
Ｏ(≧▽≦)Ｏ
(I work with CC so make sure you check that box to see my "hidden" content!)
L'uinversSims profile: https://luniversims.fr/profile/46983-missmagoo2/
There's a HUGE difference between closed paywall and early access - if the content you make is of great quality and becomes popular, then a 2 week early access period is MORE than enough to get some well deserved coin for the work. I can see that for certain creators that a smaller time period of early access might be justified, but truth be told I respect creators a lot more if they don't have a mandatory pay system on their patreon - I'll support them if I use their content a lot and I think the quality is high enough. That's all there is to it.
Especially for modders that make big mods that give players a lot of gameplay expansion and fixes, the patreon early access serves as a kind of quality testing and support for the mod aswell, so paying for that is definitely justfied - as long as it's early access that is.
It's very rare that any mod or content that is locked behind a paywall is high quality enough to be worth it, because the creator doesn't have an incentive to keep improving and fixing things. And even if they start out with quality, it's just not worth the extra work for them once they get those patrons rolling in. The rule of early access only does not only protect EA but the modding community as a whole and ofcourse the simmers so they don't get scammed.
Yes, EA has the artistic rights to their own meshes and the items already in-game. However, I'm talking about the stuff not in-game. I'm not a Maxis-match CC user, so maybe alpha seems a bit different in my mind, but the only thing similar in alpha is the in-game sizing. The CC creators make their own meshes, use their own blending, learn the techniques on their own, etc. I'd say that the content can be considered "fair use".
Now, mods that use Maxis meshes, change the coding of the game, etc can be considered copyrighted by EA and should not be monetized.
☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Follow me on the gallery ☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Origin ID: Missmagoo2
Ｏ(≧▽≦)Ｏ
(I work with CC so make sure you check that box to see my "hidden" content!)
L'uinversSims profile: https://luniversims.fr/profile/46983-missmagoo2/
"F. Your Contributions. In exchange for use of the Software, and to the extent
that your contributions through use of the Software give rise to any copyright
interest, you hereby grant EA an exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, fully
transferable and sub-licensable worldwide right and license to use your
contributions in any way and for any purpose in connection with the Software
and related goods and services including the rights to reproduce, copy, adapt,
modify, perform, display, publish, broadcast, transmit, or otherwise
communicate to the public by any means whether now known or unknown
and distribute your contributions without any further notice or compensation to
you of any kind for the whole. If the duration of the granted right cannot be
perpetual in accordance with the laws of your country of residence, the term
of the grant shall be the maximum duration of protection granted to
intellectual property rights by the laws of your country of residence or any
international conventions. You further agree that you will not assert any
moral rights with respect to your contributions as licensed to EA herein. The
license grant to EA survives any termination of this License. "
https://media.contentapi.ea.com/content/dam/eacom/en-us/eula/eula-the-sims-4-pc-row-07092014.pdf
"When you contribute UGC, you grant to EA, its licensors and licensees a non-exclusive, perpetual, transferable, worldwide, sublicensable license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works, publicly perform, publicly display or otherwise transmit and communicate the UGC, or any portion of it, in any manner or form and in any medium or forum, whether now known or later devised, without notice, payment or attribution of any kind to you or any third party. You also grant to all other users who can access and use your UGC on an EA Service the right to use, copy, modify, display, perform, create derivative works from, and otherwise communicate and distribute your UGC on or through the relevant EA Service without further notice, attribution or compensation to you."
https://tos.ea.com/legalapp/WEBTERMS/US/en/PC/#section6
So at any point and time EA can take any content alpha or not and sell it as their own. Is it fair? That is subjective. But good advice for anyone to read their legal rights before signing or agreeing to anything. I do know Gaiaonline has a lot more artist freedom for content creators which is probably why some of the SimGurus started their art shops there. Thankfully a CC artist got hired on recently and will get compensated working for EA now.
Alpha creators use the same system as anyone else. Extract an EA mesh from the game, override it in free software called blender. Add in normal and bump maps and copy a texture from the internet. It's not complicated and the only difference is the texture used.
None of that deserves money.
Again, yes they do state in legal documents that they could claim it as their own, if they so choose, but if they try to claim certain CC, it might not hold up if EA had no part in the creation. Now what they could probably do is ask for a percentage of profits since they run the platform the CC is used on.
CC is a grey area to me and I think to EA as well, which is why they're not cracking down on it.
☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Follow me on the gallery ☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Origin ID: Missmagoo2
Ｏ(≧▽≦)Ｏ
(I work with CC so make sure you check that box to see my "hidden" content!)
L'uinversSims profile: https://luniversims.fr/profile/46983-missmagoo2/
What they are doing is probably illegal from the sound of things, in terms of EA TOS, but I am not EA corporation, so the more important question to me is whether it's ethical. And I do find the point someone brought up about MTX interesting in that sense. Some people may be falling prey to the same psychological vulnerabilities that come with MTX in a game like this itself and if so, then it's unethical to be preying on them in that way with permanent exclusivity. But that seems like a shaky argument because there is no apparatus with which these creators are forcing people to grapple with the choice of buying their content simply because they play the game.
Anyway, I'd be curious to know if there are people who have had experiences with compulsively spending a lot of money on such exclusives and then regretting it later. There are always stories like that with MTX systems within a video game, but I'm wondering if the same kind of thing could apply to something outside of the game (but still loosely connected to it). It seems like it'd be hard to spend anywhere near the same amount or with the same level of addictive consistency as those MTX markets are designed to support.
― Mark Twain
It fascinates me that during the height of Sims 2/3, expecting money for content you make with programs which are free to download and use, was highly frowned upon.
Now you're entitled when you assume that content will be released for free at some point.
Very few people are paying for programs they use to make CC and mods; the most likely being for Photoshop and Milkshape, although Gimp and Blender do an equally good job and are both free.
My point is, when you're paying for mods and CC, you're paying for the time only that the creator took. 10 years ago, this was seen as a hobby - now it appears to be a source of income.
My point here is that no, it's not entitlement to assume that CC will actually be released for free at some point. We all pay for packs and many agree that packs can be overpriced. It seems astounding to me that it's mainstream now to have to pay for fan-made CC.
Just my two cents, for what it's worth.
Personally, I don't think either group is acting "entitled," but I think people should keep in mind that a lot of modding in general is probably done by students and retirees (or others in a similar type of position, I don't want to try to name them all) where they can more justify spending time on modding and seeing no money in return. Which is a direct result of the kind of system they live under (whether their needs will get met, whether they'll have food, water, and shelter, without bringing in significant amounts of money on a regular basis).
What might look like entitlement or greed to some is probably just trying to make a living to survive. (This does not apply to corporations, I'm talking about individual modders.)
Part of the reason I'm saying this is because people who have only ever used mods (not made any), or people who are in a comfortable position in terms of money and security, need to keep in mind that a lot of the existence of modding and the work that does get done is possible for certain people for a certain window of time and then it becomes increasingly less feasible if it's not bringing anything in.
Things have gotten worse in this way in some countries since the time of Sims 2/3, so it is no surprise to me that the interest in recouping the time spent has gone up.
I for one want mods to be free, I would prefer it if games like this were free in general and made on a volunteered basis instead of out of obligation to get basic needs met, but until/unless the systems and priorities of them are changed, people are going to be pressured in directions they wouldn't even consider otherwise.
I think it might be a bit of a stretch to assume it's because EA wants us to get used to micro-transactions. Honestly, I think the only people who do care are high up on the EA totem poll and they don't have enough staff underneath them who actually do care.
Devs who work on the game don't get paid enough to care. Gurus don't get paid enough to care. I am not getting paid, so I don't care.
The Sims game relies heavily on mods and CC content - whether it's a "put your book away mod", alpha CC, or MCCC. If EA starts putting up a fight against what the CC/mod community have deemed worthy of their money, then there might be backlash.
☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Follow me on the gallery ☆ﾟ.*･｡ﾟ Origin ID: Missmagoo2
Ｏ(≧▽≦)Ｏ
(I work with CC so make sure you check that box to see my "hidden" content!)
L'uinversSims profile: https://luniversims.fr/profile/46983-missmagoo2/
I had fun with it of course. Getting paid for something I already enjoy is icing yknow?
But I would never sell meshes that weren't my own or something simple like recolors.