Maps - Credits

[deepstrasz]

@loktar that means starting the credits list close to when you download the resources. We're trying to find a way for people who don't do that and have to do it afterwards, later on.

Edit: If this one minute per resource extra step was put into place, mapmakers could just screenshot their import managers giving the deserved credit to the makers of the resources they used in their projects.

Good thinking.
Lots of stuff to rename and I don't think mods will want to do it

 

[Tal'Rarity]

@loktar that means starting the credits list close to when you download the resources. We're trying to find a way for people who don't do that and have to do it afterwards, later on.

Good thinking.
Lots of stuff to rename and I don't think mods will want to do it

Well its a similar idea with trying to get mapmakers who also work for free usually and devote lots of time to use credit lists. Sure its a must if you want to get into game development later but most only do this as a hobby while resource makers usually turn it into a job. Credit is very important and improving on ways to achieve this is never a bad idea.

 

[loktar]

I really think you're overthinking this. It's just a matter common courtesy, putting in a bit of effort to make a list while you're working on the map, or otherwise putting in a bit more of an effort afterwards.

I don't think anyone expects anyone to spend a huge amount of time on it either when compiling the list after the fact. Just the bare minimum to find the bulk of authors and a quick note along the lines of "Let me know if I've forgotten anyone."

 

[Tal'Rarity]

I really think you're overthinking this. It's just a matter common courtesy, putting in a bit of effort to make a list while you're working on the map, or otherwise putting in a bit more of an effort afterwards.

I don't think anyone expects anyone to spend a huge amount of time on it either when compiling the list after the fact. Just the bare minimum to find the bulk of authors and a quick note along the lines of "Let me know if I've forgotten anyone."

Or just name/sign your work you spent time on so you can be credited much easier and better.

 

[IcemanBo]

I looked more detailly into approved maps' credits and mentioned, in about first 2 pages, that several maps don't match the current credit rule, meaning that resource creators weren't named at all.

• Blood and Magic ( credits exist for 2 persons on hive for support, but no resource is credited )
  
• Hero Race Arena V6.0 ( credits goes to hiveworkshop, but also no author is credited )
  
• 2 Player Campaign - Reforged
  
• Journey Through Twisted Meadows v2.8
  
• Doomed Realm -Hero Survival- v2.0

==

Also, I want to say something about the discussion how far credit should go. I expect myself to get to know from a credit what a creator has contributed. That's the main point. In conclusion, a simple list of names is not sufficient for me, as I can get no information from it. It's just useless, if there's nothing concrete.
A description, a link to source, or something similar... something that has information about the content is relevant.

Putting in categories "Models" etc is better than nothing, but it's just being a bit lazy. Might show not much appreciation.

I don't suggest reviewers being absolutely strict, though. For example that a map should not be approved if exactly <this credit form> is not given. I just think 'credits' in general, should be sensitized some more, and also being more in routine when dealing with submission approval.

 

[deepstrasz]

Doomed Realm -Hero Survival- v2.0

Wonder if I actually missed it or the description was edited afterwards sometime.

 

[IcemanBo]

Also, internal credits != external credits. When we talk here about credits, it's mostly about credits that are given for external people who only passively contributed to a map, by providing their already finished work.

For the own team, the project internal people, it might often make no sense to give concrete details in credits:

• user1 did trigger1, trigger2, trigger3, he made the tooltip of Thunderclap, half tooltip of Thunderbold, and chose the title of Chapter 3
• user2 did bottom left terrain, model1, model2, model3, balanced some units, fixed bug in trigger2

... as members of the own team often do multiple tasks, and might even create things exclusively and only for the project.
And then sure, some pure listing of team members can make sense, or also some generalization is totally fine, in "Models", "Systems", ..

But it's different if someone just passively supports your team, and you specifically download and include his work as part of the project. Then, there's a concrete external asset in use, which should be noted, next to the author.

 

[Kyrbi0]

I agree with IcemanBo (unbelievable, I know xD). I'm hugely dissatisfied with so-called "Credits" lists that simply contain a list of names, with little-to-no indication of what they actually contributed. Even dividing them up into sections ("Models", "Code", etc) only marginally helps.

Ostensibly, I go to a Credits list because I saw a cool Thing in the map & I want to know who made that Thing so I can go download it myself! So those kinds of lists are essentially useless for me, in that position.

This is something I have taken very seriously, and since the beginning I have attempted to maintain an exhaustive list of all the custom content I download (with the author, natch).

~~~

Now, that being said, I don't know how I feel about requiring everyone to do the same, especially for those who haven't been keeping an exhaustive list since Day 1. Like, I take it upon myself because I believe it to be important, but I don't know about making it a requirement. I'm in part concerned about the challenges of doing so late in the process. (and yeah, I get it, "tough luck", but that seems a bit too harsh to me).

I wonder if we might do sort of a 'carrot' vs. a 'stick'; rather than punishing those who don't, is there a way to benefit those who do? Higher review priority? Some kind of little mod-review Reward?

 

[deepstrasz]

I wonder if we might do sort of a 'carrot' vs. a 'stick'; rather than punishing those who don't, is there a way to benefit those who do? Higher review priority? Some kind of little mod-review Reward?

Well, only mods can give more rep.

 

[IcemanBo]

I wouldn't go so far to actively reward someone for having 'proper credits'. In comparison, I would not bother if approval is delayed for others, by 1-2 days. Like if someone has no credits at all, or just "Thanks to hive" and has pages of resources in use, then I would go so far to call it not matching hive standards. Then heck, spend time, and come back for approval next days. At least my opinion.

 

[The_Silent]

Would it be possible stamp thw models with a author "watermark" in the meta data so that the resources detection system becomes more precise?

 

[Kyrbi0]

Ooh, I like this; systemic solution to a systemic problem.

 

[General Frank]

Why not instead of 'stamping' models people can add a special tag into the MDL file themselves that will make such undertaking easier.
I am strictly against doing something to a resource against the will of the author.
An 'opt-in' method seems much more humane than doing something over people's heads.

 

[Kyrbi0]

I do understand the desire to maintain autonomy... But the issue at hand is directly related to people *not* opting-in to available tools.