[RFC] Revamping "credits" in map resources

[Cokemonkey11]

Hi folks,

There's been a discussion amongst a few hive staff members about the current rules for resource/map submissions. The details of this are:

1. Map resources presently require resource credits to be attested in both the map (often done in the quest menu, but not a requirement), and also in the submission summary text for the hive map submission.
2. Upon inspection, this double-requirement has not been reliably policed (we can easily find 10+ counterexamples to the rule)
3. The rule text is not very clear, a lot of folks seem to think that the requirement is to have credits either or inside the map/hive description
4. There's been enough input on both sides that it's become clear that the rule is worth revisiting.

The outcome of this thread/poll is not final, but the results will feed into any official decision that staff members come to. The poll is open for 7d.

++ @Ralle @General Frank @Barorque @eejin @Alexen @Mayday @deepstrasz want to be sure to grab your votes as well

 

[Ralle]

I designed the poll. I think it adds a lot of value to track if the voter is a map maker or an asset creator because map makers generally just want to please the asset maker and the asset maker is ultimately the one we want to please by requiring credits.

I don't want this rule to exist if asset creators don't care and if this thread leads to a more specific rule that pleases asset makers more, it's a big win.

 

[Barorque]

I think it would be nice to say inmap "Full Credits on (Hive link)", but primary crediting should be on Hive, whether in map or project forum if applicable. Simply because you can add links to people's pages etc.

 

[Daffa]

I prefer the Hive one since it's easier to make it more cohesive and pretty. The ones that are included in maps tend to be EXTREMELY unpleasant to look at.

 

[deepstrasz]

Similarly to how the two above me wrote, I think it's better and easier to have a proper list on the map thread and the map could contain a link to the map site page instead since writing a credits list there is kind of annoying. But of course, in the map, there could be just resource maker names for peace of mind.

 

[Mr.Goblin]

Personnally the more the better. Credits in the hiveworkshop threads/map page and inside the map. It's extra work. but on moral standpoint. Give credit where it's do.

the amount of maps i've played that uses my icons and I saw there was no credits is a little sad to be honest.

 

[Kyrbi0]

I don't think I'll vote, in part because I really haven't uploaded any of my projects, and also because I tend to like to take the time to do both (i.e. Credits in-map and on Hive).

However, I just wanted to commend you on an excellent poll. : )

 

[Retera]

As a sidenote to this, was it ever considered to modify Hive tools from the tools section to stamp assets that get created with authorship metadata? Because we so frequently use unique file formats (BLP / MDX), I don't see it as outside the realm of possibility to basically make MDX editing software tag the model with an author indication. Obviously anybody could change deface it like how Warcraft III maps have an author field that can be modified by bad actors -- but I think in a lot of cases the lack of attribution to assets used in maps is probably actually due to the lack of effort for attribution and not due to a bad faith desire to discredit the art asset authors. I'm not saying we should necessarily encourage laziness, but in general I see Warcraft III as a platform for making maps efficiently rather than for making the widest range of possible elegant creations at this time. Accordingly, it seems likely we would continue to attract people who are interested in low-effort, high-returns projects in some cases (although this has certainly become less true as the 20 years go on, due to the high-effort and high-investment people being the ones who end up sticking around).

So anyway, is there a reason that we don't update the official MDX specifications with a new AUTH binary chunk or something like that to include author attributions? Far as I know War3 ignores MDX binary chunks that it was not built to handle, such as how MdlVis adds a binary chunk with the 4-letter rawcode MDLV or something like that to store MdlVis specific model metadata.

I know it's a bit late to suggest this, but it seems like it would be definitely convenient when working with maps if the models all had author tags embedded in them. It might open the door for automatically generated map credits.

Anyway, that's just a theoretical idea. Putting something like I'm suggesting into practice would likely take a while because of the time required to get people to adopt it.

 

[Cokemonkey11]

Hi folks

Thanks for comments and votes. Results are in and it looks like:

• People prefer to put credits in hive description (15 - 7)
• That is true for both developers (11 - 5) and for creatives (4 - 2)

For next steps I will write a proposal to modify current map submission rules so that:

1. Credits in hive description for resources used is required
2. Credits in-map for resources used is encouraged

This reflects the preferences from both groups and also clarifies the rule

 

[Cokemonkey11]

[Proposal] clarify map submission requirements rules

See [RFC] Revamping "credits" in map resources for context The aim here is to: 1. Specify that credits for resources used are required in the hive submission/post 2. Clarify that credits for resourced used in-map are encouraged but not required Old text: The authors of imports you used...

www.hiveworkshop.com