Thatās a terrible analogy. There are many reasons for making a map, and recognition is not the only one. There have been decades of maps for thousands of games without protection.
Maybe itās your motivation, but donāt project that onto everyone.
I already explained why. You can go up and read it again, because Ill just end up repeating myself. Ill explain shortly again anyway. It provides more readability for the developer while he/she is testing with the public and at the same time obfuscating the text for those who donāt have the key.
Dude, look at just simple thing. Workshop have no salary for developers. Workshop even not guarantee for the authors copyrights. So developers have no salary and have no recognition. Why they just still developing it? I think thats why people whining here. They want some recognition for spent hours, maybe days or weeks on developing the mode. I think its really not good when someone spent 10+ hours on mode development and some guy just copy it and pass as own.
@Maravis, but tell me, why the encode the description for public, if you are testing the mode with public? Look, if you will not encode the mode everyone can just copy it and use as own. So if i not encode - he can copy. If i encode - he cant. Okay, but what will be if i not encode the desctiption? He will see the rules and can play the mode. If he even cant see the rules bcz description is encoded, he still can copy the mode (bcz code not encrypted) and even dont know the rules.
So in 4 variants of combining this things i prefer Encoded code + non-encoded description.
Excuse me if I didnāt say it clearly enough. I meant adding the encrypted text to the description for the share code version. That way it will spring up multiple games with your encrypted text in it that everyone can verify who the original creator is.
You meant the names of functions inside the code?
Yes, but I meant both of them. Iām predicting that low effort dishonest copiers wont delete encrypted text in the description. Even if they do or add their own you can easily see spot how its different from the other instances of the gamemode in the browser.
Fun.
Recognition among those it matters (this forum, friends, etc).
To learn.
Iām in the āfunā camp. Iām pretty sure thatās where most mods/maps throughout gaming history were made. Recognition alsoā¦ but once again, they had no protection. It doesnāt matter, because the people who care will find out.
What has changed from all other unprotected maps for other games throughout history? Starcraft spawned entire generasā¦ and had none.
Hmmm but i think i already said about it here
I just renamed all name functions on my battletag, and i have 2 variations of the mode. When i working in private closed room i using the non-encrypted version. If i open public i use encrypted version. But i really not understand why use the AES-256 encryption in names of the functions if even with work-names to battletag-names of the functions they not understand what function do?
I think if you can get recognition for your efforts and not get, i prefer to get it and not to be noname in the community. + Its the change to get some popularity as good gamemoder and if community from skilled workshopers will want to make something A-MEI-ZING they will prefer to call not nonames, but really well-known gamemoders for gather nice team and turn the world around with it.
Well really guys its all up to just measuring how much of an impact it will have on the workshop to not give credit to original authors. People could make awesome things that you wish you could play, but keep to themselves. Even then there is no reason not to give them credit. It doesnāt hurt the ones who donāt care and it satisfies those who do. Its a complete positive.
The only ones that can be hurt by this or are against this are those with malicious intentions. There is no reason not to do this.
Okay I agree that for the share code there is no need to rename the functions to encrypted text when you can simply paste your battletag in all of them. The purpose the encrypted text will only serve is for testing with the public while youāre developing it.
Actually thats why i created this, guys. Maybe im sure that encrypting the code its a really anoying thing, but real any article must tell about all ways, not only about positive.
Positive ways: its a paste the mode on some popular resourses, youtube video, the description. If i just link here the sites on which you can patent the mode it would be a positive post. But i also told about encryption and i dont see here anything bad, bcz i only the man who made the guide. I dont propagandize for āAll necessarily use the encryption of the code!ā, actually i agree with @Sci that people must be kind to each other and not delete the author marks from description, but i dont believe world that works. Im sure that always will be unhonest lazy players which make no effort but copy modes and using it as own. So those, who will want to use encryption - i showed them how. Use it or not - its their choice. I think i did the great thing. And others who told me about another ways too.
I hate this idea honestly. Any form of code hiding or copy protection will be detrimental to the workshop. The ability to copy, modify, learn from, and build upon others code is not something that blizz should limit. A credit system, sure, actually limiting the ability to copy, modify, or see workshop code is not something I want to see and itās something that will cause more harm then good.
Yeah. Personally Iām confident that some form of credit system will be done by the devs. If not we will see an uproar about it on live release of the workshop.
We already see it on PTR. There will be just same situation which on this forum now. There will be it just more, that all.
So you are agree that unhonest players copy the modes from each other and using this modes like they developed it without any efforts? So then you suggest how fix it.
A) Yes it happens, but not as often as people like to make it out to be.
B) I suggested a credit system, aka tracking of authors. An internal file share system (think steam workshop or Halo fileshare) would also mostly solve the issue.
C) I wouldnāt care that much if they donāt fix it as while credit stealing is a dick move I wonāt lose sleep over it and I donāt see it as harmful enough to be a major worry.
D) Fixes that involve copy protection and code hiding will cause more detrimental effects to the workshop ecosystem then credit stealing.
E) Post your stuff to code sharing sites like Elo hell, or even just reddit posts in workshop sub-reddits.
I also thought about this thing. The system, when people copy some mode and using it at the up of the description will be indelible mark of the author who developed the mode, but i not believe that Blizzard will add it.
Why would they not add it?
Because i guess they even not think about this direction. Maybe they improving the stability or some new opportunities of workshop.
The idea has been brought up in multiple threads discussing the topic and Blizz has already said they are discussing the topic. Why would they not think about or discuss a credit system but think about discuss and add your solution? They would discuss the pros and cons of the different options just as we are here. My main argument has and continues to be that the negatives to copy/edit protection outweigh any benefit and that the credit stealing problem specifically can be addressed by file shares, a credit system, or edit tracking all of which avoid the detrimental effects of copy protection.
Added your suggestion into the guide. Thx for answer.