Ok Beth.. it's April...

[protocolk]

So... anyone kows how to create or change quests with the new geck?

I just cant find the quest part of it, it hasnt been released yet in this beta version or Im just blind? (if I  missing it please tell me where it is, I need it for my reformation mod)

[oniric1]

So... anyone kows how to create or change quests with the new geck?

I just cant find the quest part of it, it hasnt been released yet in this beta version or Im just blind? (if I  missing it please tell me where it is, I need it for my reformation mod)

object window, character, quest, create a new quest.

 

happy to help

[protocolk]

 

So... anyone kows how to create or change quests with the new geck?

I just cant find the quest part of it, it hasnt been released yet in this beta version or Im just blind? (if I  missing it please tell me where it is, I need it for my reformation mod)

object window, character, quest, create a new quest.

 

happy to help

 

 

I am making a mod to allow the player to make meaningful decisions on factions, I wanted to edit end of the line to allow the player make a deal with desdemona, they lay low for a while and after I take ove the institute I grant the synths rights, some of them actually like living in the institute.

[Guest]

Last I heard moving NPCs around had issues which they are trying to fox so keep that in mind.

[protocolk]

thanks for the tip´.

[DocClox]

The only mods that might become paid is those crappy armors and etc... "mods".

No mod which needs another mod to function has a snowballs chance in hell in making it paid and if it does well the guy who made the framework will make it paid too repeat that enough times you end up paying 40 bucks for a dozen mods.

 

Nah. Beth have got that covered in the EULA that makes them the rightsholder for any mods. If a mod needs another mod, Beth can give them permission to use it.

 

I assume that's the reason for including such language in the first place. The Forever Free alliance effectively blocked paid mods for Skyrim, but that isn't going to work with Fallout 4.

[Guest]

I dont really feel like making a large post but I will say that the language used is pretty standard and it is used so that beth can cover their ass.

 

And two, if Beth starts giving permissions for mods without the mod authors consent, effectively stealing it, even though they legally own it then they kill any incentive for modding. People will either stop making them or take down their files.

 

Either way modding dies and Beth loses a big added value to their product. Not to mention the negative press hellstorm.

Anyway I am done speaking of hypotheticals, lets see what happens.

[DocClox]

I dont really feel like making a large post but I will say that the language used is pretty standard and it is used so that beth can cover their ass.

In Skyrim you gave Beth the right to use your mods however they wished, but you retained the copyright. In FO4 you explicitly sign over all rights to Bethesda.

 

The Skyrim language was sufficient for any amount of ass-coverage. This is different.

 

And two, if Beth starts giving permissions for mods without the mod authors consent, effectively stealing it, even though they legally own it then they kill any incentive for modding. People will either stop making them or take down their files.

They'll argue that you knew the score when you started making mods and that the legal definition of "stealing" is the only one that matters. It won't matter if you take down your mods, since they'll have copies already. Especially if you upload through Bethesda.net.

 

Either way modding dies and Beth loses a big added value to their product. Not to mention the negative press hellstorm.

They have shown a disturbing willingness to shoot themselves in the foot lately, however, so I'm not going to bet on common sense and long termism ruling the day at Bethesda.

 

Anyway I am done speaking of hypotheticals, lets see what happens.

And it certainly is hypothetical. I just think it's a valid concern. Hell, you can't even read the forum posts on bethesda.net without signing up to that stupid thing. This goes way beyond CYA.

[Zor2k13]

The more they lock down and restrict, the more the average user questions why they need to bother with the game or the company products. When an empire dies it doesn't just explode or something, no it simply collapses and the people just leave constantly until everyone is gone. History proves this over and over again so if they keep the pressure up and if the industry in general gets worse with DLC and season pass blah blah then it will cause people to stop bothering with games.

[jaam]

 

I dont really feel like making a large post but I will say that the language used is pretty standard and it is used so that beth can cover their ass.

In Skyrim you gave Beth the right to use your mods however they wished, but you retained the copyright. In FO4 you explicitly sign over all rights to Bethesda.

 

The Skyrim language was sufficient for any amount of ass-coverage. This is different.

 

And two, if Beth starts giving permissions for mods without the mod authors consent, effectively stealing it, even though they legally own it then they kill any incentive for modding. People will either stop making them or take down their files.

They'll argue that you knew the score when you started making mods and that the legal definition of "stealing" is the only one that matters. It won't matter if you take down your mods, since they'll have copies already. Especially if you upload through Bethesda.net.

 

Either way modding dies and Beth loses a big added value to their product. Not to mention the negative press hellstorm.

They have shown a disturbing willingness to shoot themselves in the foot lately, however, so I'm not going to bet on common sense and long termism ruling the day at Bethesda.

 

Anyway I am done speaking of hypotheticals, lets see what happens.

And it certainly is hypothetical. I just think it's a valid concern. Hell, you can't even read the forum posts on bethesda.net without signing up to that stupid thing. This goes way beyond CYA.

 

 

You are still the owner and as such you can give right to whomever you please.

They have the rights from you, yes, but just like they did in every game before. Nothing changed, they just used vocabulary easier to understand by non lawyers.

[DocClox]

You are still the owner and as such you can give right to whomever you please.

They have the rights from you, yes, but just like they did in every game before. Nothing changed, they just used vocabulary easier to understand by non lawyers.

Well, the wording I'm working with is the one for the game, since I've not installed the CK, but that talks about "transfer of all rights and title"; which is to say ownership.

 

So no, under those terms you don't own your work under any legal definition. Hence the fuss, really.

 

Of course, it's possible that the wording changed for the CK since I can't find that online to check. I'm also not sure what you agree to for the bethesda.net EULA. But if you're using the CK legally, you'll have agreed to all three, so the terms of all three will be binding upon you.

 

That said, I gather that the EULA grants you the rights to distribute your own work, but from what I've seen that's granted to you by Bethesda as a courtesy rather than being the result of your own ownership.

 

But hey, like I say, I'm working off old information and could be wrong.

[jaam]

 

You are still the owner and as such you can give right to whomever you please.

They have the rights from you, yes, but just like they did in every game before. Nothing changed, they just used vocabulary easier to understand by non lawyers.

Well, the wording I'm working with is the one for the game, since I've not installed the CK, but that talks about "transfer of all rights and title"; which is to say ownership.

 

So no, under those terms you don't own your work under any legal definition. Hence the fuss, really.

 

Of course, it's possible that the wording changed for the CK since I can't find that online to check. I'm also not sure what you agree to for the bethesda.net EULA. But if you're using the CK legally, you'll have agreed to all three, so the terms of all three will be binding upon you.

 

That said, I gather that the EULA grants you the rights to distribute your own work, but from what I've seen that's granted to you by Bethesda as a courtesy rather than being the result of your own ownership.

 

But hey, like I say, I'm working off old information and could be wrong.

 

 

NO. Rights are not ownership.

 

[DocClox]

NO. Rights are not ownership.

"Title" is.

[Ernest Lemmingway]

That said, I gather that the EULA grants you the rights to distribute your own work, but from what I've seen that's granted to you by Bethesda as a courtesy rather than being the result of your own ownership.

 

But hey, like I say, I'm working off old information and could be wrong.

 

 

That's pretty much what is says this time. At least as far as I can tell. All the legal doublespeak is hard to read without dozing off.

 

Anything Bethesda tries will be subject to qui bono ("who profits"). Computer gamers have access and resources to obtain mods from sites other than Bethesda.net and to bypass any restrictions they try to implement. The costs vastly outweigh the returns on any scheme to limit what computer gamers can load. That's not the case for console gamers who will be limited to whatever is hosted on Bethesda.net. And before anyone mentions hacking the mod access on consoles, consider that both systems are using proprietary file formats. If a mod isn't formatted to run on them then it can't be loaded. That's one reason why consoles will only be able to download from Bethesda.net. It also means that console gamers will have little leeway to fight any attempt at paid downloads other than simply not playing.