None of the “yous” in this post are directly targeted at you, I just find it easier to type that way.
Clearly you’ve never dealt with children. They’re going to want the cosmetic and rather than spending money on something actually worth something in the game, they’ll go and waste money on something that gets them nowhere else other than to make themselves look “cooler”. If we’re going to be saying that everyone playing a server with these pay to win things is full of children, then let’s assume they’re children.
If you can’t find it within yourself to go “oh wow they just wasted a ton of money on virtual items” and be happy with how much work you put into getting those wonderful items, then I’d consider just not playing a server with that format. Just, really.
again, not arguing the eula, just arguing points
I’m really just having an opinion. You do have better points other than “Well it’s not yours” above this, so I’ll let you get away with that
Additionally, the Commercial usage guidelines state that you may sell cosmetic items, except for “capes”, if the item sold does not give a user an unfair gameplay advantage over anyone else on the server. Due to this, you are not allowed to sell the following for hard currency:
–snip–
Items or perks that affect gameplay or give the player an unfair advantage, even if they are also available through soft currency purchase, or just by playing the game for a certain time.
tldr; soft currencies are fine, as long as they arn’t tied to hard currency.
edit:
“By “server,” we mean a single connecting address or IP number.”
Is in direct context to the section that talks about charging for access.
Networks of servers are by definition bound to this for purposes of having multiple servers behind a proxy.
Yeah, I took a look back at it and honestly, the way it’s laid out makes it fairly confusing and really up to interpretation. I’m pretty sure as long as you don’t charge ever for the currency, it is completely and utterly okay by their standards. If they banned your server for just allowing people to buy and sell ingame items for a virtual currency, that’s a bit silly.
The literal wording of the commercial use guidelines basically disallows it, but since the Q&A basically says it’s fine, I’d assume Mojang won’t care.
It doesn’t matter that they are jealous, it doesn’t matter that they also want to buy what someone else has got. What matters is that the players feeling of value.
Doing otherwise damages Minecraft’s feel as a whole, over their entire brand. As someone who participates in the community, I can appreciate that, as it also damages my reputation by association, just from saying that I’ve hosted Minecraft servers, and reflects poorly on all Minecraft players.
I avoid it wherever possible, the problem is that the entire server ecosytem is hard to compete against people not following this. I ran a server and community into the ground on Bukkit for these very principals, because I didn’t have the time and energy to invest in alternate means of promotion. That isn’t to say it’s not possible, it just takes more effort then the ‘cheap’ tactics that are available when you violate the EULA.
My main issue with the EULA and commercial agreement is just that Mojang is trying to decide what’s fair by just disallowing certain things that could really improve certain servers. Being able to buy a kit online used to be nice because people would target that person sometimes to steal their stuff, but that’s really not a thing anymore.
How is buying an outright advantage nice?
How is bullying someone for supporting the server “nice”?
It’s a quick buck at the risk of your reputation, or paying for reviews on voting sites to lure the next suckers in.
Also, an addendum. These have been my largely biased opinions and don’t represent the view of SpongePowered staff in general, however the staff do encourage people to not break the EULA. In case some people were having troubles seperating my personal opinions & methods of communicating them from my staff role.
Edit:
Also for what it’s worth. my old server, before the EULA, would have been violating, just.
The closest we got to selling an ingame advantages to donators, was getting additional claim blocks more quickly.
In our eyes we were giving out what people could accrue with time, for money, basically as a way of reserving a larger area of land that they otherwise would have been entitled to. Our reasoning was that someone donating would likely to be as committed to staying and using that land, as someone that had played for an equivalent time.
Had we still been running at the time of the EULA announcement, we likely would have ceased doing so.
The other ranks were trust based, based on their reputation in our community. and soft currency based, which were not associated with hard currency.
Mojang has the absolute right to decide what’s fair. It’s their software, it’s their game.[quote=“codeHusky, post:28, topic:19104”]
Being able to buy a kit online used to be nice because people would target that person sometimes to steal their stuff,
[/quote]
In the event that the players decide to steal their stuff, and in the event that they’re able to. However, this is entirely dependent on both of those things. For every one player who thinks ‘cool shit, I wanna steal it’, there’s many more who think ‘oh I wish I could have that, and it’s unfair that I can’t’.
Healthy Minecraft communities are based on playing, not paying.
The main thing is just the fact that it makes the server more interesting to play. Trying to beat harder and more equipt players (and even actually beating them) is rather rewarding, thus my point. More highly equipt players means more challenge, meaning more fun.
Yeah, except that happens either way. The difference is whether you feel that the state of being highly equipped is ever attainable for you, or whether you will always be the one trying to get a leg up (surrounded by better equipped players).
I would argue that the fact that such a plugin would directly violate the EULA would be a relevant post on the main thread, being a solid fact and being directly relevant to the plugin’s development or lack thereof.
[quote=“pie_flavor, post:17, topic:19123, full:true”]
Such a system would directly break the EULA.
[quote=“pie_flavor, post:4, topic:19123”]
[quote=“Mojang’s Servers and Hosting EULA”]
use in-game currencies IF (i) they are “soft currencies” i.e. a currency earned or expended only through gameplay that has no real world value and that cannot be cashed out, used or transferred across free or paid servers, or converted into “credits”; and (ii) you don’t give the impression that it comes from or is associated with Mojang.
[/quote][/quote][/quote]
Again, that is intended to mean only if the currency can be gained through physical currency like BitCoin or USD. Transferable items should not and in a realistic situation wouldn’t be against the EULA.
… Source? The direct text of the EULA, which given Mojang’s free interpretation should only be interpreted the most obvious say, says that a currency cannot have a real world value, cannot be cashed out, cannot be used or transferred across free or paid servers, and cannot be converted into “credits”. This plugin would provide a currency that cannot be used or transferred across free or paid servers, thus directly breaking the EULA.
No, not at all. Read it again. But, for the sake of better understanding, give it context:
“Therefore, if you comply with and follow the Brand and Asset Usage Guidelines and Naming Guidelines above YOU MAY:
[…]
" - use in-game currencies IF (i) they are “soft currencies” i.e. a currency earned or expended only through gameplay that has no real world value and that cannot be cashed out, used or transferred across free or paid servers, or converted into “credits”; and (ii) you don’t give the impression that it comes from or is associated with Mojang.”
For the lazy readers: “YOU MAY” “use in-game currencies IF (i) they are “soft currencies” […] " and that cannot […] be used or transferred across free or paid servers OR converted into credits”
Definition round:
Soft Currency: Soft currencies have no ‘real-life’ value attached, therefore only valid in the virtual world and are not registered in economic terms as an actual currency (which BitCoin is). Soft currencies have no cross-value to ‘hard currencies’. The player’s server balance is soft currency, just like “enjin points” are, or your “100 diamond sword vouchers”. None are anchored in ‘hard’ values, therefore are a soft currency, because they are used to exchange goods by defined values.
Hard Currency: They are the ones you use to buy a car, house, or buy other “hard currencies” with. Eg, BitCoin, registered (though with no central bank), can be used to buy American dollars. No bogus stuff here, BitCoin is not a soft currency. Don’t trust me though, trust the actual currency statement.
Used/Transferred: Meaning the actual movement of worth across one starting value to another, be it equal, or with an exchange rate.
Conversion: the act of transforming one specific item into another with the intent of carrying its worth
Give the impression: Implying, looking like, making it seem like - basically, carrying the potential to been understood as.
Now, why would Mojang do that? This is important because it becomes the spirit of the actual EULA statement (which, in most Commonwealth countries) can be used against you - if you want to actually go that far into the detailing of a game EULA. The intent is clear here: “don’t give the impression that it comes from or is associated with Mojang.” Having transferable soft currencies across servers breaks the EULA, because it can give the impression of being “from” Mojang, even if you TOS it and state it does not. Passing as/Looking like, is enough to warrant it an infringement of the MC EULA.
**It’s also important to state that in the actual EULA, they use ; and (ii) to seperate the transfer/conversion clause to the ‘impression’ clause. This is an enumeration of conditions, and therefore implies it infringes the EULA if one or the other is met.
I would argue, again, that the primary reason they specifically banned cross-server currencies was because of the fact that there’s an incredibly low chance that it would remain fair and balanced, an extremely high chance that smaller servers which don’t get complaints will offer the cross-server currency for real money, or by dint of a different economy have the cross-server currency worth less, or any of a bunch of other possibilities. Mojang’s Servers and Hosting section is designed mostly to prevent two things, people pretending to be them and people unbalancing the game. A cross-server currency by definition will always be unbalanced, because only identical servers will value it identically, and we don’t want a bunch of cookie-cutter servers.
