These change won't come without consequences. Some servers are out of control, I agree. There are some disgusting, money-grubbing servers out there that have been there for the money since the beginning - but this is going to affect every server, and will outright destroy the servers that are NOT just there for the money, and will break large servers, that hundreds of thousands of players - including a lot of you people reading this play on. So yes, cheer now for the death of hypixel, for the destruction of mineplex and the annihilation of shotbow (pun intended) but realize that any minigames you play now won't have more than 50 people on them at a time. Realize that though there may be no more pay-to-wins, that there will be no more of a LOT of other servers too.
Actually, with some tricky editing, you could just put every minigame on a different server, and then charge access to those servers. IF you wanted to have them connect I'm pretty sure there is a way to do that too. I'm sure someone will figure out a way. Trust me, this is gonna be a lot better for Minecraft in the long run.
And to all those that are saying that this will be the death of Minecraft, I can not see how you are being more dramatic. One guy even said that this would be the death of the entire video game industry! Anyhow, all this is doing is evening out the playing field a little better. I mean, get over yourself and look at the big picture. There aren't that many servers that rely on soley the money they get from kits to survive, and if they do, they are doing it wrong. Sell cosmetic things or put up advertisements. Mojang is giving you the tools, you just need to use them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oh hey. Looks like you're reading my signature. That's nice. If you thought I was going to put something funny here, I'm not. I will however put a link to my suggestion about gold tools. I think it's fairly popular. It would be nice if it was added. Just click the link and look at it. Please? I'm desperate. http://www.minecraft...-arent-useless/
Actually, with some tricky editing, you could just put every minigame on a different server, and then charge access to those servers. IF you wanted to have them connect I'm pretty sure there is a way to do that too. I'm sure someone will figure out a way. Trust me, this is gonna be a lot better for Minecraft in the long run.
And to all those that are saying that this will be the death of Minecraft, I can not see how you are being more dramatic. One guy even said that this would be the death of the entire video game industry! Anyhow, all this is doing is evening out the playing field a little better. I mean, get over yourself and look at the big picture. There aren't that many servers that rely on soley the money they get from kits to survive, and if they do, they are doing it wrong. Sell cosmetic things or put up advertisements. Mojang is giving you the tools, you just need to use them.
The way I'm seeing this, is it is going to make it
1: Easier to get players (most servers will likely shutdown, which means finally the community will be more spread)
2: Harder to make money - It was already hard, I'm sure we'll find ways to fix this. I'm already working out ways.
I don't really fully support this, and if my server fails I will not bring it back due to this. But still, it's not the worse thing, I agree people are getting overly dramatic. Minecraft may lose a great number of players, but it won't die for at least a few years.
Though there's nothing I can confirm, so I suppose we'll just wait and see.
Almost no one seems to be making a distinction between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law here.
The letter of the law has been refined so that if Mojang should ever need to clamp down on some unruly, abusive server, they can do so to the full extent of the law.
The spirit of the law remains unchanged though. Mojang has been kinda lax about enforcing its rules and would honestly prefer to remain that way, so as long as you aren't sinister, you're probably fine the way you are. Think of it like the complex relationships anime studios have with fansubbers. The way fans sub and distribute anime is technically illegal, but most studios are content to leave them be because of the interest and excitement they generate for their work.
And really, if you're comparing Mojang to EA, you might as well be invoking Godwin's Law.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Author of , Minecraft's most noteworthy Mega Man-themed resource pack!
Also the author of Tales from the Creature Keeper, a book series where humanity is long gone, but its successors, both domesticated and feral, could learn a lot from its legacy.
Got mixed feelings on this one. One the one hand, I really like that this should hopefully eliminate P2W servers (especially with players buying PvP kits and such giving them an unfair advantage). However, as the co-owner of a small, 'vanilla minigames', server myself, I can't help but feel some of these rules don't make too much sense in avoiding the P2W model.
I'll take an example from our server:
A player could 'donate' (though we call those contributions now) to earn a rank, and said rank lets them access a place called 'The Zone'. However, 'The Zone' provides no benefit to them, all it's there for is as a means for us to give them perks that are ALLOWED by the EULA (such as turn on particle effects or play music to everyone).
...So, does 'The Zone' of our server still break EULA rules, as it seems it does simply due to how players that contributed money gain access to it (although a non-paid rank on our server also has access to it, they cannot access the specific room that allows them to use things intended for contributors), even though the access to that place only serves the purpose to allowing players to get perks that are, as far as I know, acceptable by the EULA anyway?
Damn, now I'm a little confused...
Not sure if you had a reply to this at all yet, but from my understanding is that shouldn't be against the EULA as it is purely a cosmetic gain rather than "providing" an item that players that haven't paid can't get access to. Mojang as far as I could tell are encouraging to be able to give cosmetic stuff to players if you wish to do so, just don't go giving out diamond swords that can 1/2 shot someone else that is unable to pay
I am not sure how accurate I am so it may pay to check it out some more first.
So far you have made the most sense more than anyone else on this topic so far. You said about how people aren't taking much notice of what you have posted multiple times? I feel that has more to do with the fact that the ones that are speaking up the most are the ones that don't seem to understand the situation with the EULA, they see that something is supposedly gone wrong and jumped on board to make more noise. Most of the ones remaining quiet are ones that aren't bothered by the whole ordeal as they understand and know that the community and servers in general aren't going to effected as much as some think they will be
I just hope the ones making more of a mess of this start to calm down soon enough.
If this pay-to-win nonsense was nipped in the bud to begin with, no one would be complaining about this.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say that there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." -Frank Zappa
I was thinking about this and the answer I arrived at surprised me. You can charge whoever you want. There's nothing in the EULA that states you must charge everyone. You could demand a fee from every other person (or usernames that start with A-M), because once they get on to your server, the gameplay is the same.
Any thoughts? Ideas?
The following is my own personal opinion and in no way representative of the views of any other person, organisation, or entity that may be affiliated with me.
I'm all for Mojang wanting to protect their IP rights, but I dislike this sort of turnabout. They neglected to enforce the current EULA, effectively giving permission for developers to use their code to create plugins and allowing server owners greater control over their servers. This freedom helped grow the user base into what it is now. After developing a large user base, Mojang effectively gives everyone, who helped make the Minecraft phenomenon what it is, the finger and starts putting out signs that they are going to clamp down on people who break their EULA.
My understanding is that this action is in response to parents complaining that their children had spent lots of money on gaining perks to be used in servers. This next part will probably be controversial, but if that is true then it is the parents responsibilty for either giving their children the means to use that money or not taking sufficient steps to prevent them from getting it. I'm sorry if this offends people, but in my limited experience of multiplayer servers, I have not yet once found a server where the game Minecraft was limited in some fashion and it required real money in order to unlock basic features in the vanilla game. All servers that I've been on have provided exactly the same functions I find in my single-player game for free. It is true that most, if not all, servers that I've seen allow donation, and in return for donations perks are provided as a "thank you". Teleporting to a visable place and cutting down trees instantly are just a couple of examples. Such perks should not be considered as game breaking or overpowered since someone who has not donated can stil quite easily get to the same place or cut down trees without donating.
People talk about donations being "pay to win", but what does that mean? In vanilla minecraft there are currently only two bosses: The Ender Dragon and The Wither. Any time spent in the game afterward is for simply creative purposes in which it is not possible to "win" or "lose". There are 3rd-party plugins that provide extra games such as spleef, TNT run, etc. It may be possible for some perks to give players an unfair advantage, but that would be according to the rules of that server. It is quite easy to find another server to play on that provides a more level playing field among users.
One major problem facing public servers that I've found is "griefers", namely people who log onto a server simply for the single purpose of destroying another person work. A user could spend hours building something just to have it destroyed the next time they log on because a griefer found their build. Making all users equal and giving them access to all the same perks means giving griefers the same things. With commands like teleport, jump, etc. they will be able to travel further and do more damage, thereby causing more problems. TNT is often restricted (about the only thing from Vanilla Minecraft that is) because of it's destructive power. Allowing everyone, including griefers, would be a grave mistake. Who wants to play (even if for free as they are now) on a server where anything they build will be destroyed and gone when they next log back on? No one. Users certainly won't pay a subscription fee (discussed below) to access such a server.
My main concern though about the Mojang choosing to enforce the new EULA (which is their right of course) is that there are only two ways for a server owner to make money from the server; non-cape cosmetic items (which don't exist yet in the game) and compulsory subscription fees (which no one will want to pay). Basically, server owners have a choice: 1) Spend a lot of money (sometimes thousands of dollars in equipment, maintenance, utilities, etc.) with no form or return or either accept their loss (if they've already got a running server) or give up on hosting a minecraft server in the first place (to give you an idea of the cost, I run a very small server on my desktop for a few local friends, and keeping that runnning 24/7 has near doubled my monthly electricity bill to about $150-200). Imagine how much a multi-server setup for 500-10,000 users would cost?
My concern is that large servers will disappear leaving only small servers such as mine operating simply because I'm not too worried about sucking up the cost (at the moment).
Unfortunately, it looks as though the effect of enforcing this new EULA will be to change the current model of donations which are completely voluntary to one of either compulsory monthly payments (I'm sure the aforementioned said parents will love that) or playing for free on a small server with just a few friends.
Either way, I'm afraid I can't view this change as being progressive.
The current system of server self-management is much cheaper in the long run; mainly because if users don't wish to donate, they don't have to, and if a server charges too much money for anything, the user can easily change to a different server (there are after all, hundreds out there).
Idk, I just wish I could of kept my server the way it was... I was fair and did not charge too much for anything... I had donation ranks at $30 and my monthly bill is $36 per month... I would change the price to be lower as long as they let me keep my server the way it is...
Not sure if you had a reply to this at all yet, but from my understanding is that shouldn't be against the EULA as it is purely a cosmetic gain rather than "providing" an item that players that haven't paid can't get access to. Mojang as far as I could tell are encouraging to be able to give cosmetic stuff to players if you wish to do so, just don't go giving out diamond swords that can 1/2 shot someone else that is unable to pay
I am not sure how accurate I am so it may pay to check it out some more first.
Sounds good to me, according to:
Can I sell ranks on my server?
Yes. Ranks are allowed so long as any perks gained are cosmetic. Coloured names, prefixes, special hats etc. are fine.
However, it also sounds like:
Can I charge access to a specific part of my server, such as a minigame or world?
No, you cannot charge for any part of a server other than the initial access. Once on a server, all players must have the same gameplay privileges. You may make a different server for the user to connect to which features “premium” areas, and charge for access to that server instead, but the benefits cannot carry over to your other servers.
I suppose you have to ask yourself, what exactly is a gameplay privilege?
It's not a matter of having fun with smaller numbers of people, on minigame servers it becomes boring to play with the same people over and over again. Large servers, like Hypixel who has thousands of slots, allow you to play with many different people, meet new friends, and have a different experience each game. You cannot do that with servers limited to 100 people, end of story.
Boring is subjective and it may be boring for you to play with the same group of people in a modded server but there are people who never gets bored playing with only 1 friend together on a vanilla server. I do get bored of MC sometimes but it I simply play another game until the urge to play MC returns instead of forcing myself to play it. Why don't you take a break from MC sometimes instead of treating it like a full time job that it was never meant to be.
1) Let's say you have /kit starter available for everyone. When they use it, it has a cooldown before they are able to use it again. Are you able to charge hard currency in order for them to bypass the cooldown time?
2) Pixelmon. Does this make it where if they wish to sell a legendary "Pixelmon" for hard currency on their website, are they allowed to do so as long as the "Pixelmon" has a CHANCE of spawning in the wild on the server?
I'm pretty happy about these changes. Hosting a server isn't supposed to be something you should have to accept "donations" for. I've been running my own server for over 2 years now on a hosting site for a small community and I've never once asked for "donations" or even genuine donations, and I know that hosting a server that's not utter crap isn't exactly cheap. If it wasn't something I genuinely enjoyed, I wouldn't bother running a server. Because I enjoy it, I'm more than willing to put aside part of my paycheck to host my server. If more server owners went with that mentality, it'd be so much easier to find a good server.
I have been running a server for 2 years with 15-25 daily players. This new eula isn't going to affect me. $50/ year for a lag free 30 player slot server isn't a lot at all. Don't understand the rage. Path of Exile is doing very well with this format.
I'm pretty happy about these changes. Hosting a server isn't supposed to be something you should have to accept "donations" for. I've been running my own server for over 2 years now on a hosting site for a small community and I've never once asked for "donations" or even genuine donations, and I know that hosting a server that's not utter crap isn't exactly cheap. If it wasn't something I genuinely enjoyed, I wouldn't bother running a server. Because I enjoy it, I'm more than willing to put aside part of my paycheck to host my server. If more server owners went with that mentality, it'd be so much easier to find a good server.
The thing is, it's been going on too long. It is ingrained in most of the younger players, (even some of the older players) that in order to donate to help with server expenses, something is expected in return other than a simple "thank you".
If players like a server they play on, like the staff, they should donate (if able) without expecting something in return.
That would be in a perfect world, and is not the case though.
I am sure some of the larger servers out there, that have all these perks, ranks, titles for a specific amount of money, and have players foolish enough to donate such an amount, probably make enough money to not only cover the server expenses, but some of their own personal cost of living.
It's hard to conform to the proper way, and most will always want something in return for a donation.
Anyone get the idea that maybe people will just use Minecraft Realms to still be pay-to-win?
Also, wouldn't it technically be equal to have like "Double XP" for donators and so on PvP servers, but if you are not a donator but kill a Donator with Double XP so you get Triple XP for the round?
It's an open letter to Notch, from the perspective of the big, but actually decent, server devs.
Just to add on to it a little bit-
They and we all (for the most part) realize by now that the "old" EULA technically did not allow for these servers to do what they do anyway. We realize the rules were technically made more "liberal" by these changes. A lot of people who realize this have changed their stance from "bring the old EULA back!" to "Fix the EULA!" Just because it took a "change" for people to notice the awkward rules doesn't make the "old" rules any less awkward/not good. I really don't appreciate the whole "The rules didn't really change, people!" sort of response that's being used for this topic by Mojang quite a bit (as you can see in Notch's blog post, "Literally worse than EA").
I don't care that the rules didn't "change." They were never great in the first place. You should all read the letter above.
Forgive me if this has been covered. We're looking to make sure our server is EULA compliant. But I'd like some clarification on of cosmetic and gameplay. For instance we know pets hats and tags are cosmetic. What about the ability to play songs via the craftbook midi IC? It would be nice to have a clear definition.
I would say yes just not 100% though as I think it would count as a effect kind of like particle effect, but its sound effects.
Im going to buy another minecraft next day but i see this thing... Minecraft you just lost a lot of users from that who donated lot of servers and realms.
Actually, with some tricky editing, you could just put every minigame on a different server, and then charge access to those servers. IF you wanted to have them connect I'm pretty sure there is a way to do that too. I'm sure someone will figure out a way. Trust me, this is gonna be a lot better for Minecraft in the long run.
And to all those that are saying that this will be the death of Minecraft, I can not see how you are being more dramatic. One guy even said that this would be the death of the entire video game industry! Anyhow, all this is doing is evening out the playing field a little better. I mean, get over yourself and look at the big picture. There aren't that many servers that rely on soley the money they get from kits to survive, and if they do, they are doing it wrong. Sell cosmetic things or put up advertisements. Mojang is giving you the tools, you just need to use them.
http://www.minecraft...-arent-useless/
The way I'm seeing this, is it is going to make it
1: Easier to get players (most servers will likely shutdown, which means finally the community will be more spread)
2: Harder to make money - It was already hard, I'm sure we'll find ways to fix this. I'm already working out ways.
I don't really fully support this, and if my server fails I will not bring it back due to this. But still, it's not the worse thing, I agree people are getting overly dramatic. Minecraft may lose a great number of players, but it won't die for at least a few years.
Though there's nothing I can confirm, so I suppose we'll just wait and see.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumThe letter of the law has been refined so that if Mojang should ever need to clamp down on some unruly, abusive server, they can do so to the full extent of the law.
The spirit of the law remains unchanged though. Mojang has been kinda lax about enforcing its rules and would honestly prefer to remain that way, so as long as you aren't sinister, you're probably fine the way you are. Think of it like the complex relationships anime studios have with fansubbers. The way fans sub and distribute anime is technically illegal, but most studios are content to leave them be because of the interest and excitement they generate for their work.
And really, if you're comparing Mojang to EA, you might as well be invoking Godwin's Law.
Also the author of Tales from the Creature Keeper, a book series where humanity is long gone, but its successors, both domesticated and feral, could learn a lot from its legacy.
Not sure if you had a reply to this at all yet, but from my understanding is that shouldn't be against the EULA as it is purely a cosmetic gain rather than "providing" an item that players that haven't paid can't get access to. Mojang as far as I could tell are encouraging to be able to give cosmetic stuff to players if you wish to do so, just don't go giving out diamond swords that can 1/2 shot someone else that is unable to pay
I am not sure how accurate I am so it may pay to check it out some more first.
So far you have made the most sense more than anyone else on this topic so far. You said about how people aren't taking much notice of what you have posted multiple times? I feel that has more to do with the fact that the ones that are speaking up the most are the ones that don't seem to understand the situation with the EULA, they see that something is supposedly gone wrong and jumped on board to make more noise. Most of the ones remaining quiet are ones that aren't bothered by the whole ordeal as they understand and know that the community and servers in general aren't going to effected as much as some think they will be
I just hope the ones making more of a mess of this start to calm down soon enough.
I was thinking about this and the answer I arrived at surprised me. You can charge whoever you want. There's nothing in the EULA that states you must charge everyone. You could demand a fee from every other person (or usernames that start with A-M), because once they get on to your server, the gameplay is the same.
Any thoughts? Ideas?
I'm all for Mojang wanting to protect their IP rights, but I dislike this sort of turnabout. They neglected to enforce the current EULA, effectively giving permission for developers to use their code to create plugins and allowing server owners greater control over their servers. This freedom helped grow the user base into what it is now. After developing a large user base, Mojang effectively gives everyone, who helped make the Minecraft phenomenon what it is, the finger and starts putting out signs that they are going to clamp down on people who break their EULA.
My understanding is that this action is in response to parents complaining that their children had spent lots of money on gaining perks to be used in servers. This next part will probably be controversial, but if that is true then it is the parents responsibilty for either giving their children the means to use that money or not taking sufficient steps to prevent them from getting it. I'm sorry if this offends people, but in my limited experience of multiplayer servers, I have not yet once found a server where the game Minecraft was limited in some fashion and it required real money in order to unlock basic features in the vanilla game. All servers that I've been on have provided exactly the same functions I find in my single-player game for free. It is true that most, if not all, servers that I've seen allow donation, and in return for donations perks are provided as a "thank you". Teleporting to a visable place and cutting down trees instantly are just a couple of examples. Such perks should not be considered as game breaking or overpowered since someone who has not donated can stil quite easily get to the same place or cut down trees without donating.
People talk about donations being "pay to win", but what does that mean? In vanilla minecraft there are currently only two bosses: The Ender Dragon and The Wither. Any time spent in the game afterward is for simply creative purposes in which it is not possible to "win" or "lose". There are 3rd-party plugins that provide extra games such as spleef, TNT run, etc. It may be possible for some perks to give players an unfair advantage, but that would be according to the rules of that server. It is quite easy to find another server to play on that provides a more level playing field among users.
One major problem facing public servers that I've found is "griefers", namely people who log onto a server simply for the single purpose of destroying another person work. A user could spend hours building something just to have it destroyed the next time they log on because a griefer found their build. Making all users equal and giving them access to all the same perks means giving griefers the same things. With commands like teleport, jump, etc. they will be able to travel further and do more damage, thereby causing more problems. TNT is often restricted (about the only thing from Vanilla Minecraft that is) because of it's destructive power. Allowing everyone, including griefers, would be a grave mistake. Who wants to play (even if for free as they are now) on a server where anything they build will be destroyed and gone when they next log back on? No one. Users certainly won't pay a subscription fee (discussed below) to access such a server.
My main concern though about the Mojang choosing to enforce the new EULA (which is their right of course) is that there are only two ways for a server owner to make money from the server; non-cape cosmetic items (which don't exist yet in the game) and compulsory subscription fees (which no one will want to pay). Basically, server owners have a choice: 1) Spend a lot of money (sometimes thousands of dollars in equipment, maintenance, utilities, etc.) with no form or return or either accept their loss (if they've already got a running server) or give up on hosting a minecraft server in the first place (to give you an idea of the cost, I run a very small server on my desktop for a few local friends, and keeping that runnning 24/7 has near doubled my monthly electricity bill to about $150-200). Imagine how much a multi-server setup for 500-10,000 users would cost?
My concern is that large servers will disappear leaving only small servers such as mine operating simply because I'm not too worried about sucking up the cost (at the moment).
Unfortunately, it looks as though the effect of enforcing this new EULA will be to change the current model of donations which are completely voluntary to one of either compulsory monthly payments (I'm sure the aforementioned said parents will love that) or playing for free on a small server with just a few friends.
Either way, I'm afraid I can't view this change as being progressive.
The current system of server self-management is much cheaper in the long run; mainly because if users don't wish to donate, they don't have to, and if a server charges too much money for anything, the user can easily change to a different server (there are after all, hundreds out there).
Sounds good to me, according to:
However, it also sounds like:
I suppose you have to ask yourself, what exactly is a gameplay privilege?
Boring is subjective and it may be boring for you to play with the same group of people in a modded server but there are people who never gets bored playing with only 1 friend together on a vanilla server. I do get bored of MC sometimes but it I simply play another game until the urge to play MC returns instead of forcing myself to play it. Why don't you take a break from MC sometimes instead of treating it like a full time job that it was never meant to be.
Some Mojangsters mentioned how ridiculous it was that 'donation' ranks cost more than the Game itself.
Both are direct violation of EULA.
The thing is, it's been going on too long. It is ingrained in most of the younger players, (even some of the older players) that in order to donate to help with server expenses, something is expected in return other than a simple "thank you".
If players like a server they play on, like the staff, they should donate (if able) without expecting something in return.
That would be in a perfect world, and is not the case though.
I am sure some of the larger servers out there, that have all these perks, ranks, titles for a specific amount of money, and have players foolish enough to donate such an amount, probably make enough money to not only cover the server expenses, but some of their own personal cost of living.
It's hard to conform to the proper way, and most will always want something in return for a donation.
Also, wouldn't it technically be equal to have like "Double XP" for donators and so on PvP servers, but if you are not a donator but kill a Donator with Double XP so you get Triple XP for the round?
An Open Letter to Notch
It's an open letter to Notch, from the perspective of the big, but actually decent, server devs.
Just to add on to it a little bit-
They and we all (for the most part) realize by now that the "old" EULA technically did not allow for these servers to do what they do anyway. We realize the rules were technically made more "liberal" by these changes. A lot of people who realize this have changed their stance from "bring the old EULA back!" to "Fix the EULA!" Just because it took a "change" for people to notice the awkward rules doesn't make the "old" rules any less awkward/not good. I really don't appreciate the whole "The rules didn't really change, people!" sort of response that's being used for this topic by Mojang quite a bit (as you can see in Notch's blog post, "Literally worse than EA").
I don't care that the rules didn't "change." They were never great in the first place. You should all read the letter above.
I would say yes just not 100% though as I think it would count as a effect kind of like particle effect, but its sound effects.