The Future of Compensation for TF2 Mappers: A Community / Valve Discussion

[ScorpioUprising]

This is exactly the model he contacted me about, and asked me to commit to a percentage of any possible revenue that may come out of a map tested by them that is picked up by Valve.

He contacted me as well, but I explained that I didn't think it was on me to provide out of my cut. If valve figures out a way to provide out of their side, I'm all for it, but I agree on not guaranteeing any money for feedback/play testing out of my pocket.

 

[xzzy]

If UGC wants money for running custom maps, that's between them and Valve (it's basically a sponsorship at that point).

There should be absolutely no mechanism by which UGC can charge mappers to test or play maps in the league. The mapper is providing the service and deserves compensation, not the other way around.

 

[RedRumUGC]

Yeah I have to chip in here. I’ve been talking to some mappers already on the issue, some mixed opinions. I’ve been told by TF2maps.net staff/admin members and people in the community where you lack the right feedback to do these changes. If you think you can do changes without the right feedback, then why aren’t we seeing better maps? Everyone knows this and it’s great Valve wants to help mappers out.

The problem I have is my playtesting team in UGC gets screwed in the end. I do not want money! Since Valve might be changing how maps are getting in the game, it would only make sense if my playtesting team for UGC got rewarded as well. I’ve been working with all sorts of map makers especially the last 6+ months for Highlander and without our help they couldn’t have done it. There’s no question about that! I’m not being cocky, I’m just stating the facts. Even each mapper I’ve worked with have said this.

No matter how good the mapper is, we’ve been working with some of the best mappers to completely new mappers that need the right help to do these changes. This is for pub or comp maps in general here. It would be great to get something out of it so we can use a % of some kind in our prize pool, since our players are playtesting your maps for a long period of time. I’ll use Sean aka Heyo Cutino as an example here since he’s very well known. He said “proper playtesting is part of the mapping process.”

I see a lot of potential in a lot of maps on this site for pub or comp. A lot of maps aren’t even talked about or even looked at even. The fun part is finding the right mappers to work with you to do proper changes. It doesn’t matter the skill level of the mapper. I can take a new mapper and help develop/playtest a great map and even some of the best mappers I’ve worked within this community. Nobody has experience this kind of playtesting and we get compliments all the time about it.

 

[fubarFX]

I think the problem here is that TF2 and comp TF2 are different games. We [mostly] don't play comp here.
Games like CSGO are entirely comp. The comp play and the pub play are the same game, that just isn't the case for TF2.

honestly I have always felt that it was on us to figure out what is compelling to both competitive play and pub play (maybe that's overly ambitious, blame my optimistic nature). But yes, I do feel like we are partly responsible for that divide. If tf2m wants to settle for 'okay' pub maps, that's all fine and good, but I'll be out there, at the avant-garde, trying to make things progress.

The next problem is that because we don't play comp, we're not making maps for comp. Any time we are we're ignoring what we'd normally be designing for. None of us want to make maps for some other group of players, we want to make maps for ourselves.

that's also a big part of the issue (an issue that might be outside the scope of this topic). Tf2m only maps for themselves, other mappers. I can see right away why the idea of promoting the art form outside this community can be perceived not only as futile but also counter productive to our circle jerking. What have people here really done to reach out? The workshop doesn't fix that attitude, it validates it (and that makes me concerned).

I don't mean to be harsh but things have to be said.

They can do that. Why should competitive players be forced to play the game a certain way if no one else is forced to do so?

just so we're clear, what I was talking about was not about forcing players to play a certain way/certain maps, it's more about creating incentives for players to play/test custom maps to help us push things forward.

If UGC wants money for running custom maps, that's between them and Valve (it's basically a sponsorship at that point).

that's one way to look at it, but that doesn't strengthen the relationship between tf2m and the competitive community which is what I was pointing at. I think there's an opportunity here where many parties can fix their problems together.

 

[Crash]

The reward the competitive community gets for play testing maps is the map. The entire purpose of testing with competitive is to create a map that specifically runs well for their group.

The competitive leagues get the map whether Valve picks it up or not.

The whole purpose of this conversation is about how Valve doesn't think mappers are compensated enough.

 

[YM]

I was testing stark with redrum and a bunch of UGC players. I'd be happy to send UGC a small % if stark was then picked up by Valve. This applies to stark because I know with 100% certainty Valve wouldn't take it as-is, and if Valve take it in the future, it's because of the testing I've recieved from UGC players.

I also thought about why the heck I didn't send TF2maps anything for either hoodoo or mann manor, but I at least have the excuse that there wasn't any workshop based resource share thingy to prompt me to. I'd certainly send a % straight to TF2maps.net if any more of my maps go official. It might only be 1-2%, but that's still going to be a reasonable monthly contribution towards drp's server costs.

with items valve gets 50% (?).

75%

 

[xzzy]

that's one way to look at it, but that doesn't strengthen the relationship between tf2m and the competitive community which is what I was pointing at. I think there's an opportunity here where many parties can fix their problems together.

I understand and support that, but now that actual real live money is being discussed it's grown up time and both sides are absolutely required to detail obligations and agree upon them before doing any work. It's no longer two communities working towards a common goal, it's two businesses providing an exchange of services.

Failure to do this is a near guarantee that eventually someone is going to feel like they got screwed, and if the situation is serious enough, it will end up in lawsuits.

I can't even imagine what Valve's opinion on all of this might be, I guess it depends on who has control of the copyright when a map (or hat) becomes official.

 

[YM]

What have people here really done to reach out? The workshop doesn't fix that attitude, it validates it (and that makes me concerned).

I don't mean to be harsh but things have to be said.

I spent a lot of time doing promotion for my earlier maps and saw other people doing the same. I did not have a good experience with it so I stopped. The TF2 community were not great recievers of map promotion. I will admit that the landscape has changed somewhat in the last 4 years, but still, the sour taste remains in my mouth.

 

[Sergis]

(..) Could we not incentivize collaboration between the competitive community and mappers by using map revenues to fund competitive events? (..)

imo lets get this revenue going first before we start sharing and dividing it

 

[Snowshoe]

Just gonna throw my opinions around on some issues, if anyone wants to take a listen:

Quickplay needs to be changed - As for a short-term change, Valve needs to enable community servers by default in the quickplay search. They were talking about this many months ago on HLDS relating to the abuse of the Quickplay system, but nothing has been solved (or appears to have been changed) in regards to getting community servers back on by default.

Next problem: There is no incentive for quickplay server owners to run custom maps. A custom map on your rotation effectively shuts off traffic for the duration the map is on the server. This basically means, you have to rely on the people who were on the previous map, or people coming in from the server browser. You see that big giant "Play Multiplayer" button on the main menu? That's what most casual and new players use.

Custom maps need some way to be incorporated within Quickplay, or I figure custom maps servers will continue to die as they have been since early 2012/late 2011. Yes, there are many custom maps servers still around, but are mostly gimmick/custom gamemode servers that don't need Quickplay in the first place. Many serious custom maps are long forgotten unless the competitive community picks them up.

Instead of banning all custom maps outright, I suggest a possible filter for map prefixes, restricting gamemodes to what TF2 already has. Of course, this does not benefit people who create custom gamemodes, and could probably be circumvented with a map recompile, but I figure it's better than nothing at least. Ideally, this would filter out things like vsh_ or trade_ from Quickplay but keep custom pl_ or cp_

About the map workshop - I think it's a great idea, and I've actually emailed Valve in the past about it. I hope TF2 gets it as soon as possible. What many TF2 maps need is the publicity of the Steam Workshop, for other people to see, and also for Valve to see. Of course, the feedback is awful, but I don't think anyone takes that seriously, not even the hat-makers. People use Facepunch/TF2maps.net/other sites for serious feedback.

Preferably, I'd like the map workshop to work how the item workshop does, where you are submitting something to be approved by Valve and added into the official game. It sounds simpler to implement a curating system (already in the game) for maps than to overhaul for a subscription system/pay 2 play system CS:GO has.

Paying the map-makers - We're going to need some way to pay the map-makers without doing CS:GO style operations, which is a decent challenge to overcome. The best way about it would to probably involve trading and the TF2 economy. You can keep doing it the Valve way, with aesthetic incentives to give money, or you could do something passive like marking crates and such. There's probably many ways you could go about it.

Finally, have some maps I think should be considered for use in the game (based on pure nostalgia):

• pl_5curve
• pl_borax
• pl_boundary
• pl_cashworks
• pl_deadwood
• pl_halfacre (replace pl_hoodoo with this? :thumbup1
• pl_outback
• pl_repository
• pl_stovepipe
• pl_swiftwater

 

[Sergis]

It's no longer two communities working towards a common goal, it's two businesses providing an exchange of services.

aint it amazing how money changes things

 

[YM]

• pl_5curve
• pl_borax
• pl_boundary
• pl_cashworks
• pl_deadwood
• pl_halfacre (replace pl_hoodoo with this? :thumbup1
• pl_outback
• pl_repository
• pl_stovepipe
• pl_swiftwater

All payload. good nostaliga :thumbup1:

 

[TMP]

All payload. good nostaliga :thumbup1:

They're practically all from the same contest too!

To be fair that was an awesome contest.

 

[henke37]

A possible idea is to grant people a cosmetic item as a reward for participating in officially recognized map tests. Us regulars could be granted a vintage version of it to show how cool we are to have been doing it before it was official. As for the item itself, I am thinking of a small pin or something like that.

 

[TheBestUsername]

How did we go from making legitimately constructive suggestions, to telling each other our ideas are terrible, to arguing about whether or not comp players have the right to take a portion of our money?

Get on ze topic, dummkopfs!

 

[zpqrei]

Yeah, if we could get back on topic, that'd be brill, as I'd like to get a list of suggestions sent off to Corey by the end of the weekend.

 

[Fruity Snacks]

Its been suggested before, but the tagged crates from officialized maps I think is the simpliest nd most efficient idea, at least for mapsthat are currently in the game.

This was a topic for compensating mappers... not plugin makers, not modelers, not competitve leauges. Those things need to discussed in another thread or within their respective communities. Future discussion needs to be on topic for this thead.

 

[xzzy]

Tagged crates is interesting from a "identify which maps are popular" angle but I'd worry how much real money it would generate if you required those crates to be opened to generate money.. there's over two million crates for sale on the market right now. There's no way for me to know how many crates are opened a day but in a game with ~80,000 players that seems like a losing proposition since only a fraction of those accounts will be using keys.

Dedicating a slice of key sales for distribution to mappers seems like it'd be really easy to implement, and gives a direct tap into TF2's main source of revenue. Then use the existence of tagged crates to divide the pie, favoring the more popular maps.

 

[RubbishyUser]

If zqprei wanted to set up a poll in the OP with the 3 or so main options, as well as a "vote of no confidence" candidate...?

I'm personally pretty convinced by the crates solution or the special quality for items dropped on custom maps. You could even have special quality crates of existing crates that give special quality hats, stranges and unusuals when opened - bringing value to those items, increasing the number of those crates opened, improving the TF2 economy as a whole while moving money into the hands of mapmakers. Having said that, setting up a poll and seeing the numbers would be good closure for this Thread.

After zpqrei has sent that back to Valve, we can then discuss in our own time the matters of playtesting, community custom map servers, stamps, and money for other people. When it comes to reimbursement for other organisations, like UGC, the sensible thing to do would probably be the cut of Valve's money method that we see with cosmetics.

 

[Fruity Snacks]

Polls are an excuse to not have a discussion.