Things I don't like about the Gun Mettle update:

  • If you're asking a question make sure to set the thread type to be a question!

tyler

aa
Sep 11, 2013
5,102
4,621
EDIT: After reading my posts again, I sound really angry in a lot of them. I am not really angry. I'm just trying to present my ideas concisely.

Things I don't like about the Gun Mettle update:
  • We don't have full access to the Japan/Borneo/Snowplow assets for some reason. This seems to be because

  • Valve didn't actually buy the maps the same way they have before, which is really disappointing. Artists should be paid up front for their work, and royalties should come after. Royalties only should not be an option. I really dislike this method of distributing maps as it sets a really nasty precedent that I'm already seeing people submit to. I thought Valve requesting all the custom assets would mean we're getting them, but apparently they did that for no reason?

  • Valve relies on the community to pay for the purchase of the maps by buying a $6 collection of pixels. What if everyone decided to boycott the skins? Stupider things have happened around Valve games.

  • People are saying you can get the $6 back by selling your skins, which is fucking stupid. In fact, Steam wallets are stupid. Valve basically has a bank you can't withdraw money from, and every time you buy or sell something in their system, they make money from it.

  • So, sure, you can get your $6 back. But what does Valve get? They get the percentage cut from the Gun Mettle pass, then all the cuts on community market sales. And then you still can't do anything with the money you get for selling skins except spend it on more Steam stuff, which gives Valve money again.

  • The Steam Wallet is really the worst thing in existence because it's essentially just a funnel you put money into and eventually all the money goes to Valve.

  • What happens in 4 weeks when the skins are fifty cents? What happens next campaign when people don't like the maps? Or the skins are just worth nothing immediately? We just give Valve $6 for stupid shit again I guess. I don't know.

tld;dr: Valve should be paying mappers, not just promising them a nebulous cut of proceeds. Valve should not be able to take community content and use it in one of their products without paying the author first. The community floating the cost, while not even getting the same benefits as all other community maps (assets, permanent rotation), is disgusting. And further, arguments that you can recoup your cost of entry are null, as doing so plays right back into Valve's money funnel. We shouldn't have to resort to Valve's Money Funnel. Ever.

Well, can't wait to get a map in the next campaign! Woo! Go Workshop! Yeah! This is what we all wanted, right guys?

This entire thing is a way to shaft players and content creators. I'm not really into this.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:

tyler

aa
Sep 11, 2013
5,102
4,621
Yep. That's really the big thing. This whole update feels like a way to dodge proper compensation in favor of a system that will work out far, far better for Valve.

Previous updates would float the cost of maps (like the cost of a map really impacts them anyway) with items or hats Valve made, mixed with community items. This time they've foregone that entirely. It's cool to essentially get a community update (the only Valve thing here is Powerhouse and skins) but it really, really sucks that it feels designed around Valve maximizing their profit margin.

They could have bought the maps the old way, and simply featured them for 3 months with a campaign. They didn't. They could have done the same royalty scheme they are doing now. But they didn't.
 

YM

LVL100 YM
aa
Dec 5, 2007
7,135
6,056
One bullet for each of yours:

  • The choice to use pakfiles instead of the vpk is odd, I don't understand it but don't particularly mind it. I expect it's because they're doing featured maps that will be in for a short time, then the next lot will be in. I really don't mind this approach, it means they have to drop old maps to stop TF2 ballooning to a billion GB, but it means the more community members can be paid for their level design work.
  • The workshop agreement transfers IP to Valve when we upload it. We all agreed for this to be the case by uploading our maps. That said: The amount Valve paid for the IP transfer in the past was garbage. a mere technicality to facilitate the contract. The campaign passes could easily earn a map more in 2 months than hoodoo's 5 years of stamps. This isn't a bad thing, it's change, but not outright bad.
  • Why is pumping money through the system a bad thing? It gives people who want to spend less an option, as well as giving those who want to spend more to get exactly what they want an option.
  • You can put the money elsewhere. True it's always in your wallet, and valve will continue to take shares from it on whatever you buy, but I can go buy someone else' product with it. I can go buy a different game with that reclaimed money. Which is awesome.
  • This isn't a post about the update is it, just about the wallets.
  • What happens next time is anybody's guess. This is the only thing I don't like. It ties the amount of money the mappers make, to something other than the quality of their work. If Valve do a terrible event next time and no one buys into it, those mappers are going to get way less. Conversely, if they do a way better job next time, we missed out. The stamps were at least fair in that people would buy ones for the maps they liked most.

Generally yes, I think a guaranteed amount should be offered, then beyond that whatever royalties they offer is up to them.

I have a mixed bag of feelings about the possibility of these three maps being removed after the event, but then if my back of the envelope calculations are correct and it earns what I think it might, then it'll have done better than 5 years of stamps in two months, which I certainly can't complain about. We aren't being shafted. As for players... well it depends on if you think $5.99 is worth 3 months of contract fun + 24 weapon chances, initial reactions suggest people think it is.
 

tyler

aa
Sep 11, 2013
5,102
4,621
I appreciate that you (and others) can earn more than you would have from a lump sum and stamps, but at least that was guaranteed.

Like you said, the money map makers get isn't tied to their product, as it is with items. It used to be, via stamps and a lump sum. Now it isn't. I don't think stamps are perfect, and I like the featured campaign aspect, but the methodology is all wrong.

Valve needs to guarantee a minimum payment at least, I think. It can be structured like a contract for recording artists or writers, who are given an advance sum based on expectations for sales and then further royalties. I love that map makers can now make even more money, please don't get me wrong, but the way they are being treated is not acceptable in my opinion.
 

tyler

aa
Sep 11, 2013
5,102
4,621
Also YM, what about Manor stamps? No one likes Hoodoo, and that's also from a time when Valve was paying a lot less for maps, so I don't really see that as a fair comparison. I ask this just for curiosity I guess. But haven't maps purchased more recently been bought for $7000 or $7500 or something? A guaranteed seven grand plus royalties would just be a lot more... well, good.
 

ExtraCheesyPie

L420: High Member
Jan 29, 2015
484
151
Also YM, what about Manor stamps? No one likes Hoodoo, and that's also from a time when Valve was paying a lot less for maps, so I don't really see that as a fair comparison. I ask this just for curiosity I guess. But haven't maps purchased more recently been bought for $7000 or $7500 or something? A guaranteed seven grand plus royalties would just be a lot more... well, good.

I've always been afraid to mention I don't like hoodoo because i'm afraid of YM's wrath D:
 

YM

LVL100 YM
aa
Dec 5, 2007
7,135
6,056
I haven't heard anything about maps being bought for so much and given that stamps exist, can't believe it unless someone who made the maps in question says it.

I did however hear someone say standin and process had earnt roughly that much via stamps.

You don't think hoodoo is a fair comparison because you A) listen to the vocal minority and B) don't have the sales data. Hoodoo outsells manor 1.9x and outsells coldfront 2.7x I don't have data for any other maps. This is averaged sales over the last 3 and a half years. It's also units sold, not the money I've earnt from those units.

Hoodoo is actually a bad example for your arguments because it sells so well not because (as you think) it sells poorly

Current estimates (looking at weapon quantities in the market and at stats.tf) suggest that 10k units have sold and each map has earnt about 5k so far. (also assuming it's a standard 25% of the campaign pass price, which it might not be)
 

Vincent

&#128296 Grandmaster Lizard Wizard Jedi &#128296
aa
Sep 5, 2009
912
684
I thanked for how well thought out your post is.

I just have some questions; do you think this system of campaigns gets more community maps played by the masses? What if Valve isn't buying maps because they don't feel it's a good investment long term?

I'd wager more map makers have potential to see their work played, even for a little, with this system. I understand that this campaign thing isn't prefered, I'm not a fan of this myself, but what if it's this or nothing for some map makers?

As someone who didn't pay any money I will say it was nice actually seeing people play the new map content. This could just be the hype going strong for the update but hopefully after this hype dies people keep playing the maps if only for the missions. The only thing keeping me from playing maps after updates is player count.
 

tyler

aa
Sep 11, 2013
5,102
4,621

Well, that's certainly more pertinent information. Can you blame me for believing someone would use data that supported their points, rather than data that didn't? Just gotta check.

5k each already is pretty good I guess. I mean it's been one day!

I want to reiterate that I don't care how much money a map makes in 3 months though, because the important thing is paying people for their work up front (no matter the industry). That's really what I'm getting at here.
 

tyler

aa
Sep 11, 2013
5,102
4,621
I'd wager more map makers have potential to see their work played, even for a little, with this system. I understand that this campaign thing isn't prefered, I'm not a fan of this myself, but what if it's this or nothing for some map makers?
Actually, quickplay has all but eradicated servers where authors could have their custom maps played. The idea that now the workshop and the associated push to Valve servers supports mappers is laughable considering Valve's quickplay implementation is the reason we lack support. These days I open the server browser and see 500 Lotus Clan and Valve servers--none of the variety that was around before quickplay. It's true they weren't paid, but it was already all or nothing in that regard anyway. The new system might give more money to more mappers, but I don't think it's necessarily beneficial to mappers as a larger group, or to players.

As for your other questions, I don't know. Too speculative for me.
 
Last edited:

Fruity Snacks

Creator of blackholes & memes. Destroyer of forums
aa
Sep 5, 2010
6,394
5,571
Actually, quickplay has all but eradicated servers where authors could have their custom maps played. The idea that now the workshop and the associated push to Valve servers supports mappers is laughable. These days I open the server browser and see 500 Lotus Clan and Valve servers--none of the variety that was around before quickplay. It's true they weren't paid, but it was already all or nothing in that regard anyway. The new system might give more money to more mappers, but I don't think it's necessarily beneficial to mappers as a larger group, or to players.

As for your other questions, I don't know. Too speculative for me.

This is the one thing that I think can be done better, but I don't know what Valve has in mind or what they want to do with things, so I can't really come up with a solid solution that works with what Valve's vision is, and works for everyone else.
 
Mar 23, 2013
1,013
347
Things I don't like about the Gun Mettle update:
  • We don't have full access to the Japan/Borneo/Snowplow assets for some reason. This seems to be because

  • Valve didn't actually buy the maps the same way they have before, which is really disappointing. Artists should be paid up front for their work, and royalties should come after. I really dislike this method of distributing maps as it sets a really nasty precedent that I'm already seeing people submit to. I thought Valve requesting all the custom assets would mean we're getting them, but apparently they did that for no reason?



  • The assets are still packed in the BSPs and i think the reason to that is that Valve was simply too lazy to depack them and include them to the game.
    That's really a shame since from now on, you might pack assets which are already in the game wasting time and harddrive space. This really should eb changed since this assets have some great quality and will probably used a lot in custom maps

    Maybe that's the reason that some custom assets dont show up sometimes on the new maps?
 

tyler

aa
Sep 11, 2013
5,102
4,621
This is the one thing that I think can be done better, but I don't know what Valve has in mind or what they want to do with things, so I can't really come up with a solid solution that works with what Valve's vision is, and works for everyone else.

Yeah, I mean I understand why they implemented quickplay. It ensures that new players go to servers where the game can be played more or less as they intend, and it means new players won't be faced with a thousand trade_minecraft_porn_v2 servers when trying to join games. It's good for the player experience. But it really hurt custom map servers a lot, and that killed a lot of our potential outreach avenues.
 
Nov 2, 2010
355
1,048
Has it actually been confirmed anywhere that the campaign maps will be removed at the end of the update?
 

tyler

aa
Sep 11, 2013
5,102
4,621
That's the assumption. That's what CS:GO does, and so far this update is basically a 1:1 copy of CS:GO operations.
 

tyler

aa
Sep 11, 2013
5,102
4,621
Try and ask them about some of the concerns I've mentioned here. I know you don't necessarily agree with me, but I know that others do (like Crash, for instance). It's worth ironing this out more--you guys shouldn't be giving up your maps without really knowing what's happening with them or you.