So, while browsing through Steam I just saw this gem: http://store.steampowered.com/app/655040/Deltaplan_Simulator/
It’s obviously the kite demo, with a few post-process effects added on top of it. Is it even legal to sell this as your own work?
It’s not the Kite demo, but it is one of the free examples that Epic provides, it’s the Landscape Mountains example. Epic would need to have Steam remove it though.
Oh you’re right, my bad, I confused the two because of the name.
As long as you follow the license agreement that comes with the content, you can do what you want with it. That’s kind of the point of our sample content and purchased asset packs.
Cheers,
Michael Noland
Surely Epic is going to take some sort of stance when it comes to wholesale uploading of their example content, and selling it for profit?
I mean if not, I might as well just bombard Steam with each of all the free content examples; I’d only need to sell about 25 copies of each at £3 a piece to start making a profit.
I was literally just going to post something similar. While you’re at it, might as well upload all the different mit plugin projects as games too.
If i copy someones story verbatim and upload it claiming it’s mine. I’m then guilty of plagiarism.
BUT if i copy someones tutorial assets / content and re-upload it claiming it’s mine, I’m an Indie developer.
I really don’t know what or how anything could be fixed, really this is on steams head b/c they are the ones really making profit off this garbage. The store fee, + a 30% minimum cut.
I mean why make a Half Life 3 or Episode 3 when you can just profit off tutorial assets made by companies like Epic or Unity?
You know, this is what bugs me. Here I am, trying to build some great and unique game that I pour a lot of hard work into, which is costing me a lot of my own money and time (which is also money) and will perhaps not even get me back my investments.
And then I just look at Steam and see guys getting some decent money by flooding Steam with asset flips, scams and rip offs, without any real effort on their side. Makes you question why you actually go the hard way if you could just be an a****** too and have it that much easier.
Because about 1% of the people you ever meet are good, honorable human beings. And those are worth all the effort of standing up to the other 99%, ******** and snakes. #musk-style
Thank you for restoring my believe in humanity. (:
And that’s exactly why I checked to see if people thought it was ok to use bought tree and rocks assets. That’s about as far as I go. Oh and clouds because I can’t afford to pay for Maya Prof every month but Maya LT is fine. Even though I did really want to dabble with volumetric clouds. Hopefully steams new Greenlight policy helps against this stuff.
Well there’s Good Ol Games.
They made assets for people to use. If you created assets, and put into mp. Wouldnt you like to see them in a game?
There’s a difference between using assets to build your game, and literally just uploading an unmodified content example.
By all means, use generic assets to get the work done - even the big AAA studios do this kind of thing all the time. It’ll be more obvious however if you use assets that aren’t generic.
@ambershee I absolutely agree. Somethings are done in disgusting tastes. I thought this was just a landscape. Turns out it’s the entire project just built for steam. LOL.
if epic sees no problem with it its basically up to the market to decide i say… but me personally i’d want a better product then what can be slapped together on a friday night.
The problem there is that ‘the market’ is blissfully unaware that they are being duped; your average consumer isn’t familiar with the free content examples and as such won’t recognise them.
I thing that average consumer only wanna play dont worry about the art. Poor developers have rights to make games.
I think it’s more a steam problem than an epic one.
Epic gives us some asset to begin with and we are free to use them legally.
But, steam is actually accepting every game on his store with no curation at all.
Several YT journalist (cynical brit, Jim Sterling) point that since a while now.
Some really good games will be drowned in the tremendous amount of asset flip and ****** game coming every day in the store.
The steam greenlight program was an attempt to filter these game but it was rapidly trolled by groups offering free keys for people to vote for there games.
This gives a bad idea of indie dev’s (law suit against game critics ! no kidding), make the success of well done game more difficult and learn to player that they can spend money in very very bad games…
Halas, Valve doesn’t seams to be wanting to do that… They speak about an algorithm that should put the best product in the front store and burry the rest in the limbos of steam.
But it will never replace a human curation and quality checking.
In general, asset flips are spottted by users and they have very bad appreciation… But they still in the store.
Quality of a game is regarless of use own assets or buy/free assets
You’re right but the games we call “asset flips” are only bought assets and have no production value at all…