.
Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 188

Thread: Trainz Content Creator Program, now online!

  1. #1

    Default Trainz Content Creator Program, now online!

    We have been working hard to get our online submission process ready for all content creators who are keen to earn some monetary rewards for their Trainz creations. We are very happy to announce the Trainz Content Creator Program (TCCP) online system is now open for business.

    TCCP allows all content creators to sign-in using their existing MyTrainz account and submit their DLC and then share in the ongoing revenues generated. This content can be anything from rolling stock and locos to new sessions and routes.

    Once submitted and approved, our content team will process and package the content ready for sale inside Trainz PC, Mac and iOS products as well as on SimulatorCentral.com and 3rd party websites such as STEAM.



    Please note, the TCCP online system is for content creators making payware DLC only. For free content we will continue our ongoing support for the Trainz Download Station (DLS).

    Submit your content via TCCP now @ https://contentcreators.trainzportal.com

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    5,016

    Default

    Any instruction of how this works please?

    Surely this should be in the payware forum.
    Last edited by amigacooke; August 7th, 2015 at 06:06 AM.

  3. #3

    Default

    You're seriously going down the Railworks route N3V? And how big is the creator's share of the profits? What's more, how do you expect people to buy this stuff when it only works in T:ANE, which, as I have noted in a few other threads, hasn't exactly proved a hit. I can't see many payware creators subscribing to this tbh.

  4. #4

    Default

    I doubt there will be many takers and people aren't going to stump up £25 for a model railway layout which is about all TANE is currently capable of building.

    The announcement also begs several supplementary questions...

    1. If I create a route and it is approved for a sale, is it just the author who gets the royalties? What about all the 3D modellers whose assets I have referenced, should they not get a share too? Why should I use a particular brand of trees and get a £2 commission on every route sold, when the tree or track spline creator gets nothing?

    2. If I create a session for a freeware route and try to sell it, then shouldn't the author of the route also get a commission.

    Before soliciting the creation of payware N3V should be repairing its status with the community and fixing up TANE, unless of course you really are that desperate for money. Cultivate the freeware which can go on the DLS and ensure ongoing sales of FCT's. I'm sure most savvy users will see this for what it is.
    TANE...Resistance Is Futile

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    United States of America, Va, Woodbridge
    Posts
    4,558
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    All very good questions Vern...

    Someone could make a session for Tume's new Avery-Drexel route and get paid for it, but Tume nevers sees a penny of that money..

    Same thing with JR's Mojave Sub...

    I can also see where someone could build up consists using someone's freeware and then try to have them sold as DLC..

    I think some more information is warranted.

    Hopefully N3V will see the logic in the questions being asked, and perhaps fix TANE first before trying to make more DLC for it.

  6. #6

    Default

    :|(10 charactergjgsnkgbh

    MY OPINIONS DO NOT REFLECT THOSE OF THE ERECTING HALL
    BNSF1238 on YouTube

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    not your concern
    Posts
    894
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I was going to attempt to add my CSX Florence Division as no one has done any of it. Then the more I tried to contact makers of freeware content, I found that so long as it was going to be used for TANE that they would not allow me to use their content. Then contacting N3V Games only turned empty promises and even got to where it involved Tony Hilliam and I exchanging a few choice words. While some may view this is as a golden opportunity, trust me, unless your using 100% of your own content, it's not what its cracked up to be.
    Now I just sit back and run my own route.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by n8phu View Post
    All very good questions Vern...

    Someone could make a session for Tume's new Avery-Drexel route and get paid for it, but Tume nevers sees a penny of that money..

    Same thing with JR's Mojave Sub...

    I can also see where someone could build up consists using someone's freeware and then try to have them sold as DLC..

    I think some more information is warranted.

    Hopefully N3V will see the logic in the questions being asked, and perhaps fix TANE first before trying to make more DLC for it.
    This is exactly the thing which has torn a rift through the RW-TS community. To the extent that some developers specifically prohibit anyone else profiting off the back of their work, or - sadly from the freeware users POV - referencing assets from a payware route in a freeware route even if shared on the Workshop. Some payware route providers have stipulated that even freeware scenarios should only really go on Workshop.

    Even if Tony & Co succeed in fixing Trainz, do they really want to go down a road which could tear the content creators apart?
    TANE...Resistance Is Futile

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    United States of America, Idaho
    Posts
    2,237

    Default

    I know people will hate this a lotttt....

    Payware payware, money money, $$$$,$$$
    That's it? Right now I'm still figuring out why I bought a game without trees and grass... Not very fun building routes without those assets that you HAVE to HAVE. If I wanted railworks, I would've bought it. Oh wait, I did. At this point, at least it has trees and grass you can use in the game to build a route. If I was N3V, I'd be ashamed, outstanding products, then you backstab the people that made your game what it is today by first releasing a game that is buggy incomplete and worthless, and then one that doesn't even have any trees or grass to build a route with. For surely anybody that has a brain should know that any game like Trainz should have trees and grass ready to go, not years later after it's already been released. You guys down in Australia must see a lot of fog, as TANE is full of it, and it is really annoying and makes 0 sense to me. Why no option just to turn it to 0 like in 12? Why does it have to be so complicated? I understand that you're building the next TS2015 but, really, you could make a simpler one than that. To tell you the truth, the people over in the TS-RW community are laughing at TANE. It's worse than MSTS. So I assume the new era is where everybody leaves, and the next Trainz is TANE= Trainz are no longer existent? I can't believe I actually supported this. I'm ashamed of myself for even buying your product.
    Does TANE have potential? Yes. Will it be realized? Not until we get people smart enough to realize it. The current people are not. As you can see, all they know is $$$$.
    Last edited by Enzo1; August 8th, 2015 at 05:49 AM.
    Chris
    And as always, Have fun!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom, Worcestershire
    Posts
    29,106
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Enzo1 View Post
    I know people will hate this a lotttt....

    Payware payware, money money, $$$$,$$$
    That's it? Right now I'm still figuring out why I bought a game without trees and grass... Not very fun building routes without those assets that you HAVE to HAVE. If I wanted railworks, I would've bought it. Oh wait, I did. At this point, at least it has trees and grass you can use in the game to build a route. If I was N3V, I'd be ashamed, outstanding products, then you backstab the people that made your game what it is today by first releasing a game that is buggy incomplete and worthless, and then one that doesn't even have any trees or grass to build a route with. For surely anybody that has a brain should know that any game like Trainz should have trees and grass ready to go, not years later after it's already been released. You guys down in Australia must see a lot of fog, as TANE is full of it, and it is really annoying and makes 0 sense to me. Why no option just to turn it to 0 like in 12? Why does it have to be so complicated? I understand that you're building the next TS2015 but, really, you could make a simpler one than that. To tell you the truth, the people over in the TS-RW community are laughing at TANE. It's worse than MSTS. So I assume the new era is where everybody leaves, and the next Trainz is TANE= Trainz are no longer existent? I can't believe I actually supported this. I'm ashamed of myself for even buying your product.
    Does TANE have potential? Yes. Will it be realized? Not until we get people smart enough to realize it. The current people are not. As you can see, all they know is $$$$.
    One small comment regarding the tree side. Part of the issue has not actually been caused by N3V (the Speedtree side) - the problem is due to IDV not supporting older Speedtree versions in their product as well and that the only 64-bit version, which is what T:ANE is, is versions 7 and later.

    Shane
    Shane Turner
    Technical and DirectX Advisor - Not affiliated with N3V

    My Forum -- PevSoft Tools -- Tutorial List (inc DirectX) -- My Utilities --TrainzTutorials.com

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    United States of America, Va, Woodbridge
    Posts
    4,558
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vern View Post
    This is exactly the thing which has torn a rift through the RW-TS community. To the extent that some developers specifically prohibit anyone else profiting off the back of their work, or - sadly from the freeware users POV - referencing assets from a payware route in a freeware route even if shared on the Workshop. Some payware route providers have stipulated that even freeware scenarios should only really go on Workshop.

    Even if Tony & Co succeed in fixing Trainz, do they really want to go down a road which could tear the content creators apart?

    Like the community isn't torn apart now.

    I can understand the sentiment of someone keeping others from profiteering from their hard work.

    I can see those figuring they are going to make a quick buck off of someone else's assets...

    Oh wait...
    Last edited by n8phu; August 8th, 2015 at 06:16 AM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, Victoria, Tecoma
    Posts
    3,777

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vern View Post
    1. If I create a route and it is approved for a sale, is it just the author who gets the royalties? What about all the 3D modellers whose assets I have referenced, should they not get a share too? Why should I use a particular brand of trees and get a £2 commission on every route sold, when the tree or track spline creator gets nothing?
    As with all previous discussions on this, N3V can include content in DLCs (and built-in) from the Download Station without needing to contact creators. This includes DLC packs created by 3rd party creators. For a $20 route, if you gave every creator $1 for ever asset they made, you'd end up owing every creator for every sale. This part of the DLS EULA has been in place for a very long time. Since the dependencies are available as freeware, they remain free (just also being distributed via the DLC system if required).

    The same can be said for ANY built-in or payware route that so much as references an asset. If what you are saying applied, then it would simply not be possible to even include built-in content in Trainz, let alone for any creator to release a payware route, or session.


    2. If I create a session for a freeware route and try to sell it, then shouldn't the author of the route also get a commission.
    Same as above.


    Note, this is only for DLS content, via the DLC system. If selling via your own website, you can do so for content from the DLS so long as you don't redistribute the content without permission. If you reference non DLS content, you'll need the creators permission.

    Before soliciting the creation of payware N3V should be repairing its status with the community and fixing up TANE, unless of course you really are that desperate for money. Cultivate the freeware which can go on the DLS and ensure ongoing sales of FCT's. I'm sure most savvy users will see this for what it is.
    There's more than just game programmers involved in a games company. Those who aren't game programmers generally take on a variety of tasks. This includes packaging/releasing DLC packs. This system has been in development for quite a while, and will mean that less resources are required to handle DLC packs. DLC packs mean sales, which means money to continue development of TANE, which means that issues can be fixed.

    Many of those who work on payware also work on freeware; and payware sales also help us to actually produce more freeware as we can.


    Zecrail DLS Content
    All comments are my own unless otherwise stated.

  13. #13

    Default

    Well then Zec, don't be surprised to see asset creators obsoleting their content on the DLS with little grey boxes or rude avatars to stop their stuff being referenced in a route someone else is getting paid for. If I was an asset creator rather than a route builder that is what I would seriously be considering doing right now.

    And a note to those who may be thinking about profiting from this...

    Any commission you earn on sales is classified as income and needs to be declared alongside any other salary or wage you may earn and subject to tax (and in the case of the UK National Insurance). People will be watching... Earning income in this manner may also breach your contract of employment with your main employer, especially if they feel there is a conflict of interest - i.e. you stay up until 2am working on your route then can't stay awake in your day job. So don't think of it as a simple way to make a quick buck.

    Also, as soon as your content starts changing hands for money, it will come under much more scrutiny. People who might have been forgiving of little errors or glitches in freeware will come down like a ton of bricks. Uploading something "as is" and leaving it unfixed is not an option for payware, you need to be prepared to repair and patch any problems that might come up.
    TANE...Resistance Is Futile

  14. #14

    Arrow Changes in the agreement needed.

    I am not saying I am happy with this "developent" or that I am not happy with it. I just like to mention some things found in the agreement.

    I just read the whole agreement and there are a few things that need some serious changing if you want to take payware creators more serious and get them to use your system:

    Pricing DLC:

    You are going to give 50% of the Net Price to the Content Creator.
    Not sure how this translates, but if "Net Price" translates to what I think it does than this effectively means this:
    "After we deduct our cost (like a cut for maintaining the website, helpdesk service, time we spend on writing newsletter, etc) from the sale price, you get 50% of what is left".
    Since the agreement does not state what the (estimated) costs are of these factors, it might already be 50% (if not more), resulting in the creator getting only 25% of the actual sale price.

    Paying 80% of the Net Price to the Content Creator would be a lot more appropriate, as your costs are already taken care off anyway, 20% is a pretty decent margin for doing nothing (as costs for what you did do are already covered) and more content available adds to your product popularity already (so increases sale as a whole, which already means more profit for you).

    Refunds:

    Let me quote the relevant part:
    4.4 Refunds
    N3V does not typically offer refunds to end users for digital products, however in cases where N3V is obliged by law to give refunds or decides to do so for commercial reasons, or where a Content Creator's breach of these terms has placed N3V in a position where it is ethically obliged to give refunds, the Content Creator will be liable for up to 100% of the sale price of the relevant Created Content for each item refunded.
    So after taking (in the current situation) at least 50% of the actual sale price, you are going to make the Content Creator pay 100% in case YOU decide the customer deserves a refund?
    In other words: You are going to make the Content creator pay at least double of what he initially made on the sale for something that you initially failed to notice when you evaluated the product being sold.
    Since "commercial reasons" can effectively mean "any reason at all", in theory that means the Content Creator can end up paying you (at least) twice the amount of money as he ever gained for the asset.
    Please explain to me how that makes sense.

  15. #15

    Default

    Sounds like a pyramid scheme to me, Knotty!
    TANE...Resistance Is Futile

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •