By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - LittleBigPlanet contains copyright system

LOL MATURE on 27 August 2008
WessleWoggle said:

Restrict - To keep or confine within limits

It's restriciting by definition.

I have no problem with making speical levels to send to friends and things like that, but what it is implying is that when you put out a level, you can restrict who can play it.

"Additionally, you can control who is allowed to use your levels by setting a difficulty rating and/or giving away invite keys."

You can control who plays it so it's restricted. I'm not saying it's a bad thing but it IS restricting, which you said it isn't.

 

 

 I don't think "difficulty rating" means that only people who know how to play can play it but for people who may be new to the game might find the level too challenging and frustrating for them if they so choose to download it. (So I dont think difficulty rating means its stoping people from playing just warning new people)

and "giving away invite keys" would be exactly for all the reasons I posted.

1. "Mature" content

2. friend only content.

3. level feed back from select few.



Around the Network
LOL MATURE on 27 August 2008

Sqrl said: 

I'm not sure you understand the meaning of the word restrict then.  Whether or not these features are restricting is not even debatable..they clearly meet the very definition of the word. 

Now if you want to argue that those restrictions will be used sparingly and only when it suits the good of the community then that is fine (and I hope you're right).  But to suggest that they aren't restrictions at all is a bit ridiculous.

The bottom line is that it will be up to the community to decide how these restrictions will be utilized and that means that the most interesting aspect of the game (the sharing of content and community creativity) is going to have a bit of a question mark next to it for many people until the game launches and they get it in their hands. 

You are of course free to be optimistic about the prospects but personally I subscribe to the philosophy that pessimism has all the advantages.  I'm either going to be right or pleasantly surprised, either way I can claim a victory

 

 These restrictions are stoping people from playing a level they don't even know about.

Let's say I create a level. I send out my friend invites.

Lets say I have no clue who you are. You don't get one. You have no clue this level exists

Does that effect you at all? No. How does that restrict your game play? How does not playing a level you have no clue about effect you?  It doesnt.

But it allows me to be more free with my level design and who i give it out to making it more friendly towards the creaters and giving me more functions and customizations allowing me to have more options on what I do with what I create. Not restricting me at all and actually giving me more content and fun.



TheRealMafoo on 27 August 2008
Sqrl said:

OK I was kind of suspicious of the idea that people could sell their content before but adding in even more restrictions really does make me wonder how open it will truly be. I think the fundamental idea is the free and open sharing of creativity, I don't really know how adding restrictions and barriers etc..really fits into that idea but I guess we will all see soon enough.

I really think this is the wrong direction but it will be up to the community to decide how it really plays out.

 

I don't get this. Giving me more options is less restrictive, not more. I can now do more things with my content (make it private, unchangeable, open, etc).

How is giving me more options restrictive?

I mean if the original design was to do this, and then the developers said "we are now going to make all content open and free for everyone to do anything they wanted with it", I would feel like they restricted me more, not less.



LOL MATURE on 27 August 2008
TheRealMafoo said:
Sqrl said:

OK I was kind of suspicious of the idea that people could sell their content before but adding in even more restrictions really does make me wonder how open it will truly be. I think the fundamental idea is the free and open sharing of creativity, I don't really know how adding restrictions and barriers etc..really fits into that idea but I guess we will all see soon enough.

I really think this is the wrong direction but it will be up to the community to decide how it really plays out.

 

I don't get this. Giving me more options is less restrictive, not more. I can now do more things with my content (make it private, unchangeable, open, etc).

How is giving me more options restrictive?

I mean if the original design was to do this, and then the developers said "we are now going to make all content open and free for everyone to do anything they wanted with it", I would feel like they restricted me more, not less.

Basically what I'm trying to say.

More options = less restricting (Even if the option is to restrict other people from playing)

 



IllegalPaladin on 27 August 2008

I was wondering about this. Would you be able to take a level somebody else made, edit some of it, and then pawn it off as your own? Would there always be basic data of the level (like a history of users who worked on it) or something?

It'd give the people who would want it the option to keep their levels from being messed up and such.



Around the Network
DOATS1 on 27 August 2008

excuse my ignorance, but i see nowhere in the text that you HAVE to copyright your own content. as far as i understand, it's only optional. so people will only copyright their content if they don't want it to be copied. what's so bad about that? if people want to openly share, they can happily do so.




mesoteto on 27 August 2008
Godot said:
Obliterator1700 said:

LBP NEWS!

In a game like LittleBigPlanet, sharing user generated content is a big part of the experience. Ever more so, protecting one's personal creations is going to be an even bigger issue. With players expected to swap content daily, one has to wonder how will players control the distribution of unique content in the do-it-yourself platformer?

The answer is that the game will utilize a simple system called "copyright" which is not the same as the legal sense. Players can "copyright" objects which are collectibles in their levels; copyright items can be used by the people who've collected them, but they won't be able to alter your content or give it away to others. Non-copyright items can be edited and shared freely by anyone. Additionally, you can control who is allowed to use your levels by setting a difficulty rating and/or giving away invite keys.

http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2008/08/26/littlebigplanet-contains-copyright-system/

 

What do you think of this? I think it makes sense and is actually a good idea.

 

I think it may actually hinder the experience. This game is all about sharing not restricting.

 

i am no fan of the game but this does seem to hit the nail on teh head...whats teh point of making stuff if you dont want teh world to see it and use it to its full potential?



 

Lafiel on 27 August 2008

@ DOATS1)

indeed,

the nay-sayers just have a fieldday again with possible worst-case scenarios, while infact this just gives creators more freedom to decide what happens with their own work


@ mesoteto )

The creator can decide to share it and make it available for everyone, he just also has the option to not do so, what's the problem with that?
Believe me, there will be enough people who are willing to share, especially in a social game like this.


@ sqrl )

and if all of mankind had subscribed (to that philosophy) we'd still be living on the trees



mesoteto on 27 August 2008

this game will be made by people that are really good at making levels and if they decide to limit who can play them...you will have death of the game

i am afraid that what will end up happening is tons of ok levels but nothing stellar unless you know the right people and you will quickly lose people wanting to play

kinda like an top tier class will have all the great levels and most of the good levels then you will get just some random crap for everybody else

i think they can do copy right but make it a times thing, you can only hold the level for so long then it goes out to the world to play



 

badgenome on 27 August 2008

I'm not really a fan of the idea of charging for user created levels, but this one sounds like a sensible feature to me. Why not let the people who create content have some control over it?