save your apartment designs?

[Zyegs]

(02-09-2018, 12:17 AM)Avril 2018 Wrote:

(02-08-2018, 02:36 PM)Zyegs Wrote: In the beginning I made exclusive designs, but after seeing that those designs didn't end up being so exclusive, I decided to start selling them to more than one person.

The problem is that the people you sell it to can sell it to other people and so on. In the end the designer is the one who makes less money of all.

Basically I think the problem is that most players don't appreciate the effort and the work behind the designs (at least in my case, I can't speak for others). If they were honest enough not to resell the designs or give them without permission this wouldn't happen.

Not looking for an argument just a discussion.

If I commissioned a design should that not belong to me?   I can use, give or sell as I want.   If I paid you for an exclusive design and you sold it to another aren’t you in the wrong?

The “cost” in the design is the time it took you:  selling it to 1, 2 or 3 people does not result in more production costs.   So if you sold 20 for $10k each that would be better than 1 for $100k.   I might buy more than one design at $10k but maybe none at $100k.

The problem is that they should follow the same rules that many other digital products but they don't do it (although it's normal that they can't do it, after all this is a game). For example when you buy a license for a program or a videogame in digital version, apart from deciding to use it, you can give it or resell it but just one time, not infinitely.

I agree that selling it to several people doesn't increase costs, but it's normal for the "digital world". As happens with programs, or video games.

In short, designers don't want to spend our time so that other people without doing anything can get profit from a job that is not theirs.

[Avril 2018]

I don’t really disagree with what you have said so these are really just observations.   Thank you for replying anyway.

The problem is that they should follow the same rules that many other digital products but they don't do it (although it's normal that they can't do it, after all this is a game). For example when you buy a license for a program or a videogame in digital version, apart from deciding to use it, you can give it or resell it but just one time, not infinitely.

Yes, a key code, and not really practical in game.   But in general if I buy a programme or game for personal use I don’t think that I should pay twice for using it on two machines, my PC and my desktop.   So if I have two AVs with rooms I should not have to pay twice:  it’s like having to buy 2 CD’s, one to play at home and another in car.   I know that this is not the main point, it’s unauthorised reselling.

I agree that selling it to several people doesn't increase costs, but it's normal for the "digital world". As happens with programs, or video games.

Yes and I fail to understand the economics.   Full Photoshop sells for >£500 and cut down Elements for £70:  if full Photoshop was only £200 so many more people would buy it that Adobe would make more money.

In short, designers don't want to spend our time so that other people without doing anything can get profit from a job that is not theirs.

Yes and it’s down to a justifiable lack of trust in game.   If someone marketed your design then they would have done something that they should be paid for.   It’s when they sell it without your permission that is the problem.

[Zyegs]

You are welcome, thanks to you too for understand my point of view. Here are my observations.

Yes, a key code, and not really practical in game. But in general if I buy a programme or game for personal use I don’t think that I should pay twice for using it on two machines, my PC and my desktop. So if I have two AVs with rooms I should not have to pay twice: it’s like having to buy 2 CD’s, one to play at home and another in car. I know that this is not the main point, it’s unauthorised reselling.

Is true that you don't need to pay twice for use a programme or game on two machines, but this is because you are using the same account in both (Adobe account, Steam account, ect). If you try to use that game or programme at the same time in two machines, you just can't. In your example you can use the CD in both, but only in one at the same time.

Yes and I fail to understand the economics. Full Photoshop sells for >£500 and cut down Elements for £70: if full Photoshop was only £200 so many more people would buy it that Adobe would make more money.

It is also true that if anything lowers its price is more accessible, but that depends on the people you want to reach. For example, if Apple sold their products for cheaper price they would surely have more sales but wouldn't have that touch of exclusivity that makes it so distinguished.

Yes and it’s down to a justifiable lack of trust in game. If someone marketed your design then they would have done something that they should be paid for.   It’s when they sell it without your permission that is the problem.

I agree with you in this, but as I said at the beginning I don't think there is a solution to that problem.

[Avril 2018]

if Apple sold their products for cheaper price they would surely have more sales but wouldn't have that touch of exclusivity that makes it so distinguished.

Yes, Apple products are highly desired by many people;  even when they have a track record of fragile screens and phones slowing down.   In economic terms I think they can be described as a Veblen or positional good.

[Willy_for_Boobies]

Have a thought about it too and have perhaps a little improvement for some idea i read somewhere around here :

 - Designer opens his own thread: apartments by xxxxxxx
    (can also post in Thread :  Apartments but with own thread it would be perhapos more clearly arranged)
 - Headline of each picture/post can be "protected design by XXXXXXXX" or "free design by xxxxxxxx" 
 - Type of "user license" or copyright written under picture: 
  * "buyer can only use it for own apartment and has no right for selling or giving it to others (without permission of the designer / owner)
  * "sellable exclusively one time " and prize  or "sold only to xxxxxxx"
  * "sellable moretimes (or xx Times)" and prize  and "sold to xxxxxx" (list) .
  * "possible resellers are:  (list)

Artist can edit his posts to write there the legal or registered user(s) of his design.

[Zephyr]

(06-11-2018, 07:04 PM)Willy_for_Boobies Wrote: Have a thought about it too and have perhaps a little improvement for some idea i read somewhere around here :

 - Designer opens his own thread: apartments by xxxxxxx
    (can also post in Thread :  Apartments but with own thread it would be perhapos more clearly arranged)
 - Headline of each picture/post can be "protected design by XXXXXXXX" or "free design by xxxxxxxx" 
 - Type of "user license" or copyright written under picture: 
  * "buyer can only use it for own apartment and has no right for selling or giving it to others (without permission of the designer / owner)
  * "sellable exclusively one time " and prize  or "sold only to xxxxxxx"
  * "sellable moretimes (or xx Times)" and prize  and "sold to xxxxxx" (list) .
  * "possible resellers are:  (list)

Artist can edit his posts to write there the legal or registered user(s) of his design.

Perfectly good ideas but it only works if there is someone there to enforce it.  Would mnf or the mods be interested?

[Emmie]

It sounds like A LOT of work. And I'm also not entirely sure what stance the devs would have. Don't get me wrong, I can confidently speak for the devs when I say that taking credit for something someone else made, is not cool. But at the same time, I'm pretty sure these things would fall under public domain, so I don't know how much "enforcing" we'd be able to, or allowed to do. On top of that, there's the process of verifying the original creators claims etc. It sounds like a nice idea though.

[ludwig]

Hello,

I look for a background template for my 2 bedroom house.


I do not know how to do it, Does anyone have one free ?

Thnaks for your answer

[Amberlicious]

I understand all the angst from designers. When you put a lot of effort into something you want and expect to get the rewards yourself. And these can be financial or not. 
I do custom designs for selected people and I charge an amount that I'm happy to start with. When my customer buys the design it is his or hers. They are free to delete it, use it, resell it or gift it. Having said that I only do 'real' custom designs. I like to have meetings with the customer, discuss options, references, styles, etc. We often exchange images of real houses as references. Then I set to design something to match that briefing as best as possible. A few rounds of changes and details often follow. The whole process takes a lot of time, but result is something special. Regardless of the amount I charge, it will never cover for the real hours put into the project. This is the reason my designs cost more than most and also the reason I only design for people who appreciate that.

[LilCaylee]

That's the thing, They can be so expensive as to make the whole thing ridiculous. I realize that this may be in response to people reselling, as stated, but, for many of us, it seems a waste of good game cash.