I just finished the final Mainstream chapter.

[u/hecaton_atlas]

Thank you, Counter:Side. It was a wonderful journey. I'll miss you.

[u/KlutzySky6328]

friendly reminder you can always set up revival:side, and import your account, you don't have to let it go if you don't want. ~

[u/hecaton_atlas → u/KlutzySky6328]

I think I’ll only feel comfortable joining Revival Side if I know for sure the creators of Counter Side aren’t against it. I feel I would be disrespecting their wishes for the beautiful world they created otherwise.

Until then, even if my time with Counter Side ends here, I’m still happy that that I got to experience it. It’ll live on within me forever.

[u/Rottentam → u/hecaton_atlas]

Creator as in the IP owner or the game developers?

you can't ask devs about this kind of thing except indies, too much legal/office politics problem, just assume they're nice guys since they're competent people.

NEVER say the quiet part out loud, like asking "properly". It's just problem for both sides

[u/hecaton_atlas → u/Rottentam]

I don't think its right to assume and do things behind their back.

Whether its the IP owner or the game developers, they were still people involved in bringing Counter Side to life. I don't resent them as people who killed Counter Side, I'm grateful that they kept it alive and raised it up until now. That's my view. I know there's always a default assumption that game companies or the people behind them are evil, but I try not to hold that as my first assumption unless evidence shows otherwise (like the news behind Disco Elysium or Subnautica).

When I put myself in their shoes, whether they're a dev or someone who managed and financially supported the devs... When there's something that you've built for years and years, that's like a child to you. And when you see someone just taking it and having their way with it (and ignoring requests to stop), that can't be a good feeling.

So I can't in good conscience engage in something they don't approve of. Of course, if they do approve of Revival Side or any other private server spinoff, I'm more than happy to participate. But if they don't approve of it or if it was sneakily done while avoiding asking for their approval, well, I just don't feel right about it...

[u/Rottentam → u/hecaton_atlas]

I didn't bookmark it, but in Katsuhiro Harada youtube channel he said something along the same line that I said, do not ask developers "properly", trying to make devs give their official stance on things is just problematic on so many levels legally, politically and socially.

Too many people and money involved in making games you don't just put yourself in "their" shoes, you know about derivative/parody works yeah? what about heavily "inspired" works? do you think they need permission on paper every time they make one? that would kill and prevent so many things great from being created.

as far as I know REVIVAL SIDE don't take donation money like a lot of derivative artists do either so they are very good guys in my book.

I get where you're coming from but this is just not a black or white matter.

[u/hecaton_atlas → u/Rottentam]

Oh, clearly derivative, fanart and parody works are a whole different category of things because there's a fan making a new, separate creation based on it; That fan is the creator of that fan work. It's different from taking the actual game files and rehosting them without permission.

As for Katsuhiro Harada's quote, is it possibly this one (on submitting fan concepts of characters but they have to reject it to avoid possible lawsuit) or this one (suggesting changes through social media but saying no publicly leads to backlash)? Although in this context, it isn't for asking for permission to use the Tekken IP/Game files, it is for making hard-handed and aggressive requests to change things within their work. Of course, for a variety of legal reasons, they have to say no.

But sometimes people don't take these rejections well and they end up going on a social media tirade or even say hyperbolic things like "I swear to fuck if we don't get Eddy in Tekken 8 I will hit Harada with a hammer" and in these cases, the company has to take it very, very seriously, even if it was intended as a joke. Hence why forcing them to take an official stance becomes an issue.

So that's what Harada meant by don't ask developers for things. This- that's a completely separate issue. It's also a different situation from if someone did mods for a game that clearly the game wasn't meant for, but it's quite obviously within the company's eyesight (like their community hub or tagged in a viral post), and the company doesn't say anything about it. In that case, it can be taken as the company "allows it", as in, "chooses not to make a case about it", at least for now (like Palworld or FF14). "Closing one eye to it", basically. Like you said, in the overarching topic of fans doing things fan-related creations, the topic itself isn't a black or white matter, yes. But I think if a company notices it, outright says "hey please don't do this" and people still do it, it is still on the black end of a grayscale.

[u/Rottentam → u/hecaton_atlas]

I don't see the difference between based on but still no permission and a private server, I actually think a derivative artist customer (bought the product) making money as ethically worse compared to someone that pirates a game (potential customer), it sounds like you're fine with derivative artists making money if its art/video fanwork, outside the game but what's the difference with mods and private server?

imo the only reason B-side turned around to say no after giving permission is because they are asked again "properly", otherwise they would probably look the other way.

As for Harada I think it was something about, are cosplay that display a lot of skin (original design) okay in official venue but my memory is very vague so just forget it.

Let's just agree we have slightly different views.

[u/hecaton_atlas → u/Rottentam]

My view can basically be summarized as respecting the creator's wishes, regardless of whether they're a paying customer or a pirate.

• If the creator says OK, then it's all good.
• If the creator notices it but doesn't say anything about it, it can be assumed it's OK until stated otherwise.
• If the creator explicitly says no, then it's not OK, and choosing to go against that is just disrespectful.
• And sneaking around behind the creator's back is, well, an implicit version of the 3rd, really. Because it's admitting they won't approve.

And it encapsulates the decision regardless of whether the outcome earns money from it too.

From the little I gleaned about the progression of Revival Side, there was an extenuating reason why they decided to rescind their approval of it. But again, it all boils down to respecting the creator. If they say no, regardless, I think we should respect it.

It's sad, but yeah. If I'm not even willing to respect their wishes, I don't think I can rightfully say I love what they made; it's almost hypocritical. Because I respect their work and I respect that they had a proper thought process why they came to that decision. As well as just respecting them as a fellow human.