Mojang had always fostered a laissez faire sensibility it had pushed Minecraft as an open platform, freely customisable by both players and server providers.
The grievance many Minecraft fans had was simple: although these terms had always been present in Mojang's Minecraft EULA, they had never been enforced over the three years since the game's launch.
#The hive minecraft server update license
There were dozens of unfavourable comparisons between Mojang and monolithic video game publishers like Electronic Arts and Activision, the latter often criticised online for their highly restrictive digital rights management and user license agreements. With days, there was a hash tag #saveminecraft, which would be seen by over 500,000 users. In short, Mojang wanted to prevent servers from offering players a "pay to win" model to customers.īut the server providers balked – and a Twitter storm ensued. He also stated that servers could charge players for entry, and for personalisation items like cool hats and silly pets, but could not charge for items that would affect gameplay, such as powerful swords or potions. Mojang spokesperson Owen Hill explained that server providers could accept donations from players, as long as these payments were not exchanged for items or power-ups that would give players advantages in the game world.
The trouble started on Thursday 12 June when Mojang posted a statement on its website, responding to some Twitter disagreements about the extent to which server companies could monetise their custom Minecraft content and services. Now the previously benign Swedish studio is putting its foot down, and a fissure has opened up across the once peaceful Minecraft community. Mineplex, like hundreds of other Minecraft server providers, may be breaking the End User License Agreement (EULA) provided by the game's developer, Mojang.
0 kommentar(er)
