Yeah, I get you, though what @Scriptos said is true, instead of making temporary solutions, they should work on an alternative before removing the feature completly.
1 Like
I personally feel like the minority in this situation, as many people have expressed their happiness for this change. I on the other hand used private modules as one of few primary sources of income. I can no longer sell my product because no temporary or long-term fix was released after this announcement. People could simply copy my code, change it, re-release it, and because it is a paid service, these things are not meant to happen.
Making my module public is also not viable because by checking “Allow Copying” which is necessary to make modules public, you give all users rights to take, modify, etc your code. This voids the copyright you are given when publishing a private module. If someone were to steal my product, I could not do anything about it.
This is not okay. I have really been trying to push for a solution or something but nobody listened to what I had to say. I often feel like the features we are given to provide a better economy across the board are being restricted simply because some people are being malicious.
I have no control over who takes my code and re-sells it and that is a large loss in profit for me. It discourages me to develop on this platform in many ways.
I also believe that some people think that making games or contributing to games is one of the only ways to make profit on the platform. However, as I have described above, that is not true. Providing a service to other games for a fee was an option before this change. This change has essentially ruined an entire method of making money on Roblox.
8 Likes
What I said on my flagged post is basically this, but in a way more…truthful… than what people don’t want to see. This change will discourage people from developing and be a damaging factor to the developer base on roblox. If they would listen to their community and respect the feedback, this could go very differently.
4 Likes
Roblox should not be able to completely remove a feature without providing some sort of middle ground that compensates. This change hurt at least one developer, which is in my opinion one developer too many. Even if their compensation did not allow me to continue selling my product, it still would mean that they care about coming up with something to allow the majority of people impacted by this change to continue updating their product on the platform.
7 Likes
I fully agree. I disagree that they are removing a feature so widely used and not providing an alternative until the end of the year. This ruins a lot of services (as stated numerous times).
3 Likes
Lots of people here rely on private modules, maybe if there could be a way of denying certain actions of the module (e.g. you deny the module to create a new Instance for example) that could prevent backdoors to be inserted into games.
Maybe there could be a permission level that you set while requiring the module, for example
- Level 1: Can’t use functions, create new Instances or access Remotes
- Level 2: Can use functions
- Level 3: Can insert Instances
- Level 4: Can access Remotes
This would be hard to work with and there wouldnt be enough permission settings for certain modules, but it could be a temporary solution until an alternative method has been developed.
3 Likes
I think having a toggle function to allow Private Modules is one of the better suggestions i’ve seen.
One argument made against it is that people don’t know what they’re getting into when clicking “YES” to turn them on, but again, why are we limiting the community because people can’t do basic research into private modules and how they can positively and negatively benefit the community.
1 Like
What is “basic research” into a closed-source module you have 0 control over?
I would prefer a permission system as it gives you more control over what the module can do in your game and you can stop it from inserting malicious models etc into your game while it still serves its function.
1 Like
“Basic Research” is knowing that they can harm your game and to trust the individual who owns the private module.
1 Like
I agree. I think that this would be another great alternative to completely wiping out Private Modules.
1 Like
Yeah, as stated earlier its obviously not going to work perfectly fine, but it could work until they find a better alternative for private modules.
1 Like
Imagine this scenario
A bad actor creates a useful (or reuploads someone elses) module that is genuinely good, and people use it and say it’s good and what not, because it is at that point, then suddenly, the bad actor changes the code afterward, which being private you can’t tell at all, then adds a backdoor to all the games using it.
If there is ways to cause harm to games, people will do it. Can’t rely on people to do “basic research” if it’s really not easy to do in the first place, especially for new/young developers
Thats exactly what the permission system would prevent; If you take away its permission of adding new Instances, backdoors can’t be added without you knowing.
1 Like
I see your point, but I still disagree.
I think that it still matters to be informed about Private Modules and how they can be manipulated to harm your game. It is just highly frustrating to me to see a good feature, in my opinion, to be removed without any alternative mentioned.
1 Like
Very true, I would be happy if they’d atleast work together with the community and find a good suitable solution to this problem. I think its unfair towards us to simply change things up just like they want to and we have to deal with it.
2 Likes
I believe my post earlier was flagged because I recommended roblox become like EA, and work on working with their community. EA actually listens to their community and works on their feedback, why won’t roblox? This isn’t meant to bash roblox, but merely to suggest they improve their relations with the community they say they listen to.
3 Likes
I completely agree. Once again not to bash ROBLOX but I believe ROBLOX struggles with communicating and listening to their community. Especially the ones developing it.
2 Likes
Aye. My post may have been too harsh with the truth, but I was merely pointing out how another company listens to their community and is improving their relations with their player base.
2 Likes
I’m sure if they’d listen to what we have to say and what we have in mind, this whole topic wouldn’t be a problem for anyone really. It would be a plus on both Roblox’s and our side.
2 Likes