GoodSarmatian
Jokerfied Western Male
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 9,408
And now I'm aganst it. It's OK that Valve and Bethesda get a cut, but not this much. The other way around (75% for the modder) would have been acceptable.
I sure hope you like paying for your mods
- Thread starter Oruc
- Start date
And now I'm aganst it. It's OK that Valve and Bethesda get a cut, but not this much. The other way around (75% for the modder) would have been acceptable.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,926
Why? 25% is the same system they already use for TF2, CS:GO, and DOTA.
Lets not pretend anybody in this thread really cares about the modder who is selling and how the final percentages are. The only thing buyers care about is how much does it cost to buy and is it worth that price, and nobody really cares about where the money in the end goes. That is a business decision and agreement made between the modder, Valve, and Beth.
Lets not pretend anybody in this thread really cares about the modder who is selling and how the final percentages are. The only thing buyers care about is how much does it cost to buy and is it worth that price, and nobody really cares about where the money in the end goes. That is a business decision and agreement made between the modder, Valve, and Beth.
On a point of principle, I do. I would happily make a donation to a modder for their mod and I long ago paid to remove ads for my account on the Nexus, but Im certainly not paying Valve for the privilege of using the ridiculous Workshop subscription method.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,926
Would you be okay if modders did something like they do for Sims game and create separate websites for the purpose of selling mods that gave a larger percentage of the cut to modders?
I personally find 75% too much, but Bethesda needs to make clear whether or not sales can happen on non-Steam sites.
I personally find 75% too much, but Bethesda needs to make clear whether or not sales can happen on non-Steam sites.
I avoided Sims 2 pay-sites like the plague, but I’d at least consider it if Bethesda and the modders in question were getting compensated in an easy-to-see way (like Humble Bundle does with their sales).
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,926
I don't understand why it matters who is getting compensated in the sales because, at the end of the day, this is a deal the modders willingly accept. I don't go to a restaurant and wonder which portion of my meal is going to the staff, to the store, and into the pockets of the owners and make my spending decisions from there.
And most people who buy actual video games don't stop and care how much of the money goes to the publishers and Valve before anybody else either.
And most people who buy actual video games don't stop and care how much of the money goes to the publishers and Valve before anybody else either.
I’m not most people. Besides which, in the very link you posted, Chesko alleged that Valve said that if a mod was free, it was fair game to merchandise without the modder’s consent. If Valve are willing to utterly ignore copyright law in that regard, what makes you think I want to subsidise them at all?
Maniacal
the green Napoleon
No one thinks you're a paid shill, just not seeing the full picture and maybe a bit naive.
The prices for almost all of those skins in Valve's games are ridiculously overpriced anyway.
At that point you're still better off donating to them via paypal.
I recall there being a couple modders for Mount&Blade who wanted to start charging for their mod, I think they worked out an agreement with TaleWorlds to do it, but I don't know what happened to the mod after that besides it being moved to their own website and it pretty much dropped off the radar.
Valve is performing absolutely no control over this at all, besides removing ones that are clearly inappropriate for the Workshop's rules like the HD horse genital mod that someone uploaded (and probably not by the actual author). There is nothing to check or enforce that people aren't stealing other's work and (trying to) profiting off of it. This is a major issue in and of itself.
And that is still kind of a BS price for many of the same reasons, although at least those skins are tested (not always very well) and fully supported (not very well sometimes) by Valve.
The prices for almost all of those skins in Valve's games are ridiculously overpriced anyway.
I do, because even though I am 100% against pay gating mods the fact that the modders only get 25% then they do 99% of the work is just plain wrong and insulting. It will also only serve to drive prices up a bit more, and why the hell would I want to support the modder if it means for them to get even $1 from me I have to pay $3 more to Valve & Bethsoft? I already bought the game, a DLC, and many other games (generally on sale, for prices that are lower than what some of these modders want).
At that point you're still better off donating to them via paypal.
I don't know how those Sims sites get away with it even if they call it a donation, anyone else trying that can and will get served a cease and desist from the publisher/dev and will see extremely few people even buy their mod.
I recall there being a couple modders for Mount&Blade who wanted to start charging for their mod, I think they worked out an agreement with TaleWorlds to do it, but I don't know what happened to the mod after that besides it being moved to their own website and it pretty much dropped off the radar.
Valve is performing absolutely no control over this at all, besides removing ones that are clearly inappropriate for the Workshop's rules like the HD horse genital mod that someone uploaded (and probably not by the actual author). There is nothing to check or enforce that people aren't stealing other's work and (trying to) profiting off of it. This is a major issue in and of itself.
Yeah, I have to say, my first reaction was a bit of betrayal and horror at this whole thing. Admittedly, it could turn out good, and based on a couple of hours last night looking over the big mods' response to the whole debacle, I think Skyrim's main mod suites will be fine. I highly suspect that no one is going to be making much money on the Steam Workshop from this, as I think due to all of the interconnecting mods that exist and the reliance on things like SKSE for more sophisticated mods, only very few are going to manage to succeed without issue. The graver concern is for Fallout 4 and/or Elder Scrolls 6 which will possibly have this implemented from the beginning. I suspect that the future will still give us less cooperation from the mod community as a whole and more independent (paid) mods that offer smaller amounts of content.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,926
Purchasing goods and services from a company does not equal subsidizing that company.
But in the end, the content creators accepted these terms.
I'm not insulted. If a modder is insulted, they won't put their mod up on the service.
No idea to be honest. If all the companies who would go after people making money on mods, you would think it would be EA.
But in the end, the content creators accepted these terms.
I'm not insulted. If a modder is insulted, they won't put their mod up on the service.
No idea to be honest. If all the companies who would go after people making money on mods, you would think it would be EA.
Maniacal
the green Napoleon
Wolfbeckett
Jerkin' and nonsense.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2011
- Messages
- 2,682
Yes. I personally don't really care what happens with Skyrim mods, I don't play Skyrim anymore. My concern is 100% for what will happen with future Bethesda games. Bethesda hasn't released a game since Morrowind that I would be willing to play unmodded, and even MW has mods that I consider necessary, although I would still play the game if they disappeared. If the mods I need to make Bethesda games fun to me start costing money, all of a sudden a Bethesda game starts to cost significantly more than other games, so why should I bother?
Gary Childress
Student for and of life
I'm sort of split on the issue of paying for mods. I've done graphic modding for a few games (including Civ III) and obviously wouldn't mind a few extra cents in return. On the other hand I also enjoy playing mods created by others so coming from the consumer standpoint I won't be looking forward to paying extra for unofficial content.
Not sure how to react to the direction the gaming industry seems to be going. All these DLC bundles seem to be a way of nickel and diming us to death, on the other hand I suppose the more lucrative the gaming industry becomes, the more variety of games we should (hopefully) see coming out. At least it's supposed to work that way in economic theory.
Not sure how to react to the direction the gaming industry seems to be going. All these DLC bundles seem to be a way of nickel and diming us to death, on the other hand I suppose the more lucrative the gaming industry becomes, the more variety of games we should (hopefully) see coming out. At least it's supposed to work that way in economic theory.
cybrxkhan
Asian Xwedodah
Copypasta from a post I made last night on the OT thread:
After some thinking, here are my thoughts as someone who has, if I may so boast, quite some modding experience (albeit not with Skyrim modding).
I don't think giving modders money is necessarily a bad thing. Modding can be hellishly like work sometimes. It can be stressful not only dealing with the actual modding process, but also with a vocal minority of entitled asshat users who act like dicks when you don't do things their way or cater to their demands. Though I haven't had it happen to me, apparently Crakedtoothgrin, a CKII modder who has occasionally been contracted by PI to make some artwork, even had people stalking him online when they got pissy. Certainly, making a bit of dough would make me more willing to put up with all that sort of crap.
However, as the implementation here is sloppy and awful, my biggest concern is what some may know as "modder drama". The (a?) Nexus admin correctly predicted this was going to happen a month or so ago, and stated their reservations:
Some who haven't been involved in modding may think the issue of asking permission or receiving credit as simply a pleasant matter of asking a question, but it's often not. People may conflict over how work can be integrated, whether the mod-taker has the right to change content he/she takes, how crediting should be done, and so on. Like treaties between nations and implementation of domestic law, people may agree to something, but then disagree on interpreting it - ie, I gave you permission to use x, in a manner y, but that did not imply you could do z with x. And then there's the issue that even if you make mod A and give permission for mod B to use its contents, you'll have to deal with mod B granting permission to mod C to use it; even if you make the creator of B agree to make others credit A, it's difficult to make sure they enforce it - and then mod C might give mod D permission, and so on.
Part of why I've always been very laid-back with regards to these matters when I modded CKII was because I wanted to avoid all this potential drama. Many, many modders, including some I've worked with, share vastly different approaches. Essentially, things are going to get a hella complicated now when we factor in this finite resource called money. And how will these squabbles be solved quickly and efficiently now, when money is involved? Normally, they are solved through faith and this sort of unspoken code of honor, or through giant flamewars. At the end of the day, though, the general consensus is that modders help each other. Throw in money, and this makes the idea of sharing your stuff less appealing. If I were making money off my CKII mods, I'd have been much, much less easy-going with these sort of matters
Perhaps Valve's implementation of this was fated to be sloppy and awful no matter what, regardless, given how chaotic and complicated the modding world can really be. It's like international law, where there's no supreme authority to enforce anything.
Anyways, I've sometimes joked to my fellow modders that you have to think of your mod projects a bit like a business, but that was mainly in terms of how you advertised yourself and in terms of finding niches and satisfying user demand. I never thought it could be like this. Things are going to get interesting, I suppose, or, it might end up after the initial wave of anger no one will care. We'll see.
But hey, I can guarantee you those porn mods will never be on sale.
After some thinking, here are my thoughts as someone who has, if I may so boast, quite some modding experience (albeit not with Skyrim modding).
I don't think giving modders money is necessarily a bad thing. Modding can be hellishly like work sometimes. It can be stressful not only dealing with the actual modding process, but also with a vocal minority of entitled asshat users who act like dicks when you don't do things their way or cater to their demands. Though I haven't had it happen to me, apparently Crakedtoothgrin, a CKII modder who has occasionally been contracted by PI to make some artwork, even had people stalking him online when they got pissy. Certainly, making a bit of dough would make me more willing to put up with all that sort of crap.
However, as the implementation here is sloppy and awful, my biggest concern is what some may know as "modder drama". The (a?) Nexus admin correctly predicted this was going to happen a month or so ago, and stated their reservations:
Some who haven't been involved in modding may think the issue of asking permission or receiving credit as simply a pleasant matter of asking a question, but it's often not. People may conflict over how work can be integrated, whether the mod-taker has the right to change content he/she takes, how crediting should be done, and so on. Like treaties between nations and implementation of domestic law, people may agree to something, but then disagree on interpreting it - ie, I gave you permission to use x, in a manner y, but that did not imply you could do z with x. And then there's the issue that even if you make mod A and give permission for mod B to use its contents, you'll have to deal with mod B granting permission to mod C to use it; even if you make the creator of B agree to make others credit A, it's difficult to make sure they enforce it - and then mod C might give mod D permission, and so on.
Part of why I've always been very laid-back with regards to these matters when I modded CKII was because I wanted to avoid all this potential drama. Many, many modders, including some I've worked with, share vastly different approaches. Essentially, things are going to get a hella complicated now when we factor in this finite resource called money. And how will these squabbles be solved quickly and efficiently now, when money is involved? Normally, they are solved through faith and this sort of unspoken code of honor, or through giant flamewars. At the end of the day, though, the general consensus is that modders help each other. Throw in money, and this makes the idea of sharing your stuff less appealing. If I were making money off my CKII mods, I'd have been much, much less easy-going with these sort of matters
Perhaps Valve's implementation of this was fated to be sloppy and awful no matter what, regardless, given how chaotic and complicated the modding world can really be. It's like international law, where there's no supreme authority to enforce anything.
Anyways, I've sometimes joked to my fellow modders that you have to think of your mod projects a bit like a business, but that was mainly in terms of how you advertised yourself and in terms of finding niches and satisfying user demand. I never thought it could be like this. Things are going to get interesting, I suppose, or, it might end up after the initial wave of anger no one will care. We'll see.
But hey, I can guarantee you those porn mods will never be on sale.
warpus
In pork I trust
I don't like this one bit, I think it's going to impact the modding community in mostly negative ways.
I am going to stick to free mods only.
I am going to stick to free mods only.
Chesko has spoken out about his experiences with the curated workshop.
Oruc
Reactionary
Yeah, I can only see theft and resale being a major problem of the mods that DO take a stand and decide not to be paid, unless they are already on Steam. Valve: Fence of the Modding Community.
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
I don't understand. If it's opt-in then wouldn't the modders, in essence consent to the 75% thing? If that breakdown isn't amenable to them they can always host their mods for free and request donations on patreon or whatever.
The 75% thing makes sense to me regardless. The reason mods are and have always been more or less fine is because they are nominally free. Nobody is making any money off them and therefore no copyrights or work are being infringed upon. When you throw money into the equation then you have a problem with copyright. 75% is the number Bethesda says they want if you're going to make money off of their labor and assets. That's their right. It's their product. If you don't want 75% of the proceeds going to them then host the mod for free or get free mods. If none of this works then mod-creators will just go back to the way it used to be. As long as content-creators aren't being forced to charge for their products I don't really see what the big deal is here.
Ok I can see how stealing modded assets could be a problem. But that's on Valve to create a system that allows mod creators to assert and dictate ownership over their products. The whole thing could be tricky as everybody who makes a mod is in violation of the original game company's copyright, so as far as I understand it, no mod creator technically owns any of their content.
The 75% thing makes sense to me regardless. The reason mods are and have always been more or less fine is because they are nominally free. Nobody is making any money off them and therefore no copyrights or work are being infringed upon. When you throw money into the equation then you have a problem with copyright. 75% is the number Bethesda says they want if you're going to make money off of their labor and assets. That's their right. It's their product. If you don't want 75% of the proceeds going to them then host the mod for free or get free mods. If none of this works then mod-creators will just go back to the way it used to be. As long as content-creators aren't being forced to charge for their products I don't really see what the big deal is here.
Ok I can see how stealing modded assets could be a problem. But that's on Valve to create a system that allows mod creators to assert and dictate ownership over their products. The whole thing could be tricky as everybody who makes a mod is in violation of the original game company's copyright, so as far as I understand it, no mod creator technically owns any of their content.
