# Valve/Bethesda Introduce paid mods System



## Estillum (Oct 24, 2012)

http://steamcommunity.com/workshop/aboutpaidcontent/
Not sure how I feel about this..


----------



## ScorchedEarth (Jul 12, 2014)

I don't like this corporative foray into what has traditionally been a free hobby by players for players. Now creators who previously created content for free are going to start seeing dollar signs, leading to a greedier modding community overall. It's a cashgrab.


----------



## ScorchedEarth (Jul 12, 2014)

Valve's cut is 75% and the 25% the actual creator gets is subject to taxes. WOW. Just wow. Valve is the new EA. Screw this, I'm buying on GOG from now on.


----------



## Wylini (Mar 23, 2015)

I'm not even a PC gamer and this pisses me off. At least Nexus is still free, although people are taking their mods off of Nexus and putting them exclusively on steam to make a quick buck.

There is no way this is going to last with all the community backlash.


----------



## Kiba (Apr 26, 2013)

Well their goes the whole allure of being a PC gamer. Hopefully this doesn't start a trend among other developers.


----------



## Kanova (Dec 17, 2012)

I don't think Nexus will ever go down. Most mod creators do it for the love of doing it, not because they are greedy ****s. Besides, if it gets too bad I'll just start torrenting them instead of buying as a nice **** you. No scare.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

Sorry, but I think this is great :duck that money could help people. Not everyone has the time or money to work for free on good quality mods.


----------



## Wylini (Mar 23, 2015)

Persephone The Dread said:


> Sorry, but I think this is great :duck that money could help people.


Yeah, but they could have carried it out in a better way. I think a donation option would have been perfect.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

Wylini said:


> Yeah, but they could have carried it out in a better way. I think a donation option would have been perfect.


Perhaps, and I think the 75/25 split someone mentioned above if true is harsh (since this is supposed to be giving back to people that increase the longevity of your game... Not using them for cheap dev work..) But I don't think the idea of mod makers getting money and encouraging people to pay for good content is a bad thing. Especially for larger, good quality mods that are basically like dlc in their own right and it would encourage better quality from creators at least.


----------



## Tokztero (Sep 12, 2013)

First they start selling games in development or demos and now this!!!


----------



## ScorchedEarth (Jul 12, 2014)

I think this could change modding permanently, and not for the better. This move is basically Valve butting in out of nowhere and introducing a monetary incentive where none was present or needed. Modders could ask for donations, this could even be integrated into Steam. But no, Valve has to have their (enormous) cut. We've had a few of these awful, anti-consumer moves lately. The demise of the trading system, Early Access with no quality control or refunds, Greenlight community voting that is ridiculously easy to cheat, and now this. You know what feature I'd like to see? A support system that's staffed by people rather than apes.


----------



## Esteban (Dec 8, 2014)

This is really disappointing. I'd rather just pay for DLC from the developers than from a bunch of amateurs. 

LOL @ paying for Skryim mods. This has to be some kind of joke. $4.99 for the mod Wet And Cold? 

The only time I might consider paying for a mod is if the quality was along the lines of The Shadow Broker DLC for Mass Effect 2 or the DLC for Bioshock Infinite. Skyrim mods -- not a single one of the numerous ones I tried -- don't even approach that level of quality. 

I don't see these amateurish attempts at DLC approaching that level of quality without them turning it into some kind of profession. But, if you're at that level of talent why bother with modding in the first place? You might as well just make your own game.

This just looks like another attempt at turning gamers into beta testers who apparently ought to be grateful enough for the opportunity to do so by shelling out money for amateurish content. 

How about this, game developers: You complete your games before releasing them so modding communities like the Skyrim modding community don't have to exist in the first place to do the job you should have done in the first place? Use a game engine that isn't riddled with bugs, enrich your gameworld with characters that are actually interesting, create gameplay and RPG elements that aren't flawed and broken, etc. 

Don't export your jobs to amateurs.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

Esteban said:


> This is really disappointing. I'd rather just pay for DLC from the developers than from a bunch of amateurs.
> 
> LOL @ paying for Skryim mods. This has to be some kind of joke. $4.99 for the mod Wet And Cold?
> 
> ...


That's not always an option, say if you're making armour and stuff like that but don't have the necessary, oh I don't know, programming knowledge to make an entire game yourself?

Honestly you guys depress me. I can understand being irritated by the implementation but why if some people are willing to pay would you not want to see mod creators get money?

Because you hate your life and don't want people to make money doing 'the wrong thing?'

These people should get a proper job like working as an investment banker! A job they'll hate until they kill themselves as everyone should do! Shame on them for thinking they could ever get money doing something enjoyable to them!


----------



## Esteban (Dec 8, 2014)

Persephone The Dread said:


> That's not always an option, say if you're making armour and stuff like that but don't have the necessary, oh I don't know, programming knowledge to make an entire game yourself?


Exactly my point. In order for mods to approach the level of quality as the DLC in the examples I listed above (I wouldn't buy armor as DLC or a mod), they'd have to turn it into some sort of profession.

As most mods stand now, they're not worth the money, imo, but go ahead and pay for it if you want to. A fool and his money are soon parted. I view this as yet another attempt by developers to export their jobs to gamers.



Persephone The Dread said:


> Honestly you guys depress me. I can understand being irritated by the implementation but why if some people are willing to pay would you not want to see mod creators get money?


 Other people can go ahead and pay for amateurish content if they want to, but I sure as hell won't. Developers are just going to end up releasing games that are even more broken with the expectation that some modder will fix it -- for a price. The EA model is annoying enough (See BF4's disastrous release and its content for sale) without it basically being exported to amateurs.



Persephone The Dread said:


> Because you hate your life and don't want people to make money doing 'the wrong thing?'


People can try to make money in whatever legal way they want, however dumb and wrong I think it is. I'm still not paying for it.



Persephone The Dread said:


> These people should get a proper job like working as an investment banker! A job they'll hate until they kill themselves as everyone should do! Shame on them for thinking they could ever get money doing something enjoyable to them!


I don't care what jobs they get or don't get. I'm not paying for some charity service for amateurish content that's better suited as a hobby.


----------



## Wylini (Mar 23, 2015)

LawfulStupid said:


> The demise of the trading system, Early Access with no quality control or refunds, Greenlight community voting that is ridiculously easy to cheat, and now this. You know what feature I'd like to see? A support system that's staffed by people rather than apes.


I completely agree with this. A big problem with this new system is that anyone can release a half-*** mod and expect to be paid. Plus, you don't always know what you are getting.


----------



## Estillum (Oct 24, 2012)

Esteban said:


> amateurish


Jesus can you stop saying that. Just because the content creators aren't taking it up the *** my some major games company doesn't mean their work is "amateurish", I've seen Major Game overhauls and content additions that rival a lot of AAA dross coming out lately, by that logic indie game's aren't worth buying solely because they are self employed.

My major problem with this is the price of the mods, and the amount that is actually going to the mod devs. I still play skyrim to this day almost entirely due to the efforts of modders so I'd agree it'd be unfair of me to not at least throw a little cash their way, But the sad truth is I'm ****ing poor, so in reality instead of giving back to all the mod devs it's just seriously limiting the amount of mods I can use. So goes life I suppose, But when there are countless indie games on steam for five dollars, or wet and cold effects for one game at the same price My choice is obvious. 
They could definitely be priced better, I would possibly spend five dollars on major dlc sized addons like Falskaar, but not something as insignificant as wet and cold. That and all if not most of the money should go to the modders, if I'm paying anything I want to know the money is going to the people whose content I enjoyed. The stated 1/3 split is absolutely ridiculous, especially if rumours on the nexus are true that the modders only make money after they make over 400$ or the local equivalent. ****ing ridiculously greedy for people who are supposedly trying to help out content creators.


----------



## Paper Samurai (Oct 1, 2009)

Not too happy about this. Modding has always been free to end users with optional donations. There is no modder out there who does what they do expecting a huge pay check, this is an attempt to commercialise something that doesn't need it.


----------



## Estillum (Oct 24, 2012)

Why do I feel like one could draw parallels to this and when youtube started paying people to make videos...


----------



## ScorchedEarth (Jul 12, 2014)

Persephone The Dread said:


> Honestly you guys depress me. I can understand being irritated by the implementation but why if some people are willing to pay would you not want to see mod creators get money?


It's too drastic a move, an immediate monetization of a hobby that has largely been free thus far. It's likely to irrevocably change the modding scene, and it further centralizes the gaming market into Steam when previously, for example, the main source for Skyrim mods was a non-Steam, independent website. And just think, all of a sudden if you want full access to community-created content, you'll have to fork over likely hundreds of dollars to buy every Skyrim mod. It's so blatantly anti-consumer.

Oh, and you just know they're going to treat it like Early Access and Greenlight. No quality control or policing whatsoever, total Wild West scenario. For amateur-created mods it's even more of a concern because suppose you buy a 5-dollar mod with a long questline and discover a couple days later that the latter half is bugged. Even the 24-hour refund policy won't help you then. It's not even really a refund, the money goes to your Steam wallet.

Finally, this being Steam, they're very likely to somehow lock downloaded content so you can't just copy-paste and send it to a friend. Which rules out player tweaking of the mod files in case they want something changed or fixed. Which is, you know, _what modding is all about_. Even as a non-creator, I've had to get my hands dirty once to get a mod to behave how I wanted it to, and it's unlikely that Steam will allow this tampering.

I'm not against creators being compensated for their work, but I think donations are a better way of doing it when it comes to mods. Almost anything would be better than this shameless move.


----------



## Esteban (Dec 8, 2014)

Estillum said:


> Jesus can you stop saying that. Just because the content creators aren't taking it up the *** my some major games company doesn't mean their work is "amateurish", I've seen Major Game overhauls and content additions that rival a lot of AAA dross coming out lately, by that logic indie game's aren't worth buying solely because they are self employed.


No. Most of it is the work of amateurs when compared with quality DLC on the market. That doesn't mean it's a bad thing necessarily, but I don't want to pay for it. And ffs most indie developers aren't exactly making games at the complexity of Mass Effect or Bioshock or something else requiring more technical skill. Yes, some of their content -- their mods for more complex games -- can rival some of the crap DLC being released by developers, but that just speaks to the apparently poor standards of some developers.

As I said previously, the only time I'd be willing to pay for a mod is if its quality is along the lines of The Shadow Broker mission from Mass Effect 2 or Bioshock Infinite's DLC. That's more along the lines of what I think as being professionally done DLC. None of the highly rated Skyrim mods even approach that quality.

Basically I won't pay for most mods because most of them will be as poorly done as some of the notoriously bad DLCs released by developers in the past. Does anyone remember the horse armor DLC released by Bethesda for Oblivion back in the day? That's basically what we're getting.

Again, others are free to pay for it if they want, but I'm not buying mother****ing horse armor. lmfao 

And, seriously, you couldn't even pay me to use most of the trash mods released for Skyrim. In order to get that game to a playable state without it crashing all the time, you have to install extra software, make patches, check for compatibility, etc. Why should I have to pay for something that I have to work to even get working?


----------



## Paper Samurai (Oct 1, 2009)

Estillum said:


> Why do I feel like one could draw parallels to this and when youtube started paying people to make videos...


Not a great analogy I don't think. End users were never paying youtubers, that was a continuation of a _free_ service which evolved to allow people to make a living from it.

People who watched youtube also didn't have the issue of being milked more and more with each passing year (DLC)


----------



## Estillum (Oct 24, 2012)

Paper Samurai said:


> Not a great analogy I don't think. End users were never paying youtubers, that was a continuation of a _free_ service which evolved to allow people to make a living from it.
> 
> People who watched youtube also didn't have the issue of being milked more and more with each passing year (DLC)


Not on the consumer end but on the developer end, but since consumers are the most affected by this maybe not the most perfect analogy in retrospect, though for some reason that is what I'm continuously the most reminded of.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

LawfulStupid said:


> It's too drastic a move, an immediate monetization of a hobby that has largely been free thus far. It's likely to irrevocably change the modding scene, and it further centralizes the gaming market into Steam when previously, for example, the main source for Skyrim mods was a non-Steam, independent website. And just think, all of a sudden if you want full access to community-created content, you'll have to fork over likely hundreds of dollars to buy every Skyrim mod. It's so blatantly anti-consumer.
> 
> Oh, and you just know they're going to treat it like Early Access and Greenlight. No quality control or policing whatsoever, total Wild West scenario. For amateur-created mods it's even more of a concern because suppose you buy a 5-dollar mod with a long questline and discover a couple days later that the latter half is bugged. Even the 24-hour refund policy won't help you then. It's not even really a refund, the money goes to your Steam wallet.
> 
> ...





Persephone The Dread said:


> Honestly you guys depress me. *I can understand being irritated by the implementation* but why if some people are willing to pay would you not want to see mod creators get money?


Not sure I understand the problem with greenlight though besides potential bias, but you'll find that everywhere.


----------



## ScorchedEarth (Jul 12, 2014)

Persephone The Dread said:


> Not sure I understand the problem with greenlight though besides potential bias, but you'll find that everywhere.


Do you know how tripe like Air Control got through Greenlight? Devs went on forums promising free game codes to whomever voted for the game on Greenlight. People went like 'yay, free cards!' and voted without even looking at the game. Basically, if you have 100 bucks and a bunch of assets you can string together into some minimalistic form of gameplay, you can get your drek on Steam. Good luck finding the gems in that mess. And Valve will happily sell it all as long as they get a cut.


----------



## Estillum (Oct 24, 2012)

Esteban said:


> Again, others are free to pay for it if they want, but I'm not buying mother****ing horse armor. lmfao


I can at least agree with you on that, I don't mind paying for major game affecting mods that took some massive effort to put together, but I can't see myself ever buying any of the ninety-nine cent swords, or several dollar armour sets when the change is purely a minor aesthetic one and the in-game sets work just fine from a mechanical standpoint.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

LawfulStupid said:


> Do you know how tripe like Air Control got through Greenlight? Devs went on forums promising free game codes to whomever voted for the game on Greenlight. People went like 'yay, free cards!' and voted without even looking at the game. Basically, if you have 100 bucks and a bunch of assets you can string together into some minimalistic form of gameplay, you can get your drek on Steam. Good luck finding the gems in that mess. And Valve will happily sell it all as long as they get a cut.


I'm sure Steam said they take that into account/frown upon that, they probably don't in practise, but what can you do? Players only have themselves to blame if they go for that.


----------



## Esteban (Dec 8, 2014)

Estillum said:


> I can at least agree with you on that, I don't mind paying for major game affecting mods that took some massive effort to put together, but I can't see myself ever buying any of the ninety-nine cent swords, or several dollar armour sets when the change is purely a minor aesthetic one and the in-game sets work just fine from a mechanical standpoint.


That's the quality of the vast majority of mods, too. Wet and cold, immersive armors, jiggling female physics, etc. It's level of quality is like that mother****ing horse armor DLC released for Oblivion on xbox360. 

Even the ones that required massive effort aren't even that great because they're mostly just fixing the game's deficits in the first place, such as with Skyrim. SkyUI, Interesting NPCs, gameplay rebalancing mods, etc., all should have been something like what should have been released with the game in the first place.

This is what I mean by developers exporting their jobs to amateurs. It's great that these people enjoy modding these shoddy games, but I don't want to pay amateurs to fix shoddy games or pay them to do what they basically buy the Fallout and Elder Scroll games to do.


----------



## OCSASE2016 (Apr 17, 2015)

Stuff like this is the reason I don't really game as much as I used to. The quality and fun factor go down while the price goes up. Even games today seem to focus more on being pretty versus being actually fun to play. I think the money grab just ruins any motivation on actually creating a quality game. It just seems that whenever artist struggle/underpaid their content comes out better more times than not. Just look at musicians before and after money. Of course I'm just ranting out of my arse and haven't read the article, but I'm sure some long time gamers can relate.


----------



## Esteban (Dec 8, 2014)

Developers lay the framework and export the rest to no-life gamers. I bet this is their model, too. They're probably in their ****ing offices talking about it with a bunch business buzzwords. 

"The synergistic cooperation of modders and developers for the betterment of gamers" .... The higher-ups will regurgitate some ridiculous business buzzwords they use to assert their authority: One big system of rationalizing positivity to grease the wheels of capitalism. Oh, whatever. 

This will probably be good for me. If modders largely charge for their mods, then I won't waste my time on them. If developers release broken games because they expect modders to fix them, then I won't waste my time on them. They'll be doing me a favor. Thanks for the synergistic propulsion of my *** out of my computer chair of apathy and out into the world where my life may actually have meaning beyond depression-induced escapism.


----------



## Kiba (Apr 26, 2013)

Something else that concerns me about this whole thing is the licensing of modder created assets. Something that used to be relatively commonplace is using other modders created content, which you could away with if you got the ok from the original modder. How is this going to work out now? They are basically shutting down what made the modding community so great, the open source co-operation of a community.
The only potentially up side to this whole thing is, if this does indeed become a trend, we would undoubtedly start seeing small professional studios creating professional quality mods that would be more of a 3rd party DLC vs. a mod. Which ironically would destroy the whole synergistic relationship they are trying to build because all the smaller modders would be shot out of the water by better content.


----------



## Paper Samurai (Oct 1, 2009)

Kiba said:


> Something else that concerns me about this whole thing is the licensing of modder created assets. Something that used to be relatively commonplace is using other modders created content, which you could away with if you got the ok from the original modder. How is this going to work out now? They are basically shutting down what made the modding community so great, the open source co-operation of a community.


It does get murky. Who gets paid when a mod is created that adds a layer onto an existing mod(like you said) What's to stop someone publishing a mod on Steam that they didn't create, which up until then was freely available. :um


----------



## Estillum (Oct 24, 2012)

Either way this move seems to be regarded with almost universal derision by the steam and nexus communities as far as I can tell. I can't imagine it will last long, at least not in its current form.


----------



## NahMean (May 19, 2014)

TotalBiscuit does a decent job of pointing out the good & bad from this I think. There are some very good modders who put a lot of time & energy in their creations, and I could see them deserving of a little $$$ for their efforts. But there are way too many potential risks that can come from this. None short of all the copyright & legality issues to come from this. Not to mention of people literally taking content off Nexus and re-uploading it onto the Steam shop to charge $$$. A lot of the coding in certain mods can conflict with one another and break the game to the point of being unplayable. There is just too many risks & problems that I feel Valve didn't take into enough consideration with this.





I think Valve should've just enabled the option for users to donate $$$ directly to the modder instead of paying to use their mods. Maybe even take a part of the cut too (but not 75% as that is absolutely ridiculous, even if Bethesada is taking a piece of it). All of this seems like an easy cash grab for Valve. They use to be one of my most liked game developers, but I'm starting to lose a bit of respect for Lord Gaben. MILLIONS of fans have begged Valve for years to release Half Life 3 or even just HL2: Episode 3. I can't understand for the life of me on why Gaben keeps refusing to release one final entry in the Half Life series to wrap up the story. (it feels cruel to be waiting this long after the huge cliff hanger from HL 2: Ep 2). What was even the last game that Valve created? Left 4 Dead 2? Portal 2?


----------



## Paper Samurai (Oct 1, 2009)

Estillum said:


> Not on the consumer end but on the developer end, but since consumers are the most affected by this maybe not the most perfect analogy in retrospect, though for some reason that is what I'm continuously the most reminded of.


I guess, I can see where you're coming from. To me though, it's like open source software - all the code is freely available and can be modified for other projects:

https://github.com/search?utf8=✓&q=http

Even big companies like Microsoft and Google provide code in this way. I don't know if you realise this, but the internet would be a big steaming turd if this wasn't the case. People would have to come up with their own software for every little thing and the amount bugs and security holes would be ridiculous. (think mid/late 90's internet)

This model is very similar to game mods, some people provide donation links for others to contribute to if the can. But most don't, it's done for the sheer fun of it/challenge rather than financial gain.


----------



## Sprocketjam (Feb 16, 2014)

The end of an era.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

NahMean said:


> TotalBiscuit does a decent job of pointing out the good & bad from this I think. There are some very good modders who put a lot of time & energy in their creations, and I could see them deserving of a little $$$ for their efforts. But there are way too many potential risks that can come from this. None short of all the copyright & legality issues to come from this. Not to mention of people literally taking content off Nexus and re-uploading it onto the Steam shop to charge $$$. A lot of the coding in certain mods can conflict with one another and break the game to the point of being unplayable. There is just too many risks & problems that I feel Valve didn't take into enough consideration with this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, I agree with this video.


----------



## Nunuc (Jul 9, 2013)

NahMean said:


> I can't understand for the life of me on why Gaben keeps refusing to release one final entry in the Half Life series to wrap up the story.


Yes, where the heck is my Half-Life: The Prequel, GabeN? 
Time to earn that diploma, read some books, have some coffee, cook some meth, maybe even have a baby or two (no, you can't have three, you're the Freeman for gods sake, not some kind of weird...Threeman, who is free to have three, man).










I'd pay for that expansion/mod, EA.


----------



## Melodic (Apr 16, 2009)

If they cost money I simply won't use them - makes it easier and easier to stop playing games anyway.


----------



## NahMean (May 19, 2014)

Nunuc said:


> Yes, where the heck is my Half-Life: The Prequel, GabeN?
> Time to earn that diploma, read some books, have some coffee, cook some meth, maybe even have a baby or two (no, you can't have three, you're the Freeman for gods sake, not some kind of weird...Threeman, who is free to have three, man).
> 
> 
> ...


Lord Gaben does as he pleases. Probably flipping the bird to his fans as I write this....


----------



## Wylini (Mar 23, 2015)

http://steamcommunity.com/games/SteamWorkshop/announcements/detail/208632365253244218

Well, it's over.


----------



## NahMean (May 19, 2014)

Wylini said:


> http://steamcommunity.com/games/SteamWorkshop/announcements/detail/208632365253244218
> 
> Well, it's over.


Good move by Valve. Forcing it so prematurely especially on a game that has been out for so long was a bad move imo. Of course the article strongly hinted at them revisiting the idea later down the road. I still think an optional donation button on the Steam Workshop is the best way to handle this and eliminate any controversy. 5-15% of the cut to Valve would sound about right.

*Interesting quote from the founder of Nexus*:
_The worry is with the introduction of Curated Workshops that free and open modding will be removed entirely, as in, it just won't be possible to do. You've seen the arguments before with developers like BioWare and DICE no longer supporting modding with their games, they say it's because it's too complicated for modders or because they don't have time to work on the tools, many users argue it's because they don't want mods to cut in to DLC sales. I don't know any more about it than you in that regard, but if you're running a curated modding marketplace and there's a site out there with lots of mods available for free (note: probably not the same mods, as that wouldn't make sense!) will you willingly let that continue or would you try to ensure all your mods were going through your curated marketplace? I guess it would entirely depend on the developer and publisher in question, but if you ask me, my main concern now is the DRMification and closing down of free and open modding, the concept that modding can only take place if it's done through one official platform to the detriment of all others. Because up until now that's definitely not what modding has been about at all._


----------



## Scrub-Zero (Feb 9, 2004)

I was worried it wouldn't go away. Would you imagine Fallout 4 and Elder Scroll 6 modding tool being sold on Steam for real cash? 10-15$ for G.e.c.k and on top you have to buy mods overpriced because Valve and Beth got too greedy.

A guy like me who owns all the Bethesda games and i run roughly 100 mods for each game. Id be ruined fast if i had to buy all of those :lol

Bethesda should just be happy that people are still buying and playing their games years after release just because of mods. I have a love/hate relationship with Bethesda, but i still respect them a lot because they allow us to mod their games to our hearts content. I would not even own one of their games if it wasn't for modding.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

> We're going to remove the payment feature from the Skyrim workshop. For anyone who spent money on a mod, we'll be refunding you the complete amount. We talked to the team at Bethesda and they agree.
> 
> We've done this because it's clear we didn't understand exactly what we were doing. We've been shipping many features over the years aimed at allowing community creators to receive a share of the rewards, and in the past, they've been received well. It's obvious now that this case is different.
> 
> ...


Bolded part did make me sad. Hopefully they'll implement something better that gives back to modders. Being paid and doing something because you enjoy it are not mutually exclusive things, as Totalbiscuit said.


----------



## zookeeper (Jun 3, 2009)

Watching valve fanboys lose their **** over the last few days has been delicious.


----------



## Kiba (Apr 26, 2013)

Wylini said:


> http://steamcommunity.com/games/SteamWorkshop/announcements/detail/208632365253244218
> 
> Well, it's over.


----------



## Esteban (Dec 8, 2014)

Yeah, it looks like it was just a test to gauge the reaction from the community. They'll probably have a more refined but still ultimately anti-consumer model in place for future Elder Scrolls and Fallout games. 

The theoretical ideal some of you are hoping will be implemented in future Elder Scrolls and Fallout games, I have little doubt, won't happen.

But, again, it will be a good thing for me.


----------



## Charmander (Sep 5, 2012)

At least their hearts seemed to be in the right place. Yeah, they did look to take a tidy profit from doing it but I think some of the mods deserve to get paid.


----------



## Paper Samurai (Oct 1, 2009)

The time for paying for mods has gone. I think that's the important thing to remember. Can you imagine paying money to watch youtube videos? Heck can you even imagine paying for music anymore rather than streaming it?

The same is true for mods and I think even if this system was implemented, very few people could 'make a living out of it' as the intended goal stated. That being said donations have given modders some money over the years. And there is an increasing trend of professional mods coming into the scene. The games Cities Skyline for example has a professional game dev creating additional content after getting financed by a kick starter campaign.
*
Final thoughts - this was a slightly greedy attempt at making mods 'unofficial DLC' for the big game companies more than anything. Thank god it was resisted.*


----------



## AngelClare (Jul 10, 2012)

Persephone The Dread said:


> Sorry, but I think this is great :duck that money could help people. Not everyone has the time or money to work for free on good quality mods.


I agree. Plus the potential of making a profit could lead to more mods of higher quality.


----------



## Sacrieur (Jan 14, 2013)

Congrats. Now it's ensured that modders won't get paid for their work. Well done.


----------



## ScorchedEarth (Jul 12, 2014)

Buh-bye, shameless cashgrab. Although even in the statement, they made it sound like Skyrim just wasn't the right place to start. I'm guessing we'll be seeing the same thing introduced to a number of much smaller games that won't get as much of a reaction, then they'll put it in newly-released AAA games where the dissent will get drowned out by hype.


----------



## Sacrieur (Jan 14, 2013)

LawfulStupid said:


> Buh-bye, shameless cashgrab.


How dare modders get to decide whether or not to sell their content?

I'm glad you stopped them from making any money.

You know what I love? That modders are pulling down content thanks to the community's sense of entitlement. Some modders even received death threats for wanting to sell their own work.

It's not your decision or business about the agreed upon cuts. If the modder thinks the deal is unfair they don't have to sell anything.


----------



## fotschi (Feb 25, 2015)

Well there goes my plan of making a career out of nude mods.

As someone who has made mods for stuff before, I'm pretty torn by this. Because on one hand I definitely would like to exploit it and make some dosh, on the other hand a lot of the fun in modding comes from things that would be totally illegal if money is involved (like ripping a model of a 1967 Mustang from Forza 4 and dropping it in as a mustang horse in Skyrim).


----------



## Scrub-Zero (Feb 9, 2004)

Sacrieur said:


> Congrats. Now it's ensured that modders won't get paid for their work. Well done.


It's a setback. The bait and hook has been set, and now modders have being paid for their work in mind. Sooner than later, we will pay for mods.


----------



## Sacrieur (Jan 14, 2013)

Scrub-Zero said:


> It's a setback. The bait and hook has been set, and now modders have being paid for their work in mind. Sooner than later, we will pay for mods.


A victory for everyone everywhere.


----------



## Kiba (Apr 26, 2013)

Sacrieur said:


> A victory for everyone everywhere.


Still really hating the repercussions from this.... So much cross content and dependency between mods. And again, this paired with the the ownership of assets issue, it's going to be a nightmare to collaborate within the community, especially if a 3rd party is taking a commission for distribution (everybody loves Intellectual Property Policy's!). But i guess as long as someones making money, it doesn't matter.


----------



## Sacrieur (Jan 14, 2013)

Kiba said:


> Still really hating the repercussions from this.... So much cross content and dependency between mods. And again, this paired with the the ownership of assets issue, it's going to be a nightmare to collaborate within the community, especially if a 3rd party is taking a commission for distribution (everybody loves Intellectual Property Policy's!). But i guess as long as someones making money, it doesn't matter.


There's a 24 hour refund policy.


----------



## Kiba (Apr 26, 2013)

Sacrieur said:


> There's a 24 hour refund policy.


......Repercussions of future implementation of a pay structure for mods (If such a thing comes to pass. i wouldn't have quoted, if it wasn't on the same tangent that Scrub began) ... Wtf does anything that i posted have to do with Steams damage control? That was random.


----------



## AussiePea (Mar 27, 2007)

Anyone who genuinely cares about the topic should listen to this:






Guests are the owner of Nexus and a modder, good insight into more than the outrage of people who probably don't even play these games.


----------

