Yeah, totally agree. If that is what they are doing, screw them.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Tweets Claim Valve Removing Donation Links from Workshop Mods
- Thread starter Bornstellar
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, totally agree. If that is what they are doing, screw them.
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
Thanks for compiling this. Definitely seems a good idea to withhold judgement for now. Given some of the decisions they've made you have to wonder how Valve/Bethesda didn't see this sort of reaction coming and prepare/communicate more extensively.
Valve is paying them for content used in their game. Here, Valve is just sitting in the middle, siphoning off a large chunk of the money. Slightly different.
You also can't measure them in much the same way. Some of these mods are very intricate using lots of their own assets etc, while others may just be using much of what already exists to make something.
I really doubt Valve takes all of the 75%. I've heard that Valve takes 25% and Bethesda takes 50% though I'm not sure if that is true or not. Bethesda definitely takes a cut though, there is no way they could sell mods without giving them a cut.
Some of them are just scripts. Where is the line? Who owns what? How are mods with multiple people involved going to be handled? There are a ton of questions that go along with a huge step like this, plenty of which have yet to be answered by Valve.
I think a lot of the criticism would go away if modders had the majority stake in all this, like 75%, Bethesda got 20% for it being their game, and Valve got 5% for facilitating it all. Both companies already benefit a large amount by the increased sales mods bring, so they're already enjoying some benefits, which is why this has all been free up until now.
This shouldn't be a take it or leave it situation with the 25%. That makes sense when it's skinners and modelers creating stuff in the hopes it gets put in a particular game store. It doesn't make nearly as much sense to cast a giant net for singleplayer mods, scripts, etc...
Valve needs to put their foot down and set the minimum payout for modders at 50%.
I would speculate that the split is something similar to that. It still begs the question of why Valve needs to take 25% (hypothetically). There are definitely costs of upkeep of the service and particularly associated with the fee for payment to the creators / taxes, but my assumption is that they are also taking a sizeable profit at the same time (unnecessarily)
The funny thing is for map makers in TF2 they often get paid far, far less when Valve buys their map and adds it to the game then people who spend a few hours making a hat even though maps take far more work and time. I know that is something Valve wants to change though.
The amount Valve has paid for maps in TF2 has varied over the years, however one of the map makers who recently had maps added to the game got paid $7000 per map by Valve. Valve also has a map stamp donation system, which he said he has made several hundred dollars to several thousand dollars a month off of.
maestrillo
Banned
Oh Valve... I don't know why, but you are converting in some kind of Nintendo
Sucking? Maybe. Greedy? Where have you been all this time? Valve are masters at monetizing their digital goods. It's just that they've been doing it so long without ruffling too many feathers. But if you step away and look at how they've set up everything? They've always been greedy. It's just that in the past they made sure you were smiling when you forked over your cash.
I dont personally get why a supposedly intelligent group of people cant come up with a relatively simple system of payment. Flat shares are so crude and invite criticism regardless of the amounts involved. I would have at least proposed that they do a YouTube style deal, where subscribing to the workshop had you access all the mods, and the sums divvied to the mods that you have downloaded.
In fact they could keep the current shares and after allotted periods of time, an increasing share goes to the modders for consecutive updates and continued usage of said mods by the consumer.
I feel Valve is run by idiots at this point, only interested in gaining money to keep away Microsoft and spite them because Gabe has a personal and pure hatred of the company.
In fact they could keep the current shares and after allotted periods of time, an increasing share goes to the modders for consecutive updates and continued usage of said mods by the consumer.
I feel Valve is run by idiots at this point, only interested in gaining money to keep away Microsoft and spite them because Gabe has a personal and pure hatred of the company.
I would not call them greedy. Everything is pretty much justified and the way they share revenue with community is unique.
ashecitism
Member
Thanks for this.
Can this be put in the OP?
With their notorious hands-off, laissez-faire approach? Nope.
Interesting that the developer/publisher gets to choose the percentage the mod maker gets, hopefully we see mod makers get a higher revenue split with other titles.
That 25% number is pretty close to Valve's standard 30% they get for selling stuff on Steam though. I'm sure it could be less and Valve could make a profit, though honestly if people are used to around a 30% cut for Valve I probably wouldn't drop it much, if at all if I was them.
Not my point whatsoever
The 25% is skyrim specific in this case. The publisher/dev could put the cut for the modder to 90% if they wanted.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/...sold_on_the_Steam_Workshop_for_real_money.php
RandyBobandy
Banned
When did mods start costing money? Fuck that shit. Who pays for mods? I mean, really. Especially those that have tons of mods for games. Paying extra for that is a disgrace
ashecitism
Member
He's talking about the supposed split between Bethesda and Valve. Modder takes 25% and the former two take 75% from which Beth takes 50% and Valve takes 25%
I know
I posted it
I'm saying Valve isn't exactly known to take matters in their hands that much.
I know their attitude is exactly to let the market sort it out. They think talented modders will flock to the games that pay out the most, and that will in turn encourage developers to pay out more to content creators. Doesn't always work out that way.
Well I don't know what your definition of greedy is, but the price I pay for games I'm happy to part with. It certainly beats console game prices during major sales.
Taking 75% from someone else's work is really high. I know they're within their rights to do it I'm not arguing that, but 75% is really greedy. I'm hoping this is a Bethesda thing and not a Valve thing.
MidnightWatcher
Neo Member
I don't know why people are complaining about the 25% modders get. That's more than musicians and authors get for selling Music/books and they make those, in most cases, are made from scratch.
IMO 25% is a decent deal for a content creator compared to others.
IMO 25% is a decent deal for a content creator compared to others.
Guess I'll be going retail again to avoid supporting Steamworks and Valve in general as much as possible. Glad I already have an unlocked account so I don't have to give them any more money than the minimal account just so I can access all features as a non-digital customer
Can't believe I even voluntarily translated for them for the longest time
Can't believe I even voluntarily translated for them for the longest time
Not yet, no. That basically all relies on the benevolence of corporations, which is historically not a good bet. Get them hooked on the revenue streams from mods and they might just feel the need to exercise more control over the process.
Most of those creators are getting paid promotion in exchange for giving up such a large cut. This is just a man in the middle.
Wait.. so we don't even know if this issue is real, yet?
Waiting until we get a non-reddit source.
Because money. Gotta get yours.
NaDannMaGoGo
Member
I just don't even know how all this is supposed to work out without running it some major, major legal issues.
Profitting of non-curated mods? Really? There's gonna be copyright infringement left and right...
Profitting of non-curated mods? Really? There's gonna be copyright infringement left and right...
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
So not only does Bethesda release games that are infamously broken as shit on release so as to basically require mods to either make the game bearable or actually fun, but now they want people to pay for the mods and profit off of the people improving their game?
Great move. Good thing I left those guys behind after Morrowind.
Great move. Good thing I left those guys behind after Morrowind.
Skyfireblaze
Member
Honestly, beyond the 25% cut which is way too low for creators, I don't like the idea of paid mods at all except for maybe total-conversations. I do believe modders should should get compensation since there are quite a few mods that have lots of hard work in them although I feel that this should really only happen in form of optional donations.
The reason why I'm against paid mods in general is that I believe it might very well be harmful for the modding community in general and put a damper on it. I personally know someone who has ~200 mods installed (I'm currently at about ~80), even if each of these mods would only cost 1, that person would have needed to pay 200 extra, which is of course fair towards the content creators somewhat although I don't believe many Skyrim players will want the extra cost so I see alot less mod usage happening in general as players will stop bothering once the majority of mods are paid or simply pirate them :/
Another thing is the stability of the game and compatibility with mods. I can't count the times I downloaded a mod only to find out it conflicts with another mod, or doesn't work at all and I had to spend hours of troubleshooting to find out what conflicts where even with advanced tools like Mod Organizer, it's just the nature of the beast of course but with paid mods the risk sits entirely with the player and I doubt the Workshop will have a easy refund system or any kind of compatibility curation. Of course free alternatives like Nexus mods exists but from what I've read in this thread, modders have already began to take their mods from there to put them exclusively on the Workshop and this is also something I believe will be ultimately harmful for the modding community as a whole :/
Maybe I'm being overly negative here but the gist of my opinion is, I don't find it fair that Valve (possibly) removes donation links, I find their 75% cut way overblown and I think the concept of paid mods might prove negatively for the community, mods should donation-ware which provides the best of both worlds in my eyes.
The reason why I'm against paid mods in general is that I believe it might very well be harmful for the modding community in general and put a damper on it. I personally know someone who has ~200 mods installed (I'm currently at about ~80), even if each of these mods would only cost 1, that person would have needed to pay 200 extra, which is of course fair towards the content creators somewhat although I don't believe many Skyrim players will want the extra cost so I see alot less mod usage happening in general as players will stop bothering once the majority of mods are paid or simply pirate them :/
Another thing is the stability of the game and compatibility with mods. I can't count the times I downloaded a mod only to find out it conflicts with another mod, or doesn't work at all and I had to spend hours of troubleshooting to find out what conflicts where even with advanced tools like Mod Organizer, it's just the nature of the beast of course but with paid mods the risk sits entirely with the player and I doubt the Workshop will have a easy refund system or any kind of compatibility curation. Of course free alternatives like Nexus mods exists but from what I've read in this thread, modders have already began to take their mods from there to put them exclusively on the Workshop and this is also something I believe will be ultimately harmful for the modding community as a whole :/
Maybe I'm being overly negative here but the gist of my opinion is, I don't find it fair that Valve (possibly) removes donation links, I find their 75% cut way overblown and I think the concept of paid mods might prove negatively for the community, mods should donation-ware which provides the best of both worlds in my eyes.
PHOENIXZERO
Member
Is the fan patch available on the Workshop? I've stuck with Nexus with Skyrim and now FO3.
There's something fucked up about an already scummy situation with the idea of Bethesda getting paid for other people improving if not outright fixing their games.
There's something fucked up about an already scummy situation with the idea of Bethesda getting paid for other people improving if not outright fixing their games.
EdibleExplosives
Member
Well, this is about as scummy as you can get. The fuck happened to Valve?
Always happens to monopolies. Only gonna get worse once Valve becomes a public company. 'Lord Gaben' won't be around forever.
What makes you think this wasn't valve's proposed pricing? They already charge 75% for workshop items for their games, and their 25% cut sounds like the usual 30% cut they take off of revenue from publishers, rounded at an even 1/3 of the 75% pub cut that they already established for their own content. They aren't being held up and need to put their foot down. This is the kind of pricing they thrive off. Unless you mean they need to step up and give modders more, which I totally agree on.
EDIT: looks like I misread the one tweet saying publishers can set the cut for modders.
human onion
Banned
If this is true then the intentions of the system are pretty clear. It's a sickening cashgrab, but not like I though it was anything else when it was announced.
So does all this monetization mean that Valve is going to revamp Workshop support to add the functionality Skyrim requires to avoid conflicts and other problems, or are they going to just lazily allow people to sell things that can completely break your game and happily take their cut while throwing up some "not our problem lol" disclaimer?
Miles Quaritch
Member
Pretty surprised by some of the more recent moves by Valve.
First the $5 charge to use features on Steam and now this (if this is true of course). Didn't realise they were that hurting for money...guess Vive, that new controller along with their OS and Steamboxes drained them more than they anticipated?
First the $5 charge to use features on Steam and now this (if this is true of course). Didn't realise they were that hurting for money...guess Vive, that new controller along with their OS and Steamboxes drained them more than they anticipated?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked