Support NeoGAF

[SigSig]

Yeah, when somebody starts using "entitled" that's a good stopping point for paying attention to whatever they're saying.

Same for your use of "cute" and not replying to my post at all. See, I can do this stuff too!

But okay, let's do this without using that word you dread so much: I think the situation is very similar to other free content. When small indie games weren't being yet sold, freeware games were a thing. They still are, maybe there are a bit less, but the optional element of monetization that was added didn't have a huge negative impact (imo).
How is this optional element going to destroy the modding scene? It boggles the mind.
Also, how are people prevented from still setting up a Patreon etc?
This really seems to be a onesided problem – users wanting to have content for free instead of needing to pay for it. And yeah, that's waht I'd call entitlement.

 

[WanderingWind]

Q. Can I include someone else's mod in my mod?
A. The Steam Workshop makes it easy to allocate and approve portions of your item’s revenue with other collaborators or co-authors.

Do you have data if modders will get decent enough donations from this route? Mardoxx of SkyUI just got heat for saying no one donates.

1) The tools have always existed. But how likely do you think it'll be to get 400 different mods, all created by people who wanted to improve the community, now that there is a buck to be made? How much more closely would the organizer have to to go through each mod to ensure it was not itself borrowed from a paid mod, infringes on a byline, etc, etc. The problem isn't that it was previously impossible to share assets, the problem is that this creates many new barriers, some that are fairly insurmountable to doing something like OOO.

Donations were never a focus, they were an aside. Somehow, Twitch streamers have been able to make it happen and plenty of them make actual livings off of donations. Making it largely focus of the modding scene would be in the spirit of the community aspect of modding.

For instance, I have never used Durante's various fixes, but I have used SkyUI. When I downloaded it, there was nothing about donating to anybody. What was pushed was to "like" his mod on Nexus. Maybe there was a donation link somewhere, but it definitely wasn't pushed like the "like" system.

 

[Rafterman]

Yeah, when somebody starts using "entitled" that's a good stopping point for paying attention to whatever they're saying.

Didn't you know? Gamers are just supposed to bend over and take it when these things happen, and when they don't they're considered "entitled".

 

[Aselith]

1) The tools have always existed. But how likely do you think it'll be to get 400 different mods, all created by people who wanted to improve the community, now that there is a buck to be made? How much more closely would the organizer have to to go through each mod to ensure it was not itself borrowed from a paid mod, infringes on a byline, etc, etc. The problem isn't that it was previously impossible to share assets, the problem is that this creates many new barriers, some that are fairly insurmountable to doing something like OOO.

Donations were never a focus, they were an aside. Somehow, Twitch streamers have been able to make it happen and plenty of them make actual livings off of donations. Making it largely focus of the modding scene would be in the spirit of the community aspect of modding.

For instance, I have never used Durante's various fixes, but I have used SkyUI. When I downloaded it, there was nothing about donating to anybody. What was pushed was to "like" his mod on Nexus. Maybe there was a donation link somewhere, but it definitely wasn't pushed like the "like" system.

Twitch streamers push donations hard and the nature of you being on a website with donation information on the page makes it easier to push. The modder didn't push rt he dfonation... did you go try to find a place to donate?

Didn't you know? Gamers are just supposed to bend over and take it when these things happen, and when they don't they're considered "entitled".

Actually it's the part where you insist they continue to work for you for free whether they want to or not.

 

[Dictator93]

Paid mods. Eww.

The whole purpose of mods is that they are community passion projects. Yes, I think monetizing them destroys that entire scene and the spirit associated with it. It definitely is not the same as an optional donation.

 

[WanderingWind]

No worries. For sure though, if someone is trying to compile a bunch of paid mods into a megamod, that obviously wouldn't be allowed. That is also those particular modder's choice, and they are, by paywalling it, essentially saying they don't want to be part of anything like that (unless you gave the original creator a portion of your profit that they agree to, as mentioned above). I think this is a response more in-line to what you were initially saying.

And I think that's a major problem. Others are free to disagree. I do think modders should have the ability to get paid, but I know for damn sure I would never in my life pay for a mod without trying it out first. Of the hundreds of mods I've used (and this goes for anybody who has ever dabbled in large mod communities) many of them don't work, most of them are crap, most of them become unsupported after major game patches, etc. I would have gladly paid for OOO back in the day AFTER I knew it worked for my system, specific configuration and game version. I would not have paid for say, the mod that was supposed to give me access to a ton of new cloaks, but instead borked my game until I removed the mod and replaced all the assets with the original ones.

Twitch streamers push donations hard and the nature of you being on a website with donation information on the page makes it easier to push. The modder didn't push rt he dfonation... did you go try to find a place to donate?

Well, since I just said I had no idea SkyUI accepted donations until just now, obviously I didn't. I'm not opposed to donating to great mods. TBH, I think I saw a donation ad for one of OOO's competitors with Oblivion, but it was hosted on a personal site. I think OOO eventually moved to the Nexus.

 

[antisoulless]

24% for companies. That's all there is to it. Maybe even less. But 75% is too much.

 

[Aselith]

And I think that's a major problem. Others are free to disagree. I do think modders should have the ability to get paid, but I know for damn sure I would never in my life pay for a mod without trying it out first. Of the hundreds of mods I've used (and this goes for anybody who has ever dabbled in large mod communities) many of them don't work, most of them are crap, most of them become unsupported after major game patches, etc. I would have gladly paid for OOO back in the day AFTER I knew it worked for my system, specific configuration and game version. I would not have paid for say, the mod that was supposed to give me access to a ton of new cloaks, but instead borked my game until I removed the mod and replaced all the assets with the original ones.

Did you look for a place to donate to OOO?

 

[PnCIa]

Can you explain that one?
How is providing an optional form of monetization hurting the open nature of pc gaming?

Mods are based on collaboration for the most part. Especially in a technical mess like Skyrim.
Now, apparently Valve doesnt give a damn if someone uses a part of a free mod for a paid mod, at least right now.
And even if they make rules for using other peoples content, Valve can not control the situation anyway, see greenlight.
Furthermore i do believe that the situation in those cases is a mess anyway, good luck getting a lawyer for a case like that (And pay this person).

When someone can just take your stuff and use it while making money from it...why would you be so stupid and actually offer it for free use and participate in ongoing discussions about how to solve problem X?

Working together should be based upon equal terms. This new model would distort this principle.

 

[eot]

Alright, fess up, who copy/pasted my post from GAF to reddit? https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/33uplp/mods_and_steam/cqoj9vn

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=161384491&highlight=#post161384491

How fitting.
Makes you think, wouldn't reddit be better if people could cash out their karma? All these people with witty shower thoughts need to pay their water bills and it might encourage professionals to write more replies in /r/ELI5.

 

[Antiwhippy]

And I think that's a major problem. Others are free to disagree. I do think modders should have the ability to get paid, but I know for damn sure I would never in my life pay for a mod without trying it out first. Of the hundreds of mods I've used (and this goes for anybody who has ever dabbled in large mod communities) many of them don't work, most of them are crap, most of them become unsupported after major game patches, etc. I would have gladly paid for OOO back in the day AFTER I knew it worked for my system, specific configuration and game version. I would not have paid for say, the mod that was supposed to give me access to a ton of new cloaks, but instead borked my game until I removed the mod and replaced all the assets with the original ones.

Which can be fixed by having a refund system. Also not a problem unique to just mods.

Admittedly valve's customer service is horseshit, but that's a problem within valve and not inherent to the idea of paid mods.

 

[WanderingWind]

Did you look for a place to donate to OOO?

It was what, like 8 years ago? I have no idea.

Which can be fixed by having a refund system. Also not a problem unique to just mods.

Admittedly valve's customer service is horseshit, but that's a problem within valve and not inherent to the idea of paid mods.

Can't really separate the two though. If your only recourse is through customer service, that customer service has to be good. Each component of a massive decision like this has to take into account the reality of the markets, not the ideal situation.

 

[Serandur]

Edit: Accidental post

 

[Renekton]

Donations were never a focus, they were an aside. Somehow, Twitch streamers have been able to make it happen and plenty of them make actual livings off of donations. Making it largely focus of the modding scene would be in the spirit of the community aspect of modding.

Twitch is not a great comparison. Twitch streamers are paid from advertisements and subscriptions as well, which are both unfeasible in realm of software modding.

At the fundamental level, are you against modders asking to be paid for their work?

 

[Alienous]

It's the whole 25-75% split that sucks. Valve should have boundaries in place to ensure the mod creator can acquire a greater percentage. The number does matter and I think gauging a modders' contribution as worth half of what the developer gets (on top of what they get for the sale of the game, and the sales that the mod might promote) and equal to what the 'host' gets sucks, especially regarding the responsibility to support a mod for an indefinite period of time that a paid mod kind of demands.

I seriously doubt that 25% was Valve's idea of showing respect to modders, and this response is largely a result of that, I think.

 

[WanderingWind]

Twitch is not a great comparison. Twitch streamers are paid from advertisements and subscriptions as well, which are both unfeasible in realm of software modding.

It's not a 1-to-1 comparison, but it's proof that people will donate to things when it's made clear that this is how the system works. Clearly, not everybody, but enough so that it's become a viable way for people to make money. And considering Twitch streamers are making money off an already existing product, like modders do now, it's a decent enough comparison, IMO.

At the fundamental level, are you against modders asking to be paid for their work? Do you only want them to work for free and hope for donation?

If modders had the same level of accountability as game developers, I would still dislike it, but that would at least be more nested in what could happen. But they don't, and there has never been the expectation that they should because their projects were shared labors of love, so to speak. Once you start charging somebody for something, the "labor of love" aspect no longer matters.

 

[zonetrooper5]

Same for your use of "cute" and not replying to my post at all. See, I can do this stuff too!

But okay, let's do this without using that word you dread so much: I think the situation is very similar to other free content. When small indie games weren't being yet sold, freeware games were a thing. They still are, maybe there are a bit less, but the optional element of monetization that was added didn't have a huge negative impact (imo).
How is this optional element going to destroy the modding scene? It boggles the mind.
Also, how are people prevented from still setting up a Patreon etc?
This really seems to be a onesided problem – users wanting to have content for free instead of needing to pay for it. And yeah, that's waht I'd call entitlement.

I don't think you understand why people are upset about paid mods, the whole point of modding was to create new content or fix bugs etc because you have a passion for it not because you believe you should be paid for it. Hell if you want to make money then start up your own indie studio and make a game don't ruin a damn good tradition which actually benefits both the gamers and the companies that support modding just because of this insatiable greed from certain modders and games companies.

I also can't stand this bullshit about being entitled because we want something to remain free that has always remained free and should be free.

 

[SigSig]

I don't think you understand why people are upset about paid mods, the whole point of modding was to create new content or fix bugs etc because you have a passion for it not because you believe you should be paid for it. Hell if you want to make money then start up your own indie studio and make a game don't ruin a damn good tradition which actually benefits both the gamers and the companies that support modding just because of this insatiable greed from certain modders and games companies.

But there still will be free mods. As I asked before, how would OPTIONAL monetization take away from that?
I think most of these reasons are excuses and people are upset about paid mods because they feel like they'd miss out on content they somehow think should be free because somehow they think that modders are to provide that content without compensation. And that's entitlement to me.

I also can't stand this bullshit about being entitled because we want something to remain free that has always remained free and should be free.

Now that's an appeal to tradition if I ever saw one. Why should it remain free? Should smal indie games also be free again because they once were?

Mods are based on collaboration for the most part. Especially in a technical mess like Skyrim.
Now, apparently Valve doesnt give a damn if someone uses a part of a free mod for a paid mod, at least right now.
And even if they make rules for using other peoples content, Valve can not control the situation anyway, see greenlight.
Furthermore i do believe that the situation in those cases is a mess anyway, good luck getting a lawyer for a case like that (And pay this person).

So the problem isn't paid content in general, but the classic contribution problem (as seen in gpl'd software etc before)?

When someone can just take your stuff and use it while making money from it...why would you be so stupid and actually offer it for free use and participate in ongoing discussions about how to solve problem X?

This might surprise a lot of people, but that's what a huge part of the internet has been doing for years (decades). OSX is built on the free BSD and many other big commercial projects are taking stuff other people did, but licensed in a very lax way.
I do agree, that content creators should not be forced to agree to have their free content be used in a commercial mod, however I still think that most wouldn't care, seeing as how there is a lot of people who generally release their works into the public domain (cc0 etc).

 

[Antiwhippy]

It was what, like 8 years ago? I have no idea.



Can't really separate the two though. If your only recourse is through customer service, that customer service has to be good. Each component of a massive decision like this has to take into account the reality of the markets, not the ideal situation.

As I've said though I'm excited about someone trying to create an infrastructure that supports it, but don't necessarily know if valve to be the ones to implement it as needed.

Hopefully they would beef up their customer service. I certainly don't think the plan for it is right as of now, but it is something I do hope will pan out in the future.

 

[Serandur]

Steam itself might be a giant ad, but there's no revenue gained from watching that ad, unlike Nexus and Youtube. There's a huge difference between those two.

Except there is. "75%" off -> revenue. In any case, it doesn't matter. The point is Nexus, the place that hosts free mods, has ads just like Youtube...

Well "I guess", as in I have to pay to read YOSPOS on Something Awful and I have to look at ad's when I am browsing NeoGAF. Said "guess" because I don't know the current situation of fan-fiction and fan-art sites, but I do know that I wouldn't join a fan-fiction site that was locked behind a paywall >_>

And NeoGAF and other websites...

And of course most open source software is free, but open source software doesn't necessarily mean it's free. Dual/multilicensing, SaaS, reverse bounty and ad supported software are just one of the many ways of monetizing open source development.

And this free software. The point is that ads aren't payment, unless you're already calling current mod-hosting sites paid as is. In which case, what's the point of Valve stepping in?

I did not say all open source software is free, but the vast majority certainly is.

I quite literally meant that "we" here should mean the modders, which they do. Even if you are on a crusade against paid mods you opinions don't really matter at all unless you are a developer of the said mods or your abilities to produce, use or serve mods are severely gimped which at this point (nor any rational future prediction) is not happening.

Let's presume I'm not a long-standing TES modder, so what? How does that have any relevance to criticism? Would you change your mind otherwise? Why can you not just answer the question? "We" means nothing; it can mean the corporate entities screwing over modders for a buck, it could mean modders, it could mean the collective community interested in mods and modding. It doesn't matter. A question: Should existing games with mods be retroactively and recklessly implemented into this system as Skyrim was, potentially tarnishing years of creations among fear of theft, actual theft, and removal from existing channels? By your tone, I presume you would be perfectly happy with it if a single modder or company overseeing the project said yes and then proceed to ignore the issues.

I have to guess, suppose and question semantics because outside of "we don't want to pay for mods" and Terminator 2 kind of future fear mongering is all that has been voiced in discussion against paid mods so far. If the "opposition" if you could call it that had some convincing arguments, the quality of counter-arguments would also drastically improve. Your entire premise is based on "mods should be free" and the only question that remains is "why". Actually, maybe we should introduce paid arguments and see what happens.

That isn't all that's been voiced, you just keep ignoring the rest, the actual points of the posts and of mine to go on some weird tangent related to semantics and incorrect assumptions that has nothing to do with the actual arguments. Rewarding mod theft, damage to an existing mod community, rewarding IP-infringement, cross-licensing issues and limitations, ignoring modders' distribution wishes, etc. are not compelling arguments? If they're not, they should be easy to counter. So why not try that, instead of going for the actually easy and inconsequential points like the semantics of the word "we"? Enough with the derailed ad talk, counter the actual points in my post.

 

[romulus91]

1. Nothing wrong with charging for mods.....some modders straight up deserve to get paid
2. Nothing wrong with the IP holder to get paid a cut - is healthy for the mod scene and will stop copyright infringments
3. WTF is valves role? they anow hold a monopoly over the mod scene because an IP holder is now loosing money if they dont sue people modding out of steam. It is now in their best interests for all modders to use steam ........ does not sound good

 

[Renekton]

It's not a 1-to-1 comparison, but it's proof that people will donate to things when it's made clear that this is how the system works. Clearly, not everybody, but enough so that it's become a viable way for people to make money. And considering Twitch streamers are making money off an already existing product, like modders do now, it's a decent enough comparison, IMO.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1034080

a) 1000 in ad revenue
b) 5000 from subscription
c) 1500 from donation

If you take away (a) and (b), it's a huge loss in income for someone expected to put significant personal time and effort into the endeavour, possibly as a full-time job.

If modders had the same level of accountability as game developers, I would still dislike it, but that would at least be more nested in what could happen. But they don't, and there has never been the expectation that they should because their projects were shared labors of love, so to speak. Once you start charging somebody for something, the "labor of love" aspect no longer matters.

That's saying modders "should do this out of love" and thus should not ask for payment.

If the community-driven curation pans out (eventually, some day, I hope), it could provide the reputation/accountability to keep modders honest.

 

[notoccupanther]

Gabes AMA = Heytherefellowkids.gif ... Gabe's been swallowed by the money monster. What normal paying folk see as a twofaced compromise, he now sees as motivation.

Don't be fooled either in thinning this is an isolated motive. Businesses setup shit like this to stay on trajectory for their 5-year plan,or whatever So what with the advent of VR, Steam Machines etc....this could well be a lining up the dominoes exercise for Steam vErsion.Whatevs

Gabe has crunched the numbers and has his overclocked SteamServer has concluded that the The Steam evangelism will get this over the line.

Spoiler

disclaimer: I'm fairly new to the whole PC gaming thing, - 3 years only....yet have 25 odd years reading and despairing at corporate greed, and this reeks of exactly that.

Just my ignoramus 2 bits on the matter...now back to GTA with me

 

[WanderingWind]

As I've said though I'm excited about someone trying to create an infrastructure that supports it, but don't necessarily know if valve to be the ones to implement it as needed.

Hopefully they would beef up their customer service. I certainly don't think the plan for it is right as of now, but it is something I do hope will pan out in the future.

I'm not really excited, because I don't see how something like OOO could ever exist in this new world. Perhaps I'm wrong here, we'll see.

But I definitely agree that maybe the amount of people directly telling Gabe his company's customer service is simply unacceptable may get some gears moving. He's been surrounded by a ton of love (well deserved, IMO) but that everlasting goodwill came to an abrupt end. Maybe more people will voice their displeasure at the state of the customer service there and we'll start to see some progress there. That would be great for customers.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1034080

a) 1000 in ad revenue
b) 5000 from subscription
c) 1500 from donation

If you take away (a) and (b), it's a huge loss in income for someone expected to put significant personal time and effort into the endeavour, possibly as a full-time job.

You can't just take away subscriptions. Those are literally donations with a different name. The first one being gone, absolutely, but considering it's the smallest of the 3...well, my point is proven, I think.

 

[jabuseika]

..and modders line up to make free versions of popular payed mods.

PC gaming.

 

[-SD-]

I think monetizing them destroys that entire scene and the spirit associated with it. It definitely is not the same as an optional donation.

This guy gets it.

That's why I said earlier in the other thread that mods should always be free, no matter what. Money will ruin the spirit.

 

[zonetrooper5]

But there still will be free mods. As I asked before, how would OPTIONAL monetization take away from that?
I think most of these reasons are excuses and people are upset about paid mods because they feel like they'd miss out on content they somehow think should be free because somehow they think that modders are to provide that content without compensation. And that's entitlement to me.


Now that's an appeal to tradition if I ever saw one. Why should it remain free? Should smal indie games also be free again because they once were?

Mods and indie games aren't the same and you know that, I don't mind modders asking for donations as that is fine but straight up paying for mods is bullshit as it turns PC gaming/Steam into yet another appstore for them to rip you off for content that has always been done for free. You want to get paid for your work then either make your own indie game or ask for donations, don't ruin something which actually has a positive effect on the games, gamers and the companies themselves.

Gamers get free content, games get extra content made by the fans which keeps the game alive and allows the company to get extra sales out of it. How is that not better overall than the multiple amounts of seasons passes/cut content/P2W shit that will start to infect PC gaming, its greedy, its wrong and it will piss people off as evident by the discussion people are having.

 

[Aselith]

I'm not really excited, because I don't see how something like OOO could ever exist in this new world. Perhaps I'm wrong here, we'll see.

But I definitely agree that maybe the amount of people directly telling Gabe his company's customer service is simply unacceptable may get some gears moving. He's been surrounded by a ton of love (well deserved, IMO) but that everlasting goodwill came to an abrupt end. Maybe more people will voice their displeasure at the state of the customer service there and we'll start to see some progress there. That would be great for customers.



You can't just take away subscriptions. Those are literally donations with a different name. The first one being gone, absolutely, but considering it's the smallest of the 3...well, my point is proven, I think.

Subscriptions = paid mods, it's not pay what you want subscriptions are a set price

 

[PetriP-TNT]

That isn't all that's been voiced, you just keep ignoring the rest, the actual points of the posts and of mine to go on some weird tangent related to semantics and incorrect assumptions. Rewarding mod theft, damage to an existing mod community, rewarding IP-infringement, ignoring modders' distribution wishes, etc. are not compelling arguments? If they're not, they should be easy to counter. So why not try that, instead of going for the actually easy and inconsequential points like the semantics of the word "we"? Enough with the derailed ad talk, counter the actual points in my post.

Okay, I'll bite once more.

1. Mod theft isn't being rewarded, there is a system that very very hard system to get past if you want to make money with a stolen mod.
2. Damage to an existing mod community is hypothetical, outside of selected few taking the ball and going home, but if the damage is hypothetical, I'd say that the mod community was much weaker entity then I had imagined, if a community at all.
3. See number 1. It's not going to happen.
4. Ignoring what? The modder himself decides the distribution method and the pricing of his own mod. Not Valve, not Bethesda, the modder. If the wish is to get 100% of the money made from the payment, then the modder can choose another route to get that money, it just isn't the one Valve offers.

What's the "etc." part?

 

[jabuseika]

You know what sells games?
Free mods.

Valve should know.

 

[PetriP-TNT]

You know what sells games?
Free mods.

Valve should know.

Also conclusion: Valve has made shit-ton of money from paid mods and PC gaming wouldn't be anything without Valve so PC gaming wouldn't be anything in the year 2015 without paid mods.

 

[Rafterman]

Actually it's the part where you insist they continue to work for you for free whether they want to of not.

Are you joking? Modding is a hobby, and I neither insist or ask them to do anything. No one is forcing people to mod games. I've modded plenty myself, and donated to many others, but straight up paying like it's DLC is stupid and against everything that PC gaming is about. Excuse me for not wanting one of the best parts of what's left of PC gaming to turn into the shitshow that is the rest of gaming.

 

[Renekton]

You can't just take away subscriptions. Those are literally donations with a different name. The first one being gone, absolutely, but considering it's the smallest of the 3...well, my point is proven, I think.

Subsciptions are not donations.

Subscribers are purchasing paywalled perks such Twitch icons or in-game coop.

 

[WanderingWind]

Subscriptions = paid mods

Only if you stream only in subscriber mode only, and I think with the rise of donations, nobody does that as a matter of course, right? Subscribers get like, emoticons and the occasional giveaway nowadays. Very infrequently any channel I've watched goes into subscriber only mode...and I haven't seen that since donations became big on Twitch. For obvious reasons.

Subsciptions are not donations.

Subscribers are purchasing paywalled perks such Twitch icons or in-game coop.

We're not going to play dumb and pretend that people are subscribing for emoticons, are we? They're subbing because they like the content and want to give back. AKA , a donation. I want to meet the person who subbed strictly because they wanted a Kappa face with a viking hat.

 

[Antiwhippy]

You know what sells games?
Free mods.

Valve should know.

... That they sold?

 

[jabuseika]

... That they sold?

The Mods? Not that I know of.

They later developed full games inspired by the mods, that they sold as full products.

The fact remains, free mods helped the original games sell more.

 

[Aselith]

Are you joking? Modding is a hobby, and I neither insist or ask them to do anything. No one is forcing people to mod games. I've modded plenty myself, and donated to many others, but straight up paying like it's DLC is stupid and against everything that PC gaming is about. Excuse me for not wanting one of the best parts of what's left of PC gaming to turn into the shitshow that is the rest of gaming.

You insist that they shouldn't sell their work. And it's a hobby for you, other people may want it to become more than that. This allows for both.

Hilarious though that being paid for your work is "against everything that PC gaming is about."

 

[eot]

Are you joking? Modding is a hobby, and I neither insist or ask them to do anything. No one is forcing people to mod games. I've modded plenty myself, and donated to many others, but straight up paying like it's DLC is stupid and against everything that PC gaming is about. Excuse me for not wanting one of the best parts of what's left of PC gaming to turn into the shitshow that is the rest of gaming.

This is it in a nutshell.

 

[Renekton]

We're not going to play dumb and pretend that people are subscribing for emoticons, are we? They're subbing because they like the content and want to give back. AKA , a donation. I want to meet the person who subbed strictly because they wanted a Kappa face with a viking hat.

If they only want to give back, they just click the DONATE button.

You know what sells games?
Free mods.

Valve should know.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but some of the games in the list eventually led to priced games or community-driven monetization (CS:GO, TF2, Dota 2).

 

[Antiwhippy]

The Mods? Not that I know of.

They later developed full games inspired by the mods, that they sold as full products.

The fact remains, free mods helped the original games sell more.

That's what I meant though. They excel at taking mods and turning them into paid products.

Really, that list just made this move seem like the logical next step for them.

 

[WanderingWind]

If they only want to give back, they just click the DONATE button.

...or subscribe. You still didn't answer. Do you think people are subbing because they like the content, or to get those sweet, sweet emoticons? You and everybody else knows what the answer to that is and pretending it's not about the content is just being obtuse for the sake of continuing a lame duck argument.

Bottom line, donations and subs have shown people are willing to give back for content without paying for it up front. I feel as if with the state of mods now, making this the major focus of a massive new push would have been the way to go. But, we're in it now, so modders who are selling have better be ready to accept the responsibility of moving from a hobbyist to a developer who is getting paid to produce a certain level of functionality. And let's hope Valve, Bethesda and every other company is prepared to handle the inevitable customer support influx that will be coming from unregulated, untested paid for products going through their marketplaces.

 

[Aselith]

...or subscribe. You still didn't answer. Do you think people are subbing because they like the content, or to get those sweet, sweet emoticons? You and everybody else knows what the answer to that is and pretending it's not about the content is just being obtuse for the sake of continuing a lame duck argument.

Bottom line, donations and subs have shown people are willing to give back for content without paying for it up front. I feel as if with the state of mods now, making this the major focus of a massive new push would have been the way to go. But, we're in it now, so modders who are selling have better be ready to accept the responsibility of moving from a hobbyist to a developer who is getting paid to produce a certain level of functionality. And let's hope Valve, Bethesda and every other company is prepared to handle the inevitable customer support influx that will be coming from unregulated, untested paid for products going through their marketplaces.

They subscribe for the extra perks over a simple donation so to answer your question they subscribe for both.

 

[WanderingWind]

They subscribe for the extra perks over a simple donation so to answer your question they subscribe for both.

Uh-huh. You know damn well if the content wasn't to their liking, no amount of emoticons is going to make them sub. Yet, people sub and never touch the "perks." Not sure why this a thing people want to be pigheaded about, as it's abundantly clear to anybody who thinks about it for more that 5 seconds.

And again - donations and subs have shown people are willing to give back for content without paying for it up front. Which is what the discussion centered on. The semantic sidetracking is largely irrelevant, until you try to say that subs are equal to paid for mods. One you pay for after you found the content to your liking, one you pay for up front. They are fundamentally different.

 

[Serandur]

Okay, I'll bite once more.

1. Mod theft isn't being rewarded, there is a system that very very hard system to get past if you want to make money with a stolen mod.
2. Damage to an existing mod community is hypothetical, outside of selected few taking the ball and going home, but if the damage is hypothetical, I'd say that the mod community was much weaker entity then I had imagined, if a community at all.
3. See number 1. It's not going to happen.
4. Ignoring what? The modder himself decides the distribution method and the pricing of his own mod. Not Valve, not Bethesda, the modder. If the wish is to get 100% of the money made from the payment, then the modder can choose another route to get that money, it just isn't the one Valve offers.

What's the "etc." part?

1.Yes it is. It's not hard at all. Mod ripped, mod posted, money made. It then becomes the mod owner's responsibility to keep an eye out on Steam and make sure it wasn't stolen. If they don't constantly monitor Steam and catch it in the listing time before it's sold, too bad. Valve doesn't do complete refunds (certainly not forced refunds on the people who bought the mod with the stolen content) and they won't completely remove the mods from Steam barring legal action. It literally happened to one of the very first mods (see: Chesko) put up on Steam's paid Workshop and there are plenty others that are actually straight rips of either mods or promotional pictures or are based on a free mod the owner doesn't want sold.

2. It's not hypothetical when over 2000 mods were taken down from Nexus alone out of fear of them being stolen while others actually were because of Valve's own lack of filtering. It's also causing a very real divide with difficulties caused by mods being interdependent (see: Chesko). Even already existing mods like Midas Magic that were available on Nexus before have been exclusively put on the paid Workshop unless you want literal ads in the game. Implementing this nonsense on Skyrim, an already existing game with a stable modding community, has factually already damaged it.

3. It already happened. Valve does not have a stringent system in place for any of this. This has happened with mods and even promotional pictures, and Valve's official response is only legal action will make them remove stuff completely even in this occurrence (see: Chesko).

4. It already happened. See: Chesko (number 3) and if modders don't catch their stolen mods before they go on sale, Valve refuse to remove the item from Steam completely because of those who already purchased it. Listed mods go through an initial wait period which, according to Valve, "will provide some time for the community to help identify abuse or stolen content and report appropriately. It’s also a time that developers can use to review pending items and decide if any intervention is necessary." They're requiring modders to be vigilant in making sure they're mods aren't uploaded against their wishes or too bad. Distribution wishes ignored.

This is rewarding stolen mods and punishing modders if they now don't constantly peruse the Workshop to make sure their items aren't stolen. Plenty of mods will get through this way, Valve aren't implementing any stringent system of themselves doing anything to ensure this doesn't happen. Once again, Chesko. Already happened with one of the first of, what, 18 mods? They can't even manage that.


The etc. is that this simply cannot be regulated. Valve already have done a horrible job. They're already turning a blind eye to profiting from stolen content and have flat-out stated they will take no action to remove any such content unless someone catches it and informs them within a limited time period or they're given a legal order. The etc. is also causing a strong divide in a tradition of TES modding for no good reason other than Valve/Bethesda's profit and the effect this money and divide have on the focus of modding in a community that was strictly no-profit before and collaboration between modders. It's also giving modders the raw end of the deal in its cuts. It's doing a lot of things, first and foremost having done an already massive amount of damage.

 

[Aselith]

Uh-huh. You know damn well if the content wasn't to their liking, no amount of emoticons is going to make them sub. Yet, people sub and never touch the "perks." Not sure why this a thing people want to be pigheaded about, as it's abundantly clear to anybody who thinks about it for more that 5 seconds.

And again - donations and subs have shown people are willing to give back for content without paying for it up front. Which is what the discussion centered on. The semantic sidetracking is largely irrelevant, until you try to say that subs are equal to paid for mods. One you pay for after you found the content to your liking, one you pay for up front. They are fundamentally different.

Yeah people also don't pay for stuff in F2P games they don't want to play. Are they donating to the developer? lol wut

 

[Renekton]

...or subscribe. You still didn't answer. Do you think people are subbing because they like the content, or to get those sweet, sweet emoticons?

Yes I believe the latter. Emoticons, chat privileges, co-op, lessons, lucky draw are among the perks you get from subscription which can be purchasing motivators. The other reasoning is donation gives full amount to streamer whereas Twitch takes a significant cut from subscription.

 

[spekkeh]

Why would you care if a modder asks money? It's not what pc gaming is about? Since when is PC gaming about anything? Worried you can't flaunt it in platform wars?

Did any of you buy CS? Portal? Dota? Team fortress? All of them started out as mods, but in the old day you had to hope the engine creator wanted to fund your license, because otherwise you were shit out of luck. It's not that no modder ever wanted to sell their mod, it was simply impossible.

The implementation is shitty, it's really an IP nightmare, as it's always been, but how can you be against the principle?

 

[WanderingWind]

Yes I believe the latter. Emoticons, chat privileges, co-op, lessons, lucky draw are among the perks you get from subscription which can be purchasing motivators. The other reasoning is donation gives full amount to streamer whereas Twitch takes a significant cut from subscription.

Well, feel free to believe what you want, but I think the burden would be on you to prove that people subscribe regardless of the content. And even if you managed that frankly impossible task ("Oh, yeah, WW, I subbed to this channel I hate because I wanted an emoji") then you'd still have to show why that really matters. I will admit the possibility that a few people maybe sub to channels they hate, but there is no way that is the normal state of things.

Now, back on the actual topic and not the semantics side debate, whether you sub or you donate, you are doing so based on content you've already enjoyed. It works for Twitch because Streamer X doesn't own the Hearthstone IP, but still probably deserves the ability get paid based off his personality work and whatever. This is why I felt this was a decent enough comparison to make for the modding discussion. Oscura doesn't own TES IP, nor did he own a vast majority of the assets used in OOO. But he put a damn large amount of work into it.

 

[PetriP-TNT]

1.Yes it is. It's not hard at all. Mod ripped, mod posted, money made. It then becomes the mod owner's responsibility to keep an eye out on Steam and make sure it wasn't stolen. If they don't constantly monitor Steam and catch it in the listing time before it's sold, too bad. Valve doesn't do complete refunds and they won't completely remove the mods from Steam barring legal action. It literally happened to one of the very first mods (see: Chesko) put up on Steam's paid Workshop and there are plenty others that are actually straight rips of either mods or promotional pictures.

2. It's not hypothetical when over 2000 mods were taken down from Nexus alone out of fear of them being stolen while others actually were because of Valve's own lack of filtering. It's also causing a very real divide with difficulties caused by mods being interdependent (see: Chesko). Even already existing mods like Midas Magic that were available on Nexus before have been exclusively put on the paid Workshop unless you want literal ads in the game. Implementing this nonsense on Skyrim, an already existing game with a stable modding community, has factually already damaged it.

3. It already happened. Valve does not have a stringent system in place for any of this. This has happened with mods and even promotional pictures, and Valve's official response is only legal action will make them remove stuff completely even in this occurrence (see: Chesko).

4. It already happened. See: Chesko (number 3) and if modders don't catch their stolen mods before they go on sale, Valve refuse to remove the item from Steam completely because of those who already purchased it. Listed mods go through an initial wait period which, according to Valve, "will provide some time for the community to help identify abuse or stolen content and report appropriately. It’s also a time that developers can use to review pending items and decide if any intervention is necessary." They're requiring modders to be vigilant in making sure they're mods aren't uploaded against their wishes or too bad.

This is rewarding stolen mods and punishing modders if they now don't constantly peruse the Workshop to make sure their items aren't stolen. Plenty of mods will get through this way, Valve aren't implementing any stringent system of themselves doing anything to ensure this doesn't happen. Once again, Chesko. Already happened with one of the first of, what, 18 mods? They can't even manage that.


The etc. is that this simply cannot be regulated. Valve already have done a horrible job. They're already turning a blind eye to profiting from stolen content and have flat-out stated they will take no action to remove any such content unless someone catches it and informs them or they're given a legal order. The etc. is also causing a strong divide in a tradition of TES modding for no good reason other than Valve/Bethesda's profit. It's also giving modders the raw end of the deal in its cuts. It's doing a lot of things, first and foremost having done an already massive amount of damage.

1., 2., 3., 4. You clearly don't understand how the system works at all. Your arguments are all based on the assumption that all money from sales go directly to the creators wallet which is completely untrue. I am going to follow the popular Reddit route and explain it to you like you were five.

First of all, you need to provide your real legal name and bank account numbers to Valve. This is the first step that makes playing the system considerably more hard than say only needing a PayPal account or a Buttcoin wallet to receive the payments. If you have access to endless amounts of name / bank number combination, congratulations: you are most likely running other scams that are much more profitable than any mod-related scam could ever be.

Second of all, like I said, the payments aren't instant. They are delivered once a month, as you might know if you have ever participated in any Workshop Payment related things. And as you might know with all similar systems, the "getting in" part isn't instant either. So realistically we are looking at a ~3 month grace period before you, me or a scammer could be receiving his first payment.

Third of all, there's a cut threshold of 100 dollars before you get your share of the money. That is that a mod should make at least 400 bucks in direct sales before you would receive any money at all. Combine that with the previous two points, to perform a money making scam with-in the Steam system you should be able to:

1) Provide a real name and bank account combination
2) Make so much money that you most likely would land into the most popular category
3) And you would survive for 3 (or one) months doing that without anyone noticing.

Realistically (or statistically) speaking the mods that pass the threshold are already very popular or will be very popular. Popular things gain attention. And if you are a modder in a "close knit" community such as the Skyrim mod one and you don't notice that your creation is selling tons on the only marketplace around, I don't know what kind of modder you are.

Also Valve doesn't "refuse to remove the item after they go on sale" as you seem to think, they already have and no-one won or lost anything doing that.

 

[Serandur]

1., 2., 3., 4. You clearly don't understand how the system works at all. Your arguments are all based on the assumption that all money from sales go directly to the creators wallet which is completely untrue. I am going to follow the popular Reddit route and explain it to you like you were five.

First of all, you need to provide your real legal name and bank account numbers to Valve. This is the first step that makes playing the system considerably more hard than say only needing a PayPal account or a Buttcoin wallet to receive the payments. If you have access to endless amounts of name / bank number combination, congratulations: you are most likely running other scams that are much more profitable than any mod-related scam could ever be.

Second of all, like I said, the payments aren't instant. They are delivered once a month, as you might know if you have ever participated in any Workshop Payment related things. And as you might know with all similar systems, the "getting in" part isn't instant either. So realistically we are looking at a ~3 month grace period before you, me or a scammer could be receiving his first payment.

Third of all, there's a cut threshold of 100 dollars before you get your share of the money. That is that a mod should make at least 400 bucks in direct sales before you would receive any money at all. Combine that with the previous two points, to perform a money making scam with-in the Steam system you should be able to:

1) Provide a real name and bank account combination
2) Make so much money that you most likely would land into the most popular category
3) And you would survive for 3 (or one) months doing that without anyone noticing.

Realistically (or statistically) speaking the mods that pass the threshold are already very popular or will be very popular. Popular things gain attention. And if you are a modder in a "close knit" community such as the Skyrim mod one and you don't notice that your creation is selling tons on the only marketplace around, I don't know what kind of modder you are.

Also Valve doesn't "refuse to remove the item after they go on sale" as you seem to think, they already have and no-one won or lost anything doing that.

Nothing you just said has any relevance. It already happened. It doesn't matter how the process of signing up to be paid goes, it doesn't matter if they don't even get away with it to make much money if at all. Other users' mods are uploaded and sold in some form, the damage is done. And yes, they do refuse to completely remove the item. They remove it from further sales, but they keep it listed for those who already purchased it. You're talking about grace periods and thresholds, as if that changes any of the issue with someone uploading another person's mod against their wishes. It's all in the Chesko story. Read it.

And now you're victim blaming the modders and demanding they actually do need to constantly monitor Steam's Workshop page to make sure their stuff isn't stolen because Valve certainly won't do it. Classy.