Support NeoGAF

[Buckle]

As before, I would only be for this if the profits from them were skewed in the modder's favor, not Bethesda and Valve's like they tried to.

The way they did it before was just plain greedy and not at all some heroic effort to uplift content creators. If it's going to happen, they deserve more than scraps.

 

[Trail Guide]

The cynic in me just rolls my eyes at Valve wanting paid mods so they can get another revenue stream.

I do agree with him that modders do create value and their should be a way for them to be financially compensated but not if Valve is taking a 30% cut.

 

[Armaros]

If Gabe Newell thinks that modders should get paid then why doesn't he pay them?

He has, that's why they released them as games and hired the people responsible.

 

[Hektor]

Ever heard of Counterstrike or Dota?

That's not paying modders for their modding, that's hiring a former modder as a standard developer, ultimately expecting returns on a finished videogame

 

[Heavy's Sandvich]

Do you reckon Valve are up for paying people that help with translating their games?

 

[ieptbarakat]

I think it's fair if they work with the developer/publisher to guarantee proper quality assurance testing, have zero copyright issues, and the mod itself doesn't interfere with or contain content from another mod.

Anything less than that is a nightmare waiting to happen and will only damage the value of a game and it's modding community in the long run.

 

[HK-47]

Do you reckon Valve are up for paying people that help with translating their games?

I forgot about this.

 

[Compsiox]

I think they're going to announce something soon. They're ramping up PR.

 

[Buckle]

I think it's fair if they work with the developer/publisher to guarantee proper quality assurance testing, have zero copyright issues, and the mod itself doesn't interfere with or contain content from another mod.

Anything less than that is a nightmare waiting to happen and will only damage the value of a game and it's modding community in the long run.

Also this.

Bethesda's game engines are a fucking nightmare, modding them is like playing Jenga.

 

[Nezzhil]

They can support the modders by giving them the option to add donation buttons links to their mod's pages.

 

[Netherscourge]

Hey Gabe,

Feel free to give a % of Steam's sales to modders.

Steam takes what % of sales? Well, take a slice of THAT % and give it to modders.

This way, you're not making customers pay for them or taking away from the developer's %.

 

[Mrbob]

I have no interest in valve or publishers taking a cut off mod sales I would theoretically pay for. If anything valve and 3rd parties should be the ones paying for mods from steam sales.

 

[Spirited]

Hey Gabe,

Feel free to give a % of Steam's sales to modders.

Steam takes what % of sales? Well, take a slice of THAT % and give it to modders.

This way, you're not making customers pay for them or taking away from the developer's %.

Are we just stating the most unrealistic and dumb ways to do it now?

 

[Jonneh3003]

I don't mind paying for hard work, I just think Valve doesn't need to be greedy with the cut.

 

[purdobol]

This all make sense.. But there are some very important questions that should be asked first.

1. Why do they do this in the first place? I mean right now when they're not compensated at all?
2. What would change if the money that can be made was a factor in all of this?

The answer for the first question is simple. They love the game, and making content and sharing it with the community is fun and fulfilling in itself.

Not what would change if money was involved? On surface it would be cool, that they can be paid for the effort. But it would also mean that sharing content would not be as common as it is now. Lots of mods rely heavily on other mods. Just like with open source projects. If money is involved the sharing stops, and claims are being made. So the modders that want to use other modders work (let's say something like script extender for scrolls games) would have to either pay up or share the profit. It'll be a mess. Or the player would have to shell out more money than intended just to make "that one" mod work.
On top of it there would be enourmous spike on "I wanna slice of that pile of cash too" modders out there that would create "questionable content" just for money instead of love for the game. So the smaller but yet quality mods could get lost in the procces. And it could be harder to find them.

So in general I don't know how i feel about this. The devil is in the details and it either can help the modding scene or ruin it completely. Depends on implementation I guess. Something like seal of quality would be mandatory i think, if there's to be a mod store.

But to be honest I would rather see the publishers themselves to share the slice of the pie with modders that created really good stuff afterwards. Out of the blue so to speek. Some kind of awards for supporting the game.

Epic did a really cool thing with its make something Unreal contest. I think that's the way to do it.

 

[_Aaron_]

There are an awful lot of Valve stories lately, is this all coming out of one big event they hosted or something?

They invited press to their HQ to discuss stuff and Q&A.

 

[Waveset]

It feels like this latest media outing from Valve is being drawn out as episodic content. I want the season pass, where's everything in one place?

 

[chillybright]

Valve just want to profit from mods.

Yeah they still wouldn't let it go.

 

[Stiler]

The issue is the cut.

As we saw with the Bethesda deal, modders were getting a TINY amount of the pie for their mod while Bethesda was getting the majority, even though they didn't make the mod, just provided the tools.

Modders should get the majority of the cut, not the smallest.

On top of this, the other issue is mods themselves, pay for a mod and then the mod shuts down or a patch stops it from working and the modder isn't updating it? then what?

Then there's the pricing, a simple cosmetic mod price vs a mod that adds hours and hours of new content or completely changes the game, etc.

There's sooooooo many things to work out for this kind of thing.

I think thats part of the reason people just want mods to be free and have donations, so the people can choose if they want to help support the modder and keep it going. That seems the most fair at the current state.

 

[True Fire]

He really doesn't understand hobbyism lol

 

[Gattsu25]

That's kind of weird stance when valve always takes a flat 30% and the devs should get some compensation too for putting out the mod support and tools. It's no different from selling something made in another persons engine on steam, both the guy faciliating the tools and valve should get a proportionate cut.

You're right.

Valve - 30%
Publisher - 0.05%
Modder - 69.95%

 

[Mithos]

My biggest issue about payed mods, have always been dependencies.
So this one mod that is payed cost $10, but its dependent on 5 other mods that cost $5-10 a piece...

Not something I'll accept/support or be behind. If payed mods become a reality they need to work standalone besides the game it's made for ofc.

 

[Alienous]

I like the idea of mod creators being supported. Patreon, donation buttons - I think the compensation a modder receives should come from the same sense of good will that mods come from. Making it a marketplace just seems to muddy the system.

 

[ThatsMytrunks]

95% of the revenue should go to the modders, though.

I'd argue 80/10/10.
• 80 to the modder, who made content or fixed bugs in existing software.
• 10 to the game developer/publisher for creating the existing software.
• 10 to Valve/Steam/Whatever content provider is making the service available to end users and creators.

I think this is reasonable considering developers themselves are only seeing 70/30 on Steam anyways.I think a more realistic way is 60/20/20, but I think it's really worthwhile.

 

[A-V-B]

aka we'd love to monetize the community fixing our games.

Yup.

And if it becomes profitable enough for companies... it almost becomes an incentive to release buggy games and not maintain them outside the code modders can't legally access.

It'd be really unhealthy.

 

[Yarbskoo]

Honestly, the way he talks about it kinda implies the developer should be paying the modders, not just the players.

Which kind of makes sense actually, but good luck getting publishers to see it that way.

 

[Mrbob]

You're right.

Valve - 30%
Publisher - 0.05%
Modder - 69.95%

I'd rather give the modder 100%.... At least 90%. I'm OK with a donate page that redirects outside of steam.

The issue I have is that valve and 3rd parties are trying figure out a way to take a cut from these modded games when they are already benefiting from increases game sales.

 

[afternoon delight]

He really doesn't understand hobbyism lol

If you aren't maximizing profits at all times from every avenue possible just cut your fins off and drown with the rest of the finless sharks in the sea eh True Fire we're out to eat hearts here in the nude NPCs patch wastelands.

 

[Bornstellar]

Probably should be pubs paying modders rather than consumers considering the amount of advertising they get.

. Mods drive sales for games.

 

[Satch]

aka we'd love to monetize the community fixing our games.

yep, skyrim has had many patches made by the modders that outright fix blatant problems with the game that bethesda never touched.

i doubt bethesda is interested in paying the guy that did it though

 

[jshackles]

Gabe please don't forgot about those of us that mod Steam itself

 

[Armaros]

I'd rather give the modder 100%.... At least 90%. I'm OK with a donate page that redirects outside of steam.

The issue I have is that valve and 3rd parties are trying figure out a way to take a cut from these modded games when they are already benefiting from increases game sales.

It would never legally work. The publisher would object to another entity profiting off their IP against their permission or getting cut out.

The modder basically no legal footing for cutting anyone out of the profit arrangement.

 

[Dr.Acula]

The way I view it is that modders are getting license free access to the engine, free modding tools, the game libraries, publishing of the base game, etc.

It's completely unique. You can't make a film or a song and publish it using unlicensed stock footage or samples and not have it be cease and desisted even if you give it away for free. That anyone can use Skyrim, for example, as a free platform for their content is not something that has an analog in any other field, and it is something that games companies spent time and effort in supporting. It's clearly a burden or a risk for devs, because there are so few games that support modders to such a degree.

I get that modding is more than "practice" for a lot of people, but if it's getting to the point for a modder that they're spending so much time and money that it's not worth it, they really should either make the mod less ambitious or they should take the next step and start developing their own games and take the risks to reap the rewards.

There was a time in the 2000s where you couldn't make a game in your garage, not like you could in the 80s or 90s. But now, with such robust tools and favorable engine licensing agreements, there are plenty of self-published games made by one, or a handful of people.

I could understand the argument if it were still like the 2000s where realistically, the only way to make a game would be a free Half-Life or Quake total-conversion. For those devs, the fact they couldn't make a stand-alone game was because practically speaking, they had to make a mod. Tools were too expensive, too undocumented, and too demanding for a small team to create a game from scratch -it was just not realistic.

Today modding does not have to be the primary road to developing a complete game experience in an affordable way with a small team. Modding is a conscious choice for small, or inexperienced teams so they can reduce their risk, but they accept that their reward is also reduced.

 

[Isurus]

Guy who gets a cut of all transactions on his platform wants more transactions. Nothing nobel or surprising here.

 

[Joyful]

I think they're going to announce something soon. They're ramping up PR.

valve is unusually chatty lately, gotta agree

 

[kanuuna]

It's shitty that people who put a ton work into their mods may have to live off donations, but I'm definitely not into giving Valve 30% of what I may want to pass on to the developer in the case of mods. Then again, I think putting out a free mod that gets +10k downloads looks better on a CV than one that you managed to sell to 200 licenses of for a dollar.

Blessed be those who can actively donate and contribute to the modding community, though.

 

[Abilidebob]

If Gabe Newell thinks that modders should get paid then why doesn't he pay them?

He does though? Items for DOTA 2, CS:GO, and TF2 pretty much all come from the community. And in DOTA 2 they implemented a "pass" for custom modes that gives money to modders.

 

[Chezzymann]

He is absolutely right. But.... Theres going to always be a visceral reaction from the gamers as we have spent forever getting mods for free. And ANYTHING that comes along and threatens that is going to get pushback, whether the speaker has a point or not. People are not going to want to part ways with 'free'. No matter how justified.



This right here is probably the only way this could be realized without a bunch of gamers revolting. Have the pubs that are reaping the additional sales from these free mods, turn and share profit with the mod developer instead of having the mod developer charge upfront for the mod.

There has to be a way to disconnect the gamer from coming out of pocket directly or they just won't accept it.

Yup, I completely understand people wanting to be paid and am for it morally but as a consumer who doesn't want to spend money im against it when I actually have to choose. I like experimenting with a bunch of mods so even if they're $1 that could add up fast. Id be fine dropping $15 for some of those huge skyrim expansions though

 

[Jawmuncher]

Modders deserve some pay.
They don't deserve the pay that would go to them cut so that Steam and the Publisher get some money too. The percentage they tried to pull last time was total BS.

 

[Hektor]

He does though? Items for DOTA 2, CS:GO, and TF2 pretty much all come from the community. And in DOTA 2 they implemented a "pass" for custom modes that gives money to modders.

That isn't valve paying them, that is the community paying them and valve taking a cut. Valve gains money through these transactions.

 

[Ketch]

Ever heard of Counterstrike or Dota?

He has, that's why they released them as games and hired the people responsible.

Valve has got unlimited money. The only thing stopping them from paying prominent steam workshop creators is greed and laziness.

 

[Abilidebob]

That isn't valve paying them, that is the community paying them and valve taking a cut. Valve gains money through these transactions.

Or they could have done like pretty much every single other publisher in existence and not create any way for those content creators to get any money. Yes, customers are paying Valve and Valve is paying the modders, but when the alternative is being like before where there was pretty much 0% those people would get money you can say that Valve is paying modders. They could have easily not let those items be sold. They'd be losing money, yes, but so would the modders.

 

[Deleted member 102362]

Gabe please don't forgot about those of us that mod Steam itself

Send them another job application!

 

[Atilac]

95% of the revenue should go to the modders, though.

95% doesn't go to the developer and publisher...

 

[Atilac]

Valve has got unlimited money. The only thing stopping them from paying prominent steam workshop creators is greed and laziness.

One of the dumbest things I've read today. Christ almighty I hope you are nowhere near running a business.

 

[Ketch]

One of the dumbest things I've read today. Christ almighty I hope you are nowhere near running a business.

How is it stupid? If the owner of valve thinks that mod creators on steam aren't being fairly compensated they why doesn't he compensate them?

Your comment is the dumbest comment I've read in my entire life.

 

[Hektor]

Or they could have done like pretty much every single other publisher in existence and not create any way for those content creators to get any money. Yes, customers are paying Valve and Valve is paying the modders, but when the alternative is being like before where there was pretty much 0% those people would get money you can say that Valve is paying modders. They could have easily not let those items be sold. They'd be losing money, yes, but so would the modders.

No, you can't say valve is paying the modders when valve themselfs doesn't invest a single cent into them. They're enabling modders to earn money yes, but valve is not the one who pays, the monetary stream is still coming 100% from the community,

Paying implies that they sacrifice a portion of their own financial gain, to do the right thing, not finding a way for modders to get paid by a third party while syphoning profit in the process.

By this logic, valve is also paying developers because they publish their games on a storefront and take a 30% cut

 

[Jackpot]

If mods are good enough to drive sales then the publisher can pay them.

 

[I H8 Memes]

Probably should be pubs paying modders rather than consumers considering the amount of advertising they get.

If this really was out of genuine concern then that would be the solution. Modders get paid by the people who sell more copies of games because of them.

But thats not their solution. Because this is all about Valve and the publishers cut. Meanwhile the modder will get a whole 25%.

 

[DOBERMAN INC]

I really hope Valve doesn't read forums, they'd go bankrupt within a decade with all these totally feasible and amazing business tips being thrown around.