Support NeoGAF

[thebloo]

"You don't like modders being paid?" is a loaded, biased question.

It's currently the gaming equivalent of "what about the children?".

In the wake of this, I think Valve should push a donation button right now, while everyone is still paying attention. Have a better cut for modders out of donations and I think that would make most people happy.

 

[LAUGHTREY]

The only mistake they made was thinking that pc gamers could be civil about this

You act like someone burnt down Valves office or something.

They tried to make modding games into community-sourced untested DLC. Why would anyone be alright with this?

 

[vcc]

Yeah, those silly customers, using their voice and wallets to affect change in their favor. They really should just shut up and let the poor companies live. Like the PS3, which didn't go down in price. Like the auction house that is still around. Like the rise of alternate games like Cities and Dungeons that directly competed against games like SimCity and Dungeon Keeper (EA).

Yeah, expressing their opinions has just been horrible for consumers. They really should knock it off.

They don't vote with their wallets most of the time. BF4 still sold. D3 still sold. Sims still sold.

But also often complain about things without perspective. Like the price of games; when they are as cheap as they have ever been. I bought DQ2 for $70 in 1987. That's $130 in modern currency. A NES deluxe was $299; around $607 in 2015 funds. Systems and games are as cheap as they have ever been but people are still outraged.

XB1 DRM had legitimate concerns as did D3 AH, simcity, BF4 etc... but on this one the community is over outraged about something that isn't as serious.

 

[Sijil]

Wow.

I have to agree with him, with the shit being flung at modders who put up with paid mods, it felt like a bloody witch hunt. Heck I just saw a name and shame list against those modders on Steam forums.

 

[Call Me A Hero]

Obviously it was a bad practice. If Valve really wants to support modders then they should add donation option.

 

[vcc]

There's so much embellishment in this post there's not enough room for a point.

Wouldn't you agree though? Gamers are easily outraged.

 

[Enter the Dragon Punch]

I have to agree with, with the shit being flung at modders who put up with paid mods, it felt like a bloody witch hunt. Heck a just saw a name and shame list against those modders on Steam forums.

A vocal minority did those things - not the majority. Not fair to use a blanket statement

 

[veloxStrix]

I hope they don't back off the idea completely. There were issues with how this was implemented, but if Valve back off the idea of allowing content creators sell their content on Steam altogether.. then that's stupid.

That's what the majority of people want. I can't tell you how many comments I've seen saying something to the tune of "Modding is a hobby, get a real job."

 

[Vallen Valiant]

Wouldn't you agree though? Gamers are easily outraged.

That just might be because gamers are being mistreated as customers.

 

[LAUGHTREY]

Wouldn't you agree though? Gamers are easily outraged.

I'm sure you like to think so.

 

[Have a Nice Day]

The only mistake they made was thinking that pc gamers could be civil about this

@neogafshitposts worthy.

 

[Occam]

It's a bad idea to use money as an incentive to create mods.
It seems to be a difficult concept to grasp that not everything on this planet should be monetized.
What's next, should people who post in game forums get a cut of the ad revenue for the posts they make?

"Please subscribe"

 

[CyclopsRock]

That just might be because gamers are being mistreated as customers.

Mistreated by whom?

 

[SigSig]

The only mistake they made was thinking that pc gamers could be civil about this

Introducing the feature with Bethesda taking the biggest cut was a PR nightmare waiting to happen.

I still think the system would have been nice, but I'm okay with it being gone as well.

 

[yuraya]

Whats really funny about this paid mods stuff is that prior to the launch of the feature..Skyrim sat at like 95% overwhelmingly positive reviews on the store page. Now its at 85% very positive hehe. I know its meaningless but its still impressive since there are more than 100k reviews. The one thing people can't deny is that the backlash was huge from all of this. Anyways I am glad the issue is resolved now I can watch bethesdas e3 press conference hyped without hating on them for ripping off modders.

 

[Slavik81]

Just put a donation button there, and make sure the mod creators get a huge cut. Add a steam badge towards donating to mods.

Donation links are a good idea. Give the mod creators at least 50% and I'm sold.

 

[vcc]

That just might be because gamers are being mistreated as customers.

In the big picture; that's just not true right now. You can get a lot of gaming for very little. Game quality is fairly high. Information on games are everywhere so making a informed purchase is easy. Games offer a lot of entertainment for the money and games are as diverse as they have ever been. If you calculate by hours; there is no entertainment that is as much value. You have so many options and there are so many products to cater to every niche.

 

[SneakyStephan]

You act like someone burnt down Valves office or something.

They tried to make modding games into community-sourced untested DLC. Why would anyone be alright with this?

Don't expect these (super important) questions to get adressed by people like him.


Got to give it to bethesda the 'support the modders' angle was a clever trojan horse for what they were trying to accomplish. It was a strong tool to attempt to turn the community against eachother while they swooped in and took our shit during the infighting.
It's a great relief to see it has failed anyways.

In the big picture; that's just not true right now. You can get a lot of gaming for very little. Game quality is fairly high. Information on games are everywhere so making a informed purchase is easy. Games offer a lot of entertainment for the money and games are as diverse as they have ever been. If you calculate by hours; there is no entertainment that is as much value. You have so many options and there are so many products to cater to every niche.

Off topic but, between review embargoes, astroturfing, previews in controlled environments (e.g battlefield 4), community voices being bribed (e.g frankieOnPc and battlefield 4) it's never been more difficult to get a solid read and reliable information on games by the time they come out.
Nowadays you have to wait a good while after release for things to settle down and be able to get objective opinions, which makes it just like any other product.

Software is the only product without strict quality control guarantees and laws to protect the consumer.
My samsung tv I bought in 2008 had glitches when playing content through hdmi, a technician came over within days to replace the circuit board on my tv, if the 6 setting on my toaster does not work I can get a refund no questions asked.
Games tend to have countless faults(functionality broken) but it's hard to get a refund if at all. Standards for quality control are also far lower than for physical goods like a fridge or a toaster.

Software is the ONLY industry where right of ownership and first sale right is not respected or protected by law,let that sink in, it's INSANE. It's so insane that it's become a vessel for the corporate world to attempt to destroy ownership and first sale rights in the physical goods industry!
http://consumerist.com/2015/04/22/j...-claims-against-the-way-you-use-your-tractor/ (a random source I picked for this example, theres thousands of others for the same example, because it's a big fucking deal)
The bolded is so insane that it would have been an unimaginable concept 20 years ago, but here we are...

Every sport except for a few expensive ones like tennis and golf is cheaper than gaming.
Gaming costs thousands a year for enthusiasts, I played soccer for a decade and it cost me nothing. I played table tennis for 5 years and spent about 300 euros on it in total.

Gaming has a lot of variety though and caters to a lot of niches (at least on pc), I'll give you that.

 

[Chariot]

The only mistake they made was thinking that pc gamers could be civil about this

Seriously?

 

[not psycho]

More like 'PS3 is $600'. OUTRAGE. $60 games? OUTRAGE. AH in D3? OUTRAGE. $70 Games in Canada? OUTRAGE. $100 games in australia? OUTRAGE. $2000 PS4 because of import taxes in Brasil? OUTRAGE. Horse armour DLC? OUTRAGE. BF4 is broken? OUTRAGE. Simcity 4? OUTRAGE. SIMS dozen expansions? OUTRAGE. Ending to ME3 was so so? OUTRAGE. A older game no one plays losses multiplayer-servers? OUTRAGE.

Is this a game? I'll try.

GTA: San Andreas forced update removes 17 songs and resolution options? OUTRAGE. EA shuts down online servers for an 18 month old game after they charged extra for an "online pass" in addition to the game? OUTRAGE. Steam claims that if you ever refuse an updated terms of service, they will remove access for your own games. OUTRAGE. Sega mass takedown of youtube videos? OUTRAGE.

To be fair though, maybe I shouldn't include GTA. It's true that Steam stole the songs and options from users who bought them, but a fanmade mod gives them back...

 

[Joey Ravn]

Cool. I never cared either way about this feature, but sure it's good that this very polarizing decision has been reversed. A lot of people didn't like it, and that's fine by me.

The only mistake they made was thinking that pc gamers could be civil about this

Living on the Edge.

 

[Vallen Valiant]

In the big picture; that's just not true right now. You can get a lot of gaming for very little. Game quality is fairly high. Information on games are everywhere so making a informed purchase is easy. Games offer a lot of entertainment for the money and games are as diverse as they have ever been. If you calculate by hours; there is no entertainment that is as much value. You have so many options and there are so many products to cater to every niche.

You are completely missing it. Gamers have it good over all, but that doesn't change the fact that specific game companies make shitty decisions that we deserve to be outraged about.
A good game doesn't make an unrelated bad game better.

 

[hodgy100]

Good. Hopefully they bring it back with a better implementation.

 

[vcc]

Is this a game? I'll try.

GTA: San Andreas forced update removes 17 songs and resolution options? OUTRAGE. EA shuts down online servers for an 18 month old game after they charged extra for an "online pass" in addition to the game? OUTRAGE. Steam claims that if you ever refuse an updated terms of service, they will remove access for your own games. OUTRAGE. Sega mass takedown of youtube videos? OUTRAGE.

To be fair though, maybe I shouldn't include GTA. It's true that Steam stole the songs and options from users who bought them, but a fanmade mod gives them back...

GTA. Wasn't that also a issue with the song licencor?

Sega takedown. It's something they can do as nintendo is showing. Youtubers don't have a intrinsic right to make that stuff and monetize it.

 

[aftercompletion]

It's currently the gaming equivalent of "what about the children?".

In the wake of this, I think Valve should push a donation button right now, while everyone is still paying attention. Have a better cut for modders out of donations and I think that would make most people happy.

Donation links are a good idea. Give the mod creators at least 50% and I'm sold.

Donation buttons don't work. This has been well established already.

 

[vcc]

You are completely missing it. Gamers have it good over all, but that doesn't change the fact that specific game companies make shitty decisions that we deserve to be outraged about.
A good game doesn't make an unrelated bad game better.

I disagree that this one is much to be outraged over. It's people being used to having something made for free and then being very angry when the people who enable it, the people who make it, and the people distributing it want a payment option.

 

[CyclopsRock]

I genuinely don't understand the problem people had with this policy. Is it purely the split? Isn't that totally arbitrary, though? And why does it matter to you who ends up getting the money; you still get the same content eitherway, whatever the split.

 

[Vallen Valiant]

Good. Hopefully they bring it back with a better implementation.

All I want is for Bethesda to dedicate time and money to support any paid mod, to make sure they earn their 30% cut. To put their company name on it and have customer support.

In short, I want Bethesda to ensure a 3rd party DLC is as well supported as their own DLC.

 

[MRORANGE]

Valve fell on its own sword.

Hoping they can get rid of steam next.

 

[Coflash]

The only mistake they made was thinking that pc gamers could be civil about this

Let us know how we could have remained civil and achieved the same result.

Once you've listed out those steps, we'll explain why it's more effective for people to voice their discontent in any way that best gets the point across.

If they had proposed something fair to all, people would have reacted in accordance with that. What they proposed was ridiculous on all accounts.

In regards to how people did react; it's not as if they burned down the Valve offices. It is the internet, and the discontent is largely text based. I'm sure they'll recover.

 

[Roshin]

How do you know if donation is sufficient? SkyUI modder just said people don't donate.

I'm sure only a tiny minority would donate initially, but why not have the option present anyway? And then think of ways that would motivate people to donate, like cards, badges, etc? Once people get used to the idea, I think more of them would donate.

IMO

 

[Puppet Shadow]

Donation links are a good idea. Give the mod creators at least 50% and I'm sold.

It's a good idea in theory. The problem is people don't donate.

 

[LAUGHTREY]

I genuinely don't understand the problem people had with this policy. Is it purely the split? Isn't that totally arbitrary, though? And why does it matter to you who ends up getting the money; you still get the same content eitherway, whatever the split.

Did you not read any of the jillions of posts that were made the past few days?

It's not DLC, it's not been through QA, it's a friggen internet meme at this point that you can mod skyrim until you break it. You could pay money to break your game.

Someone pulled the 'Featured' mods and tried them out, almost every single one of them was buggy or dumb. One had the item in a completely different spot than where it said it spawned, the other one had to be spawned in with console commands.

And that was just Skyrim. Imagine if they did it with other games that are less mod-friendly.

 

[Coflash]

It's a good idea in theory. The problem is people don't donate.

So give them an incentive to. If Valve owns the store and is taking a cut, they can easily offer something in return. Look at all the hassle people go through to get cards/skins/cheap games/whatever.

This really isn't hard for them to figure out.

 

[Randam]

Donate button really is the best solution.


Did big modders say something about the whole thing?

 

[aftercompletion]

Donate button really is the best solution.


Did big modders say something about the whole thing?

Yes. They did.

They got a bunch of death threats from their own "community."

 

[CyclopsRock]

Did you not read any of the jillions of posts that were made the past few days?

It's not DLC, it's not been through QA, it's a friggen internet meme at this point that you can mod skyrim until you break it. You could pay money to break your game.

Someone pulled the 'Featured' mods and tried them out, almost every single one of them was buggy or dumb. One had the item in a completely different spot than where it said it spawned, the other one had to be spawned in with console commands.

And that was just Skyrim. Imagine if they did it with other games that are less mod-friendly.

Then don't pay for it? If someone is porpoising a bad deal to you - and I suspect the majority of these are - Then the correct course of action is to decline that offer, not demand they cease to be allowed to offer it (whilst coincidentally getting what they wanted money for for free).

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Wow. I knew there was a huge shitstorm but I'm still surprised they went back on it. In theory it could have worked but springing it on an already existing huge mod community was a mistake.

 

[Fimbulvetr]

Are you guys modders?

I am not, though I often enjoy tweaking my games. What I meant there wasn't that a profit motive would necessarily be cataclysmic, but that some amount of impact is truly unavoidable. It may well be possible to find a model that is straightforwardly for-profit but doesn't cause this problem in a significant way, but I believe this wasn't that model. I'd like to make it clear that I'm not absolutely against the idea of a for-profit model because of this problem. I do believe that an enhanced donation model should be attempted first.

 

[LAUGHTREY]

Then don't pay for it? If someone is porpoising a bad deal to you - and I suspect the majority of these are - Then the correct course of action is to decline that offer, not demand they cease to be allowed to offer it (whilst coincidentally getting what they wanted money for for free).

inb4 the only way you can mod your game at all is via paid mods.

 

[NinjamicWZ]

"Optional donation systems" are useless.

Never heard of sites like bandcamp or humblebundle?

 

[Morokh]

Donation buttons don't work. This has been well established already.

From not being brought forward enough, to, most of the time only being managed through paypal, which is far from being convenient for everyone, it doesn't take much to see why it doesn't work as much as it could.

At least this whole thing has brought some light on this aspect of things.

Now that Bethesda made an official statement that they have nothing against people making money from mods through donations or other means, maybe modders who might benefit from some extra money will be less frisky about it and consider other options, like, for sinstance Patreon who seems to work quite well for Youtubers for instance.

I mean I don't know if Kickstarter allows it, but for someone like Chesko who recorded voice-work in a studio for the follower he put on the workshop it could be an alternate way of doing it.

 

[Renekton]

So give them an incentive to. If Valve owns the store and is taking a cut, they can easily offer something in return. Look at all the hassle people go through to get cards/skins/cheap games/whatever.

This really isn't hard for them to figure out.

So the idea is to convert "donation" function into purchasing incentive rewards?

Who makes the incentives?

How do you ensure good modders get the proper share of money if the donation incentive is universal to all modders regardless of product quality?

 

[Vallen Valiant]

Yes. They did.

They got a bunch of death threats from their own "community."

This isn't new. When the Red Cross started charging for food to war veterans, when it was previously free, the veterans were outraged. The food was previous free. The outrage never went away even after the charge was dropped. This is a known case of social psychology, where something that is "free" is considered infinity more valuable than something that cost money, even if it is just a few cents. The war veterans weren't outraged that they had to pay; the war veterans were outraged that they were betrayed and being treated as mere wallets rather than people. The outrage is similar to the idea of your own mother charging you for eating at the dinner table. The idea that you no longer have a special relationship, that it is now about a working relationship instead of a personal one.

This isn't unique to gamers. And there is nothing strange about it. Free things build bridges. Charge money for things that were once free, burn these bridges. And burning bridges get people mad.

 

[danm999]

So give them an incentive to. If Valve owns the store and is taking a cut, they can easily offer something in return. Look at all the hassle people go through to get cards/skins/cheap games/whatever.

This really isn't hard for them to figure out.

Yeah Valve really messed up the carrot part of the equation here.

They made a good case for why we should have a discussion as to why modders should get something for UCG, but less so themselves or Bethesda (especially problematic given they're taking the lion's share).

Especially since they didn't appear as though they were going to put anything additional into the process of modding than they had before. It's the same error Microsoft made two years ago by asking something additional of the consumer without spelling out a tangible benefit. Lots of people will resist.

 

[xrnzaaas]

It's a shame there wasn't a similar movement when Bethesda released the horse armor. Maybe now we'd live in different times.

 

[Joey Ravn]

So give them an incentive to. If Valve owns the store and is taking a cut, they can easily offer something in return. Look at all the hassle people go through to get cards/skins/cheap games/whatever.

This really isn't hard for them to figure out.

At that point you are no longer voluntarily donating to a mod creator. You are buying a paid service that happens to include a mod alongside other bonuses.

You would believe that with the amount of people who have claimed that "if there was a donation system, I would totally donate!", modders would have secured a good revenue stream that is not forced down the consumer's throats... but it doesn't look like that's the case.

 

[aftercompletion]

This isn't new. When the Red Cross started charging for food to war veterans, when it was previously free, the veterans were outraged. The food was previous free. The outrage never went away even after the charge was dropped. This is a known case of social psychology, where something that is "free" is considered infinity more valuable than something that cost money, even if it is just a few cents. The war veterans weren't outraged that they had to pay; the war veterans were outraged that they were betrayed and being treated as mere wallets rather than people. The outrage is similar to the idea of your own mother charging you for eating at the dinner table. The idea that you no longer have a special relationship, that it is now about a working relationship instead of a personal one.

This isn't unique to gamers. And there is nothing strange about it. Free things build bridges. Charge money for things that were once free, burn these bridges. And burning bridges get people mad.

So, just to be clear: You're cool with death threats.

 

[Vallen Valiant]

It's a shame there wasn't a similar movement when Bethesda released the horse armor. Maybe now we'd live in different times.

Bethesda guaranteed the functionality of their horse armour. They made the armour, they deserve to sell it.

If Bethesda is willing to guarantee the functionally of every single paid mod, I would be happy to give them their 1/3rd cut of the profits.

So, just to be clear: You're cool with death threats.

You completely ignored my point and instead try to attack my character, that's fine. Sticks and stones. But don't think that improves your position any.

 

[neoism]

I hope this sends a message to other developers / publishers who want to try the same.

I hope it sent a message to Bethesda. I'm really glad they changed there minds. But still F4 and ES6 wouldn't be the same with this. Their games are better because of FREE mods. But it will be different though I think, because they are new games, half the problem with this was that it was an old game with a community with 3 years behind it. I will still think twice before getting a Beth game though, I'm sure this was some kind of test for their future releases... and I'm glad it failed. I still hold by a mod is only a mod if its free, otherwise its DLC.