Skyrim Workshop Now Supports Paid Mods
- Thread starter Sendou
- Start date
- Status
alexandros
Banned
The solution is simple though, don't buy it. People who want to make easy money by selling crap mods will soon realize than noone wants to buy them so they'll either make something better, give the current one for free or give up. And if they somehow find an audience for their crap then, well, buyer beware. We should all strive to be responsible consumers and vote with our wallets.
ForsakenLotus
Member
That is some reeeeally shady stuff. Is that a decision Valve specifically made? If so, Valve is looking worse and worse as a company to me.
UI shit is very disrespective to the massive work Schlangster and co have put into SkyUI. We are talking about over hundreds or thousands of manhours. They also pretty much stopped working on it well over a year ago (could be closer to two years), but have now had the means and motivation to continue whilst still offering the old version. I personally think that the resurrection of SkyUI is one positive thing that has come out so far.
It's been disabled because all the fucking comments were insults, death threats and vitriol. There was exactly fucking zero information about the mod in the comments at all.
We live in a world where many $60 games are bought and sold and are nigh unplayable, and many more will still in the future. At the very end, the customers will be the ones who will rue the day, mate.
That was a great read.
ForsakenLotus
Member
That's actually a really good point. I mean, Bethesda has a history of releasing very buggy games. It's almost hard to imagine a situation where an update from them wouldn't break at least a few mods unless there is extensive Q&A (which I doubt) that would delay the update for a long time, relatively.
The more I think about this whole situation, the more I think it's just a terrible idea. I believe, on a philosophical level, that if a publisher supports a modding community on an official basis that modders should have an opportunity to be compensated for their work. But there are just so many issues that can and likely will come up that it almost doesn't seem worth it.
Except fuck you give me money.
Agreed, there's no guarantee of inter-mod compatibility. If two mods conflict, and you're left with a buggy mess, and your only recourse is to get a "refund" for one of them. And let's be honest: if you're willing to mod Skyrim, you're not likely to have less than a dozen mods running at once. You're not likely going to have somebody swoop in with a compatibility fix for two dead mods that require money to buy in the first place.
I am all for mod authors being paid, and I'm repeating myself at this point, but the way Beth and Valve implemented this is in the most anti-consumer way possible: outside of the infrastructure to line their own and Bethesda's pockets, what else have they done to ensure that the player experience is robust? Absolutely nothing. You would think that maybe they could have made something akin to a mod manager (and if they had done something like this, I would have been far more supportive of them taking the cut they do).
And speaking of the cut, the DayZ guy mentions that stuff like the value of the IP, risks/opportunity costs, and provisions of tools/documentation as being justifications for the cut. Well, nobody is arguing against Bethesda's right to take the cut they do; they own the IP, so of course they have the right. Let's think about some of these justifications for a moment: the modding scene, like it or not, has always been a selling point of the franchise. One can even make the argument that the prospect of improvements to gameplay, graphics, UX, and fucking bug fixes, provided by the community, available for free, was always one of the biggest draws, a contributor to the IP's "value".
With regards the the risks/opportunity costs, there is no risk, there is no opportunity cost. They pay minimal, if any, overhead, there is not alternative service they can provide or seek outside of their own (in which case it wouldn't be mod development, but game development...which costs more). The only opportunity cost that exists is the amount they aren't further taking from Valve and/or the mod creator. And finally, you can talk about the tools/documentation, but again, it was one of the selling points of the game (the creation kit didn't make release, but the intent was to have it at release). Some consumers have bought the game at its value, with the mechanisms to facilitate mod creation as one of its selling points. As such, you can say that, in a way, the tools have already been paid for!
What exactly have they exactly accomplished (outside of more money), by announcing this change while Skyrim is on its last legs? I mean, it would have been one thing if they announced this in conjunction with the next TES iteration or Fallout, but all they've done is encourage a shitstorm of infighting and backstabbing between not only the mod creators and the players, but also mod creators against each other (see: SkyUI).
alexandros
Banned
ForsakenLotus
Member
Ban users or delete comments that are that toxic. Legitimate users deserve the right to discuss and inform others about the mods. It's censorship. Even if 90% of the comments are death threats, those 10% deserve a right to the forum.
Yup, they've been on point since the beginning.
It's obvious comments will return when the shitstorm has died down. As it is there's thousand upon thousands of vitriolic comments every hour.
ashecitism
Member
Thanks for this. Good read.
von Stroheim
Member
You want me to prove greed ruins everything? It's a fact based on thousands of years of human history!
75% to Valve, 25% to the content creator, in Dota 2/TF2/CSGO.
This pathetic, godawful pittance of a revenue split (as per the Skyrim commentary) has paid out $57 million to the community content creators as of the beginning of 2015, an average of $38,000 for each of the 1500 creators.
legacyzero
Banned
For me, it's always been about passion, and integrity for the IP. People make these things from their passion of the IP they're working for. And it enhances the integrity of the product. I believe Skyrim is moving units like it is, not just cause it's a decent game, but because the community is taking it beyond what it is.
If I were a game dev, this would be WAY more important to me, than the little bit of money I can collect from charging for the sake of getting a cut. It rewards fans of my IP for showing the passion for it. It creates good will, and loyalty among your fans and community.
If we keep trying to fucking monetize everything for the sake of a little bit of income, you no longer reward that passion, you no longer support the integrity of your IP and your community, and the only thing left is the dollar sign.
Sure they do! If your fans and community, and the integrity of your IP and company isn't as important to you as the customers you're trying to thrive from, then go ahead! Put a fucking price on everything.
We've already seen what that activity has done to gaming last generation, and what it continues to do today, with DLC, Season passes, pre-orders, locked away content, etc. So keep going for that money!
If I were a game dev, this would be WAY more important to me, than the little bit of money I can collect from charging for the sake of getting a cut. It rewards fans of my IP for showing the passion for it. It creates good will, and loyalty among your fans and community.
If we keep trying to fucking monetize everything for the sake of a little bit of income, you no longer reward that passion, you no longer support the integrity of your IP and your community, and the only thing left is the dollar sign.
Sure they do! If your fans and community, and the integrity of your IP and company isn't as important to you as the customers you're trying to thrive from, then go ahead! Put a fucking price on everything.
We've already seen what that activity has done to gaming last generation, and what it continues to do today, with DLC, Season passes, pre-orders, locked away content, etc. So keep going for that money!
von Stroheim
Member
It would almost be better if Bethesda did away with modding in FO4 or ES6 instead of this insidious scheme to take advantage of modders. (Oh sorry, I meant REWARD modders.)
Ol Beth spent way to much money on ES Online but I don't think they are going to recoup their investment like this....
Ol Beth spent way to much money on ES Online but I don't think they are going to recoup their investment like this....
Would be much more interesting to see the median number instead of merely the average, but Valve would never share that because it would surely be a LOT lower.
von Stroheim
Member
Yup, and it could have been $114 million or $171 million! But who got that? The starving publishers.
Spirit of Jazz
Banned
I think the article seems pretty unreasonable. He brings up poor arguments like tools (which are included with the price of the game) and opportunity costs (when this has been implement after the release of Skyrim's last piece of DLC.) Whilst ignoring how mods can encourage people to buy/continue playing games (I find this particularly curious from Dean given how radically ARMA's sales were boosted from DayZ) and how many Skyrim mods are more or less patches given how broken the game is.
Him ignoring the fact he released a mod which boosted the sales of Arma by over 300,000 copies seems pretty suspect to me. Especially given how broken his stand-alone game is and how he'd benefit from members of its community fixing it for a profit.
I wonder what the outcry would be if say Blizzard did this and started charging for paid addons for WoW and they kept 75% of the cut. I could only imagine the outrage.
I am torn on this. I understand the modders should get their cut, but it seems like a well developed system should have been put in place before this announcement.
I am torn on this. I understand the modders should get their cut, but it seems like a well developed system should have been put in place before this announcement.
That guy made pretty good points. I don't really care about the revenue split because as far as I am concerned that is the modders to deal with, but he does touch on why paid mods aren't going away. I hate the idea of paid mods and I think it is a joke that it could very well become possible that I would have to pay more for mods then I paid for the very games they are based off of. Though even I can see that my argument pretty much boils down to don't try and make money modders for reasons. Which is why it will be ignored. Unless critics can show that this will be financially worse for the parties involved it will be full steam ahead like always happens when the community tries to argue something vague like principles over profit.
For what its worth mods are a nice bonus when they were free, but I can't see myself giving two shits about them if I am expected to pay a fortune for them. Not unless they can really up their game and get rid of the hacked in feel pretty much every mod for a Bethesda game has. Edit: Though that isn't all on the modders Bethesda will need to up their mod tools/support and streamline their integration as well. If I am expecting to pay god knows how much and still spend hours to figure out the proper load/install order, see which mod works with what mod, deal with mods breaking in every update, and so on then every party involved can pretty much fuck right off.
I wonder why since content created with Source 2 will not have a fee.
von Stroheim
Member
My current Skyrim setup has 199 mods and it is awesome! It would also cost a shit load of money if the mods weren't free. I have thanked many mod authors and not once did they pull me aside and say "Hey man, can you spare $5?" It used to be a polite thank you was enough for modders who did it for the fun or recognition.
"There's a rift here in Skyrim, and can't neither magic nor the passin' of time make it right."
―Bergritte Battle-Born
"There's a rift here in Skyrim, and can't neither magic nor the passin' of time make it right."
―Bergritte Battle-Born
When the game is F2P I don't think it's that unfair, thought I sure wouldn't be against them giving more to modder in those game.
The problem with that reasoning is that many mods actually fix games: fix bugs, make UI more user friendly, provide better character models and/or textures, add new graphical effects, rebalance game so it's more enjoyable etc. So in that case Bethesda (if we're talking about Skyrim) gets money because someone bothered to improve their game.
?? You mean Valve? You know, Valve, the creators of Dota 2 and TF2 and CS:GO, the Steam platform they run on, all the community infrastructure and functionality that fostered a dedicated userbase, and the company that provided the opportunity for that community to make official content for their products for a revenue split that was freely disclosed, to the benefit of everyone involved? That starving publisher? Please join real life.
There's a much better argument to be pissed off at Bethesda for choosing to take a 50% cut when mods tend to be essential to fix their broken-ass games and add value to products that aren't necessarily very compelling otherwise.
PetriP-TNT
Member
Wait do you mean that Valve doesn't get a 75% cut by doing nothing?
superseohyun
Member
oh many of them are going somewhere. You can bet on that. Modding community will change greatly (but of course, not completely).
is it ultimately a good thing or bad ting though? Well for modders and valve, i think it will mostly likely be. For players, its difficult to tell at this point. It could be really bad for them just like the DLC micro transaction culture. But it could also have positive effect.
von Stroheim
Member
Oh, I'm pissed at Bethesda, believe me! This is no doubt a trial run for future games and I think it sucks.
The revenues cut Valve gave people could have been higher, IMHO.
Nah, that's a a different issue entirely. Source 2 is free to develop for without licensing or royalty charges as long as any commercial products released using it are sold through Steam (so that Valve gets its 30%). That's for separate standalone commercial products made with Valve's engine.
Dota 2, TF2, and CS:GO content created by the community with that 75/25 revenue split is officially integrated and sold within Valve's games. The creators of that content are independent contractors working for Valve.
HarryHengst
Member
This whole paid modding thing is absolutely brilliant. Valve is making millions profiting from free labour and they actually get defended for it, and Bethesda is planning on doing the same once Fallout 4 or the next Elder Scrolls is coming out. 19th century robber barons couldnt have done it any better.
D
Deleted member 518153
Unconfirmed Member
Oh please just don't fuck up Fallout 4 with that stupid shit. My heart can't take it anymore 
How is he ignoring that fact? If anything, he takes that into account on his views. Just look at Durante here on Neogaf. Dude has fixed several ports, increasing their sales(especially Dark Souls, which wouldn't sell nearly 2 million units on PC without him) and he has made the best downsample tool in existence. He doesn't plan to ever charge for his mods and yet his views on this are pretty similar to Dean's.
br0ken_shad0w
Member
CybernatonEvolution
Member
The problem with paid Skyrim mods is Skyrim itself; its modding mechanics are inter-connected and fragile. Another case of a game that can't have paid mods is S.T.A.L.K.E.R; its game engine often produces shader incompatibility and shit-ton of incompatibility issues. Actually, some S.T.A.L.K.E.R overhaul mods are so large and "complete" that they are worth being paid for, but they are still second-party game content that is very buggy and relies on an already-existing IP, so it shouldn't be ridiculously priced.
I agree that (good) mod authors should be paid, but those who spend a dozen of hours modeling a single asset or a horse genitalia, they should consider working as part-time designers/programmers or get paid by working hours instead of selling a very small, barely functioning fraction of a video game. It is a very exploitable business model that has many pitfalls.
Lets be honest, why would you risk dealing with Steam's policies and publishing issues when you know that your revenues will take time to generate, and that your work will almost always be considered plagiarism because you used some kind of script extender or other "backbone" Skyrim mod?
I am really curious to find out what other publishers will do. Are they going to jump on the paid mods bandwagon? I don't mind them releasing modding kits even if they use this shitty business model because we will have the modding kits anyway LOL.
Reading that thread is disgusting.
And not because of Mardoxx.
I mean,
Is one of the tamer posts.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised at people just packing up, taking their toys, and going home if that's the "community".
Edit:
Looking at that cesspool just makes me happy we have some standards here.
Spirit of Jazz
Banned
I might be off as I'm pretty damn ill right now, but where in the article does he mention how mods can increase the sales of existing games?
br0ken_shad0w
Member
removed
With the kind of responses he's getting there, he's not really wrong.
He doesn't, but I think that that fact he's something he's clearly aware off and it's being taken to account on his views on this.
Well, from these words I understand they are talking about mods too.
http://www.pcgamer.com/valve-announces-source-2-will-release-it-for-free-to-content-developers/
BreezyLimbo
Banned
After having a sleep on it, I have a couple of opinions on it-
Valve needs to have sort out the QA with this. As with mentioned with the armor above, if people are paying for it they shouldn't have to go through console/have the armor glitched from the get go.
And whilst I think 25% for the creator is too low, if the creator wants to put it up on the shop then more power to them I suppose.
Overall, I feel that the creators deserves more of a cut depending on how good the mod is, and that to do this 4 years after Skyrim came out is...a bit odd. But it's obviously a test, and we can undoubtedly say that the next ES/Fallout games will probably have a workshop like this.
Valve needs to have sort out the QA with this. As with mentioned with the armor above, if people are paying for it they shouldn't have to go through console/have the armor glitched from the get go.
And whilst I think 25% for the creator is too low, if the creator wants to put it up on the shop then more power to them I suppose.
Overall, I feel that the creators deserves more of a cut depending on how good the mod is, and that to do this 4 years after Skyrim came out is...a bit odd. But it's obviously a test, and we can undoubtedly say that the next ES/Fallout games will probably have a workshop like this.
Damn, that petition has a lot of signatures.
ashecitism
Member
Meaning the big thing with Source 2 is its ease of use, not just for professional devs, but for modders or anyone really. The percentages won't change of you want to make a Dota item with it and put it on the workshop.
I'll agree if it's the buying of car or an apartment. But it's a videogame, it's a toy, an entertainment. It's something that's suppose to allow you to relax and be entertained after a long day of hard and honest work. It shouldn't be something you have to do extensive research every single time you want to make a purchase. If they are going to charge for something, then that something has to work as intended or else, it's a scam. But, yeah consumers has to be careful too.
Anyway, just my opinion.
- Status