-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
STEAM | February 2017 - Giveaways are back
- Thread starter MRORANGE
- Start date
- Status
Ahem.
Edit: And speaking of:
Posted on Feb. 2 said:Hi guys !
Co-Op is free roam indeed, as soon as you start, you'll be able to go wherever you please and as far as you can from your buddy.
The second player is indeed a Styx's clone, but a special kind...
Our Video department is currently hard at work to prepare a cool video showcasing Co-Op Gameplay & Features. We hope we'll be able to deliver it to you in the next few weeks.
Stay tuned
Don't forget Sniper Elite 4.
Tizoc
Member
Dragon1893
Member
I was thinking that maybe after P5 I could dedicate myself to all the stuff I missed last year and during this quarter but then there's 3rd and Tokyo Xanadu...
It just never ends lol.
I'll just focus on beating Xcom2 and SMTIV Apocalypse before P5 is out. I hope I can manage it.
It just never ends lol.
I'll just focus on beating Xcom2 and SMTIV Apocalypse before P5 is out. I hope I can manage it.
Nope
I forgot to add 'too' i. My post
yep, really promising year all around
that one looks like GOTY-tier stuff. I also can't wait for Ghost Song, Death's Gambit and Battle Chef Brigade from adult swim's catalogue.
haven't we had some info that RiME is no good? Or am I confusing it with some other game
I'm afraid we can't be friends anymore
I'm afraid we can't be friends anymore
Baron von Loathsome
Member
You're confusing it with Trails in the Sky.
ModBot
Not a mod, just a bot.
Thanks to an anonymous benefactor, I am giving away a Steam key. To enter this giveaway, send a PM to ModBot with any subject line. In the body, copy and paste the entire line from the message below containing the game you want to enter for. Confused? Watch this GIF tutorial or ask for help.
Want to make your own ModBot giveaway? Click here for a quick tutorial thread. Please give generously.
ModBot Basics:
- Do not trade keys you win off-site to enrich yourself. Don't try to claim games you have no interest in collecting or playing. Don't claim games to give them to friends off-site.
- If the key is already taken you will not receive a reply. Replies may take a minute or two.
Mystery Gift --MB-93B8325F4B61BF07 - Taken by Vuze
Want to make your own ModBot giveaway? Click here for a quick tutorial thread. Please give generously.
ModBot Basics:
- Do not trade keys you win off-site to enrich yourself. Don't try to claim games you have no interest in collecting or playing. Don't claim games to give them to friends off-site.
- If the key is already taken you will not receive a reply. Replies may take a minute or two.
Mystery Gift --
More polygons pls.
Well, the game is no longer a Sony exclusive. So far GAF it basically stopped existing.
Dragon1893
Member
This should be ban worthy.
Chairmanchuck
Member
So Im not the only one who thinks like that.
The_Super_Inframan
"the journey to a thousand games ends with bad rats. ~Lao Tzu" ~Gabe Newell
Dragon1893
Member
My biggest issue with low budget jrpgs is usually the animation.
You can tell they put a lot of effort into the character models but then they move like robots and it's really jarring. Animation is the visual aspect I tend to value most so this always stands out to me.
This happened a lot with PS3 jrpgs like Atelier, Ar No Surge and Cold Steel.
All excellent games btw.
You can tell they put a lot of effort into the character models but then they move like robots and it's really jarring. Animation is the visual aspect I tend to value most so this always stands out to me.
This happened a lot with PS3 jrpgs like Atelier, Ar No Surge and Cold Steel.
All excellent games btw.
http://www.pcgamer.com/valve-modders-absolutely-need-to-be-paid/
dunno if posted, but Valve really can't give up on receiving money "for free".
dunno if posted, but Valve really can't give up on receiving money "for free".
spindoctor
Member
Would have bought Torment on release but they decided to double the price of the game for no discernible reason in my region in December. Will wait for a proper sale on that one now.
This is a deliberate misinterpretation of their motive for talking about this. Valve already have a record of sharing profits with their community content creators in their games and they have built the Steam ecosystem around content sharing. They specifically mention that they feel like modders (who create a ton of value for games they work on) should also be able to get some financial benefit for their efforts.
And the cynics just ignore the context entirely and just land on the part where Valve "wants money for free".
I'm not against Valve taking a piece of the pie, but it needs to be small so as to not adversely impact the cut the mod creator receives. 50% to the publisher, 40% to the modder and 10% to Valve seems fair to me.
Chairmanchuck
Member
I said that already in the other thread, but if Valve is taking that stance, they could also easily pay their free "community translators"...
I still would argue that Valve just would want a piece of the cake if they would want publishers to pay modders. If they use the argument "work shouldnt be free. You put effort in it and that should be honored financially", they can easily do the same with their free/voluntary translators.
GhostTrick
Banned
Paid mods are silly. Just allow a donation system and call it a day.
But donation systems already exist and don't earn valve and the publisher $$$
So you can keep using the hard work of others for free? The fierce resistance to allowing modders to offer their work for money has never, ever seem not childish and dumb to me.
Of course.
Chairmanchuck
Member
But Valve is exactly doing that with their whole "voluntary" translation project.
If anyone didnt know, Valve has free translators for Steampages, news, announcements, some games and stuff.
That is why I totally think the arguments Valve is using for that are hypocritical, when they dont even want to pay their translators money.
If anyone didnt know about this:
https://translation.steampowered.com
spindoctor
Member
I honestly don't think the publisher should get anywhere near 50%. I'd say 10% to Valve and maybe 15% to the publisher at best. The modder should take the lion's share of the proceeds. The benefit to the publisher is that their game gets longevity and possibly sales because of the modders' work. They don't need to take a large cut of the actual mod revenue.
Okay, so they don't pay their translators. That means they should never try to get anyone else paid either? Guide creators don't get paid either. They're also creating content right? If you can't pay everyone then you should pay no one?
Wasn't there that statistic where some modders earned more in those 3 days of paid Skyrim mods than they ever did from donations?
I don't know, I mean, there should be an option to allow a donation if you like a mod (and we know this already works, see in example Twitch streamers who often receive donations of thousand dollars), but I think Valve is pushing so much on this just because that's a way to receive "free" money from something. We know the ideal thing for Valve would be make Steam an automated money printing machine, but enforce paid mod like they did is wrong in my opinion, even because modders usually don't create mods to receive money, but they do that to bring something to a game they like. I remember when I was a kid I created and shared with my friend tons of Warcraft 2 maps, but nobody even thought about the possibility to sell a map.
Still, the donation option should be here, but insert the greed factor in the mod world will ruin it, and we already saw what happened in like two days Valve tried with Skyrim.
Also a 50% to the publisher...why? I mean, ok, a small fee for the publisher should be here, but in the end both modders and mod users already bought and paid the game. If I put TON of work into a mod, barely using the original code if not as a skeleton, but inserting original content by my own, why should I give half the "cost" of the mod to the publisher?
Translator's question: do you remember that reddit link showing all the shit happening behind the curtain in Valve regarding this, with tokens etc? I remember it. Translators should be paid, period. Translate is a job. You can't follow, dunno, Trails in the sky translator's blog, seeing how much goes into translating something, and than pretend those people translating Steam related stuff (even games) won't get a penny from their work. I'm totally ok with fanmade game's translation, often the translation of a game in a specific language is not possible due to budget's management etc. (I mean, without fans italian people could never play Planescape Torment into their language, and if you know the game, you also know what a titanic goal was translate that in another language manteining the mood, the spirit intact...it took years, literally, and by a group of several people). Valve is not a little indie studio, they have tons of money, they can afford to pay any translator they need. But they don't want to do that, because apparently every cent is important for them.
Just because people don't start with the intention of earning money, does not mean they shouldn't have the opportunity to. Black Mesa started as a fan-project/mod. Does that mean they should never have had the opportunity to turn it into a money-earner?
Additionally, variations of this line of reasoning are way too prevalent in gaming: "modders do it for the money" "playtester do it for the fun of playtesting" "programmers love being in the games industry, so crunch or a good work/life balance doesn't matter". All variations of the same thing - love/community/passion over money or life.
Yeah, the publisher getting a cut is way out of line. They're already getting a cut by more people buying the game.
But in fact Bleck Mesa dudes released both a free and a paid version of the game, the second one with additional stuff. I said there should be the option to give money, but it shouldn't be mandatory.
If Steam wants to do paid mod again, they need to
(1) start on a newly released game with no prior mod community (so no history or expectations of free mods)
(2) start it in a limited, controlled way (skins, maps, or hats only - no gameplay enhancers or total conversions)
...Basically the opposite of Skyrim modding scene.
Edit: And If I pay for my mods, I better be able to exercise my right to refund like any other Steam games.
(1) start on a newly released game with no prior mod community (so no history or expectations of free mods)
(2) start it in a limited, controlled way (skins, maps, or hats only - no gameplay enhancers or total conversions)
...Basically the opposite of Skyrim modding scene.
Edit: And If I pay for my mods, I better be able to exercise my right to refund like any other Steam games.
Ideally, yeah, it'd be the modder who receives the lion's share, but, by and large, getting publishers to agree to such a split strikes me as an uphill battle, especially as Bethesda and Valve collectively took 75% the first time around (50% to Bethesda and 25% to Valve, I'd wager). 50%/40%/10% isn't perfect, but it's probably the best modders can hope for.
The problem with donations is convincing people to pay rather than just taking the content and running. Mods have a very long history of being free while steamers soliciting donations is the norm.
Free version is so far out-of-date, it essentially doesn't exist. I mean, technically, yeah, you're right, but the fact that they're not updating the free version says a lot.
spindoctor
Member
And this idea that modders should do all the work because of their love of the game and never want or expect compensation is beyond ridiculous. It takes a ton of effort to make a high quality mod these days. Much more than it did in the 90s. Also, many of those modders in the 90s leveraged their work as an entry point into the game development industry.
It's truly amazing how much work modders do for the gaming community for free and we should be incredibly appreciative of their efforts. We should also never try to block them from wanting to be compensated for all their hard work.
Also, users benefit from paid mods as well. The truth of the matter is that money will attract quality developers. Think about the indie gaming scene around 2007 or so. Does anyone remember it? It was Newgrounds. Then Steam took off and provided a platform for indie devs to get paid good money. And then you saw designers and developers step away from safe jobs at AAA houses to start indie studios to make the games they want to make. And the result of that? The top of this page is a post filled with thumbnails of amazing looking indie games releasing every week of this month.
In theory, the ability to get paid for work on mods will attract more and better talent to the scene. This will result in higher quality mods that makes games better for us as gamers. There's no downside to this other than maybe having to pay for someone's hard work that makes your entertainment experience better. Who would argue that this is not a fair trade off?
It's truly amazing how much work modders do for the gaming community for free and we should be incredibly appreciative of their efforts. We should also never try to block them from wanting to be compensated for all their hard work.
Also, users benefit from paid mods as well. The truth of the matter is that money will attract quality developers. Think about the indie gaming scene around 2007 or so. Does anyone remember it? It was Newgrounds. Then Steam took off and provided a platform for indie devs to get paid good money. And then you saw designers and developers step away from safe jobs at AAA houses to start indie studios to make the games they want to make. And the result of that? The top of this page is a post filled with thumbnails of amazing looking indie games releasing every week of this month.
In theory, the ability to get paid for work on mods will attract more and better talent to the scene. This will result in higher quality mods that makes games better for us as gamers. There's no downside to this other than maybe having to pay for someone's hard work that makes your entertainment experience better. Who would argue that this is not a fair trade off?
Encouraging change is difficult. From the perspective of many, there's no bigger picture and "paid mods" simply means having to pay for something that would otherwise be free.
The only problem is the publisher may not agree to allowing paid mods without majority compensation.
They could take the long view that the mods will increase their profits substantially, but publishers don't work like that.
10/10 post.
Jawmuncher
Member
Is the $500 fee per game?
Greenlight is one time fee, Direct is per game.
There are a lot of completely valid criticisms and worries regarding paid mods, wether it's the guarantee that the mod even works - last time there was none - mods being incompatible to new patches or other mods, as well as mods requiring other mods to even work.
All these things have to be accounted for in a commercial product, which is what mods become the moment they're sold.
In dota 2 this is done via valve curating which objects are even allowed to be sold on the store.
But for general paid mods, the system valve tried to introduce last year, valves stance was "if it doesn't work tough luck my friend" which is not at all and acceptable stance to have for commercial business.
Decrying all legitimate worries as "damn Millenials want everything free" is incredibly disingenuous.
Im using donate buttons and patron myself, but paid mods are a different relationship between me and the modder and their mods, a relationship I'm not at all willing to buy into under the conditions proposed last time.
Especially not when half the money or more isn't even reaching the modder at all.
All these things have to be accounted for in a commercial product, which is what mods become the moment they're sold.
In dota 2 this is done via valve curating which objects are even allowed to be sold on the store.
But for general paid mods, the system valve tried to introduce last year, valves stance was "if it doesn't work tough luck my friend" which is not at all and acceptable stance to have for commercial business.
Decrying all legitimate worries as "damn Millenials want everything free" is incredibly disingenuous.
Im using donate buttons and patron myself, but paid mods are a different relationship between me and the modder and their mods, a relationship I'm not at all willing to buy into under the conditions proposed last time.
Especially not when half the money or more isn't even reaching the modder at all.
Jawmuncher
Member
Damn. Well I guess that'll stop anything from showing up.
LurkerPrime
Member
Praise the gods, I somehow got my PC out of the reboot loop it was trapped in. I forgive you 2017.
Like... Apparently static build-up in the PSU can cause all kinds of weird problems that are fixed by holding down the power button (while it's unplugged); either that, or whatever was the actual problem has briefly stepped aside during the forced shutdown. But even a temp fix is better than nothing, gives me time to try and nail down the issue and back up stuff.
Oh, Valve. The concept of paying modders is not without merit, but the second it is officially monetised they cease being mods and simply become third-party DLC. But only, with none of the quality or stability (or compatibility...) guarantees consumers would expect, and with a host of difficulties that I don't see anyone, least of all Valve, tackling properly.
Like, the thing that I find most difficult to solve is the web of ownership in most modding communities; namely, in Skyrim terms, SkyUI, SKSE, bugfix mods, and other framework mods that have elements, either partially or wholly, inducted into larger mods either officially (as part of the mod itself) or unofficially (as a required download for the mod). I think the only way to really make it work is for everyone involved in a particular piece of third-party DLC, whether they made a single texture or masterminded the whole thing, and to band together as a group and get their cut that way--anything less wouldn't be right. There can't be some modders getting paid, and some not--it has to be universal.
And on the note of things like SKSE, SkyUI, and bugfix mods: what kind of line are companies realistically going to draw in regards to getting players to pay to fix their game? Like monetising DSFix for Dark Souls 1; it is, without question, an essential part of playing Dark Souls 1 on PC, and Durante totally deserves money for it, but the moment it becomes game price + modder fix DLC, we're heading down a dark path where patches are being monetised. In this case, if paid modding is a thing, I think that the developers/publishers should be paying the modder for every use of the mod, rather than players. (Although I can't imagine how one would determine mods deserving of this honour, short of "lots of players use it.")
And this is without getting into the bugbear of what price any should, or would, be.
The thing is, I just don't believe Valve (or anyone, really) is prepared to tackle the myriad of problems paid modding introduces while being fair to modders, developers, AND players. It's more a matter of Valve wanting their cut yet again.
Like... Apparently static build-up in the PSU can cause all kinds of weird problems that are fixed by holding down the power button (while it's unplugged); either that, or whatever was the actual problem has briefly stepped aside during the forced shutdown. But even a temp fix is better than nothing, gives me time to try and nail down the issue and back up stuff.
Oh, Valve. The concept of paying modders is not without merit, but the second it is officially monetised they cease being mods and simply become third-party DLC. But only, with none of the quality or stability (or compatibility...) guarantees consumers would expect, and with a host of difficulties that I don't see anyone, least of all Valve, tackling properly.
Like, the thing that I find most difficult to solve is the web of ownership in most modding communities; namely, in Skyrim terms, SkyUI, SKSE, bugfix mods, and other framework mods that have elements, either partially or wholly, inducted into larger mods either officially (as part of the mod itself) or unofficially (as a required download for the mod). I think the only way to really make it work is for everyone involved in a particular piece of third-party DLC, whether they made a single texture or masterminded the whole thing, and to band together as a group and get their cut that way--anything less wouldn't be right. There can't be some modders getting paid, and some not--it has to be universal.
And on the note of things like SKSE, SkyUI, and bugfix mods: what kind of line are companies realistically going to draw in regards to getting players to pay to fix their game? Like monetising DSFix for Dark Souls 1; it is, without question, an essential part of playing Dark Souls 1 on PC, and Durante totally deserves money for it, but the moment it becomes game price + modder fix DLC, we're heading down a dark path where patches are being monetised. In this case, if paid modding is a thing, I think that the developers/publishers should be paying the modder for every use of the mod, rather than players. (Although I can't imagine how one would determine mods deserving of this honour, short of "lots of players use it.")
And this is without getting into the bugbear of what price any should, or would, be.
The thing is, I just don't believe Valve (or anyone, really) is prepared to tackle the myriad of problems paid modding introduces while being fair to modders, developers, AND players. It's more a matter of Valve wanting their cut yet again.
- Status