Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

No, that is a republic, with democratically elected representatives.

Not a democracy.


quibbles like that aside, both circumstances postulated still fit with the rhetorical question about supporting smoking bans and laws against drunk driving.

inflated PR about a game, with the intention to drive sales, is dangerously close to fraud. It causes people to spend money with the expectation of one thing, but in reality getting another. This harms the customer, and benefits the seller/producer.  There is clear and demonstrable financial harm. For the same reasons that there are truth in advertising laws, there should be stricter laws covering abusive game marketing PR policies that are clearly designed to defraud consumers. (see for instance, the PR shenanigans that went on with Kayne and Lynch, with paid reviews and gag orders against legit ones until after release day.)

For the mod community, Putnam and myself have already stated why this move is harmful, many many times. further reiteration is a waste of energy. Just scroll back a few pages. For the same reason we tell people that they cant smoke in public or drink and then drive, we need to tell people that if they want to make money with thier mods, they need to stick with the donation based model, and not use this horror conjured up by bethesda and valve. (That basic reason is this: The choices of those seeking monetization causes clear and demonstrable harm to those that choose not to. In both cases, it is an issue of protecting the public good, vs allowing individual freedom.)

The rhetorical question holds.

[Rolan7]

Look, if SkyUI were not free, Bethesda and Valve would never have gotten the money for Dawnguard and Dragonborn from me. I simply would never have gotten engaged enough to care. Anecdotes aren't data, etc, etc, but there it is.

EDIT: There's no obligation to supply nice things for free. But that doesn't mean it's not a good thing.

SkyUI is still offered for free, just not the next version.

Could that cause compatibility issues with other mods in the future?  Possibly... but if SkyUI releases a paid update which breaks people's favorite mods, it won't sell.  And I doubt that many mod authors are going to buy SkyUI just to make sure their mod works with the paid SkyUI.  Basically it falls on the SkyUI team to be careful with their changes (something I'm sure they're used to doing, as breaking compatibility is NOT a NEW problem)

All the claims that Steam is "stealing" mods from users are... frustrating.  Can we agree that the people saying *that* are entitled morons, or at least misinformed by early... misinformation?

Because all Steam is doing is offering mod authors an option to monetize.  It's not an attractive offer, but it's just an offer.  If an author decides to take advantage despite getting a 25% cut, it's not Steam nor Bethesda's *fault*.  It's no one's fault, but it's the creator's decision.  Apparently they want to be compensated, and for some reason think that this 25% will exceed Paypal and Patreon donations.

Put another way, the author thinks think they can force users to pay *over 4X* as much money than the amount that gets donated.  Despite all the easy avenues of piracy, and all the bile and blind hate flying around for anyone who dares join the system, some creators are thinking "Yes, but my compensation will be closer to what I deserve".  People keep stereotyping modders as saints who don't want compensation, but what this has shown is that many modders (by no means all, but many of the most dedicated) simply had no way to get the compensation.  They wanted to get paid, but couldn't arrange it.

So if you want to blame someone, blame the users who didn't support these creators enough through donations.
Or, blame the creators for setting unreasonable prices.  That's certainly your right as a consumer, you don't have to pay.  Though the mod author never owed you a thing.
Or I guess blame Bethesda for selling the game with the implication that the community would fix, finish, and totally convert the game for absolutely free.  Which happened for 3.5 years for Skyrim, TWENTY THREE years for TES series in general.  If it's suddenly a boycott-able offense, feel free not to buy the next installment.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[wierd]

Penguin-- the comparison to smoking in public demands your attention.

There is a minority of people who want to smoke in public places. There is a majority of people who dont want them to smoke there, and ask that they smoke elsewhere.

vs

there is a minority of modders who want to directly market thier mods. There is a majority of modders who want them to seek thier monetary compensation through other means.

It is impossible to please everyone, all the time.  I am not opposed to the donations based model. I *AM* opposed to the direct marketing model, for reasons already stated. Most in the modding community are OK with the donations model. it was introduced with very little uproar.  Why do you insist on championing this kind of model, when the majority of modders dont want it?

Why do you insist on begging special pity for people who are choosing, willingly, to do something they KNEW (and said they knew!) would cause public backlash?

[miauw62]

i am not really opposed to paying money for something like Falskaar, but i am opposed if that means that there will also be 500 paid mods for a sword, or a skimpy outfit, or an immersion-breaking quest, or weather.

if betheseda really wants to encourage this "next-level" modding, they should hire these prolific modders to make these expansions (Like with Mount and Blade, although these mods had some serious issues).

[wierd]

i am not really opposed to paying money for something like Falskaar, but i am opposed if that means that there will also be 500 paid mods for a sword, or a skimpy outfit, or an immersion-breaking quest, or weather.

if betheseda really wants to encourage this "next-level" modding, they should hire these prolific modders to make these expansions (Like with Mount and Blade, although these mods had some serious issues).

The problem there is that you cant have both. The former is assembled from the latter. Things like the total conversion mods leverage code snippets, art assets, and tips and tricks learned from the smaller "hey, i totally break the game, but look what I can do!" type mods.

a poignant anectdotal example comes from the early morrowind days. I had people asking me for scripting advice on how to make a bound bow with unlimited arrows. Used wrong, that's a magic machine gun. Used right, it's a neat feature. Same code, different ideologies of use, different outcomes.

Big mod makers have big ideas, and focus that energy on the big idea. They scrounge up all the little bits like they were legos in a box, and make really cool stuff.

the problem is the big mods they make are themselves just more legos. There is no fundamental difference, mechanically, between a big TC mod, and a small tech demo mod.

See for instance, the depenency on skyui seen in many mods.

You cant have the cake and eat it too.

[Arbinire]

can we quit with the analogies and anecdotes and just remain on topic please?  Because this whole majority vs minority part of the discussion is off base and purely opinion.  You can list things like "well the smoking ban is good cause it's harmful and the majority are for it", but on the other foot you could also argue that "well there was once a minority of people who wanted to drink from the same fountains and sit in the same sections of everyone else but the majority thought that was uppity and and un-democratic."  The feelings of the majority should NEVER supercede the rights of an individual, no matter how beautifully painted the picture may be.  Hell, some of you on this tangent started off with pointing out Hitler and how we need safe guards to prevent such a thing happening again while later arguing that the majority wanted something so it's there for right.  Believing that the majority wanting something makes it right is exactly how that whole Nationalist Socialist platform came to exist.

Edit: And sorry for the rant and also going off topic a bit but just this whole topic is hard not too rant on.

[UXLZ]

I don't agree with harassment, and in fact, I agree with the overall sentiment of that guy (for good, high-quality and heavily supported mods this could work). However, for the way Valve and Beth are handling this, in such an overtly predatory manner, I want them to burn.

[wierd]

can we quit with the analogies and anecdotes and just remain on topic please?  Because this whole majority vs minority part of the discussion is off base and purely opinion.  You can list things like "well the smoking ban is good cause it's harmful and the majority are for it", but on the other foot you could also argue that "well there was once a minority of people who wanted to drink from the same fountains and sit in the same sections of everyone else but the majority thought that was uppity and and un-democratic."  The feelings of the majority should NEVER supercede the rights of an individual, no matter how beautifully painted the picture may be.  Hell, some of you on this tangent started off with pointing out Hitler and how we need safe guards to prevent such a thing happening again while later arguing that the majority wanted something so it's there for right.  Believing that the majority wanting something makes it right is exactly how that whole Nationalist Socialist platform came to exist.

Showing clear parallels in other subjects of popular vs individual interest is inherently a part of this discussion, weather you like it nor not sir.  Property law in general, is founded on these principles,  which is inherently what this is about.

i could have used public right of way to identical effect.

Please dont godwin.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[wierd]

Why ask the first question at all in this case?

The mod users would benefit from the majority decision of the modders, that mods should be monetized only through donations. The "I refuse to pay!" crowd could choose to donate 0$.

The question has no application here.

[Arbinire]

can we quit with the analogies and anecdotes and just remain on topic please?  Because this whole majority vs minority part of the discussion is off base and purely opinion.  You can list things like "well the smoking ban is good cause it's harmful and the majority are for it", but on the other foot you could also argue that "well there was once a minority of people who wanted to drink from the same fountains and sit in the same sections of everyone else but the majority thought that was uppity and and un-democratic."  The feelings of the majority should NEVER supercede the rights of an individual, no matter how beautifully painted the picture may be.  Hell, some of you on this tangent started off with pointing out Hitler and how we need safe guards to prevent such a thing happening again while later arguing that the majority wanted something so it's there for right.  Believing that the majority wanting something makes it right is exactly how that whole Nationalist Socialist platform came to exist.

Showing clear parallels in other subjects of popular vs individual interest is inherently a part of this discussion, weather you like it nor not sir.  Property law in general, is founded on these principles,  which is inherently what this is about.

i could have used public right of way to identical effect.

Please dont godwin.

It was in response directly to earlier posts about the subject, not invoking Godwin's Law. 

[Flying Dice]

Why is the majority opinion important with modders but irrelevant with mod users? If there's a minority of modders who want to monetize, maybe they know what's best for everyone. Like the minority of consumers who don't want to pay for DLC know what's best for everyone.

Are you suggesting that the majority of mod users are hunky-dory with this system of monetization? Because unless you're privy to internal numbers from Valve regarding mod sales, I'm calling bullshit. In the two days since the story broke, we went from 100k positive reviews of Skyrim to 15k+however many former positive reviews changed their old reviews negative. The petition is up to 114k signatures. Do you really think that that many people have spent cash money on Skyrim mods?

"Bluh bluh not buy right now, waiting," no, bullshit. People speak with their wallets in this disgustingly capitalist society, and if people aren't buying, they aren't going to buy.

Also, nice misrepresentation of the DLC issue. The majority, as far as I'm aware, don't mind paying for DLC. What we care about is day-one DLC cash grabs, shit like EA pulled with the Mass Effect ending DLC, Horse Armor-esque DLC, Hearthfire DLC that literally copies an existing popular mod, &c. Dragonborn, Dawnguard? Fuck, no, I don't mind paying for those. They were good, they were worth the money. Buggy as shit, but that's what mods are there for, right? Right?

It was in response directly to earlier posts about the subject, not invoking Godwin's Law. 

It was a Godwin then. It's still a Godwin now. There are innumerable other ways to express support for either side of "majority interest vs. minority wants", and very few of them have to do with the Nazis.

[Sergarr]

You know what I think would be a 100% better plan?

Hiring the willing mod creators into the company itself as "DLC producers" with said DLC being an updated version of the mod.

That way you can have a real transition from modders to game developers, you can have all legal measures being taken care of by a single legal team, and you would have less public backlash, because you provide the positives (being able to seamlessly transition your hobby into a job) and you avoid the whole "paid mods" issue because people are already used to DLCs.

Why Bethesda/Steam didn't do that? Because it would actually take some effort?

[Arbinire]

You know what I think would be a 100% better plan?

Hiring the willing mod creators into the company itself as "DLC producers" with said DLC being an updated version of the mod.

That way you can have a real transition from modders to game developers, you can have all legal measures being taken care of by a single legal team, and you would have less public backlash, because you provide the positives (being able to seamlessly transition your hobby into a job) and you avoid the whole "paid mods" issue because people are already used to DLCs.

Why Bethesda/Steam didn't do that? Because it would actually take some effort?

They didn't do this because it'd cost them money then.