Print

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

[Putnam]

Good mod makers say "Hey, check out what I did! You can do this kind of thing too-- just do XYZ that I learned how to do!"

...is that what blushing feels like

[Noel.se]

While I disagree with the notion that modders haven't get to be paid for their work because Tradition, I do see some big problems with this system. The modders only getting 25% is IMHO ridiculous. I also can see this getting abused like the early access system: "Right now we have some item you obtain through the console, but we are going to implement quests, followers and even more items!... Eventually."
If a patch breaks a mod you don't get a refund. Not a problem with Skyrim, but if this is going to spread...
That's just the issues i can think off on the top off my head.

I kind of like the idea actually, but the system is horrible.

I hope this is just going to get boycotted by the community. The backlash isn't exactly small.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

Also, for paying for mods in general you realize people will play much less in terms of number of mods. That goes for EVERY GAME. Again, not to reuse the same example over and over, but a good scenario is mount & blade. A large number of HQ mods, if they all cost 5 dollars everyone would only play 1 or 2 and I know MANY of the M&B community who love to flip flop around 10-12. In generally though, if this were to be adopted for everything we'd all being paying hundreds more.

[wierd]

Good mod makers say "Hey, check out what I did! You can do this kind of thing too-- just do XYZ that I learned how to do!"

...is that what blushing feels like

Your contributions to DF with 3rd party tools is VERY MUCH like how the old modder community was back in the early 2000s, Putnam.  Personality wise, you remind me of Argent. That's high praise.

[Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum]

To compound that, valve takes 75% of profits and modders take 25%.

Therefore, we may hold your payment until a minimum of $100 payout is earned.

A modder would need to sell $400 US just to get paid at all, and Valve gets to keep $300 of that. If they don't get that much, which seems likely considering the backlash, then they get nothing.

Also, right now, I actually could buy Hearthfire for less than it would cost for me to re-install my *purely graphical & audio* mods...

[wierd]

Again, this is NOT for modders.  This is about hubris and greed by Bethesda and their gatekeeper, Valve.

This kind of shit against the mod community is one of the reasons I stopped working on file formats for their game engines.

(Did you know? For the longest time on their forum, I offered a free service to repair "broken" xbox saved games that could no longer load, DUE TO A DESIGN PROBLEM CAUSED BY BETHESDA. Did bethesda pay me for that service? no. Did their moderators politely ask me to help users in PMs? yes. Did I help Bethesda's user base? yes. What was the problem you ask? They hard coded a load time timeout, and directly called the dirty disc message stop screen, coupled with large save games that were unnecessarily bloated, because the game engine wrote unnecessary data into saved games, tracking every single monster you ever killed, EVER, did NOT purge old potion enchantment data, even after all instances of that potion are gone, etc. The result was that after several hours of gameplay invested into a character, several MEGABYTES of cruft would be constipating the saved game, competing for the limited RAM space on the xbox platform, causing load time slowdowns, and eventually triggering the dirty disc error screen.  The fix? Delete the garbage data.  Did I ask Bethesda to fix the problem? yes. Did they fix it? No. Was the problem STILL present in Oblivion? Yes. Was it as big a deal from the increased memory in the 360? No-- but that's not the point.)

[Urist McScoopbeard]

To compound that, valve takes 75% of profits and modders take 25%.

Therefore, we may hold your payment until a minimum of $100 payout is earned.

A modder would need to sell $400 US just to get paid at all, and Valve gets to keep $300 of that. If they don't get that much, which seems likely considering the backlash, then they get nothing.

Also, right now, I actually could buy Hearthfire for less than it would cost for me to re-install my *purely graphical & audio* mods...

yes, it's all quite tragic.

[Putnam]

I've always been pretty laid-back about all this. I always figured that I wouldn't care if anyone were to use my stuff to monetize something.

I didn't mind because I knew that that was doomed to fail.

This is Bethesda/Valve trying to make that kind of thing successful.

Very very bad.

[wierd]

Indeed-- but short of outright putting in our OWN bullshit EULA restrictions on tools, guides, assets, and informal messageboard discussions that torpedo this shit, there is not a god damned thing we can really do to stop this.

We would literally have to put an EULA on our tools saying "You cannot use this tool to make a mod that you intend to sell for money, and you cannot use the source code or documentation of this tool to create tools for the purposes of creating mods for money." or some similarly offensive shit.

[Putnam]

CC BY-SA 4.0 actually does that pretty well, I think.

[Stuebi]

Whatever, will not suceed anyway. Any modder with even a little bit of brain goes with donations. Trying to charge for mods will only make people angry and look for free other mods.

I mean, if you browse the steam workshop, and there's two categorys, "free" and "pay4" -mods. Guess which category will get filtered out? And that's not mentioning how people will react to you.

[alway]

CC BY-SA 4.0 actually does that pretty well, I think.

And there are a variety of other commonly used copyleft licenses out there. It's good practice to use them with any software you release to the public, regardless of whether you think it required or not. Likewise, you should never accept code or assets into your own project which do not have a license stating that as acceptable. Without explicit permission, it belongs solely to the creator, regardless of unstated assumptions.

The only complicating factor here is that, based on the terms apparently laid out in their modding tools, Bethesda claims to own rights to assets created using them. Could they override any third party license with that? I suspect the answer to that is ambiguous and nuanced enough that their lawyers would advice them to avoid it entirely. I think most mods would consist of a finely blended paste of assets they have a legitimate claim to and those which they do not. Certainly enough of a claim to shut down any mod projects they find objectionable (as that is SOP for mods) but not enough to claim the assets and related materials (textures, models, etc) which are generally unrelated to their systems (hence why you may see an official version of a mod packaged into a game on occasion, but never the mod itself, assets and all). Which is to say, add your license to your stuff, and that will cover it from use by those without a claim on it. Bethesda could legally claim enough of your mod to shut it down, as was always the case, but do not have a strong enough claim to actually take control of it.

Least, that's my interpretation; granted I'm a software dev, not an IP lawyer.

[Andres]

Just responding to something from the WTF thread.

The other problem with he steam thing is that it will discourage people from making free mods. The percent of mods which are free will drop to under 100. That is not acceptable.

Get off it, mate. First of all, you're not entitled to free mods simply because they're mods or because you want them to be free. The modders are the ones putting in the hard work creating content for you to enjoy and for that you should be appreciative. If they suddenly decide they want to get paid for your work it's not your place to bitch and moan - you should just suck it up and accept it. Maybe you'll support the guy who gave you your enjoyment or maybe you won't, but he's not your slave to provide you free stuff out of obligation or the goodness of his heart.
Besides, a lot of people - a lot of talented people - stop working on mods because of real-life issues, sometimes personal but a lot of the time financial. Allowing modders to get paid allows these people to remain working on mods more often, plus it could get entirely new people into the modding scene. Then people will start competing to make the best mods at the lowest prices and the consumer benefits in the end. Capitalism at work, right there.
The one expressly bad thing about this is how Valve is taking a full 75% of the modders' income which is just ludicrous to me.

fakedit: Another way to look at it is this: paying for mods should be no different than paying for expansion packs, seeing as mods are pretty much fan-made expansion packs in the first place.

[Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum]

fakedit: Another way to look at it is this: paying for mods should be no different than paying for expansion packs, seeing as mods are pretty much fan-made expansion packs in the first place.

Yeah, but when you get an expansion pack it adds things to the game. Lots of things, usually. I'm still annoyed how a minor graphical change (Wet and Cold) could be sold at a price greater than Hearthfire.

Look at the steam bundle right now. It's maybe 20 armour pieces and weapons, two quests, a companion, a "gold edition" magic upgrade (Which I think has a free version still?), a small town, and two graphical update things. All for the price of $35, and you require all the DLCs already to get that.
How many people are going to pay $1.25 for a single sword (The butterfly sword)? Especially considering there are many other swords you could get for free... I don't see many people buying it. And if that sword sells under $400 worth than the modder gets nothing.

I don't dislike the idea of paying for mods in general, but lots of stuff just isn't worth the price. And because the modders only get 25% of the money made, they need to increase the prices beyond what people are willing to pay to get much at all...

[Andres]

fakedit: Another way to look at it is this: paying for mods should be no different than paying for expansion packs, seeing as mods are pretty much fan-made expansion packs in the first place.

Yeah, but when you get an expansion pack it adds things to the game. Lots of things, usually. I'm still annoyed how a minor graphical change (Wet and Cold) could be sold at a price greater than Hearthfire.

Look at the steam bundle right now. It's maybe 20 armour pieces and weapons, two quests, a companion, a "gold edition" magic upgrade (Which I think has a free version still?), a small town, and two graphical update things. All for the price of $35, and you require all the DLCs already to get that.
How many people are going to pay $1.25 for a single sword (The butterfly sword)? Especially considering there are many other swords you could get for free... I don't see many people buying it.

Yeah, Horse Armour DLC can be bullshit depending on the price, but it's also a practice found throughout the industry. Even if previously minor mod stuff is being sold at overpriced amounts, I still think that being allowed to pay for mods will end up being a net positive in the long run.
I can't actually find the bundle you're talking about, but based on the description you gave me I'd say that's definitely a mod worth paying for, just not at the massive price it's being sold for. As for the DLC requirements, I'm not really sure what the problem there is. You'd need the DLC regardless of whether the mod was free or not. I guess the point was that paying for the mod as well as the DLC would end up being very expensive for the consumer but that's just a result of buying a lot of content.
I'd reckon a lot of people wouldn't pay $1.25 for a sword...so they won't. No problem there, I think.

And if that sword sells under $400 worth than the modder gets nothing.

I don't dislike the idea of paying for mods in general, but lots of stuff just isn't worth the price. And because the modders only get 25% of the money made, they need to increase the prices beyond what people are willing to pay to get much at all...

Yes, this is absolute bullshit to the nth degree. There is no excuse for this practice but this is a problem with Valve, not with the core concept of paid mods.