Print

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

[Putnam]

Forgot about this article by the venerable Wrye, very related:

http://wryemusings.com/Cathedral%20vs.%20Parlor.html

[Morrigi]

Not entirely sure if they suspended this guy from Steam for his mod, or changing his name to "Fuck Valve".

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Also, apparently the petition just hit 50,000 people.

Edit:
In addition, wouldn't it be trivial to download a paid mod, copy the files, get the 24 hour refund, and install the copy? I mean, it would be considered software piracy, but what exactly would they do about it?

[Flying Dice]

That's actually one of the worse parts, the system is brand new and people are already pulling mods from the Nexus to avoid having them stolen and reupped on Steam for someone else to profit on. If I were more cynical I'd say that Bethesda supported this because it would kill off a lot of non-trivial mods, making DLC more important and more likely to be purchased.

[Morrigi]

That's actually one of the worse parts, the system is brand new and people are already pulling mods from the Nexus to avoid having them stolen and reupped on Steam for someone else to profit on. If I were more cynical I'd say that Bethesda supported this because it would kill off a lot of non-trivial mods, making DLC more important and more likely to be purchased.

Yeah, but it is theoretically possible to "steal" a paid mod, copy it, and just use it yourself, without the creator getting anything out of it. This whole thing is a clusterfuck, a legal minefield, and a blight on creativity and the modding community.

[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.

have you read any of this thread at all? Like, Multiple go pretty in depth as to why mods should be free multiple times.

I didn't, actually. I just wanted to respond to a post from another thread here since here is a more appropriate place for such a response. I just didn't like his reasoning of "all mods should be free because if some weren't, the amount of mods that are free would be under 100%."

[Arbinire]

As has been said, all of this sets a very bad precedent and is doing much to drag PC Gaming kicking and screaming into the console model.

As to modders being compensated, I disagree with some that they "deserve" it, but then again I fundamentally disagree with the word "deserve" generally, since the context it is used is purely opinion, and it's a fluke when we do see people get what they "deserve" whether it is good or bad.  As to "work", modding is a hobby, development is the work, job, career.  And with the awesome level of development tools out now, like Unreal Engine and Unity, that are free and allow you to sell and distribute your games, why settle for a piddling 25% that's only going to alienate you from a REAL revenue stream?

Having fooled around with both the engines I listed, they're just as easy, if not easier to use, than most modding tool sets, and you're not locked behind a single games hardcoded mechanics.

Just a very bad precedent all around.

[SealyStar]

Edit:
In addition, wouldn't it be trivial to download a paid mod, copy the files, get the 24 hour refund, and install the copy? I mean, it would be considered software piracy, but what exactly would they do about it?

Yes, and people are already doing it.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[Trapezohedron]

Since everyone has had a very good argument here and I think everything I could say about this has been said, let me just state my opinion in two words:

This sucks.

[Flying Dice]

The only way it would be remotely acceptable would be:

1. If the 25% cut was divided among everyone other than the modder.
2. The modder was free to distribute their mod anywhere and at any price or none.
3. The modder had full rights to what they had created and could have it removed from any platform which hosted it.


In other words, pretty much exactly how the free modding community already works, barring the inclusion of an optional paywall in major distributors.

It's got other issues, namely the problem of testing. If you circumvent mod "piracy"  by not allowing trial runs and not offering refunds, that's fucking absurd and makes it very difficult to get momentum for new mods. If you don't, nobody will pay if they don't want to, effectively making it the same as a donation-based system like we already have.

[Morrigi]

Well, I decided to read through the Steam user agreement again, and noticed this:

"Workshop Contributions are Subscriptions, and therefore you agree that any Subscriber receiving distribution of your Workshop Contribution will have the same rights to use your Workshop Contribution (and will be subject to the same restrictions) as are set out in this Agreement for any other Subscriptions."

Note that Subscriptions, by definition of this document, refer to... well, games, software, or other forms of things that can be added to your library. Earlier in the document, this is stated:

"Steam and your Subscription(s) require the automatic download and installation of Content and Services onto your computer."

Seems rather obvious, until you read something stated a touch further down:

"All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Content and Services and any and all copies thereof, are owned by Valve US and/or its or its affiliates’ licensors. All rights are reserved, except as expressly stated herein. The Content and Services is protected by copyright laws, international copyright treaties and conventions and other laws. The Content and Services contains certain licensed materials and Valve’s and its affiliates’ licensors may protect their rights in the event of any violation of this Agreement."

Contents and Services obviously apply to the files included when you download a game, but also include mods. In this terminology, you have the legal right to demand compensation for the theft of a mod, just by putting it on the Workshop. Even if someone were to just include a part of your mod, make it on Nexus, and ask for donations, you could demand full compensation. Also:

"You may, in your sole discretion, choose to remove a Workshop Contribution from the applicable Workshop pages. If you do so, Valve will no longer have the right to use, distribute, transmit, communicate, publicly display or publicly perform the Workshop Contribution, except that (a) Valve may continue to exercise these rights for any Workshop Contribution that is accepted for distribution in-game or distributed in a manner that allows it to be used in-game, and (b) your removal will not affect the rights of any Subscriber who has already obtained access to a copy of the Workshop Contribution."

In other words, by putting a mod on the Workshop, Valve can leave it there even if you want to have it taken down. Chesko is out of luck.

Well yeah, they're not gonna remove it from the libraries of people who already bought it. That would probably be illegal.

[forsaken1111]

Actually, according to the rest of that documentation, Valve has the right to pull access to any Subscription with or without notice at their own discretion. So, no.

EDIT: Am I the only one who wants to test this by being a really terrible human being?

make a new steam account, buy something for like 50 cents, then go nuts.

[Propman]

No, but I'm sure plenty of people have decided not to make a mod because they can't afford to do that much work for free. Or they've put less time into their mod, or decided to stop keeping the mod compatible with the game.

Modders have to pay to live, that's just reality. Plenty of people don't have enough free time to make mods, especially really great mods. Who knows how many people could make mods if they could partially support themselves on it? Or how many people could dedicate more of their time and make a much more impressive mod? A more reliable business model means more people will be able to, and I think that could be a very good thing for the community and the gaming industry. Valve's execution is pretty flawed, but I don't think selling mods is an inherently bad concept.

What's more, modders might now have to pay to mod. As I have feared, folks are pulling their content out for fear of theft, and that will eventually only leave behind payed resources (as well as resources which disallow use in payed mods, of course). If a modder can't afford to work for free, they certainly can't afford to purchase several resources from other modders for a mod that might make revenue if a couple hundred people decide to buy it for less then the original price it cost to create in the first place. It's a gamble in the poor man's game development industry.

[Arbinire]

Actually, according to the rest of that documentation, Valve has the right to pull access to any Subscription with or without notice at their own discretion. So, no.

EDIT: Am I the only one who wants to test this by being a really terrible human being?

I'd suggest getting an external hard drive, installing Steam to it and downloading your Steam library there, then once that's done setting it to offline mode and leaving it there so you keep what you paid for.

[Morrigi]

No, but I'm sure plenty of people have decided not to make a mod because they can't afford to do that much work for free. Or they've put less time into their mod, or decided to stop keeping the mod compatible with the game.

Modders have to pay to live, that's just reality. Plenty of people don't have enough free time to make mods, especially really great mods. Who knows how many people could make mods if they could partially support themselves on it? Or how many people could dedicate more of their time and make a much more impressive mod? A more reliable business model means more people will be able to, and I think that could be a very good thing for the community and the gaming industry. Valve's execution is pretty flawed, but I don't think selling mods is an inherently bad concept.

What's more, modders might now have to pay to mod. As I have feared, folks are pulling their content out for fear of theft, and that will eventually only leave behind payed resources (as well as resources which disallow use in payed mods, of course). If a modder can't afford to work for free, they certainly can't afford to purchase several resources from other modders for a mod that might make revenue if a couple hundred people decide to buy it for less then the original price it cost to create in the first place. It's a gamble in the poor man's game development industry.

Well, one problem is that a lot of 3D modeling software has separate licenses for personal use and commercial use, and any modders using that software and selling their mods are legally liable if they don't have the commercial licenses, which cost a fortune. They could, and probably will be, sued out the ass for it.