SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
We previously covered Valve offering paid mods in the Steam Workshop. Now, Valve (and Bethesda) have realized that the way they were attempting to implement payment for modders (and themselves) could not stand alongside the current model, at least with the goodwill of the community.
From the article:
We've done this because it's clear we didn't understand exactly what we were doing. We've been shipping many features over the years aimed at allowing community creators to receive a share of the rewards, and in the past, they've been received well. It's obvious now that this case is different.
We understand our own game's communities pretty well, but stepping into an established, years old modding community in Skyrim was probably not the right place to start iterating. We think this made us miss the mark pretty badly, even though we believe there's a useful feature somewhere here.
Hopefully they do get a fully-baked donation system implemented (or some other method that makes sense).
(Score: 2) by rts008 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @12:21PM
I don't really understand the backlash.
So they made a paid mods section alongside the free mods.
As a modder, you could have dropped your mod into either section, or both(?)
I could see the uproar if they were doing away with the free mods, that is not the case.
I have been mdding Skyrim since day one, and was actually looking forward to this oppurtunity to actually make 'beer money' from some of my efforts.
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Wednesday April 29 2015, @01:24PM
The problem wasn't that you could make "beer" money. The way I understand it was that you were making "a beer" money, while Bethesda was making "RIAA" money.
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 2) by rts008 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @02:37PM
Thanks for the reply.
So the 'cut' the modder got was too small, while the bulk went to the game developer and Steam. Hmmmm...
I guess I am not part of that crowd. The way I see it, it was a way to pick up a few bucks(probably to buy more games with) for what was essentially for me, a labor of love.
I did not see this as a way to make a living, or even a part-time job, just a fun way to pay for some of my games(or beer).
I personally would have liked to see this work out.
If they were charging for all mods, or if all future mods went into the paid section only, or other such scenario, I would understand the outrage...I would be grabbing torches and pitchforks myself.
It is a single-player game, no online component at all, so it's not like you(player) would be disadvantaged by not using paid mads to play competively. You don't even have to mod the game to play it.
Most of the mods that exist can be done by anyone quickly with the Creation Kit(free mod tool), there are countless tutorials and youtube vids for making mods yourself, and if you know your way around Photoshop/GIMP and 3dsmax(?)/Blender, then the sky is the limit to the mods you can build.
I'm glad that they listened to the customers though, that is too rare these days.
And I will still build mods and play the game, paid or not. A minor disapointment to me, but far from a 'deal breaker'.
[offtopic]
BTW, I remember the discussion when you started using that sig. LOL!! I still giggle a little every time I see your posts with that sig. :-)
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Wednesday April 29 2015, @03:31PM
I'd be happy with beer money myself, but I do have a major ethical objection to other people enriching themselves from my labor without giving me a fair cut.
(Score: 2) by rts008 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @11:18PM
Yeah, 'dyingtolive' explained the root of the outrage, but I have to admit to being caught off gaurd by the shitstorm.
I quess that's the effect to expect when I'm caught thinking inside my own little box.
I understand your point of view on this, but mine is different.
For myself, I'm going to mod and play the game, 'paid mods' or not.
If you are looking at it from a 'work' perspective, then you are absolutely correct in your comment.
I'm looking at it from a 'play' perspective, and was only thinking:"Cool, get some cash for something I love doing, and am doing for free now? Yeah, why not-who cares about the 'cut', I may get lucky and get enough for DLC for my game, or, or, even enough to get a game! WOOOT!!!"
So in other words, just decorations on the iced cake, not even the icing on the cake, from my POV.
I am glad that Steam listened to the community, and I applaud them for that.(I can be a graceful loser:)
I expect this to come up again with(or if) Fallout 4, or the next Elder Scrolls game.
As long as it is optional, and applied only to single-player/offline games, then I have no problem with 'paid mods' in concept. I guess how much enthusiasim depends on terms, and just as importantly, POV.
It will be interesting, because I think this genie just slipped out the bottle.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday April 30 2015, @05:13AM
>For myself, I'm going to mod and play the game, 'paid mods' or not.
Absolutely. I've been modding for years, and was fairly active in the Total Annihilation heyday, though I've mostly not bothered to release my various mods for other games (mostly the Elder Scrolls series) since then other than by sneakernet. I'll happily release my mods for free, I'm not in it for the money, that would just be a nice little bonus and maybe a bit of motive to get me to put the last bit of polish on some projects to get them fit for distribution rather than having me personally walk my friends past the rough edges. My objection is not to me not making much money under the proposed scheme, but to someone *else* doing so all out of proportion to their contribution. That, to my mind, is at the very heart of the sickness eating away at the American economy, and I consider to be not just unfair, but actively, banally, evil.
Morally, philosophically, I would much rather give my mod away for free than let someone else reap the lion's share of the profit, and thus encourage their parasitic behavior. But I'm no saint - give me the option to make a little money on the side for no further effort and the temptation will sit there, constantly teasing me with the potential for personal gain if only I am willing to indulge their machinations. And that I don't need that - in fact it might even be enough to drive me away from modding the game at all. Temptation is most easily resisted when absent.
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Wednesday April 29 2015, @05:23PM
Well, that's what I've gleaned as the biggest thing between the Reddit shitstorm and the couple friends I spoke to who followed the deal more closely than I did. I'm sure there were other reasons ranging from well-informed and intelligent to "OMG MOAR MONIES!" (the latter of which is generally about the most coherient thing you can hope for in the Steam forums themselves).
I've heard the multiplayer pay-to-win mod fear thrown out there as well. I'd be a little worried about that one too. Obviously not for Skyrim, but other mod friendly games that are multiplayer. Killing Floor 2 comes to mind, and it's enough of a 'competitive' cooperative game that there'd probably be damage to the community if something like that came out.
Personally, I'd have no problems paying for a mod, but I for damn sure want to make sure that the money is going to who put forth the effort. At least as much of it as possible. I'm semi-okay with Valve getting their cut, long as it's all seamlessly done through the Steam interface and comes out about as little of a hassle as installing a new game. I'm not cool with Bethesda getting more than a couple percent, max. I wouldn't play Bethesda games without the modding community. If anything, they should be paying the modders. :P
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 2) by rts008 on Wednesday April 29 2015, @10:47PM
Heh. You have a point. :-)
I have been playing the Fallout games since 1996, and they have been my favorite series. The one thing I learned the hard way: SAVE OFTEN!!!
Fallout 1 & 2 were buggy as hell, and a lot of the 'mods' were actually patches to fix glitches and broken quests.
But they were enough fun that we(the fans) put up with the bad, to get the good.
So in all fairness, Bethesda is just in keeping with the Fallout Tradition of Buggy Goodness. ;-)
*Skyrim uses the same game engine that Bethesda used for Fallout 3, so most faults are shared between the Elder Scrolls and Fallout series*
I guess I'm just not as concerned about the 'cut', as it would not really change anything for me. Well, maybe if my 'paid mods' were popular enough, the money would buy me another game, or DLC for one of my games.
Just so I am being clear, I am only speaking of the Skyrim game and this recent 'event'.
In principle, I would only support 'paid mods' for single player games. The only way I would support paid mods for online multi-player games would be if, and only if, the mods conferred no advantage to gameplay. Eye-candy is fine, but no stat changes, for example. I would still lean towards no paid mods except for single player. It has been proven time and time again, that humans can learn to 'game the system', no matter how good you think your rules/security/etc. are.
My guess is that if/when Fallout 4, or the next Elder Scrolls come out, that Steam will try this again, but announce it before launching the game.