Paid mods for skyrim

[ElOhTeeBee]

Obvious problems with this:

1) Weaker modding scenes. And no, I'm not just talking Skyrim. The mere existence of an easy way to make paid mods means there will be fewer unpaid mods, fewer modders working on games that do not offer paid mods, and fewer people interested in the modding scene on both sides of the spectrum...

2) ...because the modding scene will become unreliable microtransactions. People are a lot more willing to take risks on free things; having to pay means that they will expect their downloaded content to work properly. This is obviously bad for consumers (patch comes out 25 hours after you buy a mod that completely breaks it? better hope the modder hasn't abandoned it), and only slightly less obviously bad for modders (when a patch comes out that breaks your paid mod, you will know immediately, because every single source of interaction you have with the internet will be filled with hate mail until you fix it).

3) Legal troubles. A company with actually effective vetting might have been able to handle this one, but as Valve has already proven with Greenlight and Early Access, they don't have any interest whatsoever in any sort of curation beyond letting the community handle it. Ignoring the obvious copyright infringement that's going to happen, consider just how many mods are dependent on assets from other mods. When it was all free and Creative Commons and whatnot, this wasn't an issue, because money wasn't involved. Money is involved now. One modder's already taken their mod down at the request of Fore because it used assets from his Idle Animations mod without his permission (permission that he's not willing to grant, as he believes mods should not be for-pay). What if the guys behind SKSE update their license and start DMCAing paid mods that use their code?

4) Activities this incentivizes on the part of publishers:
    a) Releasing games as buggy, unfinished messes, to make money from paid QOL fix mods.
    b) Sending cease-and-desist letters to third-party mod sites, so their mods cannot compete with the Steam Workshop.

5) Good modders could already make money off their talents, with a donation button on the download page for people who tried the mod and liked it. Great modders could often get hired by the same companies that made the games they modded. And the cut they'd get of those donations is substantially higher than the 25%, $100-minimum that Valve is offering. Pay-what-you-want is nothing new, and already worked. This is 'fixing' something that was never broken for the sake of a quick cash-grab.


Upsides:

1) Valve and the publishers get money they don't even have to work for.


Merely problems that are obvious with a quick glance and a few minutes of thought, from someone who doesn't really care all that much if the mod scenes withers and dies (I don't mod games anyway), and doesn't play or even own Skyrim. Some people will defend this. People also defend day-one DLC, pay-to-win microtransactions, and preorder exclusives. My opinions on such people are one and the same (and usually they're the same people, who like to trot out words like entitlement when, yes, paying money for something does entitle you to certain protections, or at least it used to before they decided to whiteknight publishers who couldn't give a quarter hug about them, or the developers actually making the games, or anything but their own bottom lines).

[Mick]

I have absolutely zero issues with paid mods because I am not forced to buy them. I do have an issue with mods being sold illegally (by using others' content against license) and I hope valve takes more than a half assed approach to addressing that.

I think it's a bit greedy for developers to take a cut, personally. A mod is bringing value to the product. Both the mod author and the mod buyer had to pay for the game for that transaction to take place in the first place.

[Aklyon]

Its not a stupid idea by itself I'd say (make it simpler to make a list of skyrim mods to use by ignoring all the pay ones), but the way its setup sounds like a terrible idea.

Surprised MS didn't try this first with the minecraft community over valve, tbh.

[kasnavada]

Steam (digital downloads, really) already opened up the possibility of paid DLC, micro-transactions and so on. Extending it to mods is a logical move. It's about the same, but what modders did for free is now open for business for other companies.

I'm not worried at all about micro-transactions and so on because getting a new sword for a micro-transaction has already been done, and won't work any better because that modder or this guy did it. Getting a breaking update to a game as a paid DLC was also done. Getting an upgrade that made the game worse ? Also done. And players hated it and nearly no one does it anymore. Getting "really small" upgrades won't work anymore than it does now. And really "small" upgrades will always find some modder to do and share the work for free.

However, what has not really been done before ? Recoding an entire content for a game based on a working engine as another company. And being paid for it.

Now, I'm not speaking about a few hard-core fan getting together and making stuff. Some are good, most are... ok. But now, it's possible for other dev companies to make bucks.

It means creating an entire eco-system of development companies around the world based on moddable games instead of restarting coding a game from an engine or from scratch. It also means re-using the inner workings of a game without being called a "cheap clone". Because it's a mod. It won't kill the modding community, it will give some a living and / or full-time jobs.

It's totally obvious that Bethesda is for this. I mean it could have been one of their goal since the beginning, it basically secures their position as an AAA studio while making bucks. Also Steam, obviously, is for it. And yes, people working in the game industry will also mostly be for it. Some Indy dev / large AAA teams maybe will move to make mods to compete instead of restarting their game from scratch.

Yes, I think that ultimately, a crapload of cheap engine and clones of AAA games will be better made if they're mods. It's really a win-win situation for most.

The downside is that it'll reduce the amount of people actually competing at making their own engines, and possibly becoming large editor themselves. But that's the current trend of game development anyway.

[Draco18s]

Skipping most of this thread as it echos comments I've seen everywhere else.

My major disagreement is with Valve. Valve taking 75% of the revenue is gross. Valve shouldn't even remotely take that much. I could see 20-25%, not 75%. If anything, the bulk of that should go to Bethesda. Something like 50% to Bethesda, 30% to the modder and 20% to Valve. Or 40/40% to modder and Bethesda respectively and 20% to Valve.

We don't actually know what the Valve/Bethesda split is, but I'll say one thing:
Bethesda does not deserve the lion's share.  The modder does.  Bethesda already made their money on the base game, a good $45-$55 for each purchase goes right to them.  They do not deserve 50% or even 25% of the price on a mod.  The original game company should not see mods as an revenue stream.  It should be seen as an enhancement to the Long Tail, not the primary income source.

As a modder, while I'm more than eager to produce content for almost-free (I think I've made $100 combined from all the Flash games and Minecraft mods I've made), being completely gouged when I'm offered a paid distribution method just makes me resentful and unwilling to mod for that game.

As a mod-consumer, I'd be equally offended that three quarters of the cash I'm putting down isn't going to the person who made the content I'm purchasing, but rather to the original developer.  If I like the developer, maybe its not so bad.  But in the case of Bethesda, everyone has known for years that they make incomplete games and expect modders to finish it (and they do).  So this is a pure cash-grab on Bethesda's part, and I do not approve.  It's predatory to both the modding community and the end user.

[Billick]

I'm all for modders being compensated for their work.  I hate the way it's being implemented.

[eRe4s3r]

As mod developer you are gouged even more, because those 25ct of 1$ you get are taxable income, you need to declare this properly before tax with proper money trail and everything. It's a huge pain in the ass and the reason why EVERY mod ever allowed only donations or patreon.

There is also the problem that anything that is "sold" falls under the relevant laws and rights for customers. Steams 24hr refund period is 100% illegal in the EU and will get instant null and voided if a court looks at it.

Really, I have no idea why Steam thought this was a good idea. It's not just a can of worms, it is literally a lawsuit bomb waiting to go off.  Not just for copyright, but for EU customer protection laws, tax reasons... sigh

Maybe I am pessimistic but I don't see any good coming from this. No dev ever can sustain itself with just 25ct of 1$ going to them...

[Draco18s]

No dev ever can sustain itself with just 25ct of 1$ going to them...

18 cents, actually, once you account for taxes.

[KingIsaacLinksr]

There are two things I'm going to respond to:

The whole: this will encourage lazy developers.

You could just not buy the game. I have over 195 games in my wishlist now and if this encourages even half of them to go "lazy", then I have a lot of other games I can buy from. But this isn't a valid argument because it's been brought up before for F2P business models, for DLC models and for expansion models. Sure, there are devs that can and will release games in a less-than-satisfactory state. But that's why its up to people to not buy those games and to encourage more positive standards. And that has worked in the past.

The whole: Bethesda shouldn't get any money from paid mods.
As the modder is using: The IP the game is based on, many of the original assets, the game engine it was created on and such, I don't agree with this sentiment. Bethesda/the developer should get paid for usage of what they created originally. We have many examples of this in today's society but the easiest one I can think up is custom engines and developers having to pay for usage of those engines. Why should modders be any different in this regard?

Not only that, but it's probably the only way Valve will be able to "sell" other game developers on this idea. The frank truth of it is: money speaks.

That being said, I don't disagree with the assertion that this implementation is poor. Because it is poor.

[Misery]

There are two things I'm going to respond to:

The whole: this will encourage lazy developers.

I think what was meant was moreso that it'll encourage MORE laziness from, specifically, the big guys.  I cant see smaller indie devs getting lazy as a result of this;  most indie devs I'm familiar with just arent like that.  They make a game because they want to make a game.  But the big guys, well... they're ALREADY lazy, and will indeed happily take any conceivable, viable reason they can to get even more lazy yet still make more money.   

The whole: Bethesda shouldn't get any money from paid mods.
As the modder is using: The IP the game is based on, many of the original assets, the game engine it was created on and such, I don't agree with this sentiment. Bethesda/the developer should get paid for usage of what they created originally. We have many examples of this in today's society but the easiest one I can think up is custom engines and developers having to pay for usage of those engines. Why should modders be any different in this regard?

Simple:  They're ALREADY getting money from it. 

Why?  Because there are tons of players for games like that that end up specifically buying it because, holy crap, look at all of these mods, think of the replay value!  For those that are open to using mods at all, a game having alot of them means dramatically increased value for the cost.  Heck, it can even sometimes get people that bought the console version of a game like that to then go buy the PC version, once they hear about all of these awesome mods.   In addition, Youtubers and others like to show off these mods in a variety of ways, with videos or articles or reviews or whatever.... this is entirely FREE advertising for the game's original developer/publisher. 

I could actually keep rambling on about this one for awhile, but you get what I'm saying.   I dunno if people always think of those things related to this, but that's some of my own reasoning.

[KingIsaacLinksr]

There are two things I'm going to respond to:

The whole: this will encourage lazy developers.

I think what was meant was moreso that it'll encourage MORE laziness from, specifically, the big guys.  I cant see smaller indie devs getting lazy as a result of this;  most indie devs I'm familiar with just arent like that.  They make a game because they want to make a game.  But the big guys, well... they're ALREADY lazy, and will indeed happily take any conceivable, viable reason they can to get even more lazy yet still make more money.   

If AAA publishers want to keep shooting themselves in the foot with more laziness, that's their decision. And they will pay for it. Many already have. Again, not buying their games that do this (and buying the games that do right by the consumer) is the easiest way of punishing them.

The whole: Bethesda shouldn't get any money from paid mods.
As the modder is using: The IP the game is based on, many of the original assets, the game engine it was created on and such, I don't agree with this sentiment. Bethesda/the developer should get paid for usage of what they created originally. We have many examples of this in today's society but the easiest one I can think up is custom engines and developers having to pay for usage of those engines. Why should modders be any different in this regard?

Simple:  They're ALREADY getting money from it. 

Why?  Because there are tons of players for games like that that end up specifically buying it because, holy crap, look at all of these mods, think of the replay value!  For those that are open to using mods at all, a game having alot of them means dramatically increased value for the cost.  Heck, it can even sometimes get people that bought the console version of a game like that to then go buy the PC version, once they hear about all of these awesome mods.   In addition, Youtubers and others like to show off these mods in a variety of ways, with videos or articles or reviews or whatever.... this is entirely FREE advertising for the game's original developer/publisher. 

I could actually keep rambling on about this one for awhile, but you get what I'm saying.   I dunno if people always think of those things related to this, but that's some of my own reasoning.

I do agree with the sentiment for the most part but I think that's the main reason why Modders haven't been cracked down on by any game devs/publishers before now. (I'm speaking about those games that have been modded that don't have official Steam Workshop support or other official modding support). It's probably why donations/patreon campaigns haven't been touched either. Hrm....you know what? I'm not really sure what to say about this point. Is the $$$ gained from selling the game and/or DLC enough for modders to get most of the profits (not all, because Valve will take a portion for server/transaction costs) and none go to the original devs? That's a great question. I don't have an answer.

But I can guess what the devs will say: No. Because it is their assets/IP that they created and modders are using. Still, hmm....

[Draco18s]

If AAA publishers want to keep shooting themselves in the foot with more laziness, that's their decision. And they will pay for it. Many already have. Again, not buying their games that do this (and buying the games that do right by the consumer) is the easiest way of punishing them.

They will.  The triple-A industry is very content to burn the long-term viability of their industry over short term gains.  Why?  Because when it inevitably collapses, they (the publisher) won't feel it.  They'll just take all those profits and go start some other venture.

The people that will suffer will be us, the consumer, and the developer (who had no control anyway).

[kasnavada]

This whole "they're shooting themselves in the foot" discussion is completely absurd.

The days where a single dev or even a group of 5-10 people can develop a full game are going to end. And that's a bad thing even for large studios. Solutions ? The unreal engine, RPG maker or unity. And, yes, making mods being paid is the follow-up to this. For indy devs to survive, they NEED tools to make a complete game with a small team. And big teams know that. And plan to be the ones giving the tools.

Bethesda and Steam just allowed another option with mods.

Also, it's not at all targeted at the current modders. That's maybe how they're selling this, but as said in the thread, those won't profit from it and will continue to work with donations and / or free stuff.

If anything, they are consolidating their position, going for long term gain, and flattening the opposition. Now, how the gains are distributed seem to be very poor, but hopefully it'll be fixed.

[Mick]

The days where a single dev or even a group of 5-10 people can develop a full game are going to end.

Based on what? Indie game development seems to only be growing more and more each day because platforms like Steam have made publishing and distribution easier than it's ever been.

The biggest threat to the indie developer is market saturation, not the big bad AAA teams controlling all the tools.

[TheVampire100]

The days where a single dev or even a group of 5-10 people can develop a full game are going to end.

Based on what? Indie game development seems to only be growing more and more each day because platforms like Steam have made publishing and distribution easier than it's ever been.

The biggest threat to the indie developer is market saturation, not the big bad AAA teams controlling all the tools.

Yeah, I woudl say the same. This was maybe an issue 10 or 20 years ago. But you have to look at the indie game scene, this is growing more and more. It get's every day easier to finance games as solo developer. There is stuff liek Kickstarter and Indigogo and all that stuff.