+1, It's almost as valve is like OH MODDERS SHOULD GET PAID "THROUGH OUR SYSTEM SO WE CAN GET HALF CUT OF IT"
Honestly they should have a patreon or paypal so we can support the modders if we think they're doing such amazing job.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree with this, Valve simply sees dollar signs.
Comment has been collapsed.
Generally I'm against it mainly because mods can be anything from simple reskins to whole game overhauls with the reskins being the majority. But honestly I wouldn't mind paying if it's a good complete game overhaul, something like Endreal.
Edit: A donation or a pay what you want model would work best for mods tbh.
Comment has been collapsed.
But at what point does it go from being a mod to being Copyright Infringement?
Most companies will tell you "when you try to get money for it".
This might have overreaching side effects that Valve simply isn't thinking about, or it could be their intention.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would think that this wouldn't be a problem for the most part. Devs that would say that wouldn't have mod support in the first place. I would say we should only count games which actually support modding as they would be the ones to have workshops in steam and so they would be the only ones you can pay for mods.
The problem comes when you get to the "is this mod infringing copyrights of anything else". A good example would be the M4A4 Howl skin from CS:GO which was added to the game but turned out it used art made by someone else without permission. And having quality control over mods would be harder than anything since the reskins which are the most likely to have copyright infringements are the majority and can be done in a matter of minutes depending on the game and level of mod support.
Comment has been collapsed.
Exactly - that's why mods are free: The original content creator owns the rights to all derivative works, so the rights to commercially exploit the mods don't actually belong to the modders: Beginner's guide to copyright & DMCA. The software houses can legally prevent the publication of free mods and fan art but often overlook it as long as it doesn't compete with their products.
Comment has been collapsed.
That trailer is really really good. Does the mod add a lot of playtime value? Or is it something you'll beat in a day?
Comment has been collapsed.
Haven't played it but the mod is about 30-100 hours playtime according to the site (it's a complete conversion, basically a completely different game)
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah ok cool. Ended up watching some vids of it, and reading peoples thoughts, will prob give it a run sometime now.
Comment has been collapsed.
If it, hopefully, goes the donation route, then I don't think Valve/publisher/devs should get a share of it. If someone is downloading a mod for a game, they more than likely have a legal copy of that game. And to me that's like paying the devs twice, with the second time being for something they had no part in.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree. Valve just wants a cut. And on the flip side, people want monetary compensation for their hobby and effort.. While this probably will create some fame and success for a few who would have been unnoticed otherwise, possibly a career as well.
Completely unrelated, I'm hearing there's been changes to Youtube and Greenlight.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 to donations.
If modders 'absolutely' need to be paid, then the studios should hire them. (As has happened often enough.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Most companies that are reliant on modders intentionally don't release fully-fledged content- Paradox and Bethesda, for example, are well-known for making modder-friendly games, while releasing games that tend to be a sparse in being fleshed out to begin with, compared to similar games of their genres.
By hiring them, they'd have to change their release paradigm, and also incorporate the mods into the core game, thus losing the DLC-like profits. Even by releasing them as actual official DLCs is an issue, as the games in question tend to have issues with dubious DLC practices to begin with. Keeping them as separate mods, while getting Valve to direct a cut from them to the publisher, allows the developers/publishers to not have to take on any effort, costs, or consumer negativity, while still getting profit inflow from the work.
Moreover, many of the most extensively developed mods are released for a game past the point of a game losing its appeal in the market- be it by having its sequel already released, or the studio going under. They're labors of love that extend across several years of effort, and thus tend to be problematic to incorporate in a normal fashion to begin with.
When Microsoft proposed their always-online DRM, the issue wasn't necessarily that they wanted DRM, but that they did so in a manner that sabotaged the consumer to an extensive degree. Similarly, most won't take issue with setting up a system for supporting modders, but Valve has thus far offered some dubious presentations of their approach to implementing such features- and Steam's influence is such that going about things in the "wrong" way could cause mod-using consumers some significant issues in the long run.
As an example of the inherent concerns with Valve supporting paid mods, consider the following:
While it's fully legal to mod games so long as you don't use any assets (including code) from the core game, most mods can't avoid including such. Generally, companies have been neglectful, often deliberately so, in taking action against such mods (often understanding that such mods only increase the appeal of their game among consumers). However, if you monetize mods, publishers may start to force paid mods (perhaps even with minimum payment expectations), and try and work with Valve to introduce code in Steam to allow them to more easily implement such. They can then prohibit free mods from Steam, and may even start taking action against mods offered for free elsewhere, as where such mods used to be beneficial to keep up, they now would be a threat to profits to allow to remain up.
tl;dr, a donation button centered on supporting the modders isn't bad, but there's all sorts of potential concerns for consumers if Valve manages payment for mods differently.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well said, but the "labors of love" point is why I believe they should definitely not always be paid content. There's a different impetus behind a project that's a labor of love and one that's driven by commerce.
My point on the modders being hired was from a point of view that focused more on the skill and reputation of the modder(s) than the actual mod. (Granted, there are certainly exceptions, such as Dota and Counter-Strike.)
I've been playing Skyrim vanilla for quite a while now, and I don't think it could be considered sparse for its release date and budget. Certainly, mods add much more, but I think the initial development time and cost to actually ship the title in a reasonable amount of time is under-estimated. (I hate Bethesda's DLC pricing practices btw, so please don't confuse me for a Bethesda zealot.) If hiring the modders to develop their mods in-house is unfeasible, then the mods simply continue to be a labor of love, and thus a point against claiming that modders 'absolutely' need to be paid. Or, they don't exist, and if the game then suffers as a result, then either the modders should have been hired, or it wasn't financially feasible in the first place.
I'm not a fan of requiring that people be paid just because they made a good effort -- it's similar to the arguments that, in my mind, made music industry execs sound ridiculous over their supposed losses due to mp3s. The market, and innovations, will drive pricing. If a mod is innovative enough, there might be a market for it. And donations are very welcome for appreciating those people who are taking a risk, or developing out of love.
Comment has been collapsed.
The guy on the left looks a bit like John Petrucci, haha.
Comment has been collapsed.
they need to bring back trading/market for pp with out phone first ....
Comment has been collapsed.
That would just make it easier for Scammers/Hackers again
Comment has been collapsed.
What's the difference between phone and mail confirmation? its a 2 step process...
Comment has been collapsed.
Harder to own multiple phone numbers than email addresses? At least I'd imagine something like that
Comment has been collapsed.
They can make it hard for scammers/hackers and not require a cell phone. One route would be to require authentication only in certain circumstances, like a new device, recently changed/recovered password, IP address in a different location than normal, etc. This isn't hard to implement and would actually help a lot and make security easier for the users rather than cause them extra trouble. If stuff like this was added, the average user would rarely even need to authenticate, and things would still be very secure since scammers/hackers would need to authenticate. With something like this, authentication would just be an extra measure to allow a legit user to show they are legit in a potentially suspicious seeming circumstance.
Another thing that needs to happen is to allow more options than just an app on a smartphone. Because guess what, not all users have a smartphone. People say they can get an emulator, but that still requires the ability to receive a text message, which not all users will have. Why can't the user have an email besides the Steam guard one? Why can't the code be sent via a voice call? Or why can't I specify a device I can log in with and not need that crap? Most companies that have two step verification allow more than just options that require smartphones because guess what, phones get lost/broken, the app might not work on their phone, people might not want to use an app, people might have limited data, or they may not be able to have a cell phone or afford one.
Plain and simple, every other company that has two step verification, which is what this is, gives users multiple options for how they verify. Valve doesn't seem to understand that a part of security is making it easy for the user and giving enough options that security doesn't have to be an option. A hold should be a last ditch resort for someone who lost access to all their verification options, not the only opinion for some users.
Comment has been collapsed.
You don't need a phone to trade or place things on the market. Those are just to get rid of the 15 day wait period.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't you need phone to confirm before placing something on the market? Or that can be turned off.
Comment has been collapsed.
well, if you can find someone who trade with you (because 99 % of pp don't or accept them by mistake), you can trade.
if you can see the future and guess the price of your item in 15 days, you can use the market.
if you are over by 0.01$, you most likely won't sell it because item only going cheaper over time so you need to wait another 15 days to relist the same items and so on if you are still to expensive.
Comment has been collapsed.
No? Without a phone you'll get an email in order to verify that you actually placed the order/trade, after which there will be a 15 day hold before it appears on the market or is delivered to the person you're trading with.
Comment has been collapsed.
well look at my profile and rethink about your comment because they are opposed to the fact ...
Comment has been collapsed.
There's nothing to rethink, you can place items on the market or trade without a phone number. Most people don't want to trade with others that don't use one because it takes so long.
Comment has been collapsed.
You only need a phone once to receive a code per SMS.
For the confirmations you can use WinAuth or Steam Desktop Authenticator.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am using an emulator called WinAuth to allow me to trade without a phone. It's not very intuitive to use (there is a hidden button/menu), but easy once you know how.
Comment has been collapsed.
well, read some more about winauth and tell me what are the requirement because you didn't see it yet
Comment has been collapsed.
Huh? What didn't I see?
You said they need to make trading and market available for people without phone.
I said that there is a workaround (WinAuth) that I use to trade and use the Steam Market without a phone.
Comment has been collapsed.
''You'll need to register a phone # on Steam before you can proceed. My guide below has a section on how to add a phone # to your account''
"Possible Error If You Don't Have a Phone # Registered On Steam
Skip this section if you already have a phone number registered with Steam
To use the Steam Mobile Authenticator, even on WinAuth, you need an SMS phone number registered on Steam. If you don't you will get the following message after the step above"
and it go on on the winauth steam page
Comment has been collapsed.
I guess it would depend on who is paying the modder. I'm not really into the modding scene, but when it comes to Skyrim, I know a lot of content was made by fans to extend the life of the game for themselves. I agree with Gabe, they need some sort of compensation. But I personally would never pay for a mod. And applying the Csgo method to any game that has mod support won't work for every game. The donation idea is probably the best, but maybe a notification should pop up encouraging someone to donate after they've hit the download button. Because to be fair, if "customers" were the ones buying the mods, the modders would technically be making money off someone else's game idea. As well as paying far more for a game then they originally planned.
Comment has been collapsed.
Bah, Valve is being bull**** with that 'reason'. They showed last time the content creator gets piss all. They just want even more cash without doing anything to make up for the removal of stolen games and their market stuff.
Donations, as poor as they are for most content creators, is the only method that should be considered.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wait, wait, aren't these fishes? Aren't they underwater? How is there fire underwater?
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd say if modders want to get paid, they should go on Patreon, but I'm not completely against paid mods if they're properly curated (which we all know they won't be)
Comment has been collapsed.
they refuse to curate games, what chance do the mods have. and I doubt they'll allow people to add patreon links to mod pages...
Comment has been collapsed.
If there was a way to control what is produced, then I'd agree. However, knowing Valve there would be no control over it and we would end up with a mess like Greenlight is.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ugh, here we go again. Prepare the siege machines!
Comment has been collapsed.
For me I would say "Just put a bloody Donation Button instead!"
Forgive my cynism, but the way I read it, it's a distorted way to say "Let others pay instead of me!" :p
Joke aside, I've seen many modders that were against paid mods change their minds completely after the Bethesda.theft thing. So if it were to come back, I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot of support from the modders, this time.
Comment has been collapsed.
Donation goes to the creator. If they implement it to Steam that likely means an instant cut for Valve for AGAIN doing fucking nothing. I'm so fucking fed up that each and every change from Valve aims towards automatization, they don't increase workforce even in applicable places (like support, GL) but they are so eager to cash in on anything.
Comment has been collapsed.
"but they are so eager to cash in on anything."
Like many people on Steam, I'd say.
Anyway, donations don't work for anyone. Actually, they almost don't work for most modders. You can pretty much see that by going through some modders' Patreon pages: Elianora (she make houses and she used to be against paid mods, if I recall correctly) now enjoys a $400/month with Patreon, while Sagittarius (SkyDie, Black Horse Courrier Reborn, ...) only has a $5/month Patreon.
So unless you have an avid fanbase and/or you are working on a big IMMURSIV stuff, you won't get shit.
Comment has been collapsed.
In a certain way, you're right. Regardless of whether or not there's a paywall for the mod, some people will just go for the free route. That being said, less informed people will just go for the easy way. I've done some support for mods for a few years and you'd be surprised how helpless some users can be. I'm not even being mean or anything but when you ask to put an automated installer for something that can be installed through a simple copy & paste, there's a serious problem.
And during that time, there was a guy asking us to put the mods for console players. And he was actually ready to pay for that.
That being said, I'd be curious to see the sales that were done during the first paid mods fiasco. Just to see how people will react in case this turns out to be profitable.
As for modding only for fun... well, back before Skyrim, maybe. But since modding opened to the larger crowd with the release of Skyrim, nah. Mentalities changed greatly with Skyrim. I've seen way to many modders believing that they're God's gift (meh, the french version of that expression is funnier) to believe that they do that only for fun. I could go on a rant about doing facebook and twitter accounts made just for mods but to be fair, I no longer care about this.
Some userbases accept a lot of stuff, depending on who is doing it. So I wouldn't be surprised to see some of the modders getting a lot of support from their userbase, thinking it's the way to go.
Comment has been collapsed.
To Valve: Kill yourself.
Well, in all honesty, as long as they're optional. Feel free to make the free download even a bit less convenient to have the modder profit. (Like for example having to always choose the free option from the "Download" button instead of it being the default option)
But of course Valve, modders absolutely need to be paid. It's a good thing that you'll take 0% from those donations, right? .......Right?
Oh, I forgot, you're a greedy company that is hypocritical just to get some extra dimes.
Valve's the type of company that would molest a child for $5.
Comment has been collapsed.
Good thing that the first insult came to your mind is kill yourself, your personality really shines...
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, I did it on purpose. Trust me, even someone like me can have a bit more of a brain. :D
"In all honesty" was the wrong term to use as well, so I can understand why you thought I was actually one of those people. What I meant was "in all seriousness" :)
The reason for that particular phrase was to show my frustration, I've given up. Just when I think they've improved, they come back and they come back in force.
It's to show that I can't really mutter too much. It's like I've lost the argument with Valve, but instead of losing it by just having the worse argument, they just kept yelling "LALALALALALALA" until I gave up.
Comment has been collapsed.
Eh, sorry, had a little stressed day. But I can really understand you, I just hope I never have to do anything serious with Steam support, it feels like yelling to a wall :( And most of their choices are just good for...noone but them.
Comment has been collapsed.
There, I fixed it for you:
Valve: "Modders 'absolutely' need to be paid, how could we and the devs run away with 75% of that cash otherwise?"
Once they implement this (rather "force it into our colon"), I see a grand future, filled with expansion of the Nexus gamelist.
It only has 422 games at the moment but we'll crank it up to over 9000 if the need arises...
Comment has been collapsed.
Please anyone who is surprised raise your hand. It is too much of an opportunity for Valve to not rake in even more free money from the work of others. After all, this is what the majority of their gaming portfolio is about.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I was thinking along these lines. Too easy of a profit to pass up.
Comment has been collapsed.
I must say, for a private company, they are acting more and more like a public company trying to attract investors with high quarterly profits
Comment has been collapsed.
They do, yet they do everything to remain private so they never have to disclose their actual profit margins. It wouldn't surprise me if it surpassed early 2000s EA's.
Comment has been collapsed.
One would think that their costs are rising all the time and making profits smaller... with all the new games being released on steam... BUT... most of those games are nowhere near 60-70 gb for DOOM and 70% probably never even get downloaded at all and are just idled and forgotten inside of vast user libraries...
Comment has been collapsed.
if theres money on the line then peeps are going to expect a well done solid product, im fine with the idea but i laugh game crashes from mods because theyre free who cares, but if im paying some money for that then the devs might need to get involved somehow to asure the quality and if thats going to happen then they might want to take some of the money and then what you get is CSGO.. xd
Comment has been collapsed.
They 'absolutely' need to be paid so Valve gets its share... they are so nice.
Comment has been collapsed.
Obviously !
All is about monetization, developing Steam communities and strengthening their leader position...
Comment has been collapsed.
I wonder how they want to do it without pissing people off again, considering that logistics of paid mods would be a nightmare for a company that isn't just looking for a way to get easy money from other people's work, cause I doubt Valve is gonna put much effort into screening mods.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm going to bet they will make a deal with the Publisher/Developer of the game to have higher % profit while the Modders get less %.
I recall the last Charge was Valve/Pub/Dev was around 75-85% while the Modder gets less which also includes Tax/Vats
Comment has been collapsed.
I was thinking more about quality control. I have a feeling they wouldn't do much about a mod that pretends to be a well made expansion, but in reality turns every in-game model into a penis and destroys your hard drive. Including copyrighted music and other materials, that they might care about, but that would mean that they would either a) have to actually check for it or b) implement some half-assed system that wouldn't work properly most of the time.
Comment has been collapsed.
To be honest, I think there are some mods worth charging for. If you're doing a total conversion that makes a new game out of an old one, it can be worth the price (and if they're paid, we might see people actually making a career out of deep, interesting, professional-quality total-conversion mods that we wouldn't get anywhere else.)
Valve in particular is aware of this because Counterstrike and Team Fortress started out as mods. Obviously I liked getting the original versions of those for free... but it'd be worth spending a small amount if it meant getting many more mods of that quality.
People will also use it to sell dumb horse armor mods for $$$, but those will probably just fail. So I'm not hugely worried.
Comment has been collapsed.
Like I said last time: The game company (Bethesda for Skyrim) should take the best mods, polish and make them guaranteed work. That then can be sold as quality DLC with modders getting a good share.
Anything else will lead to a greenlight shovelware catastrophe, it even got worse than that in the sole 1 week with Skyrim back then...
Comment has been collapsed.
So basically the same way CS skins and community made maps work, not sure if creators are getting a good cut from that but afaik that's how it works. It could work but I don't think that many developers would want to spare time/resources for that so it probably wouldn't work too well for the majority of the games.
Comment has been collapsed.
not sure if creators are getting a good cut from that
Valves original try already was just a measy 30% for modders even w/o any QC.
probably wouldn't work too well for the majority of the games
imagine greenlight worse 100x, that would it be w/o any checks. It's the only way to go, btw exactly how Valve already is doing it for their games.
Comment has been collapsed.
30% to modders deduct even more when tax gets into play
Comment has been collapsed.
Valve: Modders 'absolutely' need to be paid
Gabe Newell makes clear Valve's intention to bring back paid mods.
http://www.pcgamer.com/valve-modders-absolutely-need-to-be-paid
So what are your thoughts about this?
For me I would say "Just put a bloody Donation Button instead!"
Comment has been collapsed.