Steam paid mods, what's bad about them?

Closed

I'm not a big fan of the system either, but I don't think it's that bad. In my opinion, the amount the modder receives is a bit unfair. Well, Valve gets its 30%, fine. But when the developer is allowed to say they'll get 20% more than the modder... not fair. The minimum proportion the modder gets should be 35% and if the developer is kind, he might even earn more.
I don't think it's a big deal that the modder can set the minimum price to a number bigger than 0, but a pay-what-you-want system could also be nice (0$ would always be an option, too).

What do you think? Why do you dislike the new system? Or do you even dislike it?

10 years ago

Comment has been collapsed.

Why do you dislike the new system?

View Results

I don't, I like it.

Valve gets 30%, Bethesda (example) 45% and the modder only 25% of the revenue.

The mods are not always free anymore.

Other (please comment)

4 Comments

PsyKo

Remember Horse Armor those 10 years ago. Now look at DLC market this days.

Will same thing happen to modding? Well, apparently if you use free version of Midas Magic, every time you use new spell you get pop-up "buy me".

And then there's cut - while it might be nice for one-person-mods (which will be majority), big mods will not really get much popularity, unless they will be sold for crumpets (lets face it - we mod games because it's free). Big mods will need to split those 25% between many creators, which means less money per person, and since mod will be expensive, how many people will buy it?

10 years ago*

Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Treazer

This is true. The DLC market is disgusting... there are games with DLCs more expensive than the game itself. You have a point there.

10 years ago

Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

YoYoStevo

This guys post sums it up for me, it'll basically ruin the modding. And of course the whole 25% to the modder.

http://steamcommunity.com/app/72850/discussions/0/611704730319151037/

10 years ago