Paid Modding is gone... or is it?

[b3lisario]

Hobby = an activity or interest pursued for pleasure or relaxation and not as a main occupation

That's the reward you get, pleasure or relaxation

This nullifies the argument "I deserve money for my hard work" because (1) is not that hard, you did it as a hobby and (2) it's not a job, even if it's the same stuff you would do at work.

People doing volunteer work does not ask for money. They work for free for a reason, whatever it is.

 

Maybe modding is not a hobby for you. Then you are either some kind of masochist, or you left modding time ago.

Maybe you have too much free time and you really want to earn a living through modding. Good luck with that. You'll need to be very good at it. If you have the skills, why not a real job in the industry?

 

I don't think Skyrim mods, in their current state can't be monetized.

1 - The game/mod system is broken far beyond recovery. Even with a fixed engine with no memory bugs or CTD syndrome.

2 - Mod conflict resolution (last-mod-wins rule) makes the whole thing very hard to fix. That would need to change too, not sure how.

3 - SKSE should change or dissapear as it currently allows running arbitrary code on your computer. This security hole is just not acceptable in any serious system.

All this is acceptable right now because there is no money involved and there is no responsability.

[Coopervane]

 

 

We've already established that the Valve system did not work because it was an obvious cash grab scheme. There was no question about that and I was in no way, shape or form defending that practice. So discussing what was advertised and sold in the store is a moot point.

 

You've misunderstood my stance on the matter. I believe hard work and attention to quality and support is deserving of pay, but I never said there should be any kind of enforced pay-wall of any kind. The user still has the choice to say "no" and go elsewhere if they feel the mod isn't worth downloading. I am accepting of the fact that they can coexist and that there is nothing wrong with a paying a person for the work they've done. I never said anything abut shafting the buyer or any such nonsense. I know how transactions work.

 

You seem to focus on only the wants and rights of the buyer and shaft the seller. I don't see why this can't be a balanced equation. This is based on a assumption that all mods will be of shit quality and will always be shit quality. Well fuck any modder who will try to make any high quality, constantly supported, original mod assets at all then.

 

I agree with all that you've stated, it just has little to do with what you quoted me on (I essentially asked if such services were worth paying for, and you shrugged it off with how much of an obvious failure the Workshop model was). Mostly, however, I agree with your second to last paragraph and if this pay system were to work, this is what we should focus on. If you run into shit quality, what will you do? Would you not try your best to avoid it? Will you not strive to make the market better by only trying and buying the quality mods? Or will you sit and complain that the market has nothing for you? Will you not encourage profit-motivated content creators to build high quality work to fit your tastes? Is there no way where the buyer and seller can get the best outcome? Or should we just never trust the seller and only side with the consumer under the fear of a few people who try to exploit a system? Should the user's voice drown out the creators voice to the point that the creator can't express an opinion without being chastised for it because money is somehow involved?

 

Can you give me an example of how the option of paid content obliterates an entire community made up of both content creators and content users (though it's obvious that is more of the former)?

 

 

 

tl;dr :

I'm on about co-existence, not about pro- or anti- paid content, and that the witch-hunt style movement in the days of the event were uncalled for and the movement could have been done in a more civil manner; just to make my stance clear to anyone who may be confused.

 

 

If i've misunderstood your stance jacques00, it's because you've not made it very transparent to me. Your posts thus far have all been along the lines of asking "Are people not entitled to be paid for their work!?". And the simple answer to that question is "No, not really, not unless someone actually finds that work worthy of payment. It takes two to Tango".

 

That's the rethoric beeing tossed around though, simply appealing to emotion by saying "workers should be paid for their labour!". A sentiment that sounds easy to agree with on the face of it, but this situation is not nearly that cut and dried. Not even remotely.

 

 

As for me beeing entirely against paid mods? Let me direct you to a post i made on page 42 of the big "paid mods" thread here, which it seems nobody bothered to read (atleast nobody responded to it): Namely this post.

 

 

No, i'm not 100% against the idea, but the system beeing put forth was awful on every level, and knowing Valve, having seen how poorly they have handled the whole Greenlight situation, aswell Early-Access and their "any game goes as long as it's backed by some Publisher, nomatter how mercenary they may be" hands off policy, there was no way this system could have been salvaged into something reasonable. It had to be torn down entirely and a strong message sent.

 

Perhabs now that it has been, something better could come along in it's place. Buuut i'm not optimistic about that if i'm honest, and if i am forced to choose between modding staying wholly unpaid, and having to put up with one of Valve's "ooopsie!" solutions, then i shall firmly stand by the former.

 

 

Paid mods, even on a buggy thing like a Bethesda game, could work in theory. But it has to be done the right way or not at all, or it is my belief that it could only do more harm than good.

[Quisling]

I just wonder though, like teams like SkyUI, what will they do now? Are they going stop working on SkyUI now?

 

Release 5.0 for free and stop I think http://forums.bethsoft.com/topic/1475216-relz-skyui/page-5?do=findComment&comment=23949087

 

 

I'll probably upload the new version some time after the next SKSE release is ready when I have the time, because the work is already done anyway. But obviously things will never be the same after this.

[Kendo 2]

"things will never be the same after this"

 

Whose fault is THAT?  sheesh 

[guk]

 

We've done this because it's clear we didn't understand exactly what we were doing.

LOL.. That is what market research is for..

 

The problem is, that the market researchers are outsiders on the matter. It's like trying to understand the social behaviour of ants from a satellite camera.

They should have asked a good deal of modders and users instead.

 

Same thing has ruined for example Activision (from the perspective of gamers). They put a complete outsider on top of their business (Kotick), who applied lots of business practises how you would do it in the financial industry for example. Mass acquisition of developer studios, squeeze some fast money out of them, finally disband them so your AAA studios end up with less competition and more value.

 

Apparently ValveThesda tried something on a similar (moral) level, although Gabe N. should have known better with his own company's history being based largely on free mods. He even admitted in public that games like Counter-Strike or DOTA would never have become successful standalone products, if they would have cost money when they still were tiny little mods for other full price games.

[Zor2k13]

I don't think we can ever go back to what we had, I think this argument has been building up for a while now and valve starting a shit storm with it just proves that the shit was ready to fly before they came along. We need some kind of system that both the modders and the mod users are happy with.

 

Before this happened, the mod users didn't have to worry about anything because mods were free but now they have something to worry about because it looks like valve/bugfesta will only try something else later but the modders have the most to worry about because they have been worried about money for a while now.

 

If the economy was really good and unemployment was really really low like actually 2% or lower and not fake 9% and higher then NOBODY would even think about money for mods it would not be a thing at all. But since the economy sucks and things are looking bad we are all thinking about money. The modders have been talking about it for a while starting with the donations argument but now the mod users are mad because they too know the economy is bad and see this whole thing as "yet another thing" to pay for and they like anyone else would fight financial increases on themselves every time.

 

So there needs to be a system that both sides are happy with and soon before valve/bugfesta come up with their own which of course will be bad and won't work. The community must produce the idea of and at least some of the framework for this system don't leave it up to the corps.

[torkenstiem]

beth/valve knew exactly what they were doin. what they were hopin for is ppl to accept it. thats why there wasnt a warning, bam its done so there you are, paid mods.

[Kendo 2]

I have a real instance of paid modding and what it does to a community.  I’m hesitant to share this but it serves a purpose.  Please bear with me.

 

Back in 2008 when FO3 was released Exnem made a new body and due to my past support in Oblivion I was invited to join the staff on a new forum created by him and StormRaven.  Once I was added to the user group for moderators I saw what they were really intending.

 

StromRaven had convinced Exnem that he should revoke ‘his’ license and take ownership of all EyeCandy body mods, including HGEC content since they considered it a derivative.  With the help of Bben and Budda, StormRaven had accumulated a vast data base of EyeCandy mods that had been banned from Nexus.  Bben and Budda had both taken the Japanese EyeCandy mods Dark0ne didn’t allow on the site and stored them on The StromRaven Libraries site’s servers.  Their intent the whole time was to charge for the mods’ meshes and textures.  The esps/esms would be free, but they would nickle and dime everything else needed to make the mod work.  That way they would avoid the Bethesda EULA about charging for mods.  No Bethesda property would be behind a paywall.

 

Being how I am, I explained to them that what they were planning wouldn’t work; that Exnem didn’t have a license to revoke and claim ownership of anything.  The body he ‘made’ for Oblivion was based on the old Zygote body and several people had worked on it.  It was also protected by the OpenSource3DModelling license and it held Exnem to the same standard as normal users, since he downloaded a body he didn’t make and changed it.  You can imagine how well that went over with StormRaven and Exnem.  Needless to say they fabricated a conflict between us that didn’t happen and I was banned from their forum.  I tried to talk a little common sense to them and they flipped out.

 

Not one to be discouraged, I exposed their scheme on the old EyeCandy Forum and the response was as expect.  People started deleting their EyeCandy mods and hardly anyone modded for it after that.  They were also in a panic over HGEC until I explained that it was not a derivate work.  It might have the same UV map but that was all it had.  It was a new body and Exnem had no claim to it.  Anyway, the general response was one of outrage that Exnem was going to charge for content that was previously free; some of the content he didn’t make.  Shortly after that Exnem closed his forum, StormRaven closed his library and everyone started using HGEC, leaving the EyeCandy body behind.  Even though Exnem had no legal claim to the EyeCandy body (and I explained that to the users) the community abandoned it anyway.

 

And in typical ‘paid modder’ fashion both Exnem and StormRaven blamed the community.  StromRaven even went as far as to paste an edited version of the OpenSource3DModelling license to make it appear that Exnem had some sort of claim and that he was going to ‘revoke his license’.  They actually believed their own hype.

 

So I guess this recent Valve thing proves again that charging for mods pisses people off and they will turn their backs on whoever does it.  And the same thing happened this time with the for-money modding faction.  They didn’t do anything wrong by trying to charge for mods and the community is to blame.

[jacques00]

If i've misunderstood your stance jacques00, it's because you've not made it very transparent to me. Your posts thus far have all been along the lines of asking "Are people not entitled to be paid for their work!?". And the simple answer to that question is "No, not really, not unless someone actually finds that work worthy of payment. It takes two to Tango".

 

That's the rethoric beeing tossed around though, simply appealing to emotion by saying "workers should be paid for their labour!". A sentiment that sounds easy to agree with on the face of it, but this situation is not nearly that cut and dried. Not even remotely.

Sorry for not making my position clear initially--After I realized that, I added the tl;dr. If it seemed like I was one-sided it's because most of the outspoken positions already elaborated on the "why this is bad" perspective, so I felt I didn't need to parrot those lines as it's been said several times. Also, it's not backwards thinking to add some criticism and play devil's advocate to get some of the constructive ideas stirring besides having to result to name calling and finger pointing (not accusing you of that, just pointing out the rationale behind some of the arguments).

 

As for me beeing entirely against paid mods? Let me direct you to a post i made on page 42 of the big "paid mods" thread here, which it seems nobody bothered to read (atleast nobody responded to it): Namely this post.

 

No, i'm not 100% against the idea, but the system beeing put forth was awful on every level, and knowing Valve, having seen how poorly they have handled the whole Greenlight situation, aswell Early-Access and their "any game goes as long as it's backed by some Publisher, nomatter how mercenary they may be" hands off policy, there was no way this system could have been salvaged into something reasonable. It had to be torn down entirely and a strong message sent.

Thanks for the link. That was actually something constructive and I give you props for outlining that out. If there's anything we can agree on, it would be those points and the fact the the campaign Valve and Bethesda had set up was a complete sham. It could have definitely been done a lot better, in my opinion. I am glad it ended quick, but I don't like the way it ended. It should have been executed in a more calm and peaceful manner without the outrage and animosity. Call them on their bullshit and have them take responsibility for their mistake--we didn't need to create a rift within out own community to do it though. All they had to do was to launch an ill-planned campaign and everyone drops their spaghetti and starts painting enemies. That is not what supposed to happen in a strong community.

 

Perhabs now that it has been, something better could come along in it's place. Buuut i'm not optimistic about that if i'm honest, and if i am forced to choose between modding staying wholly unpaid, and having to put up with one of Valve's "ooopsie!" solutions, then i shall firmly stand by the former.

 

 

Paid mods, even on a buggy thing like a Bethesda game, could work in theory. But it has to be done the right way or not at all, or it is my belief that it could only do more harm than good.

Well you might not be optimistic about it (and there's nothing wrong with that), but I also don't think Valve is end-all. Because like scientists, we should test those theories to see if they stand up, and if it's not giving us the proper results, we will have to change some variables and test a new theory until we get it right and advance or be proven wrong and move on.

 

I think a paid model will fit in somewhere, given the current trend of gaming. It might not be for Skyrim, but I'm sure it will pop up elsewhere in future games (if there are any readily moddable games to be had in the future, anyway). However, the main issue is if, as a community, we let it be a constant problem... or we take the effort and make it better than what it initially is. If this is here to stay, we should look at ways of giving it a place (even if it's a small place) and enforce quality control both on the seller and buyer end (and all the points you mentioned in your linked post)--and the earlier we do it, the more prepared we will be to repair any damages that arise in the future. It won't be a positive thing unless we make it positive.

 

I'm all for free mods, but I think paid mods have their place too.

[Userper]

This should be good news... but all I can think about is what happens with the next beth game... Fallout 4...

[Gameplayer]

Thanks for the input KendoII

 

I remember back then wondering why there were body types that seemed like they were established yet there was next to no content.

I was also kinda in the dark about that stuff.

 

To hear that a guy like BBen who is actively involved at the Nexus participated....

That changes things.

This should be good news... but all I can think about is what happens with the next beth game... Fallout 4...

 

I know right,

 

But there wont be so many people pre-ordering, why?

 

I mean I won't no way, I mean patches alone have caused so much havoc on the mod scene.

 

Then there's this? 

 

Plus the real problem that is so underaddressed anywhere you look.

 

KendoII hit it on the head, most modders are using open-source programs to create their works.

 

A real license to create content that one could charge money for is going to run in the thousands of dollars range and I believe is well beyond being realistic for most of the popular mod authors at this time.

 

On top of that the modder will have to be pre-pared for legal matters that surround his/her product.  I kind of doubt that most people are even slightly aware of this but all it would take is just one item that one company has proof of and a desire to shut the modder down.

 

That'd be a lot more headache than it would be worth.

[jacques00]

 

I have a real instance of paid modding and what it does to a community.  I’m hesitant to share this but it serves a purpose.  Please bear with me.

Back in 2008 when FO3 was released Exnem made a new body and due to my past support in Oblivion I was invited to join the staff on a new forum created by him and StormRaven.  Once I was added to the user group for moderators I saw what they were really intending.

 

StromRaven had convinced Exnem that he should revoke ‘his’ license and take ownership of all EyeCandy body mods, including HGEC content since they considered it a derivative.  With the help of Bben and Budda, StormRaven had accumulated a vast data base of EyeCandy mods that had been banned from Nexus.  Bben and Budda had both taken the Japanese EyeCandy mods Dark0ne didn’t allow on the site and stored them on The StromRaven Libraries site’s servers.  Their intent the whole time was to charge for the mods’ meshes and textures.  The esps/esms would be free, but they would nickle and dime everything else needed to make the mod work.  That way they would avoid the Bethesda EULA about charging for mods.  No Bethesda property would be behind a paywall.

 

Being how I am, I explained to them that what they were planning wouldn’t work; that Exnem didn’t have a license to revoke and claim ownership of anything.  The body he ‘made’ for Oblivion was based on the old Zygote body and several people had worked on it.  It was also protected by the OpenSource3DModelling license and it held Exnem to the same standard as normal users, since he downloaded a body he didn’t make and changed it.  You can imagine how well that went over with StormRaven and Exnem.  Needless to say they fabricated an conflict between us that didn’t happen and I was banned from their forum.  I tried to talk a little common sense to them and they flipped out.

 

Not one to be discouraged, I exposed their scheme on the old EyeCandy Forum and the response was as expect.  People started deleting their EyeCandy mods and hardly anyone modded for it after that.  They were also in a panic over HGEC until I explained that it was not a derivate work.  It might have the same UV map but that was all it had.  It was a new body and Exnem had no claim to it.  Anyway, the general response was one of outrage that Exnem was going to charge for content that was previously free; some of the content he didn’t make.  Shortly after that Exnem closed his forum, StormRaven closed his library and everyone started using HGEC, leaving the EyeCandy body behind.  Even though Exnem had no legal claim to the EyeCandy body (and I explained that to the users) the community abandoned it anyway.

 

And in typical ‘paid modder’ fashion both Exnem and StormRaven blamed the community.  StromRaven even went as far as to paste an edited version of the OpenSource3DModelling license to make it appear that Exnem had some sort of claim and that he was going to ‘revoke his license’.  They actually believed their own hype.

 

So I guess this recent Valve thing proves again that charging for mods pisses people off and they will turn their backs on whoever does it.  And the same thing happened this time with the for-money modding faction.  They didn’t do anything wrong by trying to charge for mods and the community is to blame.

 

 

Ah, that is a very sticky issue right there, and it is a huge clusterfuck, I would agree.

 

The example of becoming discouraged and breaking up a community is still a resounding factor though--and only a community who takes offense so strongly would break itself apart like that. If the current modding community is frail enough to break under the demands of entitled modders, then maybe the modding community has a lot to learn about toughening up. If we want to be strong, we can't let entitlement (buyers, sellers, hobbyists, professionals) get to us, paid mods or not. We should put or brains and hand together and work out a solution, not scatter like leaves in a hurricane.

 

My point of reference for paid mods, if they were to exist, is the selling of custom-made content--by the modder or team of modders. This is more dedicated than a bunch of kit-bashers using recycled assets. I'm talking about building mesh, texture, sound, building, environment, quest and all other game assets from scratch or by use of legally Bethesda/board-approved assets. All the content is made by the content creators so no legal entanglements can be an issue. If this were the case, would this be an example of an acceptable mod to pay for?

[Quisling]

In our [bethesda's] early discussions regarding Workshop with Valve, they presented data showing the effect paid user content has had on their games, their players, and their modders. All of it hugely positive. They showed, quite clearly, that allowing content creators to make money increased the quality and choice that players had. They asked if we would consider doing the same.

 

This was in 2012 and we had many questions, but only one demand. It had to be open, not curated like the current models. At every step along the way with mods, we have had many opportunities to step in and control things, and decided not to. We wanted to let our players decide what is good, bad, right, and wrong. We will not pass judgment on what they do.

 

 

Basic problem with all this is Bethesda. They waited three years for Valve to remove any controls over the Paid Workshop, because they didn't want to do any work themselves (yet still take the largest slice of the pie). Then rushed it out in a couple of months, and apparently decided not to have anyone around when it launched.

 

I would have thought it was common sense, but you can't have a paid service that's exactly the same as a free service, except it costs money. The Skyrim/Steam stack is ill-suited to a paid model in the first place, so pretty much the only place to add value is in curation and support. But if your sole requirement is that you don't have to do jack shit, I'd expect a failure every time.

[Userper]

 

In our [bethesda's] early discussions regarding Workshop with Valve, they presented data showing the effect paid user content has had on their games, their players, and their modders. All of it hugely positive. They showed, quite clearly, that allowing content creators to make money increased the quality and choice that players had. They asked if we would consider doing the same.

 

This was in 2012 and we had many questions, but only one demand. It had to be open, not curated like the current models. At every step along the way with mods, we have had many opportunities to step in and control things, and decided not to. We wanted to let our players decide what is good, bad, right, and wrong. We will not pass judgment on what they do.

 

 

Basic problem with all this is Bethesda. They waited three years for Valve to remove any controls over the Paid Workshop, because they didn't want to do any work themselves (yet still take the largest slice of the pie). Then rushed it out in a couple of months, and apparently decided not to have anyone around when it launched.

 

I would have thought it was common sense, but you can't have a paid service that's exactly the same as a free service, except it costs money. The Skyrim/Steam stack is ill-suited to a paid model in the first place, so pretty much the only place to add value is in curation and support. But if your sole requirement is that you don't have to do jack shit, I'd expect a failure every time.

 

 

True dat

[bob11]

Hobby = an activity or interest pursued for pleasure or relaxation and not as a main occupation

That's the reward you get, pleasure or relaxation

This nullifies the argument "I deserve money for my hard work" because (1) is not that hard, you did it as a hobby and (2) it's not a job, even if it's the same stuff you would do at work.

People doing volunteer work does not ask for money. They work for free for a reason, whatever it is.

 

Maybe modding is not a hobby for you. Then you are either some kind of masochist, or you left modding time ago.

Maybe you have too much free time and you really want to earn a living through modding. Good luck with that. You'll need to be very good at it. If you have the skills, why not a real job in the industry?

 

I don't think Skyrim mods, in their current state can't be monetized.

1 - The game/mod system is broken far beyond recovery. Even with a fixed engine with no memory bugs or CTD syndrome.

2 - Mod conflict resolution (last-mod-wins rule) makes the whole thing very hard to fix. That would need to change too, not sure how.

3 - SKSE should change or dissapear as it currently allows running arbitrary code on your computer. This security hole is just not acceptable in any serious system.

All this is acceptable right now because there is no money involved and there is no responsability.

 

I'm confident the vast majority of modders thought that way

[cornbreadtm]

 

I have a real instance of paid modding and what it does to a community.  I’m hesitant to share this but it serves a purpose.  Please bear with me.

 

Back in 2008 when FO3 was released Exnem made a new body and due to my past support in Oblivion I was invited to join the staff on a new forum created by him and StormRaven.  Once I was added to the user group for moderators I saw what they were really intending.

 

StromRaven had convinced Exnem that he should revoke ‘his’ license and take ownership of all EyeCandy body mods, including HGEC content since they considered it a derivative.  With the help of Bben and Budda, StormRaven had accumulated a vast data base of EyeCandy mods that had been banned from Nexus.  Bben and Budda had both taken the Japanese EyeCandy mods Dark0ne didn’t allow on the site and stored them on The StromRaven Libraries site’s servers.  Their intent the whole time was to charge for the mods’ meshes and textures.  The esps/esms would be free, but they would nickle and dime everything else needed to make the mod work.  That way they would avoid the Bethesda EULA about charging for mods.  No Bethesda property would be behind a paywall.

 

Being how I am, I explained to them that what they were planning wouldn’t work; that Exnem didn’t have a license to revoke and claim ownership of anything.  The body he ‘made’ for Oblivion was based on the old Zygote body and several people had worked on it.  It was also protected by the OpenSource3DModelling license and it held Exnem to the same standard as normal users, since he downloaded a body he didn’t make and changed it.  You can imagine how well that went over with StormRaven and Exnem.  Needless to say they fabricated a conflict between us that didn’t happen and I was banned from their forum.  I tried to talk a little common sense to them and they flipped out.

 

Not one to be discouraged, I exposed their scheme on the old EyeCandy Forum and the response was as expect.  People started deleting their EyeCandy mods and hardly anyone modded for it after that.  They were also in a panic over HGEC until I explained that it was not a derivate work.  It might have the same UV map but that was all it had.  It was a new body and Exnem had no claim to it.  Anyway, the general response was one of outrage that Exnem was going to charge for content that was previously free; some of the content he didn’t make.  Shortly after that Exnem closed his forum, StormRaven closed his library and everyone started using HGEC, leaving the EyeCandy body behind.  Even though Exnem had no legal claim to the EyeCandy body (and I explained that to the users) the community abandoned it anyway.

 

And in typical ‘paid modder’ fashion both Exnem and StormRaven blamed the community.  StromRaven even went as far as to paste an edited version of the OpenSource3DModelling license to make it appear that Exnem had some sort of claim and that he was going to ‘revoke his license’.  They actually believed their own hype.

 

So I guess this recent Valve thing proves again that charging for mods pisses people off and they will turn their backs on whoever does it.  And the same thing happened this time with the for-money modding faction.  They didn’t do anything wrong by trying to charge for mods and the community is to blame.

 

 

I was wondering why I could only find big tittied mods when I first started modding Oblivion!

It was all your fault Kendo!

*Spits to the left*

*Throws salt over right shoulder*

 

But seriously it's good when things like this happens. It shows people who should be modding and who shouldn't.

 

If you make model cars every day after work and when someone offers to pay you, and you become a money monster. You realize that maybe you should have gotten a second job instead of making models. Not everyone can afford their hobbies. Some people don't make enough to relax.

 

Modding is a hobby. Should you make money from your hobbies? No. Because it wont be a hobby anymore it would be a job. And if it felt like a job before then, well it wasn't a hobby and you should have pick something more relaxing.

 

Lots of modders get out of modding cause it stops being a hobby.

 

Lots of modders stop modding because of RL, they can't afford it whatever, etc.

 

Bethesda made everyone think about this, and they forced everyone to think about their position as modders and if they should be modding or maybe get a second job to fund their life style. Paid modding wont fund anything. At least in the form they presented it.

 

[Kendo 2]

My point of reference for paid mods, if they were to exist, is the selling of custom-made content--by the modder or team of modders. This is more dedicated than a bunch of kit-bashers using recycled assets. I'm talking about building mesh, texture, sound, building, environment, quest and all other game assets from scratch or by use of legally Bethesda/board-approved assets. All the content is made by the content creators so no legal entanglements can be an issue. If this were the case, would this be an example of an acceptable mod to pay for?

That's a good point but there is one major problem and that is Valve/Steam and it's upload policy.  It is one thing for a modder to upload an esp with scripts; Bethesda has a somewhat legal claim to that content since it depends on their software.  What Bethesda cannot claim are original meshes, textures, voice acting and other sound files.  That content doesn't rely on their software and they have no legal claim to it, BUT according to Steam/Valve they own anything uploaded there.  It doesn't matter if they have a legitimate claim or not.  If people are stupid enough to upload there they just relinquished any rights they have...according to Valve/Steam.

 

I don't know about anyone else but I'll be goddamned if I'm going to make custom meshes and textures that will work on any 3D platform and mindlessly hand them over to a company like Valve.  That is where the all-inclusive grand mods people are talking about paying for will fall short and I seriously doubt anyone with real talent surrending what they made for the sake of Steam Dollars.  If they are willing to then the talent they have is wasted on them since they could take those same meshes and textures and format them for DAZ and make REAL money at Renderosity.com.

 

And I firmly believe paid-for-modding is coming with a future Bethsda release.  The big difference will be the forewarning and people will know that some mods will not be free from the start.  Part of the issue with this last go round with Valve/Steam was the fact that some modders were retrofitting existing content and fully expecting people to pay for it.  I consider that a money grab and a betrayal and I know I'm not alone.  If mods for money are there from inception people will be better with it.  They might not like it, but the betrayal factor won't be there.

[Coopervane]

 

 

 

If i've misunderstood your stance jacques00, it's because you've not made it very transparent to me. Your posts thus far have all been along the lines of asking "Are people not entitled to be paid for their work!?". And the simple answer to that question is "No, not really, not unless someone actually finds that work worthy of payment. It takes two to Tango".

 

That's the rethoric beeing tossed around though, simply appealing to emotion by saying "workers should be paid for their labour!". A sentiment that sounds easy to agree with on the face of it, but this situation is not nearly that cut and dried. Not even remotely.

Sorry for not making my position clear initially--After I realized that, I added the tl;dr. If it seemed like I was one-sided it's because most of the outspoken positions already elaborated on the "why this is bad" perspective, so I felt I didn't need to parrot those lines as it's been said several times. Also, it's not backwards thinking to add some criticism and play devil's advocate to get some of the constructive ideas stirring besides having to result to name calling and finger pointing (not accusing you of that, just pointing out the rationale behind some of the arguments).

 

As for me beeing entirely against paid mods? Let me direct you to a post i made on page 42 of the big "paid mods" thread here, which it seems nobody bothered to read (atleast nobody responded to it): Namely this post.

 

No, i'm not 100% against the idea, but the system beeing put forth was awful on every level, and knowing Valve, having seen how poorly they have handled the whole Greenlight situation, aswell Early-Access and their "any game goes as long as it's backed by some Publisher, nomatter how mercenary they may be" hands off policy, there was no way this system could have been salvaged into something reasonable. It had to be torn down entirely and a strong message sent.

Thanks for the link. That was actually something constructive and I give you props for outlining that out. If there's anything we can agree on, it would be those points and the fact the the campaign Valve and Bethesda had set up was a complete sham. It could have definitely been done a lot better, in my opinion. I am glad it ended quick, but I don't like the way it ended. It should have been executed in a more calm and peaceful manner without the outrage and animosity. Call them on their bullshit and have them take responsibility for their mistake--we didn't need to create a rift within out own community to do it though. All they had to do was to launch an ill-planned campaign and everyone drops their spaghetti and starts painting enemies. That is not what supposed to happen in a strong community.

 

Perhabs now that it has been, something better could come along in it's place. Buuut i'm not optimistic about that if i'm honest, and if i am forced to choose between modding staying wholly unpaid, and having to put up with one of Valve's "ooopsie!" solutions, then i shall firmly stand by the former.

 

 

Paid mods, even on a buggy thing like a Bethesda game, could work in theory. But it has to be done the right way or not at all, or it is my belief that it could only do more harm than good.

Well you might not be optimistic about it (and there's nothing wrong with that), but I also don't think Valve is end-all. Because like scientists, we should test those theories to see if they stand up, and if it's not giving us the proper results, we will have to change some variables and test a new theory until we get it right and advance or be proven wrong and move on.

 

I think a paid model will fit in somewhere, given the current trend of gaming. It might not be for Skyrim, but I'm sure it will pop up elsewhere in future games (if there are any readily moddable games to be had in the future, anyway). However, the main issue is if, as a community, we let it be a constant problem... or we take the effort and make it better than what it initially is. If this is here to stay, we should look at ways of giving it a place (even if it's a small place) and enforce quality control both on the seller and buyer end (and all the points you mentioned in your linked post)--and the earlier we do it, the more prepared we will be to repair any damages that arise in the future. It won't be a positive thing unless we make it positive.

 

I'm all for free mods, but I think paid mods have their place too.

 

 

 

Clearly we do actually agree on a number of points, and i would like to thank you for the civil discourse.

 

I guess that just highlights the pitfalls of communicating through a purely text-based medium. Without any body-language and vocal-inflections to fly by, it's very easy for people to talk past eachother, even on points they actually agree on.

 

It is especially dangerous when people try to counterweight what they see as a one-sided hug-box, because it's easy to come off as an extremist of the opposite side when they really just wanted people to see both sides of the coin. And i am definately guilty of having done this myself, quite a few times infact

 

 

Alas, the situation as i see it:

 

The system as presented, a system in which anyone could sell a single sword, a single armor, or a bog-standard follower mod for money (and not even get a good deal from Valve/Beth in doing so), was a terrible one, and i think we both agree. It would have been a store full of overpriced rubbish, it would have taken away from the (mostly) healthy free mod-community that existed, as mods that would have been released free went pay-to-play, it would likely have caused some damage to the free flow of information and aid within the previously free community, and to make it all worse, even the people trying to sell their mods would have been unliklely to get much of anything out of it due to the raw deal on offer.

 

In my opinion, it was a raw deal for consumers, it was a raw deal for content creators, and in the long run, it would have undermined consumer confidence in the IP and also proved to be a raw deal for Valve/Bethesda.

 

It was just not good for anybody in the long run, and i'm happy it's gone, atleast for the time beeing..

 

 

But i am not against the idea of extremely talented authors getting paid when they manage to put out something exceptional, even if it's piggy-backing off of another company's IP (IE, when it's a mod). If something like Skywind came out tomorrow, and it was as amazing as we all hope it would be, would i be opposed to paying for it? Well no, i certainly would not!

 

If a mod the size and scope of Faalskar came out next wednsday, only with even more spit-polish because the authors knew they could recoup the cost of booking some studio time to do VA work properly, and put in the extra houers on the project to make it really shine, would i be against paying for it? Ceratinly not!

 

 

So yes, paid mods can have a place, i accept that, absolutely, and if we could make the above things a reality? Then that would be a market-place that would be a benefit to both the creators and the consumers alike.

 

 

But i'm also weary.. because i remember hearing about DLC as a concept long ago and thinking "Hey, thats a pretty neat idea!", only to see it perverted and dragged through the mud till it's become the... thing that it is now. I remember thinking the same of the free-to-play model when that first came about, only to see it turn into Dungeon-Keeper Mobile by EA and F2P MicroTransactions beeing put into full-price 60 Bux retail games.

 

 

*deep sigh*

 

 

Yeah, that and quite a few more douche-moves by the gaming industry is why i am jaded and resistant to this. And sadly, i can't say that it's not warrented or that i'm just beeing paranoid, because i've seen to many things go horribly bad and abusive in this market to just pass it off as pessimism on my part

[jacques00]

 

 

My point of reference for paid mods, if they were to exist, is the selling of custom-made content--by the modder or team of modders. This is more dedicated than a bunch of kit-bashers using recycled assets. I'm talking about building mesh, texture, sound, building, environment, quest and all other game assets from scratch or by use of legally Bethesda/board-approved assets. All the content is made by the content creators so no legal entanglements can be an issue. If this were the case, would this be an example of an acceptable mod to pay for?

That's a good point but there is one major problem and that is Valve/Steam and it's upload policy.  It is one thing for a modder to upload an esp with scripts; Bethesda has a somewhat legal claim to that content since it depends on their software.  What Bethesda cannot claim are original meshes, textures, voice acting and other sound files.  That content doesn't rely on their software and they have no legal claim to it, BUT according to Steam/Valve they own anything uploaded there.  It doesn't matter if they have a legitimate claim or not.  If people are stupid enough to upload there they just relinquished any rights they have...according to Valve/Steam.

 

I don't know about anyone else but I'll be goddamned if I'm going to make custom meshes and textures that will work on any 3D platform and mindlessly hand then over to a company like Valve.  That is where the all-inclusive grand mods people are talking about paying for will fall short and I seriously doubt anyone with real talent surrending what they made for the sake of Steam Dollars.  If they are willing to then the talent they have is wasted on them since they could take those same meshes and textures and format them for DAZ and make REAL money at Renderosity.com.

 

And I firmly believe paid-for-modding is coming with a future Bethsda release.  The big difference will be the forewarning and people will know that some mods will not be free from the start.  Part of the issue with this last go round with Valve/Steam was the fact that some modders were retrofitting existing content and fully expecting people to pay for it.  I consider that a money grab and a betrayal and I know I'm not alone.  If mods for money are there from inception people will be better with it.  They might not like it, but the betrayal factor won't be there.

 

 

Yea, I can agree with most, if not all, of what you said on that point.

 

The Valve/Steam system is unfair due to the fact that they did not do their research and, of course, corporate interests taking precedence over consumer interests. We can bar doing business with Valve if they don't change their model to suit modding. But aside from all that, I think a Bethesda + mod community partnership may hold well with buyer-seller relationships, at least for Bethesda-released games. The legal ramifications can be set and renewed easier if discussed with the parent company. This is if both parties involved can come to a consensus that benefits all (property rights, profit splits, etc.).

 

Let's not assume Steam is the only platform available and that we should ignore any current or potentially new platforms that may better house the sale of mod content. Yes, the modder can take meshes and textures and sell them elsewhere, though that is not my point with content creation. I am talking about content made specifically for the game that utilizes the game's real-time engine to plot, render, and play out the content the user has made for it. This will include gameplay, environments, and quest mods too. This is actual game content made by modders. If people want to experience their game with such mods and are willing to pay for it, will it be wrong for them to pay for it?

 

I agree, paid-modding is inevitable (even though it already exists). I don't like the idea of retrofitting as much as you do, but I think those were only the symptoms to the actual problem and they all crept in due to being a rushed decision, poor quality control, and just the overall incompetence of the people organizing the entire campaign. The glaring and obvious problem was that there is a disconnect between the community and the developers (like how it is for most large companies nowadays)--and if this movement is any sign, we've only created a greater fissure between company-community relations. If we know the voluntary paid model is inevitable, and if we want it to get better, then the modding community needs to step up and speak with the game creators, the game creators/publishers should be less prude and allow consumer-based ideas influence their business models, and both should work out a game plan to make it a more pleasant experience for everyone. Work towards a solution to the problem, don't try to wish it away.

[windpl]

 

My point of reference for paid mods, if they were to exist, is the selling of custom-made content--by the modder or team of modders. This is more dedicated than a bunch of kit-bashers using recycled assets. I'm talking about building mesh, texture, sound, building, environment, quest and all other game assets from scratch or by use of legally Bethesda/board-approved assets. All the content is made by the content creators so no legal entanglements can be an issue. If this were the case, would this be an example of an acceptable mod to pay for?

That's a good point but there is one major problem and that is Valve/Steam and it's upload policy.  It is one thing for a modder to upload an esp with scripts; Bethesda has a somewhat legal claim to that content since it depends on their software.  What Bethesda cannot claim are original meshes, textures, voice acting and other sound files.  That content doesn't rely on their software and they have no legal claim to it, BUT according to Steam/Valve they own anything uploaded there.  It doesn't matter if they have a legitimate claim or not.  If people are stupid enough to upload there they just relinquished any rights they have...according to Valve/Steam.

 

I don't know about anyone else but I'll be goddamned if I'm going to make custom meshes and textures that will work on any 3D platform and mindlessly hand them over to a company like Valve.  That is where the all-inclusive grand mods people are talking about paying for will fall short and I seriously doubt anyone with real talent surrending what they made for the sake of Steam Dollars.  If they are willing to then the talent they have is wasted on them since they could take those same meshes and textures and format them for DAZ and make REAL money at Renderosity.com.

 

And I firmly believe paid-for-modding is coming with a future Bethsda release.  The big difference will be the forewarning and people will know that some mods will not be free from the start.  Part of the issue with this last go round with Valve/Steam was the fact that some modders were retrofitting existing content and fully expecting people to pay for it.  I consider that a money grab and a betrayal and I know I'm not alone.  If mods for money are there from inception people will be better with it.  They might not like it, but the betrayal factor won't be there.

 

 

To be exact, if you participate in "valve revenue sharing" they can use your assets as they see fit, be it next game or ingame item.

 

[Vykroft]

Laast is releasing his former-paidmod on nexus, is basically Purewater and others compilated in one mod (Immersive weather, etc). Putting away the hate, he could have hide his mod and never release it. I call that leave with dignity.

http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/65242/?

[guk]

[Quisling]

Laast is releasing his former-paidmod on nexus, is basically Purewater and others compilated in one mod (Immersive weather, etc). Putting away the hate, he could have hide his mod and never release it. I call that leave with dignity.

http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/65242/?

 

Has he said why he's leaving?

 

[cornbreadtm]

http://imgur.com/a/Cvrzo#0

Instantly hyped for Fallout 4 again!

[jacques00]

So yes, paid mods can have a place, i accept that, absolutely, and if we could make the above things a reality? Then that would be a market-place that would be a benefit to both the creators and the consumers alike.

If there are people who want to be more involved in this process, we should guide them to the target and make it happen. At least write to the devs and publishers to let them know how we want such a system to run if they decide to make one.

 

But i'm also weary.. because i remember hearing about DLC as a concept long ago and thinking "Hey, thats a pretty neat idea!", only to see it perverted and dragged through the mud till it's become the... thing that it is now. I remember thinking the same of the free-to-play model when that first came about, only to see it turn into Dungeon-Keeper Mobile by EA and F2P MicroTransactions beeing put into full-price 60 Bux retail games.

And the same with me. I understand and I see it too. I joke about such instances with my friends because we all see it. It's a bad trend indeed, but we can't always be so glum about it either.

 

But you know, we share a blame in this too. If we keep buying crappy DLC, we'll only get more crappy DLC. Want better DLC? Want no DLC? Want actual complete games? Show that you care, write to the devs and publishers, accept the long wait times, demand better quality material, show their investors its worth banking on!

 

We can't be inactive, let the problems go by, and once it arrives at the doorstep, yell and moan that we didn't ask for this. Those who talk about a war and fighting the good fight, are you really? Are you doing anything to make the situation any better, or are you letting bad practices remain bad practices? If we really want the good stuff, we need to let that be known and take it up with those who make the products we want to see do better. If we do nothing, we will only get more of the same.

 

So in that respect, if this event is a sign that Bethesda wants to move on to an inevitable paid model for some mods, it's up to the experienced mod community to tell them how to do it right.