# Valve now lets modders sell their mods



## Vintage Paw (Apr 23, 2015)

http://www.polygon.com/2015/4/23/8484743/steam-mod-sales-workshop-skyrim

Fucking hell.

Now modders can upload their mods to the workshop, and set their price.

They've started with Skyrim. Already established modders are removing their mods from Skyrim Nexus and putting them up on the Workshop and charging for them.

Valve have single handedly fucked over the future of Bethesda modding (and whatever comes next).

Fuck this fucking shit. So angry.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 23, 2015)

I don't like the idea of Steam monopolising mods (or anything for that matter). Fuck Steam.

I am however pretty up with the idea of modders having the opportunity to get paid.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 23, 2015)

I immediately thought of the poster Valve and wondered just how far 'monetising one's assets' could go..even here, on urban. 

Sorry...carry on.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Apr 23, 2015)

There's long been a system in place on nexus where you can donate to mod authors if you like their stuff. That ex-Sim City guy who's creating content for Skylines - he has a patreon set up. There's no shortage of ways in which people can donate to mod authors they consider worth it. 

The main worry is how will monetising this change modding? The point of modding was that people who loved the game created fresh content for it because they loved it, because they wanted to extend their experience, because they wanted to practice their skills, because they wanted to show off their skills. Certainly with Bethesda games, they wouldn't have the longevity they have without the huge modding community. Already people are taking their mods down from nexus and putting them up on Steam for payment. Well-loved, well-established mods. What does the future look like, for the _spirit_ of modding if nothing else? A modding community is at its best when people work together to help each other out, to work out and fix problems, to come up with new ideas, to collaborate. When there's a feeling of "we're all in it together." This takes a sledgehammer to that. Every modder for herself.

We also have the rather boring legal aspect. Modders often use assets they don't hold the licence to. This includes assets included in the vanilla game itself. What's the legal status of using Skyrim assets in a mod you then charge for? What about if you're using assets other modders created? Several mods do. For example, many make use of SKSE, the Skyrim Script Extender. That can't be installed through the Workshop, so it's never going to be in a package of paid content on there. If the creator of SKSE owns the copyright to that program, how does it work when other modders use assets and files from it in order to get their own mod to work?

Then there's the point about quality, compatibility and support. Certainly with Skyrim modding, you have to juggle your mods because many end up being incompatible with one another. What happens when you've paid for Mod A, and then you pay for Mod B, and they work together for a while but then Modder A updates Mod A and it breaks compatibility with Mod B? That's going to happen constantly, and it may not be something Modder A can fix, because of the huge amount of variables involved. Steam have a 24 hour refund policy in place, but I can't even begin to count the amount of mods I've discovered are incompatible at about hour 100 when they finally kick in or interact with a particular element of the game or another mod.

This is an absolutely terrible idea.


----------



## Citizen66 (Apr 23, 2015)

Of course it means Steam can take a percentage of the revenue.

Kerr-ching.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Apr 23, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Of course it means Steam can take a percentage of the revenue.
> 
> Kerr-ching.



75%, I believe.


----------



## golightly (Apr 23, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> Then there's the point about quality, compatibility and support. Certainly with Skyrim modding, you have to juggle your mods because many end up being incompatible with one another. What happens when you've paid for Mod A, and then you pay for Mod B, and they work together for a while but then Modder A updates Mod A and it breaks compatibility with Mod B? That's going to happen constantly, and it may not be something Modder A can fix, because of the huge amount of variables involved. Steam have a 24 hour refund policy in place, but I can't even begin to count the amount of mods I've discovered are incompatible at about hour 100 when they finally kick in or interact with a particular element of the game or another mod.


 
I, for one, will be very cautious about what mods I download for that very reason. Truth of the matter is that I probably wouldn't bother with purchasing mods because I don't want to spend money on something that either I cannot use or will prevent me from using something else.


----------



## classicdish (Apr 23, 2015)

Personally I won't bother with paid-for mods unless they are exceptionally good and have been road-tested by plenty of other people, since I will consider them to be the same as any other paid-for DLC.

I expect that most modders will carry on as before ... maybe after an initial period of charging to see if anyone makes any money.

Someone releasing a new mod relies on having lots of people using their mod so they can build up a reputation - how can they do this if they start charging for something that is unproven? Therefore its only going to be the very best and well-establish modders who will actually be able to get away with charging for their games and expecting any customers. Also any modders who use 'protected assets' probably won't be able to charge for them anyway (albeit there may need to be some be test cases first).


----------



## Vintage Paw (Apr 23, 2015)

One of the modders who has started using this also is responsible for the unofficial patches. He hasn't moved those over there, and likely won't because there is far too much involvement from other people, but it becomes clear what a clusterfuck this could be and how it could break a vibrant modding community in two.


----------



## classicdish (Apr 23, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> 75%, I believe.


I've read steam take c. 30 - 40% of revenue.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Apr 23, 2015)

classicdish said:


> Personally I won't bother with paid-for mods unless they are exceptionally good and have been road-tested by plenty of other people, since I will consider them to be the same as any other paid-for DLC.
> 
> I expect that most modders will carry on as before ... maybe after an initial period of charging to see if anyone makes any money.
> 
> Someone releasing a new mod relies on having lots of people using their mod so they can build up a reputation - how can they do this if they start charging for something that is unproven? Therefore its only going to be the very best and well-establish modders who will actually be able to get away with charging for their games and expecting any customers. Also any modders who use 'protected assets' probably won't be able to charge for them anyway (albeit there may need to be some be test cases first).



There's a ridiculously tiny bit in the FAQs about not using copyrighted material, saying you might forfeit your profits, get your mod taken down, and _maybe_ be banned from uploading any others. In addition, there's a little part that says, "what should I do if my mod uses bits of someone else's mod?" and the answer is "you should ask them first." Not _must_. _Should_.

Ugh. This whole thing is seriously awful in so many ways.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Apr 23, 2015)

classicdish said:


> I've read steam take c. 30 - 40% of revenue.



Modders get 25%. So maybe Beth take the rest? If so, fuck Bethesda as well.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Apr 23, 2015)

I'll add this, in case people are thinking I'm getting my knickers in a twist because I don't like paying for things: I'm a paid lifetime member of Nexus, and just yesterday I donated to a non-nexus modder I like, who I've donated to in the past (not for Skyrim). I am happy to pay for services I like. I pay for a pro account at dA despite not using it much. I've bought reddit gold. 

This paid modding system from Valve is terrible for modding.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 23, 2015)

Vintage Paw said:


> There's long been a system in place on nexus where you can donate to mod authors if you like their stuff. That ex-Sim City guy who's creating content for Skylines - he has a patreon set up. There's no shortage of ways in which people can donate to mod authors they consider worth it.
> 
> The main worry is how will monetising this change modding? The point of modding was that people who loved the game created fresh content for it because they loved it, because they wanted to extend their experience, because they wanted to practice their skills, because they wanted to show off their skills. Certainly with Bethesda games, they wouldn't have the longevity they have without the huge modding community. Already people are taking their mods down from nexus and putting them up on Steam for payment. Well-loved, well-established mods. What does the future look like, for the _spirit_ of modding if nothing else? A modding community is at its best when people work together to help each other out, to work out and fix problems, to come up with new ideas, to collaborate. When there's a feeling of "we're all in it together." This takes a sledgehammer to that. Every modder for herself.
> 
> ...


Patreon is crap. It's only useful in situations where there just aren't individual products involved, and people want to support a creator because they think they're great. It works really badly then too; when a structure for micropayments for content exists and is workable, that's way better, and everyone uses it.

People create mods because they like the game and they want to. There is nothing stopping them for doing that for free now. They might also be given some motivation that pushes them over the edge to do things by the idea of making some cash. And these are not insignificant amounts of effort—the best mods, you'd have to pay tens or hundreds of K to have produced.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Apr 23, 2015)

All those articles you see about the amazing state people get the Skyrim into? That's not just one or two mods. It's upwards of 200. NMM (Nexus Mod Manager) can comfortably handle up to 255 mods before it might start throwing out exceptions. Then you've got your texture replacers, which you're probably installing manually. My mods folder for Skyrim is 60GB. I'm not an outlier. This is the modding community. Not the majority who pick up a few here and there. The ones who go all out are the ones who continue to "drive innovation" (I can't believe I just typed that), who give their ideas to modders, who test for modders, who advertise for modders, who create excitement for a game years after its release by showcasing a gallery of stunning pictures from the game.

If modders move wholesale over to this monetised system (which won't stay with Steam - they've just opened the floodgates), imagine how much a committed player would have to spend to fully mod their game?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 23, 2015)

Rutita1 said:


> I immediately thought of the poster Valve and wondered just how far 'monetising one's assets' could go..


Snap


----------



## Vintage Paw (Apr 23, 2015)

"The free market drives innovation."

HAHAHA.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Apr 24, 2015)

I see no way this will end well


----------



## treelover (Apr 24, 2015)

This is awful news, modding and using mods is one of the great joys of pc gaming, the floodgates will open now, uplay, origin, etc, time to re download and save all my mods.


----------



## elbows (Apr 24, 2015)

The revenue share percentages are a disgrace. I'm undecided about the other implications.


----------



## Citizen66 (Apr 24, 2015)

The problem with charging for it is a lot of mods can become broken when devs release dlc. Will they be able to guarantee continued support?


----------



## treelover (Apr 24, 2015)

2.50 for the game, then 2.00 for a sword, lol.


----------



## Silva (Apr 24, 2015)

As someone who used to make mods for FIFA 2001/2002 for the fun (well, making kits, boots and balls were the most fun one would have with the game anyway  ), yeah, I don't see anything wrong with giving the creators something back.
I do see it in making it mandatory if the developer thinks so, particularly when Valve/Beth are taking most of the cut. Next step will be to release games with half-baked features, with an "unofficial mod" (by someone on the developing team) to fix issues for 99p.

Because I remember, some...  8 years ago, when paid DLCs started  to become more common, the fuckers in the industry promised they would use it to support continued development of the game, adding new features that missed the deadline etc, and would never cut material to release as DLC.  Cue in a couple of years later, and there are games where the DLC is a 30kb file to unlock data on disc.
Right now, on a lot of developers meeting rooms, I'm sure there's a new whiteboard with "stuff for paid mods" written on it.

Fuck them, and fuck Valve, if the payout rate is as ridiculous as the news are suggesting.


----------



## tiki (Apr 28, 2015)

Looks like Valve and Bethesda have changed their minds. Refunds to all who purchased. The backlash was real.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Apr 28, 2015)

Nice, first foray into monetising creativity even further repulsed. No doubt this was dreamt up in an attempt to keep games making money long past the days sales flatten out


----------



## Vintage Paw (Apr 28, 2015)

Artaxerxes said:


> Nice, first foray into monetising creativity even further repulsed. No doubt this was dreamt up in an attempt to keep games making money long past the days sales flatten out



Perhaps the fact it was Bethesda is what I (and many others) found so shocking. Their support for modding isn't exactly amazing, but they release things like the Creation Kit and GECK so modders can get stuck right into the inner workings without too much difficulty, and their engines aren't closed off like something like Frostbite (*spit*). There wouldn't be half the buzz around the Fallout and TES games if the Beth modding community wasn't so huge and involved. People are still modding Morrowind, and I know people would pay good money for Skywind, but such a huge, massive project like that was taken on without the promise of Steam revenue, so the argument that it'll help modders be attracted to modding is bullshit! It's one thing to say modders should have the opportunity to be paid for the things they make, but quite another to ignore the context in which that argument is being made -- including the state of the modding community already, how it contributes to the main game community, and who has most to gain from monetising this in the first place (Valve and Beth).

Well, I'm very glad they've dropped this. It'll be interesting to see what happens next. They've clearly not shelved the idea entirely, but they're going to have to be very canny and careful with whatever they come up with in its place because people are going to be watching them like hawks.


----------

