Jump to content

Photo

The Video Game Industry's Monetisation of Mods discussion

monetising mods video game industry community opinion monetising practices

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#11
youg3

youg3

    Stranger

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

@FrankFamily thank you for clarifying the definition sources

 

Though you still haven't stated whether you see Bethesda's Creation Club as a means to select from the community, the creators they feel would bring the most benefit to the store (cherry-picking from the community) over that of a monesation of mods practice.  

 

 

@Striker879 and thank you!



#12
Shadowheart328

Shadowheart328

    Enthusiast

  • Premium Member
  • 200 posts

Though you still haven't stated whether you see Bethesda's Creation Club as a means to select from the community, the creators they feel would bring the most benefit to the store (cherry-picking from the community) over that of a monesation of mods practice.  

I don't get how picking members from the community to make content for them, is comparable to monetization of mods. The two are only related if you intrinsically believe DLC are mods, which we've already established per definition they aren't. Otherwise the Creation Club, is just the name of the system they have in place for contracting third parties to create content for them. It just so happens that members of the community can submit applications to become a part of that group. They are technically cherry-picking for the best people who can make content for them in the same way that employers cherry-pick for who they hire from a pool of applicants. However, I doubt they are going around cherry-picking nexus or bethesda.net profiles, maybe for the initial release of the Creation Club, but not now.



#13
HeyYou

HeyYou

    Resident poster

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,115 posts

 

Though you still haven't stated whether you see Bethesda's Creation Club as a means to select from the community, the creators they feel would bring the most benefit to the store (cherry-picking from the community) over that of a monesation of mods practice.  

I don't get how picking members from the community to make content for them, is comparable to monetization of mods. The two are only related if you intrinsically believe DLC are mods, which we've already established per definition they aren't. Otherwise the Creation Club, is just the name of the system they have in place for contracting third parties to create content for them. It just so happens that members of the community can submit applications to become a part of that group. They are technically cherry-picking for the best people who can make content for them in the same way that employers cherry-pick for who they hire from a pool of applicants. However, I doubt they are going around cherry-picking nexus or bethesda.net profiles, maybe for the initial release of the Creation Club, but not now.

 

The only difference between a 'mod', and a 'dlc', is who is providing it, apparently..... To me, 'dlc', is 'downloadable content', isn't that exactly what Nexus is providing as well?There are 'mods' here on nexus, that are as large, (if not larger) than some of the 'dlc' officially released by beth. Calling Pip-Boy skins "dlc" just seems wrong to me. That's just a mod. Sure, it's an 'official' mod, but, a mod none-the-less.

 

In all reality, I think folks get better support for mods they download here, than what beth calls 'support'.......

 

As I see it, beth provides 'official content', Nexus hosts 'unofficial content'. Both are modifications of the game. Both are downloadable content. Beth gets to charge for their content, and the folks that create it, are actually being paid to do so. Content hosted here has neither of those. (for the most part.... but that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish.... :smile: )

 

As for the whole 'monetization' thing, this is a previously untapped market. (by beth at least....) It is a revenue stream that has an initial cost, and then everything after that is pure profit. Beth is going to need the infrastructure for it in any event, so, might just as well have it generate some revenue as well. This was the whole idea behind beth moving from the old forums, to the new. Integration with their new revenue stream.

 

But then, this is Beths second attempt at paid mods. Their first attempt cost them nothing, required none of their infrastructure, and exactly zero effort on their part. They just said "yes", and then all they needed to do was sit back, and watch the money roll in. I suspect that would have been more profitable for Beth than the current incarnation, but, that's just a guess, I have no hard numbers to back it up. The only reason the first round didn't work, is because Valve chickened out. The Vocal minority got up in arms, and scared them. So, they pulled the plug. Which was unfortunate, as I think (and again, this is just my opinion) that the authors would have gotten a better deal on Paid Mods 1.0....


Edited by HeyYou, 03 July 2020 - 01:16 PM.


#14
FrankFamily

FrankFamily

    The Evil Blacksmith

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,906 posts

@FrankFamily thank you for clarifying the definition sources

 

Though you still haven't stated whether you see Bethesda's Creation Club as a means to select from the community, the creators they feel would bring the most benefit to the store (cherry-picking from the community) over that of a monesation of mods practice.  

 

It's a means to sell content. That they have cherry picked from a pool of people that are already familiar with your tools because they use them in their free time and therefore require close to zero training to produce content you can use is logical I guess. I don't see the relation of that to monetization of mods. 



#15
FrankFamily

FrankFamily

    The Evil Blacksmith

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,906 posts

 

The only difference between a 'mod', and a 'dlc', is who is providing it, apparently..... To me, 'dlc', is 'downloadable content', isn't that exactly what Nexus is providing as well?There are 'mods' here on nexus, that are as large, (if not larger) than some of the 'dlc' officially released by beth. Calling Pip-Boy skins "dlc" just seems wrong to me. That's just a mod. Sure, it's an 'official' mod, but, a mod none-the-less.

 

 

No, it is not. Because precisely the difference between a mod and a dlc, by every single definition I have ever seen, is who provides it, as you said at the begining. Or, in other words, if it's official or not. And that's the definition widely used and understood except in this niche of people which insist on calling CC mods. The size is not a factor, because it makes no sense for it to be. I would remind everyone again of CDPR's so called "Free DLC's" for TW3 which are quite tiny and which I haven't seen anyone have a problem with the naming. Interestingly sometimes their big DLCs are called "Expansion packs" instead to differentiate them which is perfecly fine. There's also Morrowind, which had some small "Plugins" and then the "Expansions" both official. The plugins were small, not called mods. And you could also look at massive mods which are still mods. Call the pip-boy skins microtransactions if it makes you more comfortable than calling them dlcs but calling them mods is just incorrect. Everyone calls the Atom Shop in FO76 microtransactions, again, not mods.

 

This has nothing to do with it being good or bad or worth the money or the official support being better than unofficial supports or with my or anyone's opinion of it. It's simply about using language that actually makes sense and is consistent and people understand what you are refering to. Calling them "mods" ignores fundamental differences for no reason because there's increadibly better terms for it, like "Small DLCs", there, no confusion whatsoever. Everyone is going to understand it as official content provided by the publisher that's smaller than what you'd expect as a "DLC", particulary a DLC from Bethesda, which you expect to be an "Expansion". Or if you want to add some negative connotation then go for "Microtransactions". Everyone is going to understand what it is.

 

If you call them mods they actually won't. If you call them mods you create a plethora of misunderstanding like I have personally seen in reddit on ridiculous amounts. Most people in this community don't have the slightest idea of what they are talking about when it comes to Creation Club. You get people describing Creation Club as if it was the so-called "paid mods 1.0", saying things like existing mods being put behing a paywall, or talking of the percentage the modder gets, asuming there's no involvement by Bethesda, and all sorts of misinformation being thrown about it, that all stems from the fact that people have been using inaccurate language to describe it. And so people that don't do any research at all before opening their big mouth are confused, get the wrong impression and continue the cycle of spreading misinformation.

 

Of course, and this is with my tin-foil hat on, perhaps the people who insist on callling it mods want precisely that, to have misinformed people that can be easily manipulated into thinking negatively about it to push their agenda of hatred. That would be pretty reprehensible, wouldn't it?


Edited by FrankFamily, 03 July 2020 - 02:03 PM.


#16
HeyYou

HeyYou

    Resident poster

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,115 posts

 

 

The only difference between a 'mod', and a 'dlc', is who is providing it, apparently..... To me, 'dlc', is 'downloadable content', isn't that exactly what Nexus is providing as well?There are 'mods' here on nexus, that are as large, (if not larger) than some of the 'dlc' officially released by beth. Calling Pip-Boy skins "dlc" just seems wrong to me. That's just a mod. Sure, it's an 'official' mod, but, a mod none-the-less.

 

 

No, it is not. Because precisely the difference between a mod and a dlc, by every single definition I have ever seen, is who provides it, as you said at the begining. Or, in other words, if it's official or not. And that's the definition widely used and understood except in this niche of people which insist on calling CC mods. The size is not a factor, because it makes no sense for it to be. I would remind everyone again of CDPR's so called "Free DLC's" for TW3 which are quite tiny and which I haven't seen anyone have a problem with the naming. Interestingly sometimes their big DLCs are called "Expansion packs" instead to differentiate them which is perfecly fine. There's also Morrowind, which had some small "Plugins" and then the "Expansions" both official. The plugins were small, not called mods. And you could also look at massive mods which are still mods. Call the pip-boy skins microtransactions if it makes you more comfortable than calling them dlcs but calling them mods is just incorrect. Everyone calls the Atom Shop in FO76 microtransactions, again, not mods.

 

This has nothing to do with it being good or bad or worth the money or the official support being better than unofficial supports or with my or anyone's opinion of it. It's simply about using language that actually makes sense and is consistent and people understand what you are refering to. Calling them "mods" ignores fundamental differences for no reason because there's increadibly better terms for it, like "Small DLCs", there, no confusion whatsoever. Everyone is going to understand it as official content provided by the publisher that's smaller than what you'd expect as a "DLC", particulary a DLC from Bethesda, which you expect to be an "Expansion". Or if you want to add some negative connotation then go for "Microtransactions". Everyone is going to understand what it is.

 

If you call them mods they actually won't. If you call them mods you create a plethora of misunderstanding like I have personally seen in reddit on ridiculous amounts. Most people in this community don't have the slightest idea of what they are talking about when it comes to Creation Club. You get people describing Creation Club as if it was the so-called "paid mods 1.0", saying things like existing mods being put behing a paywall, or talking of the percentage the modder gets, asuming there's no involvement by Bethesda, and all sorts of misinformation being thrown about it, that all stems from the fact that people have been using inaccurate language to describe it. And so people that don't do any research at all before opening their big mouth are confused, get the wrong impression and continue the cycle of spreading misinformation.

 

Of course, and this is with my tin-foil hat on, perhaps the people who insist on callling it mods want precisely that, to have misinformed people that can be easily manipulated into thinking negatively about it to push their agenda of hatred. That would be pretty reprehensible, wouldn't it?

 

Ok, color me confused.

 

I said: The only difference between a 'mod', and a 'dlc', is who is providing it, apparently.....

 

Then you said: No, it is not.

 

Immediately followed by: Because precisely the difference between a mod and a dlc, by every single definition I have ever seen, is who provides it,

 

 

So, aren't we agreeing here?????

 

So far as I know, there are NO hard and fast definitions for mods vs. dlc. There is what the community accepts, but, not even everyone can agree on that. Folks use the terms interchangeably. Are they wrong? Who decides.

 

The content beth releases, modifies the game. Therefore, they are mods. The content everyone else releases, modifies the game, therefore they are mods. You download the content from whatever source, therefore, it is ALL 'downloadable content'.

 

Beth likes to call their stuff "DLC", the non-paid authors, call their content "mods", you can get both mods, and dlc from beths site.

 

Am I intentional trying to confuse the issue? Nope. Do I 'hate' anything about it? Nope. Do I use anything from Beth's site? Nope.



#17
FrankFamily

FrankFamily

    The Evil Blacksmith

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,906 posts

I'm saying "no it's not" to the part I highlighted, i.e. "Sure, it's an 'official' mod, but, a mod none-the-less.", in which you indeed contradicted your first sentence, which I agree with, the difference is who publishes. Which makes Creation Club not mods. I don't think it's as simple as "something that modifies the game is a mod" or "if you download it it's a dlc", things have more complicated meaning than that. Because nobody calls official patches "mods" and nobody calls expansions like Far Harbour or Dawnguard "mods" and mods in the Nexus are not dlcs because you download them. It's about being consistent. And people absolutely do not use them interchangeably. Intentional or not, calling them "mods" does nothing but contribute to the confusion.


Edited by FrankFamily, 03 July 2020 - 04:27 PM.


#18
HeyYou

HeyYou

    Resident poster

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,115 posts

I'm saying "no it's not" to the part I highlighted, i.e. "Sure, it's an 'official' mod, but, a mod none-the-less.", in which you indeed contradicted your first sentence, which I agree with, the difference is who publishes. Which makes Creation Club not mods. I don't think it's as simple as "something that modifies the game is a mod" or "if you download it it's a dlc", things have more complicated meaning than that. Because nobody calls official patches "mods" and nobody calls expansions like Far Harbour or Dawnguard "mods" and mods in the Nexus are not dlcs because you download them. It's about being consistent. And people absolutely do not use them interchangeably. Intentional or not, calling them "mods" does nothing but contribute to the confusion.

I suppose it depends on how deeply you want to dig into the technicalities and semantics of the whole thing. :) But, in essence, I DO agree with you, "DLC" implies official content, "Mods" implies 'unofficial' content.



#19
Striker879

Striker879

    Resident poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,086 posts

 

I'm saying "no it's not" to the part I highlighted, i.e. "Sure, it's an 'official' mod, but, a mod none-the-less.", in which you indeed contradicted your first sentence, which I agree with, the difference is who publishes. Which makes Creation Club not mods. I don't think it's as simple as "something that modifies the game is a mod" or "if you download it it's a dlc", things have more complicated meaning than that. Because nobody calls official patches "mods" and nobody calls expansions like Far Harbour or Dawnguard "mods" and mods in the Nexus are not dlcs because you download them. It's about being consistent. And people absolutely do not use them interchangeably. Intentional or not, calling them "mods" does nothing but contribute to the confusion.

I suppose it depends on how deeply you want to dig into the technicalities and semantics of the whole thing. :smile: But, in essence, I DO agree with you, "DLC" implies official content, "Mods" implies 'unofficial' content.

 

 

Whew ... was worried there that perhaps my 162 mod load order was really only six (the six I've created myself ... the rest were all downloaded).

 

The odd thing for me is that it was "monetisation" that got me to release any of "my" mods publicly (my is in quotes because not all of the assets were created by me ... in fact my contribution is the most trivial part of the whole deal). When Nexus introduced the Donation Points system I saw a way for "Mr No Online Financial Transactions" (ya that'd be me) to find a way to pay for a premium membership. In truth it's turned out to be a lot longer drawn out affair than I at first anticipated (probably in the range of three years to get one month) but it has opened a new door for me (well maybe more of a window into the minds of other mod authors).

 

That aside (for I am after all an extreme outlier case) to me at it's root this push or movement towards mods being a paid for commodity is just a natural progression in the world of business. Show me one single richer than God guy at the top who says "No, no, I've got more than enough money ... please  spend your money somewhere else". For one, they never would have made it to the top with ideas like that even being anything except alien and incomprehensible. They are hardwired to always want more and are incapable of seeing that as anything except being better for the world.

 

In a way I believe that it is we modders (if I dare place myself in that same class) who are responsible for them getting the idea. Not a large leap to go from modders saying it's not right that the companies make money from games that modders extend the life of, to rich guys saying "Hey ... I can make more money from charging for mods ... I'll just call them something else so the dumb smucks with the few pennies left in their pockets are none the wiser". By wishing out loud for a piece of the pie we gave away the whole bakery.

 

Is that right? I guess yes if you ascribe to the notion that what is best for the rich guy must be best for the world. You can probably guess that I don't belong to that particular camp, but then again I did say I'm an outlier.






Page loaded in: 0.991 seconds