[Modding Bethesda Games on Game Pass - What we know so far]

Not sure why so many people are losing their minds here, tbh. 

 

Nothing about it being on game pass forces you to use it on game pass. 

 

Buy the game on Steam and mod to your heart's content. No big deal. They mentioned possible CONSOLE exclusivity, but nothing about restricting games on PC to the Microsoft Store was even hinted towards. 

 

If that ends up happening down the road, freak out and make your voices heard. But right now this is "old man ranting at clouds" level nonsense for the most part.

[Modding Bethesda Games on Game Pass - What we know so far]

In response to post #91967003. #91979463, #91980208, #92042283, #92067333, #92140103, #92149073, #92390813, #92576988, #92589523, #92591058 are all replies on the same post.

TXChannel34 wrote: This is the predictable end of gaming. The general rule for a successful business is to find something that makes money and scale it. This is just Microsoft scaling it. They know that something that is this popular and the bygone conclusion is that there will be enough subscribers that will stay with it, they don't care about the odd ones out. When I bought games from a brick and mortar store for my new alienware laptop was like seeing my kids born, only to find out when I installed them on my computer and then launched it, it said I had to get this "steam" thing to run the game I bought on the computer I paid for. this is nothing more than money grabbing as many have noted. I don't buy a bunch of games, I don't play a bunch of them, there are a few that I have and like, and if there is a game that comes out that looks cool I will buy it, and if I don't like it, I stop playing it. I paid the developers for the privilege of trying it out. If I like it, I buy more of their games, more of their DLCs, etc. I am not going to go on down this road, you all know what I mean. Games like Fortnite and the like, sure, make em subscription stuff. Games like Fallout, Skyrim, etc, they are for refined gamers, they aren't plug and play shoot em ups. If you've ever had a problem with windows, and tried their customer support for a fix, you already know what sort of an invironment we find ourselves in now. Only in the corporate mind would anyone be ok with being turned from a player into a payer and expect the customer to be happy about it.

If they were serious about their plan and keeping us happy, they'd offer us the ability to pay a small one time charge for a game, and subscriptions would be optional with an "in app purchase". I'm still fuming about having had bought a game and have to run it through the steam client. I believe that it causes a lot of the crashes that I experience in the game. I can be playing, the game crashes, won't start back up again unless I go to task manager and force quit the 13 steam apps running in the background. But that's a different thread. I spent the last week downloading a bunch of mods and dlc and working the bugs out, and am still not done to my satisfaction, but it;'s getting there. Heck, on the microsoft platform, all you get is the vanilla game and No DLCs, no popular mods, nada. Just the opportunity to pay Microsoft $50 per month for the privilege of playing the vanilla game using their game client which is required to play at all.

Saggaris wrote: Have a Kudos for your 'rant' TX

I and a good few 'older' others feel the similar about being corporately stuffed.

GamingZacharyC wrote: Hold on a minute there: As far as we know, most Bethesda titles will be on the MS Store, yes, but we don't even know if they'll be on Steam, like Skyrim.  Personally, I'd prefer Bethesda releases their titles on Steam instead of the Bethesda.net Launcher because, honestly, that's too much bloat for my system. Bethesda titles, in my experience, are buggy and unoptimized. I don't need a buggy and unoptimized launcher running in the background, taking nibbles at my potato rig. Steam is very well optimized and well cared for.

As for the taskkilling the Steam processes: That is the game's fault. Steam provides a bunch of APIs for a game developer to make use of. If a game crashes and the game process isn't entirely dead, Steam provides an option to force quit a game if it is being stubborn. Personally, I've never had problems with Steam, only the games published on the platform. If the game crashes a lot, that's a very nieve answer to just blame the retailer service. The launcher is almost never the problem with a retailer; The problem is almost always with the game itself.

To top it all off, Game Pass is an *optional* thing, and it is $15 a month (for Ultimate), not $50. You can outright buy a copy of the game if you wish, or you can rent it and a bunch of other games for $15 a month. Personally, I would go Game Pass, but buy my Bethesda titles on Steam.


If there's one good thing I can see coming out of the MS-Zenimax deal, I do believe that Bethesda games will get better in terms of performance and bugs.

Kel1978 wrote: most Bethesda games are already on steam.  Also you can mod just mine with games from the Microsoft store. You just need to take ownership of the folder.

EnaiSiaion wrote: If the consumer rewards Microsoft for this move, it means game ownership, mods and so on don't really matter in the grand scheme of things.

I used to care about owning games, too. Then I grew up. Adults don't have time to mess around with installing and managing games, they just want to hit a button and play.

This rant feels like a brick and mortar store owner trying to defend their business from online marketplaces. People will go where they want, and if they go somewhere else, you didn't have enough to offer in the first place.

I suspect most people could not care less about moddability, and by the next generation, the only games that can be modded are games that are designed as platforms for custom content, like Mario Maker and Trackmania, and only within the confines of their sandbox. People will like it because it eliminates much of the hassle (Skyrim mods are too clunky and unprofessional for the majority of users). And if their favourite game doesn't support mods, who cares? It will have DLC instead, and once the DLC runs out, play something else!

Saggaris wrote: You seem to be a bit mixed up there, have you noticed that here on Nexus there have been over four and a half billion mod downloads... so where are you getting the idea that most people don't care about moddability?
I personally feel that you are of the camp that doesn't care and are trying to convert the mod anointed.

I understand that priorities change as you age, but don't think for one moment it's about growing up, it's not, it's about choice and what you do with that choice, if you give that up willingly then you will never get it back as long as there is a buck to be made and a head to be patted... "Yes, clever boy, you've helped to make me a greater percentage on my investment, and it only costs the user... have a pat on the head"

HaltyRem wrote: @EnaiSiaion:
I do agree about existence of dendency toward declining of using mods in new games.
From my personal point of view the reasons are:
1) modern games are staying for much longer visually and gameplay-wise non-outdated, and less lacking of quality-of-life features, so the modern games need less fixes;
2) nowadays, there are very many games with different visual styles, roleplaying setting and options, gameplay modes, so there is less need for expanding with mods all of this in any particular ONE game;
3) it is much faster and easier to just use an additional game, which already has what is needed and is optimised for it;
4) those games, that provide extensive options to fine-tune almost everything in game, do not induce desire to mod it (OH WHY DEVELOPERS DO IT SO RARELY?!!!);
5) majority of the most profitable games are either multiplayer, or cooperative, and these types of games are much less moddable then singleplayer games.

Dravond wrote: Hey there is there a guide i can look at to use mods on ms store games?

Stiffon wrote: I think Saggaris got it right and you're both in the don't mod camp and think we should all join you. Wrong. I've spent days and weeks modding games like Skyrim and FO and still do. And I spend days playing them too - still. And I'm sure I will keep on modding in the future. I'm not new to gaming nor modding, but I definitely want the choice. Being an adult means having choice.

vapor78 wrote: I like how a few comments on here make back handed swipes at the mod community as a whole... comments like " *adults* dont have time.. blah blah" these remarks are specifically stated to be dimunitive towards folks who do mod.. cuz by that logic if you mod, you arent an adult..

the bethesda games have been kept alive BY modding, ppl wouldnt still be playing marrowind or oblivion if not for mods, as another user pointed out, there have been billions of mod downloads which trumps the amount of games even sold.
ppl mod... freedom of choice and customization is what brings mods to the forefront.
Modding wasnt always a mainstream thing either, it gained popularity and now some "users" whom werent modders to begin with want to tell us we dont need mods... if that was the case, then the mods never would have existed to begin with.
Adding options to customize a game is no where even close to modding a game, some people clearly dont know anything about the subject they have an opinion about..
Lastly.. if you dont want something, cool, dont use it, but wtf is it with people that feel if they dont need it then by default it means it shouldnt even exist?

showler wrote: I would be amused if you are including EnaiSiaion, author of more than a dozen popular Skyrim mods, as someone who is against modding.

You're jumping the gun pretty hardcore here, bud. There's no possible way Microsoft would switch to a subscription ONLY model for their games. There will always be the ability to just buy a copy. There is no incentive to Microsoft or Bethesda to prevent this. Hell, ensuring the Game Pass version is crappy for mods just incentives Game Pass owners to end up buying the game outright, which double dips profit for Microsoft, since they would get the Game Pass subscription on top of the full retail purchase. 

Also...not sure where the hell you're paying $50/month for Game Pass, but you should probably get your money back, since that's over 3x the actual price. Kinda undercuts your argument when you don't understand Game Pass in the first place.

Just my two cents.