bullpcp

In response to post #24997179. #24997739, #25000969, #25001074, #25002429, #25002999, #25003089, #25006504, #25010279 are all replies on the same post. retnav98 I'm actually asking to cite specific examples with actual evidence to back up what you are saying. Instead you are repeatedly ASSERTING without a shred of evidence or data to back up your ASSERTIONS. I actually want to verify that what you are writing is correct to come to my own conclusions without relying upon some random people on the internet words for it. I want to come to the most logically conclusion based upon the most substantial evidence. If I am wrong I want to know exactly what and why. How are you so comfortable simply accepting people's word for it? You seem incredibly at ease accepting what you want to be true without any evidence but don't even acknowledge dozens of citations directly contradicting your previous beliefs. You simply move onto the next assertion like nothing happened. Please cite the source of the 8.8 million PC sales estimate. I have cited at least two complete sets of data for all three platform sales that indicate PC units sales are a minority. You assert that 8.8 million is sales is reasonable and that this number comes from a variety of sources than this should be really easy... cite one. You keep ASSERTING that the percentage of sales on each platform were the same two days after release again... citation needed. Were people have actually cited their sources they have often been misinterpreted or just plain wrong. Please indicate were all of these reports are and how they were confirmed. Please indicate why Valves reasons are obviously wrong. I've had my account frozen several times in the last few years. I'm assuming the reasons they gave me were prima facie true but... maybe conspiracy... maybe reasons... I have repeatedly pointed out how very poor the paid for mod execution was. You pointing out problems that occurred within 5 days of rolling out a new and untested product is hardly reason to believe it COULD not work. If what you write is correct about no one buying paid for mods then paid for mods would have naturally become irrelevant anyway. Peace. :)

In response to post #25007544. Much respect... but that was kinda... harsh. Peace. :)

In response to post #24965229. #24965294, #24965344, #24967219, #24968809, #24969484, #24976929, #25001309, #25006569 are all replies on the same post. RoboJasonMan "I'm going to throw some alternative statistical estimates out there... Based on news articles published in January 2014, Bethesda passed the 20 million unit milestone for sales on all platforms. http://gamerant.com/skyrim-sells-20-million/" The above article cites the below article for the Skyrim statistic. Jan. 27, 2014 http://time.com/1875/at-20-million-copies-sold-skyrim-is-in-the-top-20-bestselling-games-of-all-time/ Which cites the original at January 23, 2014 on http://www.bethblog.com/2014/01/23/the-elder-scrolls-online-voice-cast-revealed/ "Unfortunately, the 14% estimate for PC sales comes from statistical estimates from within the first few days of launch." It is research dated April 12th, 2015. Statistic Verification Source: Bethesda Game Studios, Steam, Zenimax Research Date: April 12th, 2015 "Since Valve doesn't publicly release their number of sales for games, we have to estimate it." The source for the above data is reported to be Bethesda, Steam, and Zenimax. Let me reiterate that one of the sources of data was STEAM. "Using web crawlers, the following estimated in April 2014 that Skyrim sold 5.94 million copies on PC: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/15/introducing-steam-gauge-ars-reveals-steams-most-popular-games/ Since the two figures were taken near the same time and since this was only a year ago, this seems like a reasonable current estimate. Doing some math, we get that PC sales account for 30% of Skyrim sales, not 14%. Assuming that http://www.statisticbrain.com/skyrim-the-elder-scrolls-v-statistics/" is correct on Skyrim's total sales, we would then estimate that there are about 7 million PC sales. Since Skyrim HD alone has about 7.4 million unique downloads, it's reasonable to believe that almost all PC users are mod users." Given that one of the sources of the original 14% statistics researched on April 15, 205 was Steam you would have to come to the conclusion that Steam somehow doesn't know how many units of Skyrim they have sold. Seems unlikely. Depending upon how they programmed the web crawler they could have counted Skyrim related files incorrectly as the Skyrim game. I don't know how accurate they are. I do know that they are journalists and don't pretend to be otherwise. If they are correct then the total PC sales are much higher than 5.7 million as this only counts those sold through Valve. In this case the total PC users is much higher than 30%... and would contradict all other sets of data I have been able to find by a HUGE margin. My point is that either every other source of data on PC units sold for the last few years, including both Bethesda and Steam, or perhaps total sales as well, are way off OR Ars estimate is. I suspect I know which option you will chose but as for me I’ll follow the data and Occam's razor. What I do know is that it is statistically invalid to use stats derived from different data sets and piecemeal cobble them together. It is invalid to say that I will use a total of PC units sold from one source, ars, and ignore the PC units sold from another source, statbrain, while still using the total from the other source, statbrain. If statbrains data set and statistical analysis says that only 14% of units sold were on the PC and the total units sold was 23,270,000 then 14% of 23,270,000 or 3,257,800 even if it is wrong. It is not valid to pick the highest percent estimate of PC sales from one data set and ignore it's totals and then combine it with the highest total sales from another data set while ignoring it’s PC estimates. Peace. :)

In response to post #24965229. #24965294, #24965344, #24967219, #24968809, #24969484, #24976929, #25001309 are all replies on the same post. aegiltheugly "Can I wave my hand at you and say "these are the statistics you're looking for"? No, my mind is way too strong for that. Can I make a completely transparent sophistic plea to your ego and have you believe whatever you "feel" to be correct? Peace. :)

In response to post #24997179. #24997739, #25000969, #25001074, #25002429, #25002999, #25003089 are all replies on the same post. retnav98 Please indicate where and how Bethesda and Valve related "LIES and misinformation". I'm honestly interested in the who, what, and were of such misinformation but have yet to read a credible citation. How does a refund penalize the USER? By "response" are you referring to the refund because yes a refund would help a mod user and no that would not be hurtful to modders. Bad mods get downloaded for free everyday if you give back the mod users right back were they started. Could mod users abuse the system... maybe but systems evolve... when given the chance. For instance Valve was going to limit refunds. What statistics were they relating were not valid? Hanlon's razor "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."~Robert A. Heinlein'

In response to post #25000784. #25002679, #25002729 are all replies on the same post. Please indicate where "In June 2013, Bethesda announced that over 20 million copies of the game had been sold." I found over half a dozen articles referencing the 20 million, the earliest released on Jan January 23, 2014 by Bethesda not June 2013. Please indicate where official statistics from 2013 - 2014 and 2015 match. I can't find Skyrim data at different times that give the same numbers. Please indicate where I can find such data. Articles referencing 20 million Skyrim units sold. January 23, 2014 Skyrim earned hundreds of ‘Game of the Year’ awards and sold over 20 million copies. Posted on Thursday, January 23, 2014 by Jessica Finster http://www.bethblog.com/2014/01/23/the-elder-scrolls-online-voice-cast-revealed/ Jan. 27, 2014 http://time.com/1875/at-20-million-copies-sold-skyrim-is-in-the-top-20-bestselling-games-of-all-time/ References the above artical. http://gamerant.com/skyrim-sells-20-million/ MON 27 JAN 2014 http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-01-27-skyrim-has-sold-over-20-million-copies Monday, 27 January 2014 21:31 GMT http://www.vg247.com/2014/01/27/skyrim-has-sold-over-20-million-units-bethesda-announces/ January 27, 2014 http://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-sells-20-million-copies/1100-6417363/ JANUARY 28, 2014 http://www.technobuffalo.com/2014/01/28/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-has-sold-over-20-million-copies/ Peace. :)

In response to post #25003024. Dark0ne stated explicitly that he will never charge for mods. Regardless of paid for mods the Nexus would never charge. If you would never pay for mods... you aren't even a potential customer. How would you be relevant to those proposing to sell or those proposing to purchase?

In response to post #24997179. #24997739, #25000969, #25001074, #25002429 are all replies on the same post. "First, it never was the % that was the problem, so your entire argument is invalid." For many this is exactly what they mentioned in their arguments so it may be irrelevant for you but several hundred posts would indicate others hold a different view on this. "Second, there are a few of us, a very few of us, who do not rely on Bethesda for anything. We create our own content and can use third party programs to implement them. This invalidates them as a source for anything." If you are referring to things produced that have nothing to do with Skyrim or Bethesda obvious statements are obvious. If you are referring to mods, or anything else, that runs on Skyrim's engine, but created not using their creation kit. Then you are still using their IP. You do realize making something to run on another game engine... kinda uses their IP. "I could be releasing my content for other games if Skyrim didn't exist. There are plenty of them." Uh... Yea. Did someone tell you that if you made something that had nothing to do with Skryim or Bethesda you couldn't distribute it? Yea that would be obviously wrong. "Third, the modders who jumped on the "pay me pay me" bandwagon did not create their own content whatsoever. Everything uploaded for sale was either Bethesda assets, ported from another game legally, or ported from elsewhere illegally." So if what you stated is correct than many mods that Bethesda already technically owned were being allowed to be sold for profit by people who did not own them. I don't know that anyone actually ever advocated for the allowing stolen IP to be sold. "Modding will never improve due to money. This recent fiasco proved that the exact opposite happens. The mods being spammed up for sale were garbage, plain and simple." The garbage mods that were being spammed up for sale were not selling and would not have sold. The mods that would have sold may have been different. Since it was never given a chance we will never know. You are arguing a hypothetical... we all are. "Fourth, just because you are crying about the great victory for all of us, doesn't mean it wasn't a victory. I don't know... maybe your mom will bake you some cookies." I don't agree that is was a victory. I wasn't involved in any conflict so I feel no need to cry. You mad bro... need a hug? Maybe you can eat my moms cookies... jealous? Don't choke on the Haterade. You do realize I actually benefit from this outcome. I don't want to pay for mods. I just feel that I should be able to look beyond my own self interest and propose a solution that is fair even if it disadvantages me.

In response to post #25000784. #25002679 is also a reply to the same post. You should have checked the PC section of the same site. Platform Playstation 3 6.09m 33.51678591% Xbox 360 8.38m 46.11997799% Microsoft Windows 3.7m 20.3632361% total 18.17m http://www.vgchartz.com/game/49113/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim/ http://www.vgchartz.com/game/49112/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim/ http://www.vgchartz.com/game/49111/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim/ This is older data, 21st Mar 2015, that seems to indicate, if accurate, that the percent of PC sells has dropped over time if compared to newer data, April 12th, 2015. This doesn't seem to contradict but corroborate the previous data. http://www.statisticbrain.com/skyrim-the-elder-scrolls-v-statistics/

In response to post #24997179. #24997739, #25000969, #25001074 are all replies on the same post. retnav98 I personally think 25% was terrible I probably wouldn't work for that low of a percentage. I just don't think I should have any say in what another human being considers reasonable or unreasonable. I'm unsure why you think them not being held liable is an issue. Whether they pay a percent or a set amount the distributor wouldn't be held liable regardless. Person A: I got a job for 25,000/year doing the same thing I used to get 0/year. Person B: They should pay you 100,000/year Person A: No I'm good with the 25,000/year, thank you. Person B: They shouldn't be allowed to pay you that little. Person A: Please stop trying to help. I'm good with the 25,000/year. Person B: No you should work for 100,000 or zero. Person A: Please stop trying to help me. I'm really good with the 25,000/year.

In response to post #24997179. People were essentially opposed to other consenting adults voluntarily interacting n a manner that they didn't agree with. 25% is actually much higher as a percentage return than many creators are able to get in many industries. I know that for instance authors often only get 5% for their works and that if you make the financial comparison the return on assets is often only around 8%. Of course the only relevant opinions on the matter of just compensation and cost are between those selling and those purchasing goods and services.

In response to post #24970084. If the relative percentages of platform sales numbers haven't changed significantly that would certainly be interesting. I would like to look at the numbers given in June of 2013. Please give me a link to a comparable source. The statistics given don't indicate that they haven't sold a single game since June 2013. They have currently sold over 23 million units of the game on all platforms. Please indicate were Bethesda indicated that it sold 23,270,000 units in June 2013. Germany and other European markets are known to be more PC intensive. I'm unsure what the next few percentages you cite are in reference to only that they do not add up to 100%. The stats do not indicate everything has remained the same. You would have to compare them to statistics from a previous periods of time. They are indicating the percentages of sales on different platforms. It would be interesting if they remained close to the same but that wouldn't actually be in any way contradictory or statistically impossible. Heck it might not even be that improbable. All the percentage sales numbers are saying is that relative percentage sales on different platforms. If they didn't change this would mean that continuous relative sales on all platforms have remained relatively steady over time. I'm not implying the stats are correct only that there exists little reason to think that they are "impossible". A better question would be why would the relative sales on all platforms differ significantly over time given that Skyrim was released simultaneously on all platforms. You do realize Bethesda is a publicly traded company and that them presenting fraudulent numbers to the public could very well be incredibly illegal. I'm not writing that they couldn't do it only that it would be highly illegal. I'm not believing anything because "I want to". I'm believing it because all available evidence suggest that it is so. I believe it because I currently have no rational reason to believe otherwise. Intellectual integrity is believing the exact opposite of how you "feel" when the data demands it, because feelings are irrelevant to reality, this obviously includes my feelings. I would love to live in a world were PC sales were dominant and mods were imperative to the success of Skyrim... but my "feels" are irrelevant. The better question would be why are you so very certain that the statistics are inaccurate given not contradictory evidence? Why do you believe so strongly that Bethesda is lying? Why do you seem so emotionally invested in coming to a different conclusion than the available data would warrant?

In response to post #24949999. #24951589, #24955079, #24955234, #24964064, #24964209, #24964824, #24965064, #24967959 are all replies on the same post. Azulyn Mods may very well be the key to many individuals enjoyment of the game but mods are certainly not the key for most considering only 8% of Skyrim players have ever used one. Mods are not the key to Skyrims commercial success. They definitely helped, but many in the modding community have overstated their importance to the success of Skyrim. I love mods, and have spent far more hours than I care to think about reading about them, but mods are just not the primary contributors to Skyrims financial success, regardless of my own personal feelings on the matter.

In response to post #24965229. #24965294, #24965344, #24967219 are all replies on the same post. Harbringe The sales stats come from the following website that cites Bethesda as their source. The stats were last updated April 12th, 2015. Skyrim Sales Statistics Data Skyrim units sold in the first 48 hours 3,500,000 Skyrim units sold in the first week release 7,000,000 Skyrim sales in the first week of release $450,000,000 Total Skyrim units sold 23,270,000 Total Skyrim sales revenue $1,390,000,000 Average user review rating 92 / 100 Highest number of concurrent players on Steam 320,000 Skryim Sales By Platform XBox 360 59 % Playstation 3 27 % PC 14 % Skyrim Load Times Average XBox load time 48 seconds Average Playstation 3 load time 34 seconds Skyrim Development Statistics Number of years it took to develope Skyrim 3.5 years Skryim development and marketing budget $85 Million Number of game developers employed 90 Number of actors employed for character voice overs 83 The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim is an action role-playing open world video game developed by Bethesda Game Studios and published by Bethesda Softworks. It is the fifth installment in The Elder Scrolls action role-playing video game series, following The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Skyrim was released on November 11, 2011 for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. http://www.statisticbrain.com/skyrim-the-elder-scrolls-v-statistics/ If you disagree with these statistics PLEASE indicate why you disagree with them and direct me to a more accurate source. If I'm wrong I want to know. People seem to be more willing to state their feelings on statistics rather than look up new statistics. We are on the internet.

In response to post #24966929. #24966984, #24967199 are all replies on the same post. Gastovski He did't step up for paid mods, end of discussion. Two can play at that game. Huzzah! Seriously though Dark0ne seems to have offended you by... disagreeing with you. Peace. :)

In response to post #24965229. #24965294 is also a reply to the same post. I'm a goober but how do you do that cool in response to post ### thing. I wanna play clean like that.

In response to post #24965229. #24965344 is also a reply to the same post. Despite all that, it’s still too small in our eyes. Only 8% of the Skyrim audience has ever used a mod. Less than 1% has ever made one. "http://www.bethblog.com/2015/04/27/why-were-trying-paid-skyrim-mods-on-steam/" It's obviously a bit of a PR piece but it is the closest we have to what Bethesda's reasoning was, outside of rampant speculation all over the internet.

In response to post #24942159. #24942244, #24942979, #24943319, #24944114, #24944129, #24944354, #24945849, #24950174, #24952229, #24964969 are all replies on the same post. retnav98 I've lost count of the number of times I've re installed Skyrim over the years, thinking I would have a chance to play it for once, so I'm unfortunately responsible for several of those downloads myself.

In response to post #24949999. #24951589, #24955079, #24955234, #24964064, #24964209, #24964824 are all replies on the same post. Tyerial12 Point out that mods aren't that important to the VAST majority of all users and you may as well have kicked puppies, eaten kittens, and stolen candy from babies. People value things differently. \ I personally LOVE mods but I have no illusions that they are somehow necessary for most people or the key to Skyrim's success. I would play Skryim without mods if I had to.

In response to post #24942159. #24942244, #24942979, #24943319, #24944114, #24944129, #24944354, #24945849, #24950174, #24952229 are all replies on the same post. Ghatto Bethesda the instigator of the system disagrees. It was one of the reasons they proposed the paid system to begin with.

In response to post #24949999. #24951589, #24955079, #24955234, #24964064, #24964209 are all replies on the same post. Vesuvius1745 I agree that I couldn't go back now. I did however start the game without mods, so did much of family, and friends. In our ignorance we were not just happy but ecstatic. I'm the one that went whole hog wild for mods and eventually got them involved. Some may be surprised how many PC users don't use mods. The Steam forums are full of threads devoted to this very topic. It's easy to forget that what this community has come to expect due to modding is not the norm.

In response to post #24954644. Much respect and kudos to you for contributing what you can in the best way you are able.

In response to post #24958844. "It's good to see this issue has reached the dissecting every sentence, you said/I said phase of the discussion." Good. "Always a sign that something beneficial is about to be accomplished." Point.

In response to post #24954969. #24957519 is also a reply to the same post. "Of course. I'm sorry I forgot it's your prerogative to make up complete nonsense and misrepresent what you copy/pasted just before just for the sake of having something to argue against." I laughed sooo very hard at this because this is EXACTLY how I view what YOU are doing. I was actually thinking you must be trolling me. I interpret what you are doing as pogo sticking from topic to topic without addressing anything I stated or admitting any fault or validity of any other viewpoint, while simultaneously strawmaning my arguments when you even bother to reference them, and using a plethora of weasel words in order to claim both up and down while claiming you are correct because I just don't understand. Skyrim's financial success is not currently dependent on modding given that only 14% of their sales are on PC, 8% of users have ever used mods, and I would ASSUME that an even smaller portion of the 8% would not have bought Skyrim without modding capability. I know that you disagree because reasons... because modding. (now that IS a strawman) I will not be reading or responding to anymore of your posts on this topic. Of course you probably feel I haven't even started responding. Have a good one. Peace. ;)

In response to post #24954969. Ohkay... lets try again. I stated "Trigger warning: This post is about perspective and relative importance. This may caused those with over-inflated senses of self importance to feel fear, anxiety, rage, or other negative emotions and lash out uncontrollably at those that have triggered them. I love mods and i know it is easy to lose perspective being part of a modding community but the reality is... the modding community is simply not that important to the success of Bethesda's games or their bottom line. According to Bethesda only about 8% of Skyrim players have ever used even a single mod and that less than 1% have ever created one. Given that the majority of those that have used mods would still have purchased and played Skyrim without mods this leaves well less than 4% of their sales in some way dependent on the modding community. For the fraction of the 8% of mod users against paid for mods, and would never pay for mods if available, you aren't even potential customers and aren't terribly relevant to Bethesda's business decisions. Bethesda decisions about paid for mods also have to take into account the other 92%+ of Skyrim players that have never used a mod and to the other fraction of 8% that that are potential customers of paid for mods. Together they comprise well over 92% of their customers. The VAST majority of Bethesda's customers are not part of the modding community. This community, both for and against paid for modding, is a very small minority of Skyrim players. Some here have completely lost perspective on their relative importance to the success of Bethesda. Some have claimed, against all evidence, that Bethesda's success is somehow dependent upon mods and modding in general. This does not empirically seem to be the case. Even if all who oppose paid for mods boycotted Bethesda they would see, at most, a few percent drop in sales of their game. A drop that may very well be more than made up for with increases in revenue from mods and those that may very well purchase their game due to the ease of use and easy availability of paid for mods." Then YOU responded with. "That's not how these things work, alas. Your fractions do not represent how buying decisions are made." You didn't define what "these things" were... alas. I never stated that the fraction represent how buying decisions are made. Your lack of specificity make it difficult to interpret what you mean and respond in a constructive manner. Please be aware that I ONLY mentioned Skyrim and the relative contributions of the 8% of mod users to Skyrim's units of sales and Bethesda's bottom line. Any mention of anything outside of these parameters and what I have specifically stated has NOTHING to do with any of my points even if it is super important. Do other things matter? Of course. But pogo sticking around like a madman does not make for constructive dialog. Please don't ASSUME but FEEL free to ASK and I will try to do the same. I feel no sense of obligation, and I don't expect you to, to respond to responses on assumed writings I never wrote, assumed ideas I don't hold, or assumed opinions I don't agree with. If I write "fire is hot" and you respond with the logical equivalent of "No it's not, water is wet." I will try to politely as possible point out that you aren't responding to anything I wrote and simply move on, and I would appreciate the same courtesy in return. "What matters is the anticipated value of a game vs. the price asked. As such, someone as much as considering the use of mods - whether they end up using one or not - will attribute a greater value to the game and as such be willing to pay more." I'm interpreting this to mean that those that use and value mods will value games that allow mods more than those that don't. I agree. I would ASSUME that those who specifically value the game for it's mods, and pay a premium for this feature, would probably use mods. There also exist individuals that purchased Skyrim without the intent of ever using mods, or that even have knowledge of mod existence, that later utilize mods. I am one of these individuals. I personally know of several other purchasers of this category. I can only speculate as to how much of the 8% of mod users never originally intended to use mods and therefore did not value the game at a premium because of Skyrim mods. The only way that this would be relevant to the 8% mod user statistic would be if there were more mod users that valued the game specifically for the mods but did't use mods than there were individuals that didn't value Skyrim for mods but did use them. "That also means they will buy earlier, when the price is still higher." I interpret this to mean that mod users disproportionately purchase Skyrim earlier and pay a premium. The implication would be that even though only 8% of Skyrim users use mods that they contribute disproportionately to the profit of the game as they pay a premium earlier in Skyrims release. If this assumption where true this would probably be correct. "Mods also contribute to the longevity of the game, postponing the end of the product life cycle. To get such an effect would normally involve COSTS for Bethesda. Thus, they profit from prolonged attractiveness of the game, at a time when it has long recovered the production costs, without having to invest further." I agree that mods contribute to the longevity of the game. You mention postponing the product life cycle from Bethesda's point of view they only care about the revenue phase of the product life cycle. If you are referring to how mods contribute to this continued revenue stream you are stating that mod users are purchasing Skryim latter in the productions cycle for less money. If modders contribute disproportionately to latter revenue streams they can not disproportionately also contribute to earlier revenue streams. These are mutually exclusive. There are one of three possibilities, early purchase, late purchase, or that mods users have the same time preference as normal Skyrim purchasers and don't contribute disproportionately to any time revenue stream. My ASSUMPTION is that the early adopters and the later adopters somewhat cancel out and that you are left with a marginal, if not statistically insignificant, difference in time preference for Skyrim mod users purchasing habits. "So, talking about a reduction in sales as a pure percentage is missing the point - a pure reduction in sales numbers says nothing about lost profits. A 4% loss in sales that manifests itself in week 1 has a much more serious effect on profits than an overall 4% loss that's distributed over the entire lifetime of a game." Missing what point? Since I never stated nor implied that unit sales throughout time had equal value, and that I don't believe that, I'm unsure of what point I'm missing. You could have stated that other factors would contribute to profit. And I would have agreed. You state that "a pure reduction in sales numbers says nothing about lost profits" this is a gross exaggeration. I agree that earlier more profitable sales contribute disproportionately to profit but again you stated that decreases in sales "say nothing". Surely you can admit what a gross exaggeration such a statement is. FCF1/(1+WACC)^1+...+FCFT/(1+WACC)^T for any value of FCF>0, over any reasonable range of values of T the values of FCF "say something" and sense FCF one of the primary factors in determining is unit sales, unit sales matter. Please note that at no time did I state that timing of FCF did not matter. I only stated that it would take an extremely different mod user time preference for the differences to be of significance. For instance all early purchasers or all late purchasers would be significant. "Lastly, I'm not sure what makes you believe that paid mods will have a greater ease of use. They will have the very same compatibility problems as every other mod out there. They are also far less easy to use than alternatives, with Steam caring little for load order and dependencies." This is were I explicitly state that I'm GUESSING or SPECULATING with the following in explicit reference to why paid mods would THEORETICALLY have greater ease of use. With fewer mods of higher quality it would behoove those who make them to make them compatible. This could also result in purposely incompatible mods but then again that would almost certainly be illegal. My ASSUMPTION would be that if millions of dollars were to be had with paid mods that the mod utilities would probably improve. I could be completely wrong as this is all pure speculation about mod compatibility. I have not stated nor implied anything outside of this very specific topic on paid for mods. "They will also have a mod creator behind them who has no idea about the legal obligations they are under, nor has the logistics at their disposal to meet them..." I clearly state that it is not a good idea to get into legally binding obligations without having a clear idea of what you are getting into. This applies to all parties involved including, mod creators, mod purchasers, Bethesda, and Valve both in the Untied States and Abroad. People should also be aware of support systems available to them. When you sell paid for mods you don't get to do it half way or partially. You are legally obligated and committed as soon as you sign the contract and money gets involved. If you are not sufficiently knowledgeable on contracts you should obtain legal council. Paid for mods would be for real and for serious. Having written all of that I'm only referring to individuals and legal entities doing their due diligence and the logistics at their disposal. I'm not referring to or somehow implying anything outside of this.