Publisher-Approved Paid Modding Policy

[Pickysaurus]

Over the past year several game developers have introduced varying paid modding schemes, including Bethesda's Verified Creators (Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starfield) and InZoi's Creations Marketplace. As a result, we've received a lot of requests for clarity on our paid modding stance and our paid modding rules from a number of our users. We are now updating our policies to reflect our official stance. 

 

After consulting with several mod authors in the community over the last few months, the issue was discussed at a high level within our team, and the following guidelines and actions were agreed upon. The full policy update also includes some clarifications around other paid modding. 

 

• Linking to paid mods: If the uploader has free content on Nexus Mods and would like to link to the place to purchase their paid content, we will allow it subject to the Advertising Limitations.
• Lite/Trial/Preview/Demo versions of paid mods: We will not allow free mods to be shared where they represent an inferior version of the mod with features stripped out to promote the purchase of the full version. 
• Patches for/Dependencies on Paid Mods: We allow patches that fix compatibility issues between your mod on Nexus Mods and a paid mod on an official provider as long as (1) the patch is included as part of your main mod file OR the patch is added as an "Optional file" on your mod page and (2) the paid mod is not a requirement of your mod to work. We do not allow patches for paid mods to be uploaded to "patch hub" mod pages or "standalone patch pages" on Nexus Mods. These should be uploaded to the paid modding provider's platform. For more information on this policy, please check this article.
• Collections requiring paid mods: Similar to mods, if any collections are not functional without the user purchasing paid mods, they will not be permitted. 
• Backlinks are required: If a mod author wants to link from their free content on Nexus Mods to their paid content, the paid content must include a link back to their Nexus Mods profile. 

 

Why have we chosen this policy?

We firmly believe that modding should be a pursuit of passion first and foremost, with financial compensation being a nice bonus but not the main driver of creating content. Our mission is to "Make Modding Easy" and we strongly believe that paid modding is in direct conflict with that goal. Modding games is already a complicated process and forcing users to navigate a confusing split of free and paid mods to get their setup working does not represent an easy, accessible and positive modding community. 

 

In the vast majority of cases, direct monetisation of mod content violates the EULAs that players agree to when playing games or using modding tools. This means that paid modding can result in legal issues not only for the modder charging for their work but also for any platform facilitating that behaviour. 

 

We are committed to building a positive modding community where all content is freely available.

 

However, we understand some community members do not share this view and would like to take advantage of these schemes to directly earn money for content they create rather than relying on donations and Mod Rewards. Previously this was only possible when a modder decided to make and sell their own game, but with these approved programs it is now attainable to release mod content commercially in a legal and more legitimate way. 

 

As an example, several of the mod authors involved in the Verified Creators program with Bethesda are long-time members of this community who have released great content for free over the years and provided positive interactions with users of their mods. We feel that these users should be allowed to acknowledge their paid work as long as it isn't to the detriment of the free modding ecosystem and community. 

 

We are, of course, aware that there will almost certainly be bad actors who have no interest in the free modding ecosystem and just want to use it to advertise their paid mods. To that end, we will be monitoring how this affects the community and may revise this policy again if it becomes a problem. We hope that any egregious cases will be reported and handled by our team without spoiling it for others. 

 

In terms of existing content, we'll be combing through any content that may be incompatible with these new rules and will be contacting the authors of the content if there are changes that can be made to bring it back in line with the rules. You can help us by using the "Report Abuse" button on mod pages or profiles that you feel are not aligned with the guidelines so our moderators can review them. This process may take some time as when we update our rules we feel it's fairest to take a softer approach to any existing content that may now break the rules. 
 

Edited October 31 by Pickysaurus
Updated the patches point based on feedback

[SCARaw]

Bethesdrons want to piggyback of their establish nexus reputation with paid mods

i hope backlinks are worth it, if my predictions are correct nexus should be way more attractive for bethesda loyal cashcows than bethesda market is for nexus users

as for inZOI  it feels like AI generated website to push the point...i can not see any content there at all

i wonder who registered domain

in anyways im glad you are not just bending backwards to few greedy modders, Nexus can provide better experience for the users and creators

and im sick of seeing people selling away they creativity to corporate mods

 

[NovaFinch]

39 minutes ago, Pickysaurus said:

• Patches for/Dependencies on Paid Mods: We will not allow any patches or addons for user-generated content that requires payment to unlock (this specifically excludes DLCs offered by the developer - including DLCs that bundle items previously sold individually such as Skyrim's Anniversary Upgrade). Equally, if a mod uploaded to the site requires a paid mod to function, it will not be permitted.

I get everything else, don't want Nexus to be filled with 'free trials' or any of that nonsense but this part doesn't make sense to me. Not allowing patches only hurts users who have already purchased content and want to use it with overhauls or have it available in their own language. No one in their right mind would look at this rule and think it was anything but a net negative.

[moonracer]

I would also like clarification on "patches for paid mods" For Bethesda games, does this include anything from Creation Club? Because most of that content is 3rd party and not directly created by Bethesda (even before Starfield).

I've got a ton of Creation Club patches up on the Nexus. Does this mean I need to take them down now?

[showler]

Sounds like patches for all the Creation CLUB content released prior to the new Verified Creators program is okay, but patches for things like Bards College Expansion or East Empire Company will be removed.

[showler]

While I'd assume most patches for Creations could be moved to Bethesda.net, I wonder about permission issues if you have a conflict resolution patch for a mod that is specifically not allowed on Bethesda.net?

[moddingyak]

I’m pretty much in favor this entire thing but no patches seems like a big headache. I think a lot of users, myself included use Creations for any VCs we want in our load order and look to Nexus for the rest. I feel like this is going to make it tricky to find patches and get them loaded into your mod manager. In other words it’ll make modding harder, not easier.

[FishFiend]

I generally agree with most choices made by the nexus but not allowing patches or dependencies is disapointing and going to make large modlists harder than they need to be... 

I hope this decision can be reconsidered.

 

[DarkSpiral]

I'll add my two cents to the hat.  The majority of this I can agree with, no problem, but it sounds like you intend to remove patch hubs for, say, East Empire Expansion, and I see that causing a lot of frustration to have that yanked away.

[Gaztec]

To iterate on questions already asked... By "Collections requiring Paid Mods" do you mean I can still support them so long as I mark them as Optional in my collections? Or just not at all? As it stands the UX for Optional mods in Collections isn't great and it's often easier to just clone and make a whole second collection, if enough mods have changed to warrant a new patch at the bottom.

The further rules in the Advertising Policy are also very strange to me. For instance: "Do not link to external sites/communities where monetisation of mods or modding-related assistance is discussed. This includes both direct links (e.g. Patreon) and indirect links (e.g. a Discord server promoting paid content on Patreon)"

Does that imply that I cannot have a conversation in my own discord about my thoughts on paid modding, if I link my discord on my mod pages, since it's the best place to get timely support? As it stands, many of these rules smell like "Whoever reports first wins."