Publisher-Approved Paid Modding Policy

[showler]

1 minute ago, jwisser said:

Would you mind parking this argument or taking it to DMs, please? Your constant back-and-forth is distracting from the main topic at hand.

You know what?  Fair enough.  Consider this argument ended.,

[elpuertorro]

11 minutes ago, showler said:

Okay, seriously, why would you highlight the stuff in the first image?  That's literally about technical differences between Creation Club and Creations.  They modified the game so that they don't need to release game update in order to release Creations and they don't guarantee language localizations for Creations.  That has nothing to do with ANYTHING that's being discussed.

And the second image is, once again, only relevant for the paid Creation itself not for patches for that Creation.

Ok not trolling here but i have to ask, you do know what they mean by self contained with no dependencies right?, if is to fix, alter the mod itself, no problem.
But one can not create patches for it to work with other mods unless 2 things
1. The author of the other mod is contracted under the program or
2.You have explicit permission from them to use it, but then you have to wait to see if they approve it, as the other mod also has to be inline with the TOS, so for example if they make a really cool armor, a patch for Bodyslide wouldn't be possible.
And again, this is about the PAID, not the free mods as the free mods are not in danger of anything.
no where did nexus mention about banning or not allowing FREE mods or patches for FREE mods:
 

Quote

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. 

No mention what so ever about FREE mods or patches for free mods, but some how people want to put them in there for one reason or another which i do not understand as it's clear as day in the OP that is rules for PAID content.

[UWShocks]

7 hours ago, Pickysaurus said:

Creation Club vs Verified Creators Clarification

Based on your initial feedback regarding this policy we've taken a quick dive into the Creation Club vs Verified Creator distinction for Skyrim/Fallout 4/Starfield and spoken with Bethesda to confirm the difference. 

We consider Creation Club content as "official content" in line with Bethesda's stance and therefore will treat it like DLC. This also extends to any Creations published by the official Bethesda Game Studios account on their website. You can view the list of mods for Skyrim and Starfield here.

Any other Verified Creator content is considered unofficial and this policy therefore applies to it.

HORRIBLE HORRIBLE HORRIBLE !

Why can't I make patches for MY NEXUS MODS to be compatible with the official Bethesda sponsored community Creations ? ....... why can't I host patches for my Nexus mods on the Nexus ?

If you're worried about DP abuse, then disallow DP for such patches. Better yet, get rid of DP all together. DP has only led to more community toxicity and division.  Nexus is a for profit site making money off of freely donated creations anyways; these decisions are mostly about the bottom line, I don't buy the narrative it's done for the goodness of the community. 

Patches to enable compatibility between Nexus mods and Creations should be allowed.  Please reconsider your proposed change. 

[Kant3n]

22 minutes ago, elpuertorro said:

Hmm I guess I just put that fake site together right now just to post this huh?

You have argued literally none of these points you're highlighting. You ranted about "splits" for a while and then posted a URL without citing any of it in the context of what you claimed.

[Kant3n]

11 minutes ago, elpuertorro said:

No mention what so ever about FREE mods or patches for free mods, but some how people want to put them in there for one reason or another which i do not understand as it's clear as day in the OP that is rules for PAID content.

No, but someone who uploads their own mod that includes in the FOMOD an optional compatibility patch for East Empire Expansion will have their upload taken down.

[cyan49]

8 minutes ago, elpuertorro said:

Ok not trolling here but i have to ask, you do know what they mean by self contained with no dependencies right?, if is to fix, alter the mod itself, no problem.
But one can not create patches for it to work with other mods unless 2 things
1. The author of the other mod is contracted under the program or
2.You have explicit permission from them to use it, but then you have to wait to see if they approve it, as the other mod also has to be inline with the TOS, so for example if they make a really cool armor, a patch for Bodyslide wouldn't be possible.
And again, this is about the PAID, not the free mods as the free mods are not in danger of anything.
no where did nexus mention about banning or not allowing FREE mods or patches for FREE mods:
 

No mention what so ever about FREE mods or patches for free mods, but some how people want to put them in there for one reason or another which i do not understand as it's clear as day in the OP that is rules for PAID content.

Honestly I already missed your point, but does this old quote help you? Cartogriffi said this on Discord:

Q:
Did we ever get an answer as to whether perms are granted for patching paid mods?
A:
The rules for free community creations are the same for everyone, whether they're Verified or not. So, it's not something we went out of our way to clarify.
But yes, generally speaking Verified Creators can release free content that requires/modifies their paid content. Or approve such releases by others. There are potentially edge cases where things get complicated, but nothing comes to mind.

If you want to see for yourself, copy and paste the context into the search bar on the Bethesda Game Studios Discord.

[elpuertorro]

2 minutes ago, Kant3n said:

You have argued literally none of these points you're highlighting. You ranted about "splits" for a while and then posted a URL without citing any of it.

Yes that is half true as I'm against the paid mods, but you are not paying attention, i have been talking about both points, you are not the only one I'm replying to, so maybe you missed a few post

[Ledouie]

Speak with your wallet, people. Make your voices heard. I'm not a fan of verified creations but if users want to defend them and allow patches to be hosted on nexus mods, I hope they'll fight with more than words. (not that words can't change things)

[samuelgensler]

1 hour ago, FrumpyBadger said:

Assuming this is actually the case (which I have no reason to doubt) it would have cost Nexus leadership absolutely nothing to make it clear as such in this very statement. The fact that they haven't and have chosen to position it as being the most "consumer friendly" option, while in the same breath painting modders who participate in programs whereby they receive compensation for their work as crossing some kind of 'picket line', raises an eyebrow.

Also something I was wondering. If it was Bethesda/Microsoft themselves breathing down their necks to force it, the anger could be redirected elsewhere, but it comes off as Nexus trying to make decisions for the users without consulting them. And yes, they absolutely should be consulting the traffic of their site about potential construction zones. 

Because that hasn't been said, despite ample opportunity to do so, my conclusion has to be that this is simply a decision by Nexus to try and discourage people from buying paid mods and enacting sabotage on the handful of really nice things by VC. And yeah, god forbid someone makes money off their hobby. 

I love the voluntary element of the community, and the idea that a bunch of people can come together to make something as good as an official release (Beyond Skyrim, looking at you!) but I'm not going to demonize someone who wants to earn a buck doing it in the only life they'll ever live. 

[Sable17]

On the topic, I would like to ask if mods for other "controversial" content is going to be deemed untouchable? Games with microtransactions? GTA V has made around half a billion last I checked. Games with a ludicrous money investment for the complete game+DLC (Looking at you, Sims 4)? Games that the community feels cheated by? (No Man's Sky comes to mind, though I hear it's better now.)

Or is it just content made by the community that's no-go, and corporate made stuff is A-OK?