Publisher-Approved Paid Modding Policy

[Justascarypuppet]

The inclusion of restrictions on patches for Verified Creations is, at least in my opinion, completely nonsensical. I struggle to see any way in which in improves the user experience, provides a more fulfilling modding journey, or even adheres to the values mentioned in the initial post. Patches that provide compatibility/synergy between paid verified creations and free mods on Nexus or elsewhere aren't advertisements. Nor are they "detriment(s) of the free modding ecosystem and community." What they are are part of the storied and diverse passion project that is our modding community, which is being stifled by some, not all, but some of the changes being implemented here today. 

I sincerely hope the Nexus team will reconsider the restrictions of patches that depend on verified creations, though I wonder if the response to them will make a difference if they were already able to persuade themselves that such changes were beneficial to anyone in the first place.

[elpuertorro]

10 minutes ago, MadMonkey119 said:

Yeah, it really does feel like a targeted attack only against specific games and modders. If Bethesda wants to put out a $7 gun, you can upload mods for that, but if a fellow modder has a $2 gun, you aren't allowed to upload any mods for that. God forbid.

Also, what if you have a mod that works on its own, but has an optional patch to support a Premium mod? Will Nexus nuke your mod? Are you really not allowed to support specific mods with optional patches?

 

Please stop posting, you are confused by the source material you are citing. That is not applicable here and has nothing to do with free mods, patches, etc.

Exactly my point you guys are all getting twisted and trying inject the FREE mods in the convo when the OP is talking about PAID mods no where does he post about limiting the FREE content, unless you make  a free patch that depends or patches a mod you have to  pay money for as then it's no longer really free as you have to buy a mod to use the free patch.
Free patch for free content= no problem  /  Free patch that mainly depends on the PAID CONTENT mod= no go and rightfully so.

So simple, yet you guys don't get, it and it's your own native language.

[Djlegends]

2 minutes ago, Sable17 said:

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?

oh god I forgot about sim4  modding mess

[Roadhouse699]

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. 

This is essentially screwing over any author making content with verified creations and any user who has purchased a verified creation. I get that you don't want the Nexus to be a vector for advertisement, but at the very least, patch hubs - singular pages to contain all the patches for a paid mod - should be allowed.

 

Until then, this is a very upsetting decision that shows a general lack of consideration for both the creator and user base both on the Nexus and around gaming communities in general. 

[Chernobylite12]

1 minute ago, elpuertorro said:

.....Free patch for free content= no problem  /  Free patch that mainly depends on the PAID CONTENT mod= no go and rightfully so.......

But why does this distinction need to exist? What benefit does the community at large derive from patches for paid mods being disallowed? 

LOTD can't have a patch for BCE on their official patch page for....reasons....with this decision. that's a net loss for those of us who want to use both. 

[samuelgensler]

1 minute ago, Sable17 said:

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?

Also to this point, why is a line being drawn at controversial paid mods? Why not microtransactions? That it's specifically revolving around the sites biggest traffic drivers in Skyrim, Fallout 4, and now Starfield (though to a much lesser extent, sorry Starborn) makes it pretty obvious why it's being done, which is that either Bethesda directly got involved and Nexus is backing down or they're being controlling and want to make decisions for the community about the direction it goes in.

And if it was the former, they could just say that. No one would blame them if that were the case. That they haven't makes me question any future affirmation of it being the case, because leading with that would've resulted in effectively no controversy, and the anger could be rightly turned onto Bethesda for trying to be the controlling ones. I can't fathom that's the case, though, given how many blatantly stolen things there are from other IPs. 

If something like BCE isn't going to be supported by anything nexus related, what is? Is it even possible to release a mod that's so high quality the gates are lowered for it? That mod featured, to my knowledge, the first ever returning Skyrim voice cast member, and somehow that's not good enough quality to warrant someone potentially paying for it? What does a VC have to do to get past the judge, jury, and executioner? Add a fully voiced Akavir to the CC? Of course not, even that wouldn't be enough. 

If they're truly consumer friendly, and taking a consumer friendly approach, go shut down every site revolving around greed driven games like GTA V and Sims 4. Don't discriminate, stand up for us consumers, go stop modding of games that take advantage of their players. Or, get out of the way, and allow us to make our own decisions about what mods have high enough quality to be worthy of money. We should be the judge, jury, and executioner of VC content. That content getting support in the form of compatibility patches and downloads, or being ignored, should be up to us. 

[rebelgender]

Honsetly... Stuff like this makes me really hate being on this website.
as someone who makes mods its kind of sicking seeing all the labour of moders,artist and actors just be thrown for what becuas of the whims of a leadership of a website that has a history of not paying attionon to its user base,

maybe i am a bitter and cynical artist here but if poeple want to pay people who make mods they should be able to by whatever means they have. and there is nothing wrong with commissions.

[trainwiz]

2 minutes ago, samuelgensler said:

Also to this point, why is a line being drawn at controversial paid mods? Why not microtransactions? That it's specifically revolving around the sites biggest traffic drivers in Skyrim, Fallout 4, and now Starfield (though to a much lesser extent, sorry Starborn) makes it pretty obvious why it's being done, which is that either Bethesda directly got involved and Nexus is backing down or they're being controlling and want to make decisions for the community about the direction it goes in.

And if it was the former, they could just say that. No one would blame them if that were the case. That they haven't makes me question any future affirmation of it being the case, because leading with that would've resulted in effectively no controversy, and the anger could be rightly turned onto Bethesda for trying to be the controlling ones. I can't fathom that's the case, though, given how many blatantly stolen things there are from other IPs. 

If something like BCE isn't going to be supported by anything nexus related, what is? Is it even possible to release a mod that's so high quality the gates are lowered for it? That mod featured, to my knowledge, the first ever returning Skyrim voice cast member, and somehow that's not good enough quality to warrant someone potentially paying for it? What does a VC have to do to get past the judge, jury, and executioner? Add a fully voiced Akavir to the CC? Of course not, even that wouldn't be enough. 

If they're truly consumer friendly, and taking a consumer friendly approach, go shut down every site revolving around greed driven games like GTA V and Sims 4. Don't discriminate, stand up for us consumers, go stop modding of games that take advantage of their players. Or, get out of the way, and allow us to make our own decisions about what mods have high enough quality to be worthy of money. We should be the judge, jury, and executioner of VC content. That content getting support in the form of compatibility patches and downloads, or being ignored, should be up to us. 

A line isn't even being drawn at paid mods, because the pre-this-iteration of the CC stuff is allowed. I can't understand the advertisement justification for it either, since the people publishing things like mods, compatibility patches, translations, etc, for any VC stuff aren't the original authors to begin with. And the original CC releases are still available through the exact same storefront that the VCs use.

 

[Chernobylite12]

3 minutes ago, samuelgensler said:

Also to this point, why is a line being drawn at controversial paid mods? Why not microtransactions? That it's specifically revolving around the sites biggest traffic drivers in Skyrim, Fallout 4, and now Starfield (though to a much lesser extent, sorry Starborn) makes it pretty obvious why it's being done, which is that either Bethesda directly got involved and Nexus is backing down or they're being controlling and want to make decisions for the community about the direction it goes in.

And if it was the former, they could just say that. No one would blame them if that were the case. That they haven't makes me question any future affirmation of it being the case, because leading with that would've resulted in effectively no controversy, and the anger could be rightly turned onto Bethesda for trying to be the controlling ones. I can't fathom that's the case, though, given how many blatantly stolen things there are from other IPs. 

If something like BCE isn't going to be supported by anything nexus related, what is? Is it even possible to release a mod that's so high quality the gates are lowered for it? That mod featured, to my knowledge, the first ever returning Skyrim voice cast member, and somehow that's not good enough quality to warrant someone potentially paying for it? What does a VC have to do to get past the judge, jury, and executioner? Add a fully voiced Akavir to the CC? Of course not, even that wouldn't be enough. 

If they're truly consumer friendly, and taking a consumer friendly approach, go shut down every site revolving around greed driven games like GTA V and Sims 4. Don't discriminate, stand up for us consumers, go stop modding of games that take advantage of their players. Or, get out of the way, and allow us to make our own decisions about what mods have high enough quality to be worthy of money. We should be the judge, jury, and executioner of VC content. That content getting support in the form of compatibility patches and downloads, or being ignored, should be up to us. 

Fully agree - functionally the difference between BCE and a DLC the scale of say, Hearthfires comes down to the manufacturers label on the tin. 

[Kant3n]

16 minutes ago, elpuertorro said:

Exactly my point you guys are all getting twisted and trying inject the FREE mods in the convo when the OP is talking about PAID mods no where does he post about limiting the FREE content, unless you make  a free patch that depends or patches a mod you have to  pay money for as then it's no longer really free as you have to buy a mod to use the free patch.
Free patch for free content= no problem  /  Free patch that mainly depends on the PAID CONTENT mod= no go and rightfully so.

So simple, yet you guys don't get, it and it's your own native language.

No, you don't get it, because the compatibility patches that you are free to completely ignore in a FOMOD are free content.