Quick updates to the site, money money money edition

[Shadowmane01]

I support the idea of a donate box/button.

[unique1]

In response to post #24604329. #24604549 is also a reply to the same post.

unique1 wrote:

bigdeano89 wrote: ESO has been out on PC for ages, and that isnt made by Bethesda, its made by another part of the company called Zenimax Online.

Seems you are correct, sir.

This still may however be a ploy to increase it's user base.

[Aryell]

Chesko's said "... I feel like I have been left to twist in the wind by Valve and Bethesda...." read on reddit The experiment has failed: My exit from the curated Workshop

[marthgun]

In response to post #24603119. #24603684, #24603834, #24603914, #24603939, #24603999 are all replies on the same post.

FillipeMattos wrote:

DarthOmix wrote: A lawyer from Valve said it was fair game, he talked it over with Fore and agreed to refund everyone who paid for it.

Rifleman556 wrote: Essentially if every person who made a mod were to sought out a copy right, they could infact sue Valve, before it was taken down ofcourse.

Rifleman556 wrote: It was and wasn't free game, the content can only be used legally for what the author allows.

marthgun wrote: i called for him to get banned here on the nexus along with anyone else that signed up for the 25% con job.

But lets face it, they've already recieved their punishment. everyone has been getting flamed and harassed. I don't want to cause them any more pain and suffering. I would like to think they learned their lesson. It was a selfish move on their part, but it wasn't an unjustifiable move.

If everyone made money on their mods, it might produce higher quality mods but it would destroy the average modder and make using mods far more difficult. It also has serious liability issues with selling a digital product, and so far there is no consumer protection.

FillipeMattos wrote: You need to consider whether the mod comes with third party content before starting to charge it.

@fillipe

its not even just content, from what i've been reading, under EU law if you sell a digital product, any one who contributes to that product must be viewed as employees. So anyone that play tested it, gave suggestions that were implemented, gave criticism, gave resources, allowed use of utilities, etc. The average mod probably has hundreds of hands in that cookie jar.

What valve is doing is clearly against the law. But not only that is there are liability issues with selling a product. And lets face it, most mods would be highly defective products. They could crash, or break your game, or be incompatible with future releases. And under comsumer protections, refunds would need to be given, not just in 24 hours.

[Ownerhounder]

In response to post #24596124. #24596224, #24596259 are all replies on the same post.

SolidusEkans wrote:

PickleJar wrote: We aren't the minority: the petition on Change.org has thirty thousand signatures after 24 hours. The announcement page is full of negative comments, the mods themselves are full of negative comments, the Skyrim reviews are full of negative comments. It's a PR disaster already, at least.

Reaper0021 wrote: Agreed Pickle. Voices have been thundering over this and something like 93% of it is negative.

93%?
That's oddly specific...

[KorruptKing]

Would like to give a big thumbs up to nexus. I don't know why Beth would ever go for this!!!! The reason games like Skyrim are still selling today is because of mods, that would be like Bohemia paygating the DayZ MOD, they went from selling 10k copies of ARMA to selling 1m+. The power of mods is that they let people have confidence that if they buy a game, even if it's a little rough around the edges is that they can use the mod polishing rag to show the gem of game inside. This pay-to-play-to-pay-to-mod is a f*#@ing disgusting process. I hope they all turn this around and go back to the way it was, donations only. I would gladly do a Patreon/donate to people like ZeroFrost for them to continue their work.

 

Games like Counter Strike, Dota (and LoL, HoN to an extent as the orginal DoTA mod team split and made 2 seperate games) and DayZ became their own standalones as people loved the idea behind it and the groups behind them were able to make a game for next to nothing and judge interest in it. If this pay to mod continues and gets worse to where the next Beth game has some form a DRM that only steam mods can be used (doubt they could ever enforce something like that) I weep for the future of gaming. I'm sitting here playing a game that came out 4 years ago and is still fresh because of mods.

 

TL;DR Thanks Nexus for being a beacon for the gaming community. And f*#@ you Valve/Beth

[phellen]

In response to post #24599664. #24599799, #24599829, #24599839, #24599979, #24600139, #24600194, #24600244, #24600359, #24600494, #24600539, #24600884, #24600989, #24601494, #24602579, #24602799, #24604084, #24604459, #24604609, #24605464 are all replies on the same post.

G18AkimboNoob wrote:

Eiries wrote:

However, The Nexus is a listed Service Provider on the curated Workshop, and they are profiting from Workshop sales. They are saying one thing, while simultaneously taking their cut.

I don't see how mentioning "these guys have mods too" constitutes Nexusmods making money off of this (except through traffic which he has no control over.)

Citation from bossman requested.

LtRhapthorne wrote: So Dark0ne is being as greedy as Valve

Unless he personally responds to these accusations, I'm going to ask for my account to be banned. I don't have local copies of my mods. They'll be dead forever.

PickleJar wrote: Yeah, Dark0ne needs to post about this.

LoneHP wrote:

Citation from bossman requested.

No bleeding joke on that. A statement regarding what Chesko revealed is required to begin with, because actual money has likely flowed here over Chesko's (and Fores' ) work with no indication of such.

CiderMuffin wrote: If it's from ad revenue that's an unfair statement for Chesko to make, numerous sites do ad revenue in order to make ends meet. As far as I see it I don't get how the Nexus could make money off of this as they have no part in the transactions. I think this is just Chesko using the negative PR they're getting to hurt someone else out of spite.

Eiries wrote: Chesko's been colossally wrong about a lot of stuff over the past 24 hours so I can't help but feel he's just trying to take the heat off himself and place it on Robin. We'll see, I'm sure he'll say something.

The 3rd Type wrote: http://puu.sh/hpnwE/1fa0ce9998.png

Eiries wrote:

http://puu.sh/hpnwE/1fa0ce9998.png

Totally making bank on this scandal. Totally. Hey dude.

The 3rd Type wrote: Hey Eiries. You ever get around to those Flamer Textures :^)

StaciKrash wrote: Arthmoor is also saying the same about robin

shinkicker404 wrote: link

He did reply to Chesko in Reddit.

teppic1 wrote: " Was this a risky, perhaps bold, thing to go ahead with? Yes. Was it a bit crappy of me? Also yes. But it was a risk I took, and the outcome was largely dependent on the FNIS author's reaction to the situation. He was not happy, so I took steps to resolve it. I did not "steal animations" or "steal content""

I don't agree with this at all. You cannot knowingly use someone else's work without permission for monetary profit and then call it a risk as to whether they would be happy with that or not. It's not his place to do that.

TheSabi wrote: hmm this is AFTER he used someone else assests in a mod and got caught. He's not new to modding, he knws better. This comes off more as make everyone else look like the bad guy whao is me redirecting.

He is quoted in those articles and in his letter he knew FULL WELL he shouldn't be using them and using the scapegoat of valve saying "if the download was separate and free, it was fair game." He admits FNIS isn't needed so he could have waited or just not include them like with Arissa 2.0.

Sorry if I'm not buying "nexus is evil too" after that.

Thaiauxn wrote: All of this insane traffic is going to cost the Nexus thousands of dollars per day, and we're not recouping that cost.

The only way for Nexus to try and get that back is if Valve extended an olive branch with a service provider option. That sounds like a reasonable attempt at removing the strain they've created on the site.

WightMage wrote: Dark0ne DID respond a little bit regarding the supposed 1-5 percent cut Nexus might get- It's entirely at the nodder's discretion to choose a site or two that they can give 1-5 percent of their profit to. In other words, a donation.

Chesko, unfortunately, did not choose to give the Nexus anything.

So as far as I'm concerned, this hardly the Nexus being hypocritical, since in theory it is entirely up to the modders to decide if and when they get anything.

alsoran wrote: Big fish eat little fish.

phellen wrote:

Does the 1-5% comes out of the modders profit or Valves profit share? If it's from the modders then I can believe that the nexus didn't know about it ahead of time, but if it's out of Valves profit...then I think that's a grey area to try and say "we didn't know, we're just as surprised as the rest of the community"

Earlier Dark0ne said it was Valve's profit, but maybe that was a typo?

marthgun wrote: calm down guise.

The way i understand it is that the MOD AUTHOR can elect to make Nexus a Service Provider / Curator and proceeds will go them from sales.

I don't think its Nexus decision to be chosen. It's only unethical if they coerce people into this. I would like an official statement as well just to clarify, but I don' t think Nexus accepting money from essentially donations is wrong.

gingersnapples wrote: Dark0ne has made a comment on this. go to the reddit post, scroll down.

Just to be clear I don't have a problem with it either way it's fine. It makes sense from a business stand point, and it's ultimately a good thing for the nexus to be supported in another way. They either become part of the way the modding landscape is changing or in the end they may be left out all together. I just think it's always better to be up front with information and to be transparent and all that. That's all I'm saying, and maybe this is all just speculation but some clarification would be nice. Edited April 24, 2015 by phellen

[hector530]

And here I thought I missed the first 24 hour sh*t storm.

 

people insulting each other, wild conspiracy theories, claims of the complete death of modding and gaming, and now Dark0ne is being accused of being a greedy hypocrite

 

dis gonna b gud

 

*grabs chair

[ff7legend]

There's a petition on Change.org (www.change.org/p/valve-remove-the-paid-content-of-the-steam-workshop/u/10610296) that has almost 45,000 signatures already urging Valve to take down the paid modding content from the Steam Workshop. Since it seems the majority of the modding community is opposed to the idea of paid mods from what I've read here in the comments, I encourage you to sign said petition at the link above. Peace.

[Gunblazer42]

Dark0ne, according to Chesko, there's an option for the Nexus to be given some of the cut from the sale of mods if the modder chooses to do so, along with another mod source, and tools like Blender. Chesko (or someone claiming to be him) posted as such on Reddit.

 

"I am also considering removing my content from the Nexus. Why? The problem is that Robin et al, for perfectly good political reasons, have positioned themselves as essentially the champions of free mods and that they would never implement a for-pay system. However, The Nexus is a listed Service Provider on the curated Workshop, and they are profiting from Workshop sales. They are saying one thing, while simultaneously taking their cut. I'm not sure I'm comfortable supporting that any longer. I may just host my mods on my own site for anyone who is interested."

 

As I'm not a mod author, I can't confirm that Nexus Mods is an option for sharing revenue. Can you say anything about this?