Quick updates to the site, money money money edition

[Arthmoor]

If Valve provided a means to remove Steam Wallet funds back to whatever bank card you have registered with them it would solve much of the problem you point out with refunds.

 

I don't think any of us realized refunds become wallet funds. IMO, that's not a real refund. It's like the BS you find at some retail stores where you get "store credit" instead of your money back. There's a reason stores who do that don't do well in sales.

[CiderMuffin]

In response to post #24604869.

Aryell wrote:

Chesko isn't a new person to the modding community, they knew how most of the modding community felt about paid mods and knew they were going to get a lot of hate from it. They made their grave then decided to jump out, play victim and blame everyone and try to seem like a innocent who didn't know what would happen.

But that's far from the truth, they need to realize that Bethesda nor Valve threw him into the wind, he threw himself and shouted at others thinking it would save himself.

[Mindprobe24]

In response to post #24596124. #24596224, #24596259, #24604979 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.

Ownerhounder wrote: 93%?
That's oddly specific...

45,314 supporters at this time..

[bigdeano89]

In response to post #24605159.

Gunblazer 42 wrote:

He already has, read back a few pages. Its nothing more than an optional donation mod authors can give nexus from a cut of valves split. Its not compulsary, and only amounts to 1, maybe 5% at most, for mod authors who feel Nexus helped them and their mod get to where it is now, give a little back. It also helps if mods are removed from nexus; less mods means less ad revenue, which is how this site works, this way Nexus can still get something from that mod, even if removed from here.

[gingersnapples]

In response to post #24596124. #24596224, #24596259, #24604979, #24605224 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.

Ownerhounder wrote: 93%?
That's oddly specific...

Mindprobe24 wrote: 45,314 supporters at this time..

i wouldn't assign an arbitrary % to disapproval, but there is a largely negative backlash.

also the petition is at around 44k signers now. cheers!

[erlkonnig1]

In response to post #24605159. #24605279 is also a reply to the same post.

Gunblazer 42 wrote:

bigdeano89 wrote: He already has, read back a few pages. Its nothing more than an optional donation mod authors can give nexus from a cut of valves split. Its not compulsary, and only amounts to 1, maybe 5% at most, for mod authors who feel Nexus helped them and their mod get to where it is now, give a little back. It also helps if mods are removed from nexus; less mods means less ad revenue, which is how this site works, this way Nexus can still get something from that mod, even if removed from here.

He did. In that exact thread you linked. It's not even that far down.

Basically, mod authors can elect to send up to 5% of Valve's cut of the sales to a site they wish to support. It's kind of like a "giving back to the community that allowed me to grow" donation. They aren't "taking a cut" as Chesko claims, because they only get money if the authors choose to send it to them (and, from what I've read, Chesko didn't).

[bigdeano89]

In response to post #24605164.

Arthmoor wrote:

This whole thing stinks of shady ToS on Valves part. I dont know if you read Cheskos reddit but he says that Valve refuse to take down HIS mods, even if he tells them to, without legal reasons. So, basically, if you put a paid mod up on Steam, that version of the mod is pretty much Valves to do with as they like.

I have to ask Arthmoor, did any of you read through Terms when contacted by Valve? There has to have been a contract in place surely?

[marthgun]

In response to post #24604329. #24604549, #24604794 are all replies on 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.

unique1 wrote: Seems you are correct, sir.

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

Bethesda is hosting at E3 this year, so it's clearly set up to maximize profits of Fallout 4, they want the infrastructure in place so that the steam workshop becomes the foremost hub of mods.

The problem is that steam is a terrible community. The comment system, the fact that virtually none of the essential utilities are hosted on the steam workshop, all of the knowledgable users are not on steam, they are at the nexus or the beth forums.

[CiderMuffin]

In response to post #24605164. #24605384 is also a reply to the same post.

Arthmoor wrote:

bigdeano89 wrote: This whole thing stinks of shady ToS on Valves part. I dont know if you read Cheskos reddit but he says that Valve refuse to take down HIS mods, even if he tells them to, without legal reasons. So, basically, if you put a paid mod up on Steam, that version of the mod is pretty much Valves to do with as they like.

I have to ask Arthmoor, did any of you read through Terms when contacted by Valve? There has to have been a contract in place surely?

No, no it actually wouldn't. 24 hours is a pathetic refund period as it's entirely possible that mods can break a save after the 24 hour period. It may not happen directly at 24 hours but it can still happen. It also doesn't help that mods can entirely die out later long after the refund policy expires or projects get abandoned and are left as vaporware.

It also doesn't help that a paywall model can end up with two mod makers bickering because they made something similar. Take a mod that makes border gates, someone inspired by another's wanted to improve on the idea, right now? That would go easy with the two modders but under a paywall? It's a formula for drama to explode and cause two mod makers to bicker and try to convince people their mod is the superior one despite neither fixing anything about their mod. It limits sharing and causing nothing but needless competition

it's fine modders want to be paid, it's completely fine but make it an OPTION, not a requirement. Numerous platforms exist for modders to ask for donations, hell you want to make it better get a group together and petition Bethesda and any other companies to allow modders to set up patreon accounts solely dedicated to modding. That way you're not alienating your fanbase.

Even if we got a full refund and not just steam wallet money this ordeal would still be going on unless the refund period was never-ending which just causes more problems.

@bigdeano89

at this point Chesko is acting so childish I wouldn't take his word for anything. Edited April 24, 2015 by CiderMuffin

[gingersnapples]

In response to post #24599664. #24599799, #24599829, #24599839, #24599979, #24600139, #24600194, #24600244, #24600359, #24600494, #24600539, #24600884, #24600989, #24601494, #24602579, #24602799, #24604084, #24604459, #24604609, #24605019 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.

phellen wrote: 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.

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