Drawing a line under recent events and moving on

[crashpilot]

In response to post #24873139. #24874159, #24874314, #24874474, #24874519, #24874634, #24874639, #24874729, #24874774, #24874924, #24874984, #24875019, #24875044, #24875074, #24875124, #24875219, #24875289, #24875334, #24875454, #24875484, #24875669 are all replies on the same post.

thefinn wrote: I doubt they will drop this.

They will do more research than smoking some doobies in the coffee lounge at valve and saying "You know what would be cool ?" then we'll see something similar coming up again in the future.

There's way too much money involved for this to go away.

Personally, if they'd just add a "donate" button and not try to "sell mods" that might go down better.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: With the next TES game, I could see them charging for the Creation Kit, and then setting it so you have to "share" your mods on a specific website they control, and then charging people a flat-access rate to the website.

Oh, and I can see them releasing the next TES game even more incomplete than Skyrim. Release a barebones game, make money off it, then let the modders finish your game, and make money off of that too. I bet I've just given some pencil pusher at Bethesda a 3-inch erection.

wulfharth wrote: That's called an alpha release, and that happens everyday.

Bethesda has always tried hard to keep everyone happy (except with the exclusive DLC period releases). They just wanted to give people who make mods a chance to do it for a living. Shame on them for creating jobs and stimulating the mod community. They should all kill themselves. Right? Should I make a sign protest mod about them offering opportunity?

How do I block this guy? The option isn't at the bottom of his posts.

wulfharth wrote: Ha! I found out where to do it, but I can't block you Vesuvius1745 because you've never contributed a mod, so you aren't listed as an author.

So why again do you feel you have the right to have an opinion on what actual mod contributor's are allowed to do with their mods? You aren't even one of us.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Oh, my mistake. I didn't realize the corporation known as Bethesda was being altruistic, and just wanted to stimulate the economy while at the same time giving amateur mod authors their Big Break. You're not only a glass-is-half-full kind of guy, you're a glass-is-half-full when it's actually empty kind of guy.

Instead of trying to make a buck off of mod authors, they should concentrate on making sure the next TES release is stable and complete. Yes, game companies are releasing their games earlier and earlier, and frankly, many gamers are sick of paying to Beta test unfinished products.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Good question, wulth. As someone who paid for Skyrim, I have the same right as the 133,000+ other people who signed the petition given to Bethesda telling them what we thought of this pay-for system.

I suspect the pencil pusher who came up with this idea is probably shaking in his boots. Wondering if he will have a job next month. Maybe he's even trolling these forums to test the waters, and not liking what he is seeing.

thefinn wrote: Well I am a pretty harsh critic of games, I think Skyrim is one of the best I've played in years.

There might've been some bugs at launch, but few are the games you'll find without them and frankly with the size of Skyrim they are to be expected.

I don't see how it was "incomplete".

wulfharth wrote: @Vesuvius-Instead of telling super successful multi-million dollar corporations with giant and loyal fan bases how to run their businesses, you should go try and make a dungeon or create and add a custom 3D model. I'm sure you'll change your tune very quickly.

You have no frame of reference for what it means or takes to be a mod author. Stop telling everyone what to do or what they should do. You aren't qualified.

thefinn wrote: The difference being that the question for you is "Can I still get free stuff?" while the question for modders is "Is this a system I find reasonable to work with?"

The only saving grace to me was the thought that perhaps I should start putting together my feminine walk mod again to be paid for, or to be the free alternative to the other mod of its' kind. It actually made me think this (for the very small mods I have done) it was in fact my first thought.

So it can indeed instill the impetus in modders to mod.

However, the drawbacks of the current idea are awful.

It leaves the door open for game companies to make mods "steam only" in the future for benefits to the bottom line for instance.

wulfharth wrote: The official paid DLC is Steam only. Why not the smaller not official but sanctioned DLC? We always have the Nexus if modders want to choose to throw up an donate button to not get pressed and give free work to the sweet and loving community.

thefinn wrote: You're missing the point.

They can make the game so that when it runs it only allows mods that steam downloaded.

And they would be...
1) In their rights to do so.
2) getting more profits by doing so and they are corporations you know?

Reaper0021 wrote: thefinn is right in that regard. IF THEY WANTED to be tyrannical about it that is.

thefinn wrote: And when have you known corporations not to be ?

DRM itself had huge backlash at the time... but here it is still.

Reaper0021 wrote: I agree with you thefinn. I'll tell you one that isn't and I defy you to say otherwise: CDProjekt Red. But in all aspects of this you're 100% right.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Wulf, your ad hominem aside, I'm not going to post my resume because it's irrelevant. Every person who bought Skyrim (they are called customers) have an absolute right to tell Bethesda what they think of their business practices. It doesn't matter if not a single one of those 133,000 people who signed the petition never wrote a mod, or has not done something YOU think "qualifies" them to giver their opinion. They still get to give it.

Of course Bethesda is under no obligation to listen to their customers. In this case they did. They probably also realized what a Hiroshima-type disaster this was, and if they were smart, fired the individual(s) responsible for this abortion of creativity.

wulfharth wrote: If Bethesda wanted to be tyrants, they probably wouldn't have out of pocketed to provide and update the creation kit. And that's just for the PC gamers mind you. That is a special gift just to us that is more valuable than any 10 mods on here. You should feel loved and have more faith in them.

wulfharth wrote: Vesuvius-You are Bethesda's customer. Not mine. I don't want your made up resume. All I know is that you haven't posted a single mod. You aren't a modder. Why are you telling us what we can do with our work?

Reaper0021 wrote: It's not about lack of love or faith. It's about common business practices. A business remains a business as long as it can "TURN A PROFIT" and when it can't no longer (ATARI, Commodore, SEGA, etc.) then it stops becoming a business and becomes a share holders nightmare. All of this is just theory talk...but in the back of my mind I remain cautious about what the future holds.

thefinn wrote: Totally agree, if I were going to have love or faith (without going to church) it'd be in the Nexus, not some new system Valve has talked Bethesda into.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: I, nor anybody else, is telling mod authors what they can or cannot do with their "work". As Bethesda's customers, we explained to them we did not want a pay-for paradigm for mods. We gave our opinion, which as customers we have every right to give. They didn't have to listen to their customers, but they did. Since Bethesda owns the Intellectual property rights to Skyrim, and mod authors sign their EULA accepting their contract, it is Bethesda who gets to tell mod authors what they can or cannot do with their derivative creations. If a mod author is upset by that, then they should take it up with Bethesda. Or mod for a game that allows paid-for mods. Whining about it here, or getting upset with the people who bought Skyrim and gave their opinion, is not going to be fruitful.

Reaper0021 wrote: And to continue on this point by Vesuvius1745....when I give my $$$$ for anything in this world be it new tires, PC parts, cable T.V./internet, books, food, games, music, etc. I HAVE the right as a paying customer to offer my critique or displeasure or ANYTHING with what I paid for if it doesn't meet my expectations as a customer. I don't have to be a tire manufacturer to offer my opinion that I like Firestone better than the other brands. You make no sense man in your argument. You act as if we are indebted to Bethesda and I can assure you it's the other way around. Kudos given to Vesuvius1745.

@Wulfharth,

Since there is not that much of your work you have to worry about, I would say let us our opinion and we let you yours.

[Pauliwhop]

In response to post #24873139. #24874159, #24874314, #24874474, #24874519, #24874634, #24874639, #24874729, #24874774, #24874924, #24874984, #24875019, #24875044, #24875074, #24875124, #24875219, #24875289, #24875334, #24875454, #24875484, #24875669, #24876774 are all replies on the same post.

thefinn wrote: I doubt they will drop this.

They will do more research than smoking some doobies in the coffee lounge at valve and saying "You know what would be cool ?" then we'll see something similar coming up again in the future.

There's way too much money involved for this to go away.

Personally, if they'd just add a "donate" button and not try to "sell mods" that might go down better.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: With the next TES game, I could see them charging for the Creation Kit, and then setting it so you have to "share" your mods on a specific website they control, and then charging people a flat-access rate to the website.

Oh, and I can see them releasing the next TES game even more incomplete than Skyrim. Release a barebones game, make money off it, then let the modders finish your game, and make money off of that too. I bet I've just given some pencil pusher at Bethesda a 3-inch erection.

wulfharth wrote: That's called an alpha release, and that happens everyday.

Bethesda has always tried hard to keep everyone happy (except with the exclusive DLC period releases). They just wanted to give people who make mods a chance to do it for a living. Shame on them for creating jobs and stimulating the mod community. They should all kill themselves. Right? Should I make a sign protest mod about them offering opportunity?

How do I block this guy? The option isn't at the bottom of his posts.

wulfharth wrote: Ha! I found out where to do it, but I can't block you Vesuvius1745 because you've never contributed a mod, so you aren't listed as an author.

So why again do you feel you have the right to have an opinion on what actual mod contributor's are allowed to do with their mods? You aren't even one of us.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Oh, my mistake. I didn't realize the corporation known as Bethesda was being altruistic, and just wanted to stimulate the economy while at the same time giving amateur mod authors their Big Break. You're not only a glass-is-half-full kind of guy, you're a glass-is-half-full when it's actually empty kind of guy.

Instead of trying to make a buck off of mod authors, they should concentrate on making sure the next TES release is stable and complete. Yes, game companies are releasing their games earlier and earlier, and frankly, many gamers are sick of paying to Beta test unfinished products.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Good question, wulth. As someone who paid for Skyrim, I have the same right as the 133,000+ other people who signed the petition given to Bethesda telling them what we thought of this pay-for system.

I suspect the pencil pusher who came up with this idea is probably shaking in his boots. Wondering if he will have a job next month. Maybe he's even trolling these forums to test the waters, and not liking what he is seeing.

thefinn wrote: Well I am a pretty harsh critic of games, I think Skyrim is one of the best I've played in years.

There might've been some bugs at launch, but few are the games you'll find without them and frankly with the size of Skyrim they are to be expected.

I don't see how it was "incomplete".

wulfharth wrote: @Vesuvius-Instead of telling super successful multi-million dollar corporations with giant and loyal fan bases how to run their businesses, you should go try and make a dungeon or create and add a custom 3D model. I'm sure you'll change your tune very quickly.

You have no frame of reference for what it means or takes to be a mod author. Stop telling everyone what to do or what they should do. You aren't qualified.

thefinn wrote: The difference being that the question for you is "Can I still get free stuff?" while the question for modders is "Is this a system I find reasonable to work with?"

The only saving grace to me was the thought that perhaps I should start putting together my feminine walk mod again to be paid for, or to be the free alternative to the other mod of its' kind. It actually made me think this (for the very small mods I have done) it was in fact my first thought.

So it can indeed instill the impetus in modders to mod.

However, the drawbacks of the current idea are awful.

It leaves the door open for game companies to make mods "steam only" in the future for benefits to the bottom line for instance.

wulfharth wrote: The official paid DLC is Steam only. Why not the smaller not official but sanctioned DLC? We always have the Nexus if modders want to choose to throw up an donate button to not get pressed and give free work to the sweet and loving community.

thefinn wrote: You're missing the point.

They can make the game so that when it runs it only allows mods that steam downloaded.

And they would be...
1) In their rights to do so.
2) getting more profits by doing so and they are corporations you know?

Reaper0021 wrote: thefinn is right in that regard. IF THEY WANTED to be tyrannical about it that is.

thefinn wrote: And when have you known corporations not to be ?

DRM itself had huge backlash at the time... but here it is still.

Reaper0021 wrote: I agree with you thefinn. I'll tell you one that isn't and I defy you to say otherwise: CDProjekt Red. But in all aspects of this you're 100% right.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Wulf, your ad hominem aside, I'm not going to post my resume because it's irrelevant. Every person who bought Skyrim (they are called customers) have an absolute right to tell Bethesda what they think of their business practices. It doesn't matter if not a single one of those 133,000 people who signed the petition never wrote a mod, or has not done something YOU think "qualifies" them to giver their opinion. They still get to give it.

Of course Bethesda is under no obligation to listen to their customers. In this case they did. They probably also realized what a Hiroshima-type disaster this was, and if they were smart, fired the individual(s) responsible for this abortion of creativity.

wulfharth wrote: If Bethesda wanted to be tyrants, they probably wouldn't have out of pocketed to provide and update the creation kit. And that's just for the PC gamers mind you. That is a special gift just to us that is more valuable than any 10 mods on here. You should feel loved and have more faith in them.

wulfharth wrote: Vesuvius-You are Bethesda's customer. Not mine. I don't want your made up resume. All I know is that you haven't posted a single mod. You aren't a modder. Why are you telling us what we can do with our work?

Reaper0021 wrote: It's not about lack of love or faith. It's about common business practices. A business remains a business as long as it can "TURN A PROFIT" and when it can't no longer (ATARI, Commodore, SEGA, etc.) then it stops becoming a business and becomes a share holders nightmare. All of this is just theory talk...but in the back of my mind I remain cautious about what the future holds.

thefinn wrote: Totally agree, if I were going to have love or faith (without going to church) it'd be in the Nexus, not some new system Valve has talked Bethesda into.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: I, nor anybody else, is telling mod authors what they can or cannot do with their "work". As Bethesda's customers, we explained to them we did not want a pay-for paradigm for mods. We gave our opinion, which as customers we have every right to give. They didn't have to listen to their customers, but they did. Since Bethesda owns the Intellectual property rights to Skyrim, and mod authors sign their EULA accepting their contract, it is Bethesda who gets to tell mod authors what they can or cannot do with their derivative creations. If a mod author is upset by that, then they should take it up with Bethesda. Or mod for a game that allows paid-for mods. Whining about it here, or getting upset with the people who bought Skyrim and gave their opinion, is not going to be fruitful.

Reaper0021 wrote: And to continue on this point by Vesuvius1745....when I give my $$$$ for anything in this world be it new tires, PC parts, cable T.V./internet, books, food, games, music, etc. I HAVE the right as a paying customer to offer my critique or displeasure or ANYTHING with what I paid for if it doesn't meet my expectations as a customer. I don't have to be a tire manufacturer to offer my opinion that I like Firestone better than the other brands. You make no sense man in your argument. You act as if we are indebted to Bethesda and I can assure you it's the other way around. Kudos given to Vesuvius1745.

crashpilot wrote: @Wulfharth,

Since there is not that much of your work you have to worry about, I would say let us our opinion and we let you yours.

You don't have to be a doctor to sue for Malpractice. Try again.

[AngryCupcake91]

well said sir

[muter3456]

In response to post #24859024. #24859239, #24860709, #24861914, #24870839, #24875649 are all replies on the same post.

wulfharth wrote: Sometimes an idea once presented will persist as a part of the public consciousness forever. Finding out that Bethesda is in favor of individuals being paid to create content that adds life to their games will cause a massive change in the entire modding community.

Expect to see professional DLC creating studios in the future. Modders will soon have an opportunity to mod full-time and make a living from it. I wouldn't be surprised if these studios became sub-studios of Bethesda someday.

The downside is that the most professional and biggest mods will be paid mods (much like now). The upside is that there will be more DLC quality mods available and probably with additional support from Bethesda in terms of rigging files and code.

I have never failed to buy a mod for a TES game since Morrowind, and I've considered them all money well spent. I really look forward to the prospect of more of that type of content becoming available. The sooner this site adapts to this possibility, the better it will be able to stay a foundation piece of this community.

pokenar wrote: I was not actually one of those against paid mods, I just didn't like the execution. there were many many many issues with how bethesda and valve did it.

wulfharth wrote: Those percentages are pretty standard for a situation like that. If you read the Beth Blog, they will explain it. Valve was even going to share some of their cut with the Nexus.

Also, I think it's sad that people attacked modders who were trying to exercise an opportunity that was given to them. Nothing was taken away, an option was added for the modder.

It's old news now, but it's a sad day for artistic freedom. People think they don't have to pay for art because the artist enjoys their work. That mentality needs to change if modding is to thrive and reach it's true potential.

welikedustybetter wrote: Modding is different than art in many ways. There are many aspects to consider. Mods can be buggy or incompatible with each other or with your game or system. This is exacerbated by the bugs or stability issues native to the game. Then there's the fact that many mods are dependent upon other mods. Then there are modders resources and frameworks. Would there then also be royalty fees? A paid mods system would be a legal nightmare.

To sum up my opinion on this, I think modders provide a very valuable service to these games, and they should get paid for it. However, I think a donation system is much more suited for this. Someone else made a good long post on it in a previous Nexus article, so I won't bother, but I think the current system could use some tweaks that remind users that they can donate to the mod author, and perhaps reward those that do.

wulfharth wrote: Donation systems do not work. People mostly don't bother to endorse even to the best of the best mods. Do you really think they will take the time to give out of the kindness of their hearts? Historically on this site, no. They don't understand how long it takes to add a simple model or build a dungeon.

Modding requires creativity and is undeniably Art. That's why game development is taught at art academies in America.

If everyone gave one penny to each mod they use right now, Some people could quite their jobs and mod full time. That means more mods, more updates, and more compatibility patches. Mod theft and asset theft is easy to control with the reporting system we already have in place. Creators of buggy mods will not be endorsed and will not receive repeat business.

thefinn wrote: Yeah the percentages really were a slap in the face - even if it really was just a perception thing.

If it had been an even spread of 33% each, it might've been better.

However, giving the modder 25% of the take, while the other 2 parties take the lions share, kind of says "You are the least important part of this process." doesn't it ?

It certainly gave me that perception of their views.

" Donations Systems do not work "

Yea. That's why Tarn Adams, a full on game developer, artists, even twitch streamers DEFINITELY don't make their money off donations. Definitely don't. Edited May 2, 2015 by muter3456

[Vesuvius1745]

In response to post #24859024. #24859239, #24860709, #24861914, #24870839, #24875649, #24877069 are all replies on the same post.

wulfharth wrote: Sometimes an idea once presented will persist as a part of the public consciousness forever. Finding out that Bethesda is in favor of individuals being paid to create content that adds life to their games will cause a massive change in the entire modding community.

Expect to see professional DLC creating studios in the future. Modders will soon have an opportunity to mod full-time and make a living from it. I wouldn't be surprised if these studios became sub-studios of Bethesda someday.

The downside is that the most professional and biggest mods will be paid mods (much like now). The upside is that there will be more DLC quality mods available and probably with additional support from Bethesda in terms of rigging files and code.

I have never failed to buy a mod for a TES game since Morrowind, and I've considered them all money well spent. I really look forward to the prospect of more of that type of content becoming available. The sooner this site adapts to this possibility, the better it will be able to stay a foundation piece of this community.

pokenar wrote: I was not actually one of those against paid mods, I just didn't like the execution. there were many many many issues with how bethesda and valve did it.

wulfharth wrote: Those percentages are pretty standard for a situation like that. If you read the Beth Blog, they will explain it. Valve was even going to share some of their cut with the Nexus.

Also, I think it's sad that people attacked modders who were trying to exercise an opportunity that was given to them. Nothing was taken away, an option was added for the modder.

It's old news now, but it's a sad day for artistic freedom. People think they don't have to pay for art because the artist enjoys their work. That mentality needs to change if modding is to thrive and reach it's true potential.

welikedustybetter wrote: Modding is different than art in many ways. There are many aspects to consider. Mods can be buggy or incompatible with each other or with your game or system. This is exacerbated by the bugs or stability issues native to the game. Then there's the fact that many mods are dependent upon other mods. Then there are modders resources and frameworks. Would there then also be royalty fees? A paid mods system would be a legal nightmare.

To sum up my opinion on this, I think modders provide a very valuable service to these games, and they should get paid for it. However, I think a donation system is much more suited for this. Someone else made a good long post on it in a previous Nexus article, so I won't bother, but I think the current system could use some tweaks that remind users that they can donate to the mod author, and perhaps reward those that do.

wulfharth wrote: Donation systems do not work. People mostly don't bother to endorse even to the best of the best mods. Do you really think they will take the time to give out of the kindness of their hearts? Historically on this site, no. They don't understand how long it takes to add a simple model or build a dungeon.

Modding requires creativity and is undeniably Art. That's why game development is taught at art academies in America.

If everyone gave one penny to each mod they use right now, Some people could quite their jobs and mod full time. That means more mods, more updates, and more compatibility patches. Mod theft and asset theft is easy to control with the reporting system we already have in place. Creators of buggy mods will not be endorsed and will not receive repeat business.

thefinn wrote: Yeah the percentages really were a slap in the face - even if it really was just a perception thing.

If it had been an even spread of 33% each, it might've been better.

However, giving the modder 25% of the take, while the other 2 parties take the lions share, kind of says "You are the least important part of this process." doesn't it ?

It certainly gave me that perception of their views.

muter3456 wrote: " Donations Systems do not work "

Yea. That's why Tarn Adams, a full on game developer, artists, even twitch streamers DEFINITELY don't make their money off donations. Definitely don't.

The modding community has been doing just fine for over a decade. If ain't broke, don't fix it.

But if you want to start your own mod-studio or whatnot, and sell your DLC to Bethesda or whatever, good luck with that :)

[treota]

In response to post #24859024. #24859239, #24860709, #24861914, #24870839, #24875649, #24877069, #24877239 are all replies on the same post.

wulfharth wrote: Sometimes an idea once presented will persist as a part of the public consciousness forever. Finding out that Bethesda is in favor of individuals being paid to create content that adds life to their games will cause a massive change in the entire modding community.

Expect to see professional DLC creating studios in the future. Modders will soon have an opportunity to mod full-time and make a living from it. I wouldn't be surprised if these studios became sub-studios of Bethesda someday.

The downside is that the most professional and biggest mods will be paid mods (much like now). The upside is that there will be more DLC quality mods available and probably with additional support from Bethesda in terms of rigging files and code.

I have never failed to buy a mod for a TES game since Morrowind, and I've considered them all money well spent. I really look forward to the prospect of more of that type of content becoming available. The sooner this site adapts to this possibility, the better it will be able to stay a foundation piece of this community.

pokenar wrote: I was not actually one of those against paid mods, I just didn't like the execution. there were many many many issues with how bethesda and valve did it.

wulfharth wrote: Those percentages are pretty standard for a situation like that. If you read the Beth Blog, they will explain it. Valve was even going to share some of their cut with the Nexus.

Also, I think it's sad that people attacked modders who were trying to exercise an opportunity that was given to them. Nothing was taken away, an option was added for the modder.

It's old news now, but it's a sad day for artistic freedom. People think they don't have to pay for art because the artist enjoys their work. That mentality needs to change if modding is to thrive and reach it's true potential.

welikedustybetter wrote: Modding is different than art in many ways. There are many aspects to consider. Mods can be buggy or incompatible with each other or with your game or system. This is exacerbated by the bugs or stability issues native to the game. Then there's the fact that many mods are dependent upon other mods. Then there are modders resources and frameworks. Would there then also be royalty fees? A paid mods system would be a legal nightmare.

To sum up my opinion on this, I think modders provide a very valuable service to these games, and they should get paid for it. However, I think a donation system is much more suited for this. Someone else made a good long post on it in a previous Nexus article, so I won't bother, but I think the current system could use some tweaks that remind users that they can donate to the mod author, and perhaps reward those that do.

wulfharth wrote: Donation systems do not work. People mostly don't bother to endorse even to the best of the best mods. Do you really think they will take the time to give out of the kindness of their hearts? Historically on this site, no. They don't understand how long it takes to add a simple model or build a dungeon.

Modding requires creativity and is undeniably Art. That's why game development is taught at art academies in America.

If everyone gave one penny to each mod they use right now, Some people could quite their jobs and mod full time. That means more mods, more updates, and more compatibility patches. Mod theft and asset theft is easy to control with the reporting system we already have in place. Creators of buggy mods will not be endorsed and will not receive repeat business.

thefinn wrote: Yeah the percentages really were a slap in the face - even if it really was just a perception thing.

If it had been an even spread of 33% each, it might've been better.

However, giving the modder 25% of the take, while the other 2 parties take the lions share, kind of says "You are the least important part of this process." doesn't it ?

It certainly gave me that perception of their views.

muter3456 wrote: " Donations Systems do not work "

Yea. That's why Tarn Adams, a full on game developer, artists, even twitch streamers DEFINITELY don't make their money off donations. Definitely don't.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: The modding community has been doing just fine for over a decade. If ain't broke, don't fix it.

But if you want to start your own mod-studio or whatnot, and sell your DLC to Bethesda or whatever, good luck with that :)

"Some people could quit their jobs and mod full time" - I think you nailed it there. SOME people could mod full time.

It is very unlikely to create an environment where any modder can put the effort in and make a living off it, what is significantly more likely is that SOME modders who either get lucky or have more support will be able to make a meager living off their work and most modders will have to do exactly the same as they always have.

Also with the introduction of money into the system you will cull a large portion of your audience, which personally I would say leads to less mods being created. Evidence? Name a game that has over 12,000 DLC and customers willing to pay for it (seriously I'm curious if one exists, closest I can think of is Borderlands or Dawn of War 2).

To be optimistic lets say the average customer that pays for the game (note that the base game is not free here) is also willing to buy 20 mods, 10 of those mods are most likely to be the 'essential' mods that are always the same, so 10 mod makers/studios can make a small profit.
The other 10 are just random items spread between the modding community as a whole and as such are probably not providing the authors with any real profit. Please note that if the next TES game is FREE with paid modding it might be a different story. Edited May 2, 2015 by treota

[treota]

In response to post #24873139. #24874159, #24874314, #24874474, #24874519, #24874634, #24874639, #24874729, #24874774, #24874924, #24874984, #24875019, #24875044, #24875074, #24875124, #24875219, #24875289, #24875334, #24875454, #24875484, #24875669, #24876774, #24876829 are all replies on the same post.

thefinn wrote: I doubt they will drop this.

They will do more research than smoking some doobies in the coffee lounge at valve and saying "You know what would be cool ?" then we'll see something similar coming up again in the future.

There's way too much money involved for this to go away.

Personally, if they'd just add a "donate" button and not try to "sell mods" that might go down better.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: With the next TES game, I could see them charging for the Creation Kit, and then setting it so you have to "share" your mods on a specific website they control, and then charging people a flat-access rate to the website.

Oh, and I can see them releasing the next TES game even more incomplete than Skyrim. Release a barebones game, make money off it, then let the modders finish your game, and make money off of that too. I bet I've just given some pencil pusher at Bethesda a 3-inch erection.

wulfharth wrote: That's called an alpha release, and that happens everyday.

Bethesda has always tried hard to keep everyone happy (except with the exclusive DLC period releases). They just wanted to give people who make mods a chance to do it for a living. Shame on them for creating jobs and stimulating the mod community. They should all kill themselves. Right? Should I make a sign protest mod about them offering opportunity?

How do I block this guy? The option isn't at the bottom of his posts.

wulfharth wrote: Ha! I found out where to do it, but I can't block you Vesuvius1745 because you've never contributed a mod, so you aren't listed as an author.

So why again do you feel you have the right to have an opinion on what actual mod contributor's are allowed to do with their mods? You aren't even one of us.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Oh, my mistake. I didn't realize the corporation known as Bethesda was being altruistic, and just wanted to stimulate the economy while at the same time giving amateur mod authors their Big Break. You're not only a glass-is-half-full kind of guy, you're a glass-is-half-full when it's actually empty kind of guy.

Instead of trying to make a buck off of mod authors, they should concentrate on making sure the next TES release is stable and complete. Yes, game companies are releasing their games earlier and earlier, and frankly, many gamers are sick of paying to Beta test unfinished products.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Good question, wulth. As someone who paid for Skyrim, I have the same right as the 133,000+ other people who signed the petition given to Bethesda telling them what we thought of this pay-for system.

I suspect the pencil pusher who came up with this idea is probably shaking in his boots. Wondering if he will have a job next month. Maybe he's even trolling these forums to test the waters, and not liking what he is seeing.

thefinn wrote: Well I am a pretty harsh critic of games, I think Skyrim is one of the best I've played in years.

There might've been some bugs at launch, but few are the games you'll find without them and frankly with the size of Skyrim they are to be expected.

I don't see how it was "incomplete".

wulfharth wrote: @Vesuvius-Instead of telling super successful multi-million dollar corporations with giant and loyal fan bases how to run their businesses, you should go try and make a dungeon or create and add a custom 3D model. I'm sure you'll change your tune very quickly.

You have no frame of reference for what it means or takes to be a mod author. Stop telling everyone what to do or what they should do. You aren't qualified.

thefinn wrote: The difference being that the question for you is "Can I still get free stuff?" while the question for modders is "Is this a system I find reasonable to work with?"

The only saving grace to me was the thought that perhaps I should start putting together my feminine walk mod again to be paid for, or to be the free alternative to the other mod of its' kind. It actually made me think this (for the very small mods I have done) it was in fact my first thought.

So it can indeed instill the impetus in modders to mod.

However, the drawbacks of the current idea are awful.

It leaves the door open for game companies to make mods "steam only" in the future for benefits to the bottom line for instance.

wulfharth wrote: The official paid DLC is Steam only. Why not the smaller not official but sanctioned DLC? We always have the Nexus if modders want to choose to throw up an donate button to not get pressed and give free work to the sweet and loving community.

thefinn wrote: You're missing the point.

They can make the game so that when it runs it only allows mods that steam downloaded.

And they would be...
1) In their rights to do so.
2) getting more profits by doing so and they are corporations you know?

Reaper0021 wrote: thefinn is right in that regard. IF THEY WANTED to be tyrannical about it that is.

thefinn wrote: And when have you known corporations not to be ?

DRM itself had huge backlash at the time... but here it is still.

Reaper0021 wrote: I agree with you thefinn. I'll tell you one that isn't and I defy you to say otherwise: CDProjekt Red. But in all aspects of this you're 100% right.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Wulf, your ad hominem aside, I'm not going to post my resume because it's irrelevant. Every person who bought Skyrim (they are called customers) have an absolute right to tell Bethesda what they think of their business practices. It doesn't matter if not a single one of those 133,000 people who signed the petition never wrote a mod, or has not done something YOU think "qualifies" them to giver their opinion. They still get to give it.

Of course Bethesda is under no obligation to listen to their customers. In this case they did. They probably also realized what a Hiroshima-type disaster this was, and if they were smart, fired the individual(s) responsible for this abortion of creativity.

wulfharth wrote: If Bethesda wanted to be tyrants, they probably wouldn't have out of pocketed to provide and update the creation kit. And that's just for the PC gamers mind you. That is a special gift just to us that is more valuable than any 10 mods on here. You should feel loved and have more faith in them.

wulfharth wrote: Vesuvius-You are Bethesda's customer. Not mine. I don't want your made up resume. All I know is that you haven't posted a single mod. You aren't a modder. Why are you telling us what we can do with our work?

Reaper0021 wrote: It's not about lack of love or faith. It's about common business practices. A business remains a business as long as it can "TURN A PROFIT" and when it can't no longer (ATARI, Commodore, SEGA, etc.) then it stops becoming a business and becomes a share holders nightmare. All of this is just theory talk...but in the back of my mind I remain cautious about what the future holds.

thefinn wrote: Totally agree, if I were going to have love or faith (without going to church) it'd be in the Nexus, not some new system Valve has talked Bethesda into.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: I, nor anybody else, is telling mod authors what they can or cannot do with their "work". As Bethesda's customers, we explained to them we did not want a pay-for paradigm for mods. We gave our opinion, which as customers we have every right to give. They didn't have to listen to their customers, but they did. Since Bethesda owns the Intellectual property rights to Skyrim, and mod authors sign their EULA accepting their contract, it is Bethesda who gets to tell mod authors what they can or cannot do with their derivative creations. If a mod author is upset by that, then they should take it up with Bethesda. Or mod for a game that allows paid-for mods. Whining about it here, or getting upset with the people who bought Skyrim and gave their opinion, is not going to be fruitful.

Reaper0021 wrote: And to continue on this point by Vesuvius1745....when I give my $$$$ for anything in this world be it new tires, PC parts, cable T.V./internet, books, food, games, music, etc. I HAVE the right as a paying customer to offer my critique or displeasure or ANYTHING with what I paid for if it doesn't meet my expectations as a customer. I don't have to be a tire manufacturer to offer my opinion that I like Firestone better than the other brands. You make no sense man in your argument. You act as if we are indebted to Bethesda and I can assure you it's the other way around. Kudos given to Vesuvius1745.

crashpilot wrote: @Wulfharth,

Since there is not that much of your work you have to worry about, I would say let us our opinion and we let you yours.

Pauliwhop wrote: You don't have to be a doctor to sue for Malpractice. Try again.

"All I know is that you haven't posted a single mod, so you are not a modder" - This is basically the same as telling a carpenter they aren't valid because they have never carved mahogany, who is to say that he has never contributed anything to any modding scene for any game ever created or even created content that he didn't feel like uploading.

More close to home telling a critic that their opinion is worthless because they have never done what they critique (which is pretty common).

I'm 99% sure that there are plenty of food critics for example that have never been professional chefs. Edited May 2, 2015 by treota

[thefinn]

In response to post #24873139. #24874159, #24874314, #24874474, #24874519, #24874634, #24874639, #24874729, #24874774, #24874924, #24874984, #24875019, #24875044, #24875074, #24875124, #24875219, #24875289, #24875334, #24875454, #24875484, #24875669, #24876774, #24876829, #24877709 are all replies on the same post.

thefinn wrote: I doubt they will drop this.

They will do more research than smoking some doobies in the coffee lounge at valve and saying "You know what would be cool ?" then we'll see something similar coming up again in the future.

There's way too much money involved for this to go away.

Personally, if they'd just add a "donate" button and not try to "sell mods" that might go down better.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: With the next TES game, I could see them charging for the Creation Kit, and then setting it so you have to "share" your mods on a specific website they control, and then charging people a flat-access rate to the website.

Oh, and I can see them releasing the next TES game even more incomplete than Skyrim. Release a barebones game, make money off it, then let the modders finish your game, and make money off of that too. I bet I've just given some pencil pusher at Bethesda a 3-inch erection.

wulfharth wrote: That's called an alpha release, and that happens everyday.

Bethesda has always tried hard to keep everyone happy (except with the exclusive DLC period releases). They just wanted to give people who make mods a chance to do it for a living. Shame on them for creating jobs and stimulating the mod community. They should all kill themselves. Right? Should I make a sign protest mod about them offering opportunity?

How do I block this guy? The option isn't at the bottom of his posts.

wulfharth wrote: Ha! I found out where to do it, but I can't block you Vesuvius1745 because you've never contributed a mod, so you aren't listed as an author.

So why again do you feel you have the right to have an opinion on what actual mod contributor's are allowed to do with their mods? You aren't even one of us.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Oh, my mistake. I didn't realize the corporation known as Bethesda was being altruistic, and just wanted to stimulate the economy while at the same time giving amateur mod authors their Big Break. You're not only a glass-is-half-full kind of guy, you're a glass-is-half-full when it's actually empty kind of guy.

Instead of trying to make a buck off of mod authors, they should concentrate on making sure the next TES release is stable and complete. Yes, game companies are releasing their games earlier and earlier, and frankly, many gamers are sick of paying to Beta test unfinished products.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Good question, wulth. As someone who paid for Skyrim, I have the same right as the 133,000+ other people who signed the petition given to Bethesda telling them what we thought of this pay-for system.

I suspect the pencil pusher who came up with this idea is probably shaking in his boots. Wondering if he will have a job next month. Maybe he's even trolling these forums to test the waters, and not liking what he is seeing.

thefinn wrote: Well I am a pretty harsh critic of games, I think Skyrim is one of the best I've played in years.

There might've been some bugs at launch, but few are the games you'll find without them and frankly with the size of Skyrim they are to be expected.

I don't see how it was "incomplete".

wulfharth wrote: @Vesuvius-Instead of telling super successful multi-million dollar corporations with giant and loyal fan bases how to run their businesses, you should go try and make a dungeon or create and add a custom 3D model. I'm sure you'll change your tune very quickly.

You have no frame of reference for what it means or takes to be a mod author. Stop telling everyone what to do or what they should do. You aren't qualified.

thefinn wrote: The difference being that the question for you is "Can I still get free stuff?" while the question for modders is "Is this a system I find reasonable to work with?"

The only saving grace to me was the thought that perhaps I should start putting together my feminine walk mod again to be paid for, or to be the free alternative to the other mod of its' kind. It actually made me think this (for the very small mods I have done) it was in fact my first thought.

So it can indeed instill the impetus in modders to mod.

However, the drawbacks of the current idea are awful.

It leaves the door open for game companies to make mods "steam only" in the future for benefits to the bottom line for instance.

wulfharth wrote: The official paid DLC is Steam only. Why not the smaller not official but sanctioned DLC? We always have the Nexus if modders want to choose to throw up an donate button to not get pressed and give free work to the sweet and loving community.

thefinn wrote: You're missing the point.

They can make the game so that when it runs it only allows mods that steam downloaded.

And they would be...
1) In their rights to do so.
2) getting more profits by doing so and they are corporations you know?

Reaper0021 wrote: thefinn is right in that regard. IF THEY WANTED to be tyrannical about it that is.

thefinn wrote: And when have you known corporations not to be ?

DRM itself had huge backlash at the time... but here it is still.

Reaper0021 wrote: I agree with you thefinn. I'll tell you one that isn't and I defy you to say otherwise: CDProjekt Red. But in all aspects of this you're 100% right.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Wulf, your ad hominem aside, I'm not going to post my resume because it's irrelevant. Every person who bought Skyrim (they are called customers) have an absolute right to tell Bethesda what they think of their business practices. It doesn't matter if not a single one of those 133,000 people who signed the petition never wrote a mod, or has not done something YOU think "qualifies" them to giver their opinion. They still get to give it.

Of course Bethesda is under no obligation to listen to their customers. In this case they did. They probably also realized what a Hiroshima-type disaster this was, and if they were smart, fired the individual(s) responsible for this abortion of creativity.

wulfharth wrote: If Bethesda wanted to be tyrants, they probably wouldn't have out of pocketed to provide and update the creation kit. And that's just for the PC gamers mind you. That is a special gift just to us that is more valuable than any 10 mods on here. You should feel loved and have more faith in them.

wulfharth wrote: Vesuvius-You are Bethesda's customer. Not mine. I don't want your made up resume. All I know is that you haven't posted a single mod. You aren't a modder. Why are you telling us what we can do with our work?

Reaper0021 wrote: It's not about lack of love or faith. It's about common business practices. A business remains a business as long as it can "TURN A PROFIT" and when it can't no longer (ATARI, Commodore, SEGA, etc.) then it stops becoming a business and becomes a share holders nightmare. All of this is just theory talk...but in the back of my mind I remain cautious about what the future holds.

thefinn wrote: Totally agree, if I were going to have love or faith (without going to church) it'd be in the Nexus, not some new system Valve has talked Bethesda into.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: I, nor anybody else, is telling mod authors what they can or cannot do with their "work". As Bethesda's customers, we explained to them we did not want a pay-for paradigm for mods. We gave our opinion, which as customers we have every right to give. They didn't have to listen to their customers, but they did. Since Bethesda owns the Intellectual property rights to Skyrim, and mod authors sign their EULA accepting their contract, it is Bethesda who gets to tell mod authors what they can or cannot do with their derivative creations. If a mod author is upset by that, then they should take it up with Bethesda. Or mod for a game that allows paid-for mods. Whining about it here, or getting upset with the people who bought Skyrim and gave their opinion, is not going to be fruitful.

Reaper0021 wrote: And to continue on this point by Vesuvius1745....when I give my $$$$ for anything in this world be it new tires, PC parts, cable T.V./internet, books, food, games, music, etc. I HAVE the right as a paying customer to offer my critique or displeasure or ANYTHING with what I paid for if it doesn't meet my expectations as a customer. I don't have to be a tire manufacturer to offer my opinion that I like Firestone better than the other brands. You make no sense man in your argument. You act as if we are indebted to Bethesda and I can assure you it's the other way around. Kudos given to Vesuvius1745.

crashpilot wrote: @Wulfharth,

Since there is not that much of your work you have to worry about, I would say let us our opinion and we let you yours.

Pauliwhop wrote: You don't have to be a doctor to sue for Malpractice. Try again.

treota wrote: "All I know is that you haven't posted a single mod, so you are not a modder" - This is basically the same as telling a carpenter they aren't valid because they have never carved mahogany, who is to say that he has never contributed anything to any modding scene for any game ever created or even created content that he didn't feel like uploading.

More close to home telling a critic that their opinion is worthless because they have never done what they critique (which is pretty common).

I'm 99% sure that there are plenty of food critics for example that have never been professional chefs.

The fact that your chair is made of wood, doesn't make you a carpenter.

[WightMage]

In response to post #24871504. #24871889, #24872029, #24872299, #24872914, #24873159, #24873254, #24873374, #24873424, #24873614, #24873674, #24873684, #24875884, #24876184, #24876264 are all replies on the same post.

darkslayer666 wrote: Dark0ne:

Forgive my ignorance on this topic but; Why doesn't Nexus help the modders more?

As it stands endorsements don't really do anything, other than boost ego. I'd like some Nexus revenue to go to modders... 1000 endorsements for $100?

I don't know, like I said, how much does Nexus generate income, but with it's size I'd wager quite a lot since there's a big traffic here. I mean you got the dough for managers but not for your $$$ generators? Priorities man.

Perhaps increase ad's on Nexus to support modders? People will also be more inclined to endorse.

I personally think Nexus doesn't take care of their modders much at all, and I don't agree with some of your choices. I know Nexus is a business and it's survival is your priority but no modders = no Nexus.

Relying on donations solely while taking 100% of revenue is not going to last forever as you've seen from Steam. And you also asked the modders to put nexus as a provider(which is about 5% of revenue) I mean... I bet they scratched their heads asking when did Nexus give them 5%.

I can write more, but as I've said, I'm not much knowledgeable on this subject and would like the communities help on this. I feel like Nexus isn't much better in my eyes.

If my post is offensive so be it.. good bye, but I feel like too many people aren't questioning this as well.

blackasm wrote: Very well put, as it stands the nexus gets money you could say directly from the effort of modders, as well as you tube mod reviewers, bethesda really only gets hype/publicity through modders. Typically mod authors that generate revenue from their own site would lose out being part of the nexus. I have said it a number of times earlier, but it is a classic case of talented people undervaluing themselves.

groupthinker1984 wrote: We aren't questioning it because we know the service being provided here. Free hosting of a vast repository of mods for a growing number of games alongside a free client/mod manager that is regularly updated.

You don't have to pay to host and you don't have to pay to download. The people who are paying do so to support nexusmods, not the modders. If we want our money to go to the modders, we will donate to them.

Please don't speak for us when you aren't even one of us.

Hevymettle wrote: You seem pretty opinionated despite announcing yourself that you had much ignorance on the topic. First and foremost I think it is important that you know that Valve offered this site 5% of their profit if Nexus was listed by the modder as being an aid to them. It was 100% voluntary of of the modder and initiated by Valve, so blaming this site or Dark0ne makes no sense at all.

Second, this site was founded on being a hub for modders to do what they like and to have it reach out to an audience. No one was forced to do it and they were even supplied with a program that makes it infinitely easier for people to mod their games. Attacking him as "not caring" about modders or taking advantage of them for not paying is pretty ludicrous. He is paying out the butt just to run this site. Have you even looked at the figures it takes to keep this thing going?

Your initial idea was pretty good but it sounds better when you leave out every possible thing that he would have to take into consideration. How easily would the system be abused? (people would find a way to get fake endorsements in the first week, I guarantee it). What happens if the modders start making too much money and the site is losing money offering it to them? Everything here runs the way it was created for and the people that utilize the site have done so for a reason.

It isn't a bad idea but you shouldn't over simplify it and then attack someone when you have questionable knowledge on the topic at best. That is especially distasteful when you are responding to a post that he is making about making changes to help modders make money.

macintroll wrote: I was asking on the other topic, why a system like youtube could not be added to the nexus ?.
Like here ads pay the bills. That's why we have a free service.

On youtube you can subscribe to adsense, then showing ads within your videos. Clicks and views giving back some money to each youtubber.

Simply adding ads on the mod page, which earnings goes to the modder, can be a way to give some retribution to some good mods with high pages view stats. (9M pages view for SkyUI)

Of course with this system only good high rated mods will generate some money
but neither nexus or any end user have to pay a cent to the "content provider".

Lamproly wrote: If I understand you right, macintroll, I don't think a system like that would leave grateful users. The ads in videos are - again - a huge turn-off and I only don't notice them because of adblock. And that's the reason why I turn off adblock on the nexus site, because the ads there aren't distracting or annoying me as much and I can still browse the site freely.

thefinn wrote: I think you guys are completely over-guessing what the nexus makes out of running this whole system.

As far as the 5% being paid to nexus, for all we know some completely overpaid high-priced lawyer realised there was some kind of infringement possibility in this and paying the nexus SOMETHING could alleviate that, but who knows?

Perhaps they really wanted to give something back to the community - although my cynical self just kind of laughs at that idea.

macintroll wrote: Quote "I think you guys are completely over-guessing what the nexus makes out of running this whole system."
Only servers costs for Nexus are $500.000 / year as stated Dark0ne some time ago.
Where do you think the money to pay this comes from ?

darkslayer666 wrote: @Hevymettle

Likewise my friend. You seem like you know the statistics of Nexus's income I take it?

I am not attacking Nexus, I am critiquing on the way Nexus is handling the situation. I am proposing ways on how we can keep modders from leaving, even at the expense of users by increasing ads for instance. I never said any of my ideas are soundproof. That is why I asked for communities opinion, and not be barraged.

Perhaps I should of with-held my opinion on how I feel, but it's true, Nexus doesn't support the modders one bit as far as my knowledge goes, and giving them tools is like saying a cab-driver should buy his own cab because hey... You say Nexus is trying to help but how? Certainly not out of Nexus's pockets, which I think it should since they bring in the income in the first place.

And on the point of "free-hub".. oh please, it's like saying non-profit organizations aren't profiting. Once again, I care less who's profiting, I am simply raising awareness that if Nexus can waste money on one thing but not the other is a little weird to me.

But once again, feel free to pick anything apart I'm an open book :).

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Why doesn't Nexus do more to help mod authors? Dark0ne has been hosting this site for many years. He's spent countless hours on it, and a countless amount of his own money on something that is basically a labor of love. The amount of traffic this site handles is no small feat, and no small amount of money. Dark0ne has given this resource to mod authors for free to host their files, and you want him to do even more? smh

macintroll wrote: @Lamproly
Well i just see this as a way to keep free mods, and modders here. Ads make the internet free currently, anywhere, everywhere else without ads, you pay to access the contents (or to remove the ads)

Paid modding is coming what ever you think now, Valve&Bethesda missed the point starting with Skyrim but for sure the next games without an existing user base currently will have paid mods (FO4?)
It's a trend and more games companies find this as a new good way to make money.

Everyone should also read this by moddb :
http://www.moddb.com/news/the-uncertain-future-of-paid-mods

LP1 wrote: I think this is a fair point and something that Robin is probably already thinking about. The fact is that for many years several people have actually been able to monetize modding. Youtubers, the Nexus... The only people who have been forbidden from making money off of modding were the mod authors themselves. A model like youtube with ad revenue sharing would be interesting. Any attempt at a model would be interesting. The Nexus does provide a wonderful service, and Robin runs it about as well as could be expected. It's an extremely challenging job. But the Nexus is most decidedly NOT a non-profit entity. I think that is why Robin has been as balanced as he has been in all of this. I think he truly believes in the spirit of open source. On the other hand, he is a big TES fan who has managed to turn his love of mods into a livelihood. Do modders not have the same right to try to do that? It is a complicated situation.

thefinn wrote: I take your point, but I cannot see any real feasible way for the Nexus to put a "share driven" kind of dollar amount on mods, can you ?

Like I understand the modder is the one person not getting paid in this system, but I don't see a way to change that. By the same logic, should Gopher be giving kickbacks to modders for the money he makes off Youtube?

I just don't see how that'd work.

sunshinenbrick wrote: You cannot pay for mods, you can only pay for modding. No money for modding can go through Nexus. This is the short version.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: What Sunshine said. Not to mention the Nexus is run at a loss. It's a labor of love, and all that "ad revenue" goes toward the upkeep and running of the site, and it still doesn't cover it all. Nobody is secretly getting rich off of the work of mod authors.

...which frankly, was the largest (and most BS) conspiracy theory to wreck through the Nexus community over the past week.

@Hevymettle pretty much stated anything I had to contribute to this thread. The Dark0ne does contribute greatly to modders, whether it seems overt or not, and frankly there are few things more aggravating than being accused of not "doing enough."

[sunshinenbrick]

In response to post #24873139. #24874159, #24874314, #24874474, #24874519, #24874634, #24874639, #24874729, #24874774, #24874924, #24874984, #24875019, #24875044, #24875074, #24875124, #24875219, #24875289, #24875334, #24875454, #24875484, #24875669, #24876774, #24876829, #24877709, #24877889 are all replies on the same post.

thefinn wrote: I doubt they will drop this.

They will do more research than smoking some doobies in the coffee lounge at valve and saying "You know what would be cool ?" then we'll see something similar coming up again in the future.

There's way too much money involved for this to go away.

Personally, if they'd just add a "donate" button and not try to "sell mods" that might go down better.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: With the next TES game, I could see them charging for the Creation Kit, and then setting it so you have to "share" your mods on a specific website they control, and then charging people a flat-access rate to the website.

Oh, and I can see them releasing the next TES game even more incomplete than Skyrim. Release a barebones game, make money off it, then let the modders finish your game, and make money off of that too. I bet I've just given some pencil pusher at Bethesda a 3-inch erection.

wulfharth wrote: That's called an alpha release, and that happens everyday.

Bethesda has always tried hard to keep everyone happy (except with the exclusive DLC period releases). They just wanted to give people who make mods a chance to do it for a living. Shame on them for creating jobs and stimulating the mod community. They should all kill themselves. Right? Should I make a sign protest mod about them offering opportunity?

How do I block this guy? The option isn't at the bottom of his posts.

wulfharth wrote: Ha! I found out where to do it, but I can't block you Vesuvius1745 because you've never contributed a mod, so you aren't listed as an author.

So why again do you feel you have the right to have an opinion on what actual mod contributor's are allowed to do with their mods? You aren't even one of us.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Oh, my mistake. I didn't realize the corporation known as Bethesda was being altruistic, and just wanted to stimulate the economy while at the same time giving amateur mod authors their Big Break. You're not only a glass-is-half-full kind of guy, you're a glass-is-half-full when it's actually empty kind of guy.

Instead of trying to make a buck off of mod authors, they should concentrate on making sure the next TES release is stable and complete. Yes, game companies are releasing their games earlier and earlier, and frankly, many gamers are sick of paying to Beta test unfinished products.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Good question, wulth. As someone who paid for Skyrim, I have the same right as the 133,000+ other people who signed the petition given to Bethesda telling them what we thought of this pay-for system.

I suspect the pencil pusher who came up with this idea is probably shaking in his boots. Wondering if he will have a job next month. Maybe he's even trolling these forums to test the waters, and not liking what he is seeing.

thefinn wrote: Well I am a pretty harsh critic of games, I think Skyrim is one of the best I've played in years.

There might've been some bugs at launch, but few are the games you'll find without them and frankly with the size of Skyrim they are to be expected.

I don't see how it was "incomplete".

wulfharth wrote: @Vesuvius-Instead of telling super successful multi-million dollar corporations with giant and loyal fan bases how to run their businesses, you should go try and make a dungeon or create and add a custom 3D model. I'm sure you'll change your tune very quickly.

You have no frame of reference for what it means or takes to be a mod author. Stop telling everyone what to do or what they should do. You aren't qualified.

thefinn wrote: The difference being that the question for you is "Can I still get free stuff?" while the question for modders is "Is this a system I find reasonable to work with?"

The only saving grace to me was the thought that perhaps I should start putting together my feminine walk mod again to be paid for, or to be the free alternative to the other mod of its' kind. It actually made me think this (for the very small mods I have done) it was in fact my first thought.

So it can indeed instill the impetus in modders to mod.

However, the drawbacks of the current idea are awful.

It leaves the door open for game companies to make mods "steam only" in the future for benefits to the bottom line for instance.

wulfharth wrote: The official paid DLC is Steam only. Why not the smaller not official but sanctioned DLC? We always have the Nexus if modders want to choose to throw up an donate button to not get pressed and give free work to the sweet and loving community.

thefinn wrote: You're missing the point.

They can make the game so that when it runs it only allows mods that steam downloaded.

And they would be...
1) In their rights to do so.
2) getting more profits by doing so and they are corporations you know?

Reaper0021 wrote: thefinn is right in that regard. IF THEY WANTED to be tyrannical about it that is.

thefinn wrote: And when have you known corporations not to be ?

DRM itself had huge backlash at the time... but here it is still.

Reaper0021 wrote: I agree with you thefinn. I'll tell you one that isn't and I defy you to say otherwise: CDProjekt Red. But in all aspects of this you're 100% right.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: Wulf, your ad hominem aside, I'm not going to post my resume because it's irrelevant. Every person who bought Skyrim (they are called customers) have an absolute right to tell Bethesda what they think of their business practices. It doesn't matter if not a single one of those 133,000 people who signed the petition never wrote a mod, or has not done something YOU think "qualifies" them to giver their opinion. They still get to give it.

Of course Bethesda is under no obligation to listen to their customers. In this case they did. They probably also realized what a Hiroshima-type disaster this was, and if they were smart, fired the individual(s) responsible for this abortion of creativity.

wulfharth wrote: If Bethesda wanted to be tyrants, they probably wouldn't have out of pocketed to provide and update the creation kit. And that's just for the PC gamers mind you. That is a special gift just to us that is more valuable than any 10 mods on here. You should feel loved and have more faith in them.

wulfharth wrote: Vesuvius-You are Bethesda's customer. Not mine. I don't want your made up resume. All I know is that you haven't posted a single mod. You aren't a modder. Why are you telling us what we can do with our work?

Reaper0021 wrote: It's not about lack of love or faith. It's about common business practices. A business remains a business as long as it can "TURN A PROFIT" and when it can't no longer (ATARI, Commodore, SEGA, etc.) then it stops becoming a business and becomes a share holders nightmare. All of this is just theory talk...but in the back of my mind I remain cautious about what the future holds.

thefinn wrote: Totally agree, if I were going to have love or faith (without going to church) it'd be in the Nexus, not some new system Valve has talked Bethesda into.

Vesuvius1745 wrote: I, nor anybody else, is telling mod authors what they can or cannot do with their "work". As Bethesda's customers, we explained to them we did not want a pay-for paradigm for mods. We gave our opinion, which as customers we have every right to give. They didn't have to listen to their customers, but they did. Since Bethesda owns the Intellectual property rights to Skyrim, and mod authors sign their EULA accepting their contract, it is Bethesda who gets to tell mod authors what they can or cannot do with their derivative creations. If a mod author is upset by that, then they should take it up with Bethesda. Or mod for a game that allows paid-for mods. Whining about it here, or getting upset with the people who bought Skyrim and gave their opinion, is not going to be fruitful.

Reaper0021 wrote: And to continue on this point by Vesuvius1745....when I give my $$$$ for anything in this world be it new tires, PC parts, cable T.V./internet, books, food, games, music, etc. I HAVE the right as a paying customer to offer my critique or displeasure or ANYTHING with what I paid for if it doesn't meet my expectations as a customer. I don't have to be a tire manufacturer to offer my opinion that I like Firestone better than the other brands. You make no sense man in your argument. You act as if we are indebted to Bethesda and I can assure you it's the other way around. Kudos given to Vesuvius1745.

crashpilot wrote: @Wulfharth,

Since there is not that much of your work you have to worry about, I would say let us our opinion and we let you yours.

Pauliwhop wrote: You don't have to be a doctor to sue for Malpractice. Try again.

treota wrote: "All I know is that you haven't posted a single mod, so you are not a modder" - This is basically the same as telling a carpenter they aren't valid because they have never carved mahogany, who is to say that he has never contributed anything to any modding scene for any game ever created or even created content that he didn't feel like uploading.

More close to home telling a critic that their opinion is worthless because they have never done what they critique (which is pretty common).

I'm 99% sure that there are plenty of food critics for example that have never been professional chefs.

thefinn wrote: The fact that your chair is made of wood, doesn't make you a carpenter.

"An expert is one who knows more and more about less and less until he knows absolutely everything about nothing."

Nicholas Butler