Paid mods added to Steam... then removed.

[Kalabajooie]

I don't typically use mods in my games, so I wasn't following this issue that closely. When I first heard Steam was adding the ability to charge for mods, I thought, "Great! Another avenue for people to be compensated for their passion," and carried on my day.

Then this appears: www.pcgamer.com/valve-has-removed-paid-mods-functionality-from-steam-workshop/

What is so wrong about asking for money in exchange for making something? I think Steam caved far too quickly. The 130,000 entitled little pricks that signed the petition mentioned in the article apparently have no concept that many people consider their time to be worth money. In addition, Valve pays for the space and bandwidth to host the Steam Workshop so those same entitled pricks can have their "I Win" buttons. Have they not heard of "vote with your wallet?" Why is it every time something changes in gaming, the torches and pitchforks come out?

</rant>

[Kalabajooie]

Now that I've read deeper into the issue, I see the flaw in the system: Valve and Bethesda (this started with Skyrim) took a 75% cut. That's kinda shitty, especially when Skyrim is a relatively old game and the reason people still play is because it can be modded easily.

Fix that. More money to the modders. The rest of my points still stand.

[Slurm]

Say hello to one of those entitled little pricks.

I thought the implementation was handled far too fast and needed to be removed before Steam, something I love very dearly, got drug through the mud any further.

Here's a couple things to consider:

The 75% thing: Yeah, the 25% to Valve is standard. That's been there for Steam for a long time now. The other 50% was going to Bethesda. To me, that's excessive. I get that it's their base product, but they set a precedent on the onset of the Steam Workshop and then to go bad and begin charging such a high amount? "There's oil in them there mods!"

The other problem that people saw happening was, because a lot of the existing mods use other peoples creations via community commons to get their stuff to work, there was a potential chain reaction of "stolen" wares. Something Valve said that they wouldn't get in the middle of. Because of the lack of screening over such details, who knows what would happen to the modding scene.

I completely agree that there should be a way to pay a modder for his/her contributions to the game. But giving them 25% of what you're paying into a system and not having a more well thought-out approach isn't the way to handle it.

[fluxay]

That's about as bad of a deal as the Nintendo/YouTube mess....

[Kalabajooie]

Apr 28, 2015 8:55:38 GMT -5 Slurm said:

Say hello to one of those entitled little pricks.

My language may have been a bit strong and I apologize. The time between waking up and getting ready for work likely isn't ideal for forming a reasoned argument.

My brain at the time was coming at it from two angles: First, the kids (of all ages) whose parents don't want them tapping their credit cards again and again to add cheaty mods to their games. Second, the generation of gamers that's now growing up with cheap or free games that simply expect these mods to be handed to them without regard to the time the modders have spent on them, or that shout "THEIR TAKIN ARE GURMS!" because they assume all mods will simply become paid DLC.

Would there be opportunity for abuse? Absolutely. Would some modders overcharge to try and compensate for the ludicrous cut Bethesda is taking? Definitely. But would you need to buy these paid mods to enjoy your game? Nope.

I'm not disagreeing with any of your arguments, just adding a bit of context to my own. The implementation was definitely ham-handed and half-assed and whoever struck that deal with Bethesda ought to be sent back to the mail room. It's a great idea. They just need to treat it with some more finesse.