Pyrian on 25/4/2015 at 17:31
Quote Posted by Starker
Yes, I am inclined to believe that they might have several tiers and options that they put on the table for developers/publishers.
In that they'll let the publisher set which portion of the 70% they take, sure. Reducing Valve's portion? Not so much.
Quote Posted by Starker
But of course without facts this is mere speculation on my part as much as your belief of a 25/30/45 cut.
Eh, they've outright stated they're taking their usual share, and it's an open secret that that's ~30%. Hardly speculation.
Quote Posted by Starker
What I mean is that this might kill Valve's effort of making this a sustainable way of monetising mods.
Do you really think modders are going to be so enticed by the "free" option that they won't want to make any money at all - now that they actually can? And it's not like Valve and indeed the publisher cannot adjust pricing on the fly if it's not working.
van HellSing on 25/4/2015 at 17:33
Valve's a villain with good publicity. That's what I always said.
With this move, some people are starting to open their eyes.
Starker on 25/4/2015 at 18:53
Quote Posted by Pyrian
In that they'll let the publisher set which portion of the 70% they take, sure. Reducing Valve's portion? Not so much.
Why not? They might want to incentivise developers to set better revenue shares for modders, for example.
Quote Posted by Pyrian
Eh, they've outright stated they're taking their usual share, and it's an open secret that that's ~30%. Hardly speculation.
30% of what, though? Maybe they mean that they take 30% of the 75%. And if they really take that 30% flat cut, I'd say they are more shortsighted than usual.
Quote Posted by Pyrian
Do you really think modders are going to be so enticed by the "free" option that they won't want to make any money at all - now that they actually can? And it's not like Valve and indeed the publisher cannot adjust pricing on the fly if it's not working.
I think that the success will depend on the revenue stream that will be coming in, and that's dependent on both the content producers as well as the customers buying the content. A high revenue share for modders is not only a good incentive to get modders to sign up, but it also means that they can set the prices lower, which in turn means better chances of people actually paying for the mods.
Also, a higher share would especially help bigger, higher quality projects while a small share will favour modders who make smaller, easier to produce content.
Ostriig on 25/4/2015 at 21:18
Quote Posted by Pyrian
My concern is, who's going to check? Valve sure as heck won't.
I would suggest reading Dark0ne's comments over at Nexusmods, he's the guy running the network, and he's got some interesting comments all around. Don't have to agree with everything, but a worthwhile perspective from the competition.
As to your question, he goes one further:
Quote:
(http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/news/12454/?) Originally Posted by Dark0neWhile I'm talking about this fear of mods or assets being stolen, I feel I need to point out a massive, glaring issue with this new Workshop implementation, because right now people are focusing on "Oh my god, you mean I might need to pay for some mods?" while I think an even more horrific thing is "Oh my god, you mean I will have to pay to check and make sure if someone has stolen my work!?"
Quote Posted by Jason Moyer
I'm also surprised at the number of people who develop content and don't realize that the owners of the game they're modding own the intellectual rights to their work and could monetize it themselves if they wanted to. [...] Other people are concerned that person B is going to release content that includes work by person A; guess what, neither of those people own that work, Zenimax does, and it's kind of them to not only allow you to make that stuff but to let you earn cash from it as well.
I don't think the issue is legality here, as yes, the original license you got the the game under covers it. They can do whatever they want, that's clear. But looking it from a modder's perspective, for most of these guys the only thing they've gotten out of it has been practice, props and
perhaps some CV material. Props likely being the key factor for some of them. So, on that emotional premise, it is possible that some modders will just get pissed, grab their toys and go home if they couldn't control subsequent monetisation of their stuff.
More importantly, does the possibility of allowing some mod authors to "license" their work as viral free have any notable downsides? Bearing in mind these would be the same people likely to pick up and go. 'Cause otherwise I agree, letting interested modders get some payment for their work is an excellent thing.
Quote:
I can't believe anyone is complaining about it.
I checked out the Steam forums yesterday when I first read about this stuff. There was a kid literally saying that he's "already paid for the mods by learning how to install them and resolve conflicts." And at Nexus I read a comment from some guy who was uninstalling a mod - still available for free at Nexus - because he had it up for sale on the Workshop. You tell 'em, girlfriend.
Quote Posted by Fafhrd
I think the biggest confusion is differentiation between contributions and dependencies.
That's interesting to consider. Yes, Fore's mod is a critical dependency, I
think, but it's not actually
bundled in the paid-for package.
TannisRoot on 26/4/2015 at 00:36
This will be interesting. Imagine if we had to pay for NewDark or fan missions? Actually considering Square is bleeding cash, we probably won't have imagine for very much longer. If I were you, I'd download all the mods and maps you've been putting off while they are still available...
On the up-side this probably means better mods going forward. It will encourage DLC content by outside developers. I can imagine small gaming studios going into the mod scene where they would not have before.
Here's to hoping for expansions to beloved games that wouldn't have otherwise recieved them. Crossing my fingers for a new Stalker.
Pyrian on 27/4/2015 at 23:39
Maybe something that hadn't been released yet. :p Starting a community instead of intruding into one. (And, uh, maybe more than 25%.)
faetal on 28/4/2015 at 08:29
A predictable lack of magnanimity in the comments below that.
icemann on 28/4/2015 at 08:35
Quite sad really. Means people wont be able to make careers out for modding (for now atleast), other than the immensely successful ones.
A further blow to the games industry in general. So for the time being, don't give up your day job.
Ostriig on 28/4/2015 at 08:49
What a shame. Something about babies out with the bathwater and all that. I believe Skyrim was actually a great choice to roll this out on, sure there were issues, but I think it could've worked out in the long run.
