In a move that is not even remotely surprising to me, Valve has started rolling out the ability for mod authors to sell their works. I think it’s a nice move, and could even help some even more amazing mods be created. You already had some mods release as a full paid game on Steam, but they still required you own specific games.
It was a given that Steam Workshop would work towards this, and I’m surprised anyone is shocked by it. The first game to allow it is Skyrim, so it doesn't mean much for us Linux gamers yet, but in future we hope to see it rolled out to many more games.
This has already been met with a ton of negative feedback from a whiny crowd, and there’s even a petition going against it. No surprise that it has over 24,000 votes already, but it won’t stop Valve, and it shouldn’t. It’s a good business decision, and the whiny crowd will get over it eventually.
QuoteThe workshop is a place for people to share content with each other they made so all can enjoy it for free.
Since recently this is not the case for The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Workshop. Valve has now erected a paywall for the mods.
Mods should be a free creation. Creations made by people who wish to add to the game so others can also enjoy said creation with the game.
We need to unite and reject this act by Valve. Unite have Valve remove the paid content of the Workshop.
It seems the creator of the petition feels that mods are supposed to be free, but I completely disagree. Mods can end up creating an entirely new campaign, or even an entirely different game, so why should developers have to release them for free? They shouldn't.
I just don’t get the big hoohaa about it. Nothing stops people releasing mods for free as the petition suggests by calling it a “paywall”, and there’s even a simple to use filtering system to filter-out paid mods.
What are your thoughts?
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
1mHfoksd1Z Apr 24, 2015
I think it's a good move too. Some people work hard when creating those mods... and it's their choice to either share it for free or sell it. Some people will be motivated by this feature and start creating mods for money. I can only see this as being good for everyone.
In the past, the workshop forced you to give away your work for free. Many people would have done it anyway (most modders, actually) but some didn't and either sold it somewhere else (very rare) or gave up the idea.
It's not up to us to judge this move. It's up to each modder. It's their choice if they want their mods to be paid or free. We can't force them to make free mods, we can't force them to make mods at all.
In the past, the workshop forced you to give away your work for free. Many people would have done it anyway (most modders, actually) but some didn't and either sold it somewhere else (very rare) or gave up the idea.
It's not up to us to judge this move. It's up to each modder. It's their choice if they want their mods to be paid or free. We can't force them to make free mods, we can't force them to make mods at all.
6 Likes, Who?
Comandante Ñoñardo Apr 24, 2015
This will be followed by A LOTof copyright lawsuits because of the comercial use of the assets..
Mods must stay FREE
Mods must stay FREE
2 Likes, Who?
What are the requirements to make a paid for mod?
If there's no requirements, then anyone can profit from the game developers work by making a single config file tweak and release it as such a "mod".
The amount of crap that is being greenlit over the last 6-12 months suggests that we are going to have a similar affect with mods.
I will not be surprised if the execution fails to provide any kind of quality control.
If there's no requirements, then anyone can profit from the game developers work by making a single config file tweak and release it as such a "mod".
The amount of crap that is being greenlit over the last 6-12 months suggests that we are going to have a similar affect with mods.
I will not be surprised if the execution fails to provide any kind of quality control.
1 Likes, Who?
This will be followed by A LOTof copyright lawsuits because of the comercial use of the assets..
Mods must stay FREE
The main developers would have to have signed off for it to be allowed. The developers are the ones who even enable Steam Workshop, it's not automatic for every game.
No, mods shouldn't always stay free.
0 Likes
I completely agree with Liam.
To the extent free mods can still be allowed into the workshop, I'm happy about the policy. Sincerelly, there are some awesome mods and I don't object to the devs being paid back for their work.
To the extent free mods can still be allowed into the workshop, I'm happy about the policy. Sincerelly, there are some awesome mods and I don't object to the devs being paid back for their work.
0 Likes
The main developers would have to have signed off for it to be allowed. The developers are the ones who even enable Steam Workshop, it's not automatic for every game.
Do they get to choose which mods are paid for? Or just that people in general can make paid for mods for their game?
0 Likes
Mods must stay FREE
As we were discussing in IRC, modders can still choose whether or not it can be free.
Starting to conclude to myself, this isn't a moral issue at all like those people are claiming. People are unhappy, but I doubt it has to do with mods charging for $. Of course, people will naturally shift fingers because common ground for "tradition" is easier than sticking their brains to a logical argument.
0 Likes
how is this going to work with games like Garrys mod where servers run a collection of mods. It would be shitty if you had to buy 50 different mods every time the server changes map/game mode...
0 Likes
I can see where this is coming from...
When i first came to debian, I thought that debian developers should be paid...I was told about the dunc tank experiment incident in debian's project life... this was a big effort to get some debian developers to get paid directly from the project (notice that some developers manage to get paid for their work on their own ways, but not directly from the project or with the project donations). It suffered from a lot of opposition within the project... you can probably google about it
I did not agree with this at the time... but after my 7/8 years on debian I think I understand it now... when there is money involved it kinda breaks thing... envies sprout... -"why this this person is getting paid and im not, doing the same work", etc... plus now the decisions are taken by people that cares about them... when things are money driven they turn... different... not sure if better or worse...
I dont really know where I stand on this issue... but I totally understand the motivation behind the outcry... If I were force to choose a side, i would side with the 'money breaks things' group. I would had never believed I could say that a few years ago...
When i first came to debian, I thought that debian developers should be paid...I was told about the dunc tank experiment incident in debian's project life... this was a big effort to get some debian developers to get paid directly from the project (notice that some developers manage to get paid for their work on their own ways, but not directly from the project or with the project donations). It suffered from a lot of opposition within the project... you can probably google about it
I did not agree with this at the time... but after my 7/8 years on debian I think I understand it now... when there is money involved it kinda breaks thing... envies sprout... -"why this this person is getting paid and im not, doing the same work", etc... plus now the decisions are taken by people that cares about them... when things are money driven they turn... different... not sure if better or worse...
I dont really know where I stand on this issue... but I totally understand the motivation behind the outcry... If I were force to choose a side, i would side with the 'money breaks things' group. I would had never believed I could say that a few years ago...
5 Likes, Who?
tuxisagamer Apr 24, 2015
I wonder how much overlap there are between the paid mod whiners and Gamergate. I bet quite a bit.
1 Likes, Who?
I wonder how much overlap there are between the paid mod whiners and Gamergate. I bet quite a bit.
What's your point? Just because there is (undoubtedly) overlap doesn't mean they are related.
0 Likes
lucifertdark Apr 24, 2015
It's not even been 24 hrs & one has been removed because the person trying to sell it didn't make it.
0 Likes
And in addition I read that Steam and the developers of the game will take 75% of each sale. They wouldn't allow commercial use of their work for free.This will be followed by A LOTof copyright lawsuits because of the comercial use of the assets..
Mods must stay FREE
The main developers would have to have signed off for it to be allowed. The developers are the ones who even enable Steam Workshop, it's not automatic for every game.
No, mods shouldn't always stay free.
0 Likes
tobiushirogeri Apr 24, 2015
I think it's a good thing. Some devs put lots of efforts in their mods and they deserve to get paid for their work.
0 Likes
I don't mind the concept of paid mods but there are 3 problems in the current execution:
1) The split for skyrim mods are ridiculous. A modder only gets 25% and must get at least $100 before being paid. Other games/developers will be better about it, hopefully.
2) There is no guarantee that mods will continue to work with future versions of the game. They won't necessarily get updated. The 24 hour grace period is nice but it does not mitigate the risk to the buyer long-term.
3) I'm not sure how intellectual property for purposes of publishing mods will work out. What of paid mods that use components of other mods, a practice usual in the scene? Furthermore, there's already been mods uploaded without permission from the original owner and while they might crack down on some egregious cases I'm not sure there's a practical way to impose a proof of ownership because of how the internet works.
I'm especially interested in seeing how 3) pans out. We might eventually even see litigation on it since I can imagine copyleft and copyright licenses emerging over mods in the future and developers getting sued over sold mods that have other people's work and material in it. Or it might be a non-starter if the developer owns all derivative content to being with according to courts.
What I hope from this paid mod system is that the most sensible modders that do it for the love of things will simply set it up so that they can get an optional donation and thus avoid splitting the community for games with multiplayer components.
1) The split for skyrim mods are ridiculous. A modder only gets 25% and must get at least $100 before being paid. Other games/developers will be better about it, hopefully.
2) There is no guarantee that mods will continue to work with future versions of the game. They won't necessarily get updated. The 24 hour grace period is nice but it does not mitigate the risk to the buyer long-term.
3) I'm not sure how intellectual property for purposes of publishing mods will work out. What of paid mods that use components of other mods, a practice usual in the scene? Furthermore, there's already been mods uploaded without permission from the original owner and while they might crack down on some egregious cases I'm not sure there's a practical way to impose a proof of ownership because of how the internet works.
I'm especially interested in seeing how 3) pans out. We might eventually even see litigation on it since I can imagine copyleft and copyright licenses emerging over mods in the future and developers getting sued over sold mods that have other people's work and material in it. Or it might be a non-starter if the developer owns all derivative content to being with according to courts.
What I hope from this paid mod system is that the most sensible modders that do it for the love of things will simply set it up so that they can get an optional donation and thus avoid splitting the community for games with multiplayer components.
7 Likes, Who?
I have no problem with the modders getting paid for their work. If they put in the effort to make content people want that seems only fair.
I wonder though if there can be unintended consequences since the publishers can get more out of this than the modder (if I understand correctly the publisher decides what cut the modder gets). Couldn't that lead to publishers getting additional revenue for shipping a broken game that some modder then fixes? Or just missing features. Ship the game without field-of-view slider or with locked framerate or resolution, someone makes a mod to add those features, and the publisher not only saves money on not having to implement any of this, but actually gets more money because someone else fixed the problem for them and people have to pay for the fix (unless the modder makes it available for free).
Then again, maybe I'm just old and cynical...
I wonder though if there can be unintended consequences since the publishers can get more out of this than the modder (if I understand correctly the publisher decides what cut the modder gets). Couldn't that lead to publishers getting additional revenue for shipping a broken game that some modder then fixes? Or just missing features. Ship the game without field-of-view slider or with locked framerate or resolution, someone makes a mod to add those features, and the publisher not only saves money on not having to implement any of this, but actually gets more money because someone else fixed the problem for them and people have to pay for the fix (unless the modder makes it available for free).
Then again, maybe I'm just old and cynical...
2 Likes, Who?
It's not even been 24 hrs & one has been removed because the person trying to sell it didn't make it.
So I guess that answers the question of if mods get moderated before allowed to be put up as paid for.
And in addition I read that Steam and the developers of the game will take 75% of each sale. They wouldn't allow commercial use of their work for free.
So basically, "mod devs should be paid" is actually "should only be paid pennies" then?
I think it's a good thing. Some devs put lots of efforts in their mods and they deserve to get paid for their work.
I don't think that's being questioned (certainly I'm not), but this system is so open to abuse particularly with how Valve have gone about this type of thing in the past.
0 Likes
I wonder how much overlap there are between the paid mod whiners and Gamergate. I bet quite a bit.Considering many GGers are old(er)-school PC gamers there's definitely some overlap. However, I think it's completely unrelated. GG (or at least parts of it) are against corruption in games journalism and paid-for mods are hardly a journalism ethics issue.
1 Likes, Who?
Just to raise a point I haven't (yet) seen: there seems to be a lot of rage about paying for mods, yet far less rage about cosmetic DLC.
That's a whole other ball game; "at least" it's the game developer releasing it. But that's a much bigger subject that encompasses game development as a whole, not just Steam.
Opinion not insult.
On this subject; perhaps, given the wording of this article and the fairly obvious direction Liam swings on this, these types of posts should be labelled as opinion pieces.
0 Likes
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me