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.
Quoting: GuestIt's labelled as an editorial.
I kind of meant in the title; are editorials always opinion? I can't think of any that are personally, but I could be wrong, I'm not down on all the lingo.
Quoting: GuestCurious though - why does it being the game developer matter more than, say, high quality work from a modder? I can't actually think of why myself.
I'd rather give my money to a developer who does create a game (and some hats or something) than a modder who only creates hats. This isn't to say I'm pro cosmetic DLC though.
0 Likes
I See a lot of room for Drama.
When people buy stuff with money, they automatically demand stuff. Working Features, somewhat continuus development, etc.
On the other hand we will have a significant amount of scammers hoping for the Quick Money with all the negative aspects that Early Access brought to steam.
There will be Drama around this, and its just a matter of time. And then Valve will have to make restrictions.
And Copyright people will love this, lots of people to sue!
When people buy stuff with money, they automatically demand stuff. Working Features, somewhat continuus development, etc.
On the other hand we will have a significant amount of scammers hoping for the Quick Money with all the negative aspects that Early Access brought to steam.
There will be Drama around this, and its just a matter of time. And then Valve will have to make restrictions.
And Copyright people will love this, lots of people to sue!
0 Likes
Quoting: GuestAh ok. Editorials are basically opinion pieces on a given topic. Think of them as a bit of news, along with what the author thinks of the news. As for what Liam thinks on the matter, only he knows!
Fair enough, thanks for explaining :)
Quoting: GuestWe'll see how this pans out I guess. I've seen much higher quality work come from the community than from original developers. Something like the HL2 "update" mod I might pay a little for, as an example, but I wouldn't pay anything for a box on a stick as a weapon skin (no matter who made it!). I guess what I'm trying to say is that the quality of the work and how it impacts your enjoyment of the game are what should really matter, and I don't see how being "developer official" can affect that. Although having said that, if I think about Star Wars...yeah, it will matter to some people if it's rubber-stamped-official or not.
True enough and I definately see what you are saying, I do think it depends on the developer though. As an example, I'm more than happy to pay Paradox for their EU4 unit packs, even though it's usually just a few models that have no impact on gameplay. Primarily because the game is so good, but also because they continue to push out free and paid for updates to the game.
I guess the cosmetic DLC can be a way to continue to support a developer, without having to buy the game over and over (though I think I've brought EU4 four or five times now for freinds).
0 Likes
I like the idea really, there are games which community doesn't want them to die but they do cause the companies can't make money flow anymore.
With this initiative now the game's community will decide when a game is going to die (Which is AWESOME). Games like Neverwinter Nights wouldn't be dead if this policy were implemented back in the day.
IMO everything else has less importance. Publisher, Developers and community will make it work and solve the other problems. The idea per se is great.
Plus, let the free market decide if paying is ok! You can see a mod and say "bleh" doesn't worh it. But I bet you've already seen mod's that are "zomfg!!1!".
So let the quality of the mods and the community willingness to pay decide which content deserve to be bought and which doesn't.
Cheers.
With this initiative now the game's community will decide when a game is going to die (Which is AWESOME). Games like Neverwinter Nights wouldn't be dead if this policy were implemented back in the day.
IMO everything else has less importance. Publisher, Developers and community will make it work and solve the other problems. The idea per se is great.
Plus, let the free market decide if paying is ok! You can see a mod and say "bleh" doesn't worh it. But I bet you've already seen mod's that are "zomfg!!1!".
So let the quality of the mods and the community willingness to pay decide which content deserve to be bought and which doesn't.
Cheers.
0 Likes
Quoting: fleskI guess you are right. Nobody really knows what GG is all about these days, but I guess that's expected when dealing with leaderless hashtag campaigns. Maybe we should just focus on the topic at hand and steer away from GG for now? It tends to be an explosive topic.Quoting: SamsaiGG (or at least parts of it) are against corruption in games journalism and paid-for mods are hardly a journalism ethics issue.
Neither is diversity in games or feminism in general, and yet that seems to be their main concerns.
1 Likes, Who?
I believe it is a good move, for Steam and also for the authors of mod.
I also think it will be good, since most decicated/semi-professional mods made by people who has spent many hours in their work can get back any compensation.
I don't understand the whining since noone is forcing the authors to charge for their work, probably it may be good to separate the crap from the good mods, specially when you see good ratings on paid ones, people tend to rage more if they pay for something they end up not liking :)
I also think it will be good, since most decicated/semi-professional mods made by people who has spent many hours in their work can get back any compensation.
I don't understand the whining since noone is forcing the authors to charge for their work, probably it may be good to separate the crap from the good mods, specially when you see good ratings on paid ones, people tend to rage more if they pay for something they end up not liking :)
0 Likes
I think the long and short of this entire mess is that introducing paid mods upsets the apple cart. Everything was going smoothly, and now there are all these problems cropping up that we didn't have before like monetary splits, licenses, legal concerns, and in general a lot of cognitive overhead that many view to be unnecessary. It adds a complication to a tried-and-true system without obvious benefit to the community.
There is no guarantee that allowing developers to charge for their mods will give us all better mods. However, it does guarantee that mods which were once free will now carry a price tag. From what I've read in previous comments, the only ones who stand to make any real profit from this new scheme are the developers of the original game. I expect to see a lot of rocky road ahead filled with quick cash-in texture change mods for a buck each, as well as numerous weasels who game the system en masse. If Valve's tech support system is any indication of their response time to mod issues, they don't have any hope of staying on top of this. (And if they CAN stay on top of this, a seven-day-plus turnaround for assistance with account problems is inexcusable.)
Should developers be paid for their time? The answer to that is "if they want to be". I have no problem with a modder accepting donations (although requests for donations might land you in legal hot water). I also have no problem with a modder using his work as fluff for his portfolio when he goes job hunting later. But outright charging for mods seems antithetical to the spirit of modding somehow - even though I support their right to do so.
There is no guarantee that allowing developers to charge for their mods will give us all better mods. However, it does guarantee that mods which were once free will now carry a price tag. From what I've read in previous comments, the only ones who stand to make any real profit from this new scheme are the developers of the original game. I expect to see a lot of rocky road ahead filled with quick cash-in texture change mods for a buck each, as well as numerous weasels who game the system en masse. If Valve's tech support system is any indication of their response time to mod issues, they don't have any hope of staying on top of this. (And if they CAN stay on top of this, a seven-day-plus turnaround for assistance with account problems is inexcusable.)
Should developers be paid for their time? The answer to that is "if they want to be". I have no problem with a modder accepting donations (although requests for donations might land you in legal hot water). I also have no problem with a modder using his work as fluff for his portfolio when he goes job hunting later. But outright charging for mods seems antithetical to the spirit of modding somehow - even though I support their right to do so.
0 Likes
QuoteThere is no guarantee that allowing developers to charge for their mods will give us all better mods. However, it does guarantee that mods which were once free will now carry a price tag.
Let's disagree then.
Market behaviour is not a warranty that anybody won't buy overpriced mods, no.
It means that after a period of time ppl will learn to analyze what they are buying (look for reviews and opinions before buying).
Is this obligatory? I don't think that's a correct assumption to be made.
0 Likes
4 Likes, Who?
Although I'm all for modders getting paid for their work, I think this was a bad move. Look at greenlight. There's a lot of content on greenlight that is either bad, or probably not legal. I'm afraid the mod stores will be even worse.
I'm not much of a mod player. So I don't have much of a bone in this fight.
We'll see how it plays out...
I'm not much of a mod player. So I don't have much of a bone in this fight.
We'll see how it plays out...
0 Likes
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me