Steam Allowing Paid Mods Is Awesome

While the average gamer may be against Steam allowing people to charge for mods, at least one person is for it. I'll leave it up to you to determine whether or not he's just trolling.

Many Steam users feel that there is a difference between "real" games and DLC as opposed to mods, which they see as something that should always be free. They’re wrong. This change is awesome, and ultimately it will be great for Steam, developers and especially players.

Click to expand...

I am not the biggest Polygon fan these days, but in this case I think he is just offering a counter point to what most people are saying. Saying something unpopular shouldn't always be seen as trolling.

They should require one of those disclaimers that he's a paid actor, like they do on TV.

I really fail to see the problem...If you don't want to pay for a mod, then don't. There will remain plenty of free ones it is up to the devs themselves to decide if they want to risk alienating user base by charging.i really don't see what everyone has their panties in a twist about.

Of course a polygon article, I should've guessed.

I stopped reading when he said he had a game on steam. boo hoo we are poor and our game isnt popular.

My problem is that Valve and Bethesda/ZeniMax is essentially asking these mod makers to make 3rd party DLCs that Bethesda/ZeniMax do not need to support in way, shape or form. These 3rd party DLCs are to be maintained by the sole discretion of their makers, and any compatibility issue is between the community and the modders.

More seriously, any infringement of IP is the sole responsibility of the modders, and there is no real recourse except for a "buyers beware" to the consumers. ZeniMax and Valve stand to gain the most from this, as they have no liability and no responsibility to the end consumer over the functions and the quality of the 3rd party DLCs.

The Future of Gaming:

1. Game publishers release broken Alpha's.
2. Modders patch all the bugs and create DLC. Example: Skyrim Unofficial Patches.
3. Game publishers get %55 of the take for doing almost nothing.
4. Gabe buys a new Lamborghini with Mod profits from his digital distribution empire.
5. EA and Ubisoft win again!

Dekoth-E- said:

I really fail to see the problem...If you don't want to pay for a mod, then don't. There will remain plenty of free ones it is up to the devs themselves to decide if they want to risk alienating user base by charging.i really don't see what everyone has their panties in a twist about.

Click to expand...

everyones panties are in a twist because valve takes 75 percent cut. and the people not doing anywork valve and skyrim dev take the lions share, considering skyrim would be a wasteland without mods, no more dlc etc.

Reimu said:

My problem is that Valve and Bethesda/ZeniMax is essentially asking these mod makers to make 3rd party DLCs that Bethesda/ZeniMax do not need to support in way, shape or form. These 3rd party DLCs are to be maintained by the sole discretion of their makers, and any compatibility issue is between the community and the modders.

More seriously, any infringement of IP is the sole responsibility of the modders, and there is no real recourse except for a "buyers beware" to the consumers. ZeniMax and Valve stand to gain the most from this, as they have no liability and no responsibility to the end consumer over the functions and the quality of the 3rd party DLCs.

Click to expand...

Which is why they take 75%, for all the work and support they aren't providing.

Seriously guys, Gabe's $1.5 billion net worth hardly covers breakfast, lunch, and dinner, when everyone knows that second breakfast, elevenses, afternoon tea, and supper are crucial too to allow him to keep up his strength in supporting modders, providing quality assurance, and policing this new market... oh well, technically he's not doing any of that, but the fact that none of that is being done surely weighs heavy on his mind when he's being ferried by limo to one of his jets. Some of you people are so selfish, that you'd rather see him starve to death, than appreciate that he found a way to change a system that was already working beautifully as intended in order to extract more money from gamers with no investment, risk, or support costs whatsoever. Its free money and you are are just jealous you didn't think of it first.

My opinion is just like with used games on consoles most gamers are lashing out against this out of purely selfish reasons. They don't want to have to pay for shit they got for free before, or see modders empowered with a way to make money. Right now most modders either work for free for the love of it or they work for free because they want to get a portfolio set up so they can get a job. The former group is free to continue working for free and will see no harm for this, the latter group may find they can make stuff, make money and have more options which are better for them. No where in there does this hurt people who produce quality content. But you know why it sounds so bad? Because the vast majority of people are gamers not developers and those gamers are making their voices heard louder simply because there are so many of them. And they are running around trying to spout off about every red herring they can think of. Who cares if Gabe buys a Lamborghini you dumb shits know he was a multi millionaire and could buy one before he even started with valve right?

This is a system and it isn't perfect but it will get better with time. I would like to see the studio cut go down to about 30% and I would like to see improvements in IP protections but I see right through all the selfish bullshit from most of the loud gamers. Admit it you people just don't want modders to have easy tools available to charge you for stuff. That's what this is really about. Since when did you give a flying shit about the cut anyone gets on any game before?

Name any damn argument above and explain to me why it is any different than the rest of how things operate in the industry, you cant. When steam released, people cried, when VAC released people cried, when F2P hit TF2 people cried. Never once seen these stubborn gamers not bitch and moan constantly about things that would clearly be better in the long run for many people.

Deathroned said:

everyones panties are in a twist because valve takes 75 percent cut. and the people not doing anywork valve and skyrim dev take the lions share, considering skyrim would be a wasteland without mods, no more dlc etc.

Click to expand...

IIRC, valve takes 30% which isn't unreasonable IMO considering Valve is hosting it/providing bandwidth/handling the transactions/etc.

As for Bethesda taking a cut, that's not Valves problem. While I do think it's a pretty crappy move on their part (Bethesda) that will ruin a lot of good will they've built up over the years, I also don't blame them since they're essentially allowing 3rd parties to monetize off their intellectual property. Perhaps a smaller percentage would of been more appropriate. Either way, it's also good for modders who are now able to get paid for something they've always done for free.

with that said... I highly doubt that it will be very successful. I can't ever see myself paying for a game mod off the steam workshop or elsewhere.

rudy said:

but I see right through all the selfish bullshit from most of the loud gamers. Admit it you people just don't want modders to have easy tools available to charge you for stuff. That's what this is really about. Since when did you give a flying shit about the cut anyone gets on any game before?

Click to expand...

lol this was my first thought as well when I read all the manufactured outrage on twitter. PC gamers are notoriously cheap

Deathroned said:

everyones panties are in a twist because valve takes 75 percent cut. and the people not doing anywork valve and skyrim dev take the lions share, considering skyrim would be a wasteland without mods, no more dlc etc.

Click to expand...

And who's problem is that? The Devs..not the gamers. Are they eliminating Free mods? No.. so really even if it was 99% it isn't your problem. For the record as mentioned it isn't anywhere close to 75% and that is an irrelevant point anyhow. Free mods aren't going anywhere, this is just another "Option" for devs to choose.

Seriously, people need to learn to read.

Dekoth-E- said:

I really fail to see the problem...If you don't want to pay for a mod, then don't. There will remain plenty of free ones it is up to the devs themselves to decide if they want to risk alienating user base by charging.i really don't see what everyone has their panties in a twist about.

Click to expand...

It's sort of fundamental. If you are a player who loves mods for Skyrim, then you are used to getting your mod fix from these guys. Now some of the modders are brand new and doing their mods for the first time. Others are more experienced and keep pushing the limits of what they can do within the toolset offered by Bethesda for the modders.

What the players see is a disruption of the status quo. They see a threat because some of the modders themselves don't want this and may quit. Can't buy a mod if no one is modding and won't want a mod, special one you must buy, from modders who are just trying to scam a buck.

And last, no one has any faith that Bethesda or Valve will police the mod $ store.

"Better content, and more of it"

Just like mobile gaming and early access! Right?

rudy said:

My opinion is just like with used games on consoles most gamers are lashing out against this out of purely selfish reasons. They don't want to have to pay for shit they got for free before, or see modders empowered with a way to make money. Right now most modders either work for free for the love of it or they work for free because they want to get a portfolio set up so they can get a job. The former group is free to continue working for free and will see no harm for this, the latter group may find they can make stuff, make money and have more options which are better for them. No where in there does this hurt people who produce quality content. But you know why it sounds so bad? Because the vast majority of people are gamers not developers and those gamers are making their voices heard louder simply because there are so many of them. And they are running around trying to spout off about every red herring they can think of. Who cares if Gabe buys a Lamborghini you dumb shits know he was a multi millionaire and could buy one before he even started with valve right?

This is a system and it isn't perfect but it will get better with time. I would like to see the studio cut go down to about 30% and I would like to see improvements in IP protections but I see right through all the selfish bullshit from most of the loud gamers. Admit it you people just don't want modders to have easy tools available to charge you for stuff. That's what this is really about. Since when did you give a flying shit about the cut anyone gets on any game before?

Name any damn argument above and explain to me why it is any different than the rest of how things operate in the industry, you cant. When steam released, people cried, when VAC released people cried, when F2P hit TF2 people cried. Never once seen these stubborn gamers not bitch and moan constantly about things that would clearly be better in the long run for many people.

Click to expand...

The system is getting better is it? just needs some more time.

Were you around for the release of Warcraft or maybe Age of Empires? In fact, let's open it up and say, were you a gamer in the 90's?

If you were then you'd remember a time when many products were released without very many bugs. You got updates on CD packaged in the back of Gamer magazines. Then the internet really started booming and we got the bandwidth to be able to download the patches directly from the source. Then the day came where we could download entire games purchased online and this was the apex, the best it's ever been, and it's only gotten worse since then. Games started being released with too many bugs, unplayable bugs. Then games started coming half finished with content purposefully withheld as DLC. Now people want us to pay for just the idea of a game and a hopeful promise that isn't even a promise.

I don't think it's been getting better.

Ignoring for a second all the possible negative effects of monetizing mods, the distribution is hardly fair. I think most can agree modders should get the biggest slice of the pie. Wutabout 60% for the modders, 20% to publishers and 20% to distributors. And why exactly should this be exclusive to Steam, doesn't Nexus deserve a cut?

rudy said:

Who cares if Gabe buys a Lamborghini you dumb shits know he was a multi millionaire and could buy one before he even started with valve right?

Click to expand...

Yeah some dumb shits don't have a clue.

lcpiper said:

The system is getting better is it? just needs some more time.

Were you around for the release of Warcraft or maybe Age of Empires? In fact, let's open it up and say, were you a gamer in the 90's?

If you were then you'd remember a time when many products were released without very many bugs. You got updates on CD packaged in the back of Gamer magazines. Then the internet really started booming and we got the bandwidth to be able to download the patches directly from the source. Then the day came where we could download entire games purchased online and this was the apex, the best it's ever been, and it's only gotten worse since then. Games started being released with too many bugs, unplayable bugs. Then games started coming half finished with content purposefully withheld as DLC. Now people want us to pay for just the idea of a game and a hopeful promise that isn't even a promise.

I don't think it's been getting better.

Click to expand...

I was a PC gamer though the 90's (still am) and you're looking back through rose colored glasses. Bugs were very prevalent through that time period. Hell, I credit old Windows/Dos games for my computer literacy today if not for anything else than the sheet amount of trouble shooting some games needed to even run correctly . I actually recall running into a major bug in an old Elder Scrolls game that made the game unbeatable.

Don't even get me started on 3rd party peripherals


Things have definitely gotten better. I can't remember the last game I purchased that gave me a hard time outside of not supporting SLI/Crossfire OOTB (or just being a crappy port with no real PC focused settings).

lcpiper said:

The system is getting better is it? just needs some more time.

Were you around for the release of Warcraft or maybe Age of Empires? In fact, let's open it up and say, were you a gamer in the 90's?

If you were then you'd remember a time when many products were released without very many bugs. You got updates on CD packaged in the back of Gamer magazines. Then the internet really started booming and we got the bandwidth to be able to download the patches directly from the source. Then the day came where we could download entire games purchased online and this was the apex, the best it's ever been, and it's only gotten worse since then. Games started being released with too many bugs, unplayable bugs. Then games started coming half finished with content purposefully withheld as DLC. Now people want us to pay for just the idea of a game and a hopeful promise that isn't even a promise.

I don't think it's been getting better.

Click to expand...

I was a gamer in the 90s and many bugs and shit wreaked havoc on games. You just don't remember it because you don't want to, doesn't further your agenda here. There was one difference between the 90s and today. In the 90s most people knew devs were not going to do a single thing about major bugs so they mostly considered it part of gaming. Maybe its because a higher percentage of players were tech savvy and could find their way around I don't know. But now days I think that more people actually put all the blame on devs and want things sorted out. Also back in the 90s games had not one shit of balance in them, the only sliver of balance came from the fact most games with DM games and everyone had access to all the same broke ass exploits and over powered weapons and then people would make or choose the few maps that covered up the broke ass mechanics, that's why back then there was typically just a couple or maybe even only 1 map that was the most played in competition. The iconic things people think made the 90s great you realize most of them were bugs right? Like not even intended to be part of the game. Strafe jumping, skiing in tribes, etc...

rudy said:

...skiing in tribes, etc...

Click to expand...

You just made me go down nostalgia lane HARD with this. Oh man, and I'm not nearly as old as some of you guys (26).

lcpiper said:

The system is getting better is it? just needs some more time.

Were you around for the release of Warcraft or maybe Age of Empires? In fact, let's open it up and say, were you a gamer in the 90's?

If you were then you'd remember a time when many products were released without very many bugs. You got updates on CD packaged in the back of Gamer magazines. Then the internet really started booming and we got the bandwidth to be able to download the patches directly from the source. Then the day came where we could download entire games purchased online and this was the apex, the best it's ever been, and it's only gotten worse since then. Games started being released with too many bugs, unplayable bugs. Then games started coming half finished with content purposefully withheld as DLC. Now people want us to pay for just the idea of a game and a hopeful promise that isn't even a promise.

I don't think it's been getting better.

Click to expand...

I gotta go with the rose colored glasses crowd on this one ... I bought my first computer game in 1981 and played many of the classics from Ultima I and Wizardry I into the present group of games ... I remember ToEE (Temple of Elemental Evil) which launched with a hard drive destroying bug ... I saw plenty of BSODs in the 90's playing games

The rush to the market and buggy releases has more to do with publishers than developers (and gamers to a certain extent) ... we demand the big glitzy titles with lots of bells and whistles and expensive graphics and voicing ... these things cost a developer millions of dollars for development (some of the CoD and GTA titles cost as much as a theatrical movie ... tens of millions of dollars) ... with that kind of cost the developers must rely on other people's money to make their games (publishers primarily) ... if a publisher puts 20 million into a game they expect a return (usually fairly quickly) so they will push for hard release dates

People have been criticizing things like Kickstarter since its launch but for the first time it puts the financial power directly into the hands of the user and the developer (no publisher dollars needed) ... this allows for games to be optimized around the player's desires and the developer's vision and not just around making a quick buck ... there have certainly been some people who took advantage of the system but it isn't like we never saw a crappy or incomplete release (even in the 90's)

Finally, digital distribution has been a godsend for the most part ... although we no longer have shelf after shelf of discs and boxes we still have enormous libraries of titles (most of us own more games digitally than we ever owned physically because of the bundle sales) ... the patching is convenient ... access to forums is easier ... and it is easier to find the titles that you want when you want them ... I did a lot more preordering in the 90's than I do now because then I couldn't always find the physical copy I wanted in the small market I lived in ... now I lurk and wait for sales on Steam or GOG just like everyone else ... with only the occasional launch day purchase