Bethesda: Why We’re Trying Paid Skyrim Mods On Steam

[rudy]

The problem isn't the content creator wanting money for their work. The problem is the incentives given to thieves who upload other people's content... who will QA and decide which of the swords and companions are original and infringement-free? Certainly not Valve nor Bestheda.

If the content is original, the creator will now have to actively watch for other authors infringing on his work. Now he has to play copyright wack-a-mole with the entire modding community.

"No, you cannot use my content to improve your mod."

Adding a paywall to mods creates a litigation pandemonium that Valve and Bestheda is not ready to deal with, and more importantly, kills the creative collaboration of the entire community.

As if those incentives didn't happen before, I personally had my shit ripped off many times as far back as 1999, no one, gave one shit about stealing my work. And I didn't have any money to fight them so they got away with it, this shit is incredibly rampant don't try to sugar coat it, the reality is there are many people who are very unhappy with how their works have been stolen and abused. The reality is that if I had had something like this I might have had money to fight them and to defend my works. This is a red herring constantly spewed out from people who don't know what they are talking about. Oh and back then several problems we had in our mod of not being able to get certain work done could have been solved really fast if we had a way or chance of making some money. There are hundreds of games that badly need mods and support and they don't get it in the current free system care to explain why your utopian view of communists all holding hands and making perfect mods isn't solving their problems?

 

[Dekoth-E-]

As if those incentives didn't happen before, I personally had my shit ripped off many times as far back as 1999, no one, gave one shit about stealing my work. And I didn't have any money to fight them so they got away with it, this shit is incredibly rampant don't try to sugar coat it, the reality is there are many people who are very unhappy with how their works have been stolen and abused. The reality is that if I had had something like this I might have had money to fight them and to defend my works. This is a red herring constantly spewed out from people who don't know what they are talking about. Oh and back then several problems we had in our mod of not being able to get certain work done could have been solved really fast if we had a way or chance of making some money. There are hundreds of games that badly need mods and support and they don't get it in the current free system care to explain why your utopian view of communists all holding hands and making perfect mods isn't solving their problems?

You are wasting your time man. The ignorant rabble will hear nothing of something that makes them spend money. Pc master race indeed, more like pc master cheapskates.

 

[kbrickley]

But hey, you don't become a billionaire capitalist without knowing how to profit on other people's work.

One could argue that he became a billionaire capitalist (not a bad thing by the way) by offering a competitive service that developers and users find useful ... No one is forcing developers to use Steam ... they could still issue physical discs or use a competing digital service like GOG or Amazon ... they can even (in a throwback to the birth of computer games) sell their own software through their own site ... they tend to use Steam because even with the 30% support fee they get enough benefits to make that profitable for them ... for the users we have benefited from cheap software (so cheap that many of us have amassed massive libraries of games we never even play) ... Game/Steam/Valve likes to try new ideas periodically ... some, like Early Access, seem to be mostly working ... others like Greenlight and the paid mod system have some growing pains ... others, like the Steambox are still waiting in the wings ... but isn't that how normal people learn too (we make mistakes and learn from our mistake and make corrections)

Gamers like to diss on DLC but it does work ... and more importantly it sells (meaning that the gaming population is willing to buy it) ... with a totally new eco system (to reduce the theft) and some form of curating the sales, I think a paid mod system might work ... we will see in the future if they try this again ... this implementation was flawed and I would think that all three parties have learned from this (Valve, Bethesda, and the modders) ... it will be interesting to see how this plays out the next time

 

[cptnjarhead]

I made a few mods, and definitely installed my fair share of them, but would I pay for them? Well no, but not because I don’t think they are worth it, its because they are mods. If someone wants to make money, then they should be able to release a DLC, that should meet some Q,A standards and such. I was always under the impression that mods were for people to see your skills, or share your creativity. When you buy a DLC, you know for the most part your getting a quality product, with a mod, well you can only hope it will run, and hope there are no conflicts.. and so on. I’m a firm believer in caveat emptor, but the market for mods just doesn’t seem to be something viable. If you make a successful mod, and you get zero cents, well that sucks, but it’s a mod. You could make your own game, and make zero cents too. Just because you can charge for something does not guarantee you will make a profit.

 

[Ashbringer]

The idea of paying for mods isn't the problem, but how Steam and Bethesda went about it.

First of all, Skyrim is flawed for modding. If you ever modded Skyrim then you know that game does not respond well to multiple mods. Add to it there's still bugs in the game since 2011 and you have a mess that you're paying for. If Bethesda came out with a patch to fix all these problems then I'd be more receptive to the idea of paying for mods. But as it is right now one mod can break another mod that can break a quest in the game.

Secondly, the mod developer should get the bulk of the cash. If I'm going to support mod developers I want them to get the majority of the profit. Not Steam or Bethesda. Especially Steam which just holds onto the files like the Nexus. And Steam makes no effort to help make sure some mods don't interfere with other mods, or break the game. Nexus does have a helpful tool just for this, and they don't take 1/3 of the profits, or for that matter any profits.

Finally, to keep the interest of free mods there should be an option to download a lower quality textured version of the mod. For example a 2k or 4k texture pack should be paid for but a 1k should be free. Cause lets be real here, not many people are going to care about your mod if they have to pay for it. Very few people mod their games and the ability to spread word of mouth is still important. This isn't Counter Strike where a mod turned into it's own game overnight. Counter Strike, Day of Defeat, Natural Selection, and Team Fortress wouldn't be where they are if it wasn't offered for free. But a high quality 2k or 4k texture pack is reasonable to charge money. People can try it out the mod and if they like it they can buy the high quality version.

 

[xXaNaXx]

if a modder really want money for their mod they can just set up a donation account at one of the various places that allow it, that people use for twitch stream donations.

they would get money from the people willing to give it. rather than being forced.

no one was being "forced" to do anything. if they wanted to give away their mods for free, they were still 100% free to do so. going the paid route was merely an option that was available to them.

that said, trying to do this on a game that has already had an extensive log of free mods already out there for years before trying to implement this option was a bad, bad move...mainly because of the sheer number of people who were taking those established free mods that others worked on and selling them as their own.

 

[DarkStar_WNY]

How do we value an open IP license? The active player base and built in audience?..

Funny how, while trying to excuse taking almost double the percentage of what the person going the work gets they fail to mention that much of that built in audience is there because the mod community has been so active.

I am glad to see the paid mods removed from Steam, but hope to see it replaced with an easy to use donate button, where the entire donation goes to the person who made the mod since Valve recieved payment by the return traffic of it's customers and Behesda is paid by their games staying relevant, despite it's age.

 

[Racheakt]

I have mixed feelings, but I was leaning to the side of not having an issue with.

For example when the "Skywind" mod is done i would pay for that like a expansion, that is an insane amount of work.

The issues it with the percentage split, not in the way that is immediately obvious, for the lions share of the cut Valve/Bethesda had the obligation for QA/QC. Make sure the author indeed made the mod in question and make a method of detecting mod conflicts.

All in all no mod creator was forced to charge for their mods, and having a mod "store" (to me at least) is better than a mod spamming for donations.

 

[PCMusicGuy]

The idea of paying for mods isn't the problem, but how Steam and Bethesda went about it.

First of all, Skyrim is flawed for modding. If you ever modded Skyrim then you know that game does not respond well to multiple mods. Add to it there's still bugs in the game since 2011 and you have a mess that you're paying for. If Bethesda came out with a patch to fix all these problems then I'd be more receptive to the idea of paying for mods. But as it is right now one mod can break another mod that can break a quest in the game.

Secondly, the mod developer should get the bulk of the cash. If I'm going to support mod developers I want them to get the majority of the profit. Not Steam or Bethesda. Especially Steam which just holds onto the files like the Nexus. And Steam makes no effort to help make sure some mods don't interfere with other mods, or break the game. Nexus does have a helpful tool just for this, and they don't take 1/3 of the profits, or for that matter any profits.

Finally, to keep the interest of free mods there should be an option to download a lower quality textured version of the mod. For example a 2k or 4k texture pack should be paid for but a 1k should be free. Cause lets be real here, not many people are going to care about your mod if they have to pay for it. Very few people mod their games and the ability to spread word of mouth is still important. This isn't Counter Strike where a mod turned into it's own game overnight. Counter Strike, Day of Defeat, Natural Selection, and Team Fortress wouldn't be where they are if it wasn't offered for free. But a high quality 2k or 4k texture pack is reasonable to charge money. People can try it out the mod and if they like it they can buy the high quality version.

I was with you on your first two paragraphs, but your last one is quite flawed. Why would you just arbitrarily pick high resolutions as something that justifies paying for a mod? Why not high quality voice acting or x number of new items? I suppose it is because you personally care more about graphics than other merits of a game.

I will echo what has been stated: mods must remain 100% free. I would be fine if there was a donate button where I could send the modder some money (no less than 75% of the total) to support a wonderful mod. If they want to release a platform where people can submit DLC to sell, and it meets certain qualification and testing standards, then I'm all for it. But you can't have a scheme in place with no policing or quality control. I am happy that the community was against this in general and I hope the backlash hurts the reputation of both Valve and Bethesda and makes them reevaluate how they proceed since I'm pretty sure they will try this again. Full Disclosure: I love the Elder Scrolls games and will certainly buy the next one.

 

[Ducman69]

no one was being "forced" to do anything. if they wanted to give away their mods for free, they were still 100% free to do so. going the paid route was merely an option that was available to them.

Its been said before and I guess has to be said again, OF COURSE it was forcing a change on the modding community.

Most mods, especially for Skyrim, are collaborative efforts of many individuals building upon one another or at least needing other mods to be installed to function. When its free, and everyone is working altruistically, all that is really important is ensuring that the person doing the work gets credit for it accordingly.

When you introduce money, you see what we've seen, where the question becomes who deserves what, and it becomes a much bigger issue for most people when others are making money off of YOUR work, creating a culture of jealousy and guarded ownership of individual contributions, and break down in teamwork that being effectively open-source offers a community. So if you have a mod that relies on another mod or was built upon someone else's foundation, who deserves how much of that measly 25 cents on the dollar? Its a disaster, and Valve/Bethseda were doing no policing or handling of that to justify their 75% massive cut, or setting up tools to ensure that one mod doesn't interfere with others or would be compatible with updates or really anything. And then its a disaster not only for the mod community, but for end users too.

You also now have a financial incentive which attracts cockroaches like leaving out a peanut butter sandwich in your garage, encouraging thieves to en masse steal work and sell it as their own, which is another thing we saw of course. The only way one could "steal" free work otherwise would be to use it or rehost it without giving credit to the creator... but since that costs nothing, it was never really an issue.

 

[oROEchimaru]

suggestion/overview:
a. somebody has to pay for the bandwidth
b. has to be legal not stolen content
c. have the devs get a bigger piece of the pie 50-75%
d. have valve take 15-20% cut to cover hosting costs
e. have bestheda take a smaller share 5-15%, they did create the game remember
f. however: make the prices of mods donation based similar to other campaigns "pay what you want"
-this way people can get their free mod and us pros can pay for it.

 

[Ducman69]

suggestion/overview:
a. somebody has to pay for the bandwidth
b. has to be legal not stolen content
c. have the devs get a bigger piece of the pie 50-75%
d. have valve take 15-20% cut to cover hosting costs
e. have bestheda take a smaller share 5-15%, they did create the game remember
f. however: make the prices of mods donation based similar to other campaigns "pay what you want"
-this way people can get their free mod and us pros can pay for it.

Again, I don't understand this entitlement in red.

Name ANY other industry where you have to pay royalties to the company that made the product in order to modify something the customer purchased....

If I buy an Alienware computer, and want to have a local computer shop modify it by overclocking and increasing the RAM and put in a new hard drive, should I have to give 5-15% to Dell? Why? What did they do to earn that money? Yeah, they made the product so what. Same with my car, I shouldn't have to pay Ford 5-15% the cost of a Borla exhaust to be allowed to install it. Ridiculous IMO.

 

[PersonalJ]

Again, I don't understand this entitlement in red.

Name ANY other industry where you have to pay royalties to the company that made the product in order to modify something the customer purchased....

If I buy an Alienware computer, and want to have a local computer shop modify it by overclocking and increasing the RAM and put in a new hard drive, should I have to give 5-15% to Dell? Why? What did they do to earn that money? Yeah, they made the product so what. Same with my car, I shouldn't have to pay Ford 5-15% the cost of a Borla exhaust to be allowed to install it. Ridiculous IMO.

When you monetize intellectual property in any industry you need to pay fees to the owner in any industry.

 

[DarkStar_WNY]

suggestion/overview:
a. somebody has to pay for the bandwidth
b. has to be legal not stolen content
c. have the devs get a bigger piece of the pie 50-75%
d. have valve take 15-20% cut to cover hosting costs
e. have bestheda take a smaller share 5-15%, they did create the game remember
f. however: make the prices of mods donation based similar to other campaigns "pay what you want"
-this way people can get their free mod and us pros can pay for it.

IMO Valve is paid for the bandwidth by the workshop making Valve a more desirable platform for us to purchase our games through and thus they get repeat business.

As for the maker of the game, Bethesda in this case, support of the mod community is itself payment as not only do modders fix game issues, which Bethesda should have fixed long ago, but it also keeps their games relevant. If it wasn't for the mod community Skyrim would likely just be a fond memory by now.

 

[Ashbringer]

I was with you on your first two paragraphs, but your last one is quite flawed. Why would you just arbitrarily pick high resolutions as something that justifies paying for a mod? Why not high quality voice acting or x number of new items? I suppose it is because you personally care more about graphics than other merits of a game.

Or I just didn't put much thought into it. Whatever can be done to incentivize someone to pay for a mod without alienating them from the mod.

 

[kbrickley]

Again, I don't understand this entitlement in red.

Name ANY other industry where you have to pay royalties to the company that made the product in order to modify something the customer purchased....

If I buy an Alienware computer, and want to have a local computer shop modify it by overclocking and increasing the RAM and put in a new hard drive, should I have to give 5-15% to Dell? Why? What did they do to earn that money? Yeah, they made the product so what. Same with my car, I shouldn't have to pay Ford 5-15% the cost of a Borla exhaust to be allowed to install it. Ridiculous IMO.

You keep using examples of items you purchase without license and that are covered by patent law primarily ... software is not used or purchased that way

For right or wrong you purchase a license for software and operate it under a EULA ... software is also protected by copyright law rather than patent law ... if you have a single player game or a game that has no interaction with the internet or game servers then you can do whatever you want to your software ... it only becomes an issue if you start to help others to modify their software where you come onto the radar ... if you never make any changes to the original source code then you are not in violation of copyright law ... if you start to change the original source code or supporting objects without permission from the copyright holder then you start to violate copyright

Essentially it is no different to any other copyrighted materials ... if you want to change the Harry Potter books for your own personal use there is no violation ... if you share the modified version with others then you are violating the copyright ... if you want to edit your own DVDs to remove scenes you don't like then there is no violation ... if you help others to do it or provide the modified versions to others then you are in violation ... it may not be perfect but that is the law

 

[BusyBeaverHP]

As if those incentives didn't happen before, I personally had my shit ripped off many times as far back as 1999, no one, gave one shit about stealing my work. And I didn't have any money to fight them so they got away with it, this shit is incredibly rampant don't try to sugar coat it, the reality is there are many people who are very unhappy with how their works have been stolen and abused. The reality is that if I had had something like this I might have had money to fight them and to defend my works.

1999 just called and they want their lawsuits back. The MPAA and RIAA had truckloads of money and were they able to stop millions of torrents? I think not.

The idea of trying to protect digital content with litigation is wishful thinking and those who attempt it has no idea how the world works in 2015. I'm sorry if your content was not distributed according to your wishes, but when it comes to uploading digital content, the creator has no control over what happens to it once the internet sees it.

Have you ever tried catching water with a fishnet?

This is a red herring constantly spewed out from people who don't know what they are talking about. Oh and back then several problems we had in our mod of not being able to get certain work done could have been solved really fast if we had a way or chance of making some money. There are hundreds of games that badly need mods and support and they don't get it in the current free system care to explain why your utopian view of communists all holding hands and making perfect mods isn't solving their problems?

There are hundreds of games that nobody cares about in a free market so they don't get the support in the free system. It is what it is... why are you making that irrelevant observation and calling me a communist again?

I hope those people who don't know what they're talking about isn't me, because I'm a content creator too...

I created a Doom mod called Deus Vult II

Unlike you, if I actually wanted money for my work, I'd have entered the gaming industry and made a full game already!