Steam allows paid mods, then removes it right after

Remove all ads!

I'm surprised noone has been talking about this. It caused a storm of controversy in other corners of the gaming world.

Personally, i'm not sure how I feel about paid mods. On one hand I can see how this can increase the quality of mods and encourage modders not to quit halfway through, like has been the demise of many a great one. But on the other hand I can never see myself paying for a mod. Even though I readily admit there are mods whose quality are certainly worth money, I would be far too skeptical to put down money on what could turn out to be some schmuck's poorly written fanfic.

Thoughts?

http://www.pcgamer.com/valve-has-removed-paid-mods-functionality-from-steam-workshop/

 

The backlash was so massive that they had no choice. While there's nothing wrong with paid mods, the implementation was so bad that there was simply no way it would have worked out well. The biggest slap in the face, I thought, was the money split (I think it was 30% to valve, 45% to publisher/gamedev, and a measly 25% to mod creator), but that was just the tip of the iceberg.

 

I've heard something about it, and have seen similar numbers that Keneth mentions. And that links to donations for modders were removed from some mods. I can understand the outrage, because they effectively removed any means to actually support the modder. Or only through paying 75% to others first.

I'd say it sets the wrong message for game devs, too. Just release an easy to mod game, give them the tools, then don't do much on the game itself and sit back while people start modding while you get most of that money as well.

 

I am not saying I agree with it, but it sounds like they were modeling it on what I heard the record labels did. If anything, the musicians get even less than 25%, more like pennies on the dollar instead of a quarter on the dollar.

That said, I don't use steam as I heard bad things about it some years back, and I don't have any budget at the moment for new games.

 

The model of the record labels is pretty exortionist. It might have made more sense in the days were an artist needed a physical distribution channel, although only in the sense of a few oligarch cornering the market, demanding whatever percentages they want.

For digital distribution the model seems not very representative of the effort required (not that the record label model for physical distribution seems very representative of the effort required to me).

But I don't use steam either because I don't feel like putting my whole game collection at the whim of Valve or anyone else.

 

That's what I've heard about Valve, and why I don't use them.

 

You put too much stock in hearsay. Valve is a business like any other, they make good and bad business decisions, but ultimately they're out to make money. And Steam is still the best digital distribution service, although Origin has improved considerably over the years.

 

I still don't get why someone would have put their mod on steam when the majority of their money would be taken. It's not like they couldn't put it on their own site and google searches being what they are nowadays it certainly wouldn't be hard to find.

As long as I can play my games when I don't have the money for my internet bill that month Steam is just fine with me. Besides it's nice to have a backup version of some of your games when modding them. I broke Kotor 2 the first time I tried to install the Restored Content mod, but luckily steam saved me.

If you ever want to play Kotor 2, don't forget that mod by the way. You are missing half the game without it.

 

Ah. Didn't realize it was illegal to sell mods.

 

Well, it's not so much illegal to sell mods as it is to profit off someone else's intellectual property. It may be perfectly legal to sell mods for certain games depending on their terms of use and license agreement.

 

And a mod on steam is easy. With Skyrim it is a breeze to install them without significant problems.

The big game studio see lots of UNPAID content in their games. Now a days we do not own games, we pay for the right to play theirs on their terms.

Playing UNPAID content with their games..... So un-American.

Did a lot of us not rant about DLC?

---------- Added 0 hours, 1 minutes and 33 seconds later... ----------
Steam resist, but i am afraid it is a matter of time before they cave in. And if Steam does not accept it in the long term, the studios will not bring their games to Steam. Bioware for instance

 

Bioware doesn't put their games on Steam because they were bought by EA and they have no interest in sharing.

Steam isn't going anywhere, nor is any software bound to put a serious dent into their market share unless they come up with something revolutionary, rather than just copying Steam.

 

That's the thing I don't get.
How is making and selling a mod to a game any different than making and selling products to soup up a car and turn it into a hot rod? Example, glass packs, new seats, new floor-mats, accessories to plug into the dash board, new improved radios or sound systems, things to soup up the engine to make it go faster at the price of fuel efficiency, etc?
All those things made without a license from the manufacturer, and I don't see how it is conceptually different to sell parts to mod your car than it is to sell programs to mod a game.

Sorry, I just think something is wrong with the laws when things on computers are treated different than other things "because it is just data on the computer.

 

Different industry, different rules. IP and copyright laws are a mess in my opinion, but if I was gonna start changing legislation, those wouldn't be very high my priority list.

 

As compared to cars, you buy the physical product (the car), whereas with software, you generally buy the license to use the product, not an actual physical product. More or less the same with music and movies, really.

 

The problem is that I buy a DVD and I can easily pass the DVD around to let my friends have a chance to watch the movie too while I get to watch some of their movies.
I buy a computer game which also comes on DVD and I'm not allowed to pass the DVD around to let my friend's play the game while I get a chance to play some of their games.

I used to do that all the time with the old classics back when they were current, especially in the Apple II era. Heck, my mom's cousin has had a New Years/Husband's Birthday/Wedding Anniversary party since 1990 and I've often traded games for a year with some of my relatives.

However, software publishers are now using the internet to prevent me from doing that, by making the game "phone home" and disallowing it if the same product key comes up. Forced registration and CD keys and all that are eliminating the "right of first sale".

Mind you, I know the problem of hard drive installs and the current trend NOT to require the DVD to play the game the way they used to require a CD (look at the Infinity Engine games) making it too easy for piracy, and I see how what I do is easy collateral damage, but preventing you from giving or selling the game to somebody else permanently is going too far.

Blockbuster video used to rent video games for consoles, that no longer happens. Libraries used to offer software to patrons the way they offered tapes, records, CDs, and DVDs, but that went the way of the dodo because of this practice.

 

Yeah, but software industry relies on each individual buying their own copy. If you could legally sell yours or give it away, you'd be taking a huge chunk of money from the people who made it as they don't profit from that transaction. Why exactly do you think you deserve the right to sell the software after you're done with it? That's like saying "Thanks, I really enjoyed using your software, but I want some of my money back anyway."

 

Which is such BS I don't know where to begin. Not you Keneth, I'm referring to modern industry standard....Imagine if the automobile industry took up that practice. No used cars??? Wtf!? In just about any industry I can resell anything I buy. What makes digital content so effing special? I can resell my vinyl but not my audio book? Why? They both require a machine to play. But I'd don't need to sell my record player to sell my vinyl. Anyone else's record player can play it. But in order to sell my PC game the machine needs to be sold with otherwise it might not be able to be used. That is BS. How an industry went so ass backwards over the years is ridiculous.

I hate today's world.... Bring the 90s back! (Ends rant, pours another pint of Stout, finds contentment. Aaahh, the good old days!)