|
Eric the Mauve posted:I would certainly HOPE Bethesda isn't evil or stupid enough to attempt such a thing. But I'd have said that about the entire pay-for-mods concept two days ago so I can hardly blame anyone that wants to put on a tonfoil cap right now. Honestly, this has made me concerned enough how modding will be treated in Fallout 4 to make it go from a must buy to something I'll wait on. I really don't want to have to pay for anything except the most basic of mods.
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 09:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 14:17 |
|
|
One potential problem that will come from this is copyright infringement and sale of protected properties by a modder - and the extreme legal hammer that'll come down on them. Someone selling a Disney-owned (One of the most aggressive companies in regards to IP protection) property (Lightsaber, Marvel, w/e.) and it's not caught by Valve? Whole world'a poo poo. Did they really not consider the extreme legal issues surrounding this whole thing?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 09:27
|
|
|
iGestalt posted:One potential problem that will come from this is copyright infringement and sale of protected properties by a modder - and the extreme legal hammer that'll come down on them. Someone selling a Disney-owned (One of the most aggressive companies in regards to IP protection) property (Lightsaber, Marvel, w/e.) and it's not caught by Valve? That Forbes article talks about this. Opened the valve on a whole world of big-company copyright poo poo and losing PR in the process 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 09:37
|
|
|
KakerMix posted:That Forbes article talks about this. Good. That means this will likely fail and they'll just push out more hats and gun skins.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 09:39
|
|
|
Have they rewritten the workshop agreement to protect themselves in these instances at all?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 09:46
|
|
|
MaliciousOnion posted:Have they rewritten the workshop agreement to protect themselves in these instances at all? I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if they have it set up to foist all responsibility onto the mod creator.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 09:51
|
|
|
MaliciousOnion posted:Have they rewritten the workshop agreement to protect themselves in these instances at all? Steam Workshop Support posted:Q. Can I sell a mod that contains artwork or content from another game or movie? Pretty standard, but the bold bit may cause a lot of issues for modders.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 10:05
|
|
|
iGestalt posted:Pretty standard, but the bold bit may cause a lot of issues for modders. It'd probably get caught long before the modder has earned his 400$ bucks to get a payout, meaning the only entity to actually profit from the breach in copyright is Valve, as well as being the distributor of said content. I don't see how they can foist that onto the mod maker.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 10:15
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:It'd probably get caught long before the modder has earned his 400$ bucks to get a payout, meaning the only entity to actually profit from the breach in copyright is Valve, as well as being the distributor of said content. I don't see how they can foist that onto the mod maker. Of course. But there might be a scenario where a modder makes a very, very successful mod and there is something copyrighted in it that isn't picked up for a week or so. Now you've got the situation where the content creator has made (potentially) substantial income and will be hit by the legal issues. As far as I'm aware, Disney tend to push real loving hard, too. I don't think the average content creator could deal with the legal shitstorm and Valve won't do anything to protect or help them. (I'm only using Disney as an example because they are known to be very, very aggressive with over copyright infringement - it could work with any major company though) Edit: It should also be said that this whole deal has no protection for the content creator. If anything goes wrong - they can be dropped without issue and all their revenue taken. Not only this but they can toss any legal issue directly onto the content creator and go "It's their problem". This is a terrible contract even ignoring the 25%. iGestalt fucked around with this message at 10:30 on Apr 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 10:18
|
|
|
Praetorian Mage posted:I've never been as enthusiastic about Steam as a lot of other people seemed to be. For the most part, it was something I merely tolerated. I'm one of those people who really misses physical copies of games, and it was disappointing to me to see everyone raving about how great digital distribution is. I remember reading some discussion about how great Freespace 2 is, and someone said "I wish it was on Steam", even though it was available on GOG, which gives you less bullshit. That seemed insane to me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 11:52
|
|
|
Praetorian Mage posted:I've never been as enthusiastic about Steam as a lot of other people seemed to be. For the most part, it was something I merely tolerated. I'm one of those people who really misses physical copies of games, and it was disappointing to me to see everyone raving about how great digital distribution is. I remember reading some discussion about how great Freespace 2 is, and someone said "I wish it was on Steam", even though it was available on GOG, which gives you less bullshit. That seemed insane to me. As for the topic of paid mods themselves I backed up the mods I'm interested the moment I heard about this poo poo, so I'm free to shake my head and laugh my rear end off in equal measures over what's happening. Malek Deneith fucked around with this message at 12:13 on Apr 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 12:08
|
|
|
Nerd Of Prey posted:In a hilariously weird development, the comments section on "Give Me Money For No Reason" has devolved into a petty slapfight, because enough people are voting it File of the Month that it's in danger of overtaking a "real" mod for the #1 spot. Certain users see this as such an affront that they're demanding I take the file down. I was reading those comments for the giggles. They're taking this poo poo WAY to seriously. I was giddy when I found out that this mod was made by a goon, and you have my vote for eternity*, no matter what the nay-sayers say.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 12:28
|
|
|
Tripwire (Killing Floor devs) updated their EULA on Steam to disallow paid mods.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 12:38
|
|
|
Having been doing a Bachelor's thesis that relates to data ownership/intellectual property to a degree, am I living in some sort of bubble thinking modders deserve their fair share of income? I'm not saying paid modding is necessarily a good thing, but there could be space for it if done right. Surprisingly many (not the majority) comments I've seen around the web seem to accept the 25/75 share which seems insane to me. Yes, mods are derivative work to some degree - or are they? Just because the content works on top of something built doesn't invalidate the effort put into building it. The holder for the rights for the original product still gets his income from the original sales - modding just adds on top of it just like any attachment to an existing product. Modding in general is problematic due to third party IPs and content being utilized/ripped in many cases, in which making a mod paid work is not OK at all. In some cases modders are the ones who enable modding a product in the first place. It seems awfully disingenuous for the game's publisher/Valve and the modder of "derivative" work of said modding tools to take all the income. Well, not more disingenuous than the publisher taking income for the modder's work in the first place. But yeah, obviously authors for modding tools don't generally claim ownership from the creation of mods which use their tools. edit: I'm saying that modders don't necessarily include content of the original product in their own product, like derivative works do. Actually, skins, etc. that build on top of art assets that can't be modified in a dynamic fashion (so that the mod would *only* include the modifications) would pretty obviously be thought of as derivative works. Dessel fucked around with this message at 12:49 on Apr 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 12:40
|
|
|
Dessel posted:Having been doing a Bachelor's thesis that relates to data ownership/intellectual property to a degree, am I living in some sort of bubble thinking modders deserve their fair share of income? I'm not saying paid modding is necessarily a good thing, but there could be space for it if done right. Surprisingly many (not the majority) comments I've seen around the web seem to accept the 25/75 share which seems insane to me. My issue with it is Steam should have integrated a tip jar style system (which has been the accepted method for mods over the internet since... forever?) and instead they dropped in something which gives all the power to the publisher to control the mods (they control sales and bundles completely) and gives them the lion's share of the profit. It's not cool. Also they now forbid links to any kind of donation or tipping service in mod descriptions. e: Oh yeah, and Valve's lawyers encouraged modders to use parts of free mods in their pay mods without asking permission. Space Skeleton fucked around with this message at 12:50 on Apr 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 12:45
|
|
|
it really is funny to see people complain about this
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 12:46
|
|
|
Dessel posted:Having been doing a Bachelor's thesis that relates to data ownership/intellectual property to a degree, am I living in some sort of bubble thinking modders deserve their fair share of income? I'm not saying paid modding is necessarily a good thing, but there could be space for it if done right. Surprisingly many (not the majority) comments I've seen around the web seem to accept the 25/75 share which seems insane to me. I don't think there is anything wrong with the concept of a content creator getting paid. My entire issue with this system is how badly implemented it is, how the cut works and the clusterfuck of legal issues surrounding it that could drop a modder into incredibly hot water. If it was done well, I think it'd be a great way for content creators to do what they love, and get paid for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 12:47
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm definitely not okay with how this will potentially change the dynamic of publishers making free modding impossible/more difficult and outright making mods stop working with patches and requiring people to use their marketplace with their terms. It's bit similar to kicking of all your journalists and forcing them to work for you as freelancers, and this kind of official marketplace business will give the publisher a ridiculous advantage in terms of negotiations, not giving the author their deserved income. It's shifting the balance way too much to the publisher's side. And not to mention indeed the clusterfuck of all the content business. Does the mod include pieces of the original game in its files? Or any other material which is the intellectual property of another entity? And no loving way anyone is going to be validating/checking that stuff properly. edit: If the publisher takes money from mod sales, is the publisher required to refund/make sure the mod keeps working if the original game is patched?  Dessel fucked around with this message at 13:09 on Apr 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 12:58
|
|
|
Personally I can't wait for someone to release some kind of Immersive AI mod that does literally nothing and charge  for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 13:03
|
|
|
I just realized that many mods which includes new models are probably made with software that is free only if you don't sell your work. If you sell your work they expect you to buy a license. Another area where this gets weird.
Space Skeleton fucked around with this message at 13:12 on Apr 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 13:10
|
|
|
Does anyone have a copy of ENB .265? I want to see if reverting to that version will fix a parallax issue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 13:12
|
|
|
Killsion posted:Holy poo poo the Sky UI posts on the Nexus mod page... wow. Mardoxx is doing some of the worst PR I've seen in quite some time. It's absolutely beautiful to watch. He is not even hiding the fact that he's thumbing his nose at the users and laughing all the way to the bank. I'm sure the other team member(s) will put a leash on at some point but for now the comments are a sight to behold.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 13:20
|
|
|
Not to mention that like 90% of extra armours and stuff are cobbled together from (or wholesale copy-pastes of) models from the Witcher 2. CDProjekt was always cool with it because they're a ridiculously reasonable company, but now that people are charging for their work...?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 13:23
|
|
|
Strategic Tea posted:Not to mention that like 90% of extra armours and stuff are cobbled together from (or wholesale copy-pastes of) models from the Witcher 2. CDProjekt was always cool with it because they're a ridiculously reasonable company, but now that people are charging for their work...? I did some armor modding in New Vegas for a while and basically every armor I looked at which wasn't a composite of existing game armor was ripped off from some other game and either retextured or slightly changed. Every single one. I know this so well because I looked at the original armors from those games too and it was quite apparent. This already was infringement and even if the Nexus had rules against that sort of thing it was largely ignored I guess in parts because they really would have to take down pretty much every mod and nobody gained really a direct profit from and who cares, really. Now that there's money involved this will change, and I doubt it is much different for Skyrim and some of the "original" assets from some modders.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 13:59
|
|
|
It's going to be a delightful shitstorm when someone rips S.T.A.L.K.E.R. guns and poo poo and tries to sell them on Fallout 4's marketplace for money. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
closeted republican posted:I'm pretty sure this was a scheme by Bethesda to make some money off of modding. They get a 45% cut, which is way larger than the 30% Valve gets. Interviews with Bethesda constanlty talk about how important modding is to their games, so it's no surprise they would try to monetize it sometime down the line. Ever since Morrowind, the huge (and free) mod ecosystem has been seen as a major positive feature, so they already monetise it by selling more games. I can only see a more restrictive and restricted modding environment having a chilling effect on that. Certain aspects of the mod community were already pretty toxic without explicitly enabling the shitlords, gently caress knows what it'll be like now. tooterfish fucked around with this message at 14:29 on Apr 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 14:26
|
|
|
Dessel posted:Yes, mods are derivative work to some degree - or are they? I'm not a lawyer but the impression I get from Bethesda's EUA is that "All mods are derivative work that belong to them unless you can afford the legal muscle to prove otherwise, which obviously you can't so you'll take what we give you and be happy with it, lololol, I can't believe you guys fell for this." It would be great if mod authors could be compensated for their work, but everyone buying into this fantasy scenario where mod authors can make a living modding and the quality mods will flow like wine are fooling themselves. Especially not now that the first wave of paid modders have proven they will take on all the risk & labor and turn on each other for obscenely small rewards. Killsion posted:Holy poo poo the Sky UI posts on the Nexus mod page... wow. Mardoxx is doing some of the worst PR I've seen in quite some time. It's fascinating how quickly some of these goofs turned into baby robber barons at the mere promise of potential internet bucks. tooterfish posted:It's pretty short term thinking in my opinion. I'm sure there are devs at Bethesda fully aware of the symbiotic relationship they have with the modding community just like I am sure that the business side sees no value to it if it's not directly generating revenue. If ultimately the only mods to survive this are endless lovely sword reskins sold through the Workshop, it's a win for Valve and Bethesda because direct monetization holds more value to them than nebulous concepts like "developer reputation" and "extending the life of an IP".
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 14:55
|
|
|
Wee Tinkle Wand posted:e: Oh yeah, and Valve's lawyers encouraged modders to use parts of free mods in their pay mods without asking permission. Cynic Jester posted:It'd probably get caught long before the modder has earned his 400$ bucks to get a payout, meaning the only entity to actually profit from the breach in copyright is Valve, as well as being the distributor of said content. I don't see how they can foist that onto the mod maker. End of the day this is functioning the way youtube does, and if you replace modder with developer and mod with game the same way steam works (more or less). Oh and did anyone mention that Midas Magic's free version has been updated to show popups advertising the paid version?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:Oh and did anyone mention that Midas Magic's free version has been updated to show popups advertising the paid version? Yep.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 15:28
|
|
|
Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:No they didn't, they were posed a question about outside dependancies (i.e. relying on SKSE) and they said that relying on them was fine - as long as they weren't included in the sold product. The issue you refer to was a mod with fishing relying on another animation mod. The fishing mod didn't include the animation mod per-say, but it did include animation instructions. It functioned without it (the animation just wouldn't play) but since the modder would have used boilerplate code to create the animation it would have included part of the animation modder's content. Since this was a sold product that included content the modder didn't own they were hosed legally. Fine nuances like this weren't part of the pre-launch conversations, partly due to Valve and Bethesda misunderstanding the competence of the modders they were dealing with and the rushed state of the whole affair. The thing is it didn't really, because FNIS is just an animation tool bit like SKSE or whatever. I don't see what difference is there between the two. The issue is that the FNIS guy didn't give his permission for it, and even third-party frameworks have to be licensed in a specific way so that you can use it. It's really dumb either way, mods should be free with maybe a voluntary donation button. Yes I've made a bunch of mods myself, I don't care what people say, unless you make something on a scale of an actual game (like GMOD) you should not be charging for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 15:28
|
|
|
Does anyone know if it's possible for a mod maker to set $0.00 as an option for "pay what you want", so it would essentially operate as a convenient tip jar/donate button? I feel like that would alleviate at least some of the concerns people have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
273423-X posted:Does anyone know if it's possible for a mod maker to set $0.00 as an option for "pay what you want", so it would essentially operate as a convenient tip jar/donate button? I feel like that would alleviate at least some of the concerns people have. It specifically does not. 25 cents is the lowest you can set PWYW, making it not that at all. Again, greed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 15:43
|
|
|
273423-X posted:Does anyone know if it's possible for a mod maker to set $0.00 as an option for "pay what you want", so it would essentially operate as a convenient tip jar/donate button? I feel like that would alleviate at least some of the concerns people have. Nope, not possible. The way modders are getting around this is creating identical paid and free versions of a mod on the workshop, so anyone who doesn't want to pay can subscribe to the free one and anyone who wants to give a tip can buy the PWYW version.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
Skyrim's rating has dropped 3% into "Very Positive."
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
SkyUI's endorsements are rising again, they were at 272,129 when I checked.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 15:58
|
|
|
Squeegy posted:SkyUI's endorsements are rising again, they were at 272,129 when I checked. What are the odds this is the mod maker padding his mod with endorsements? Edit: Looks like the mod maker is relying on people not checking the comments to avoid a loss of endorsements actually. What a scummy move. It's only gotten him less than nine endorsements so far though. There's no way he makes up the loss of all the endorsements he lost at the rate of gain. He also posted a rant about how there was never a modding community in Skyrim on Reddit that I can't see due to him deleting it. Apparently it was pretty scummy however and has people up in arms against him. Again. You should see the title of it. "A genuine appeal to the true sons of modding." is how it starts off. The replies are pretty stellar too in that literally no one seems to be supporting what he's saying no matter how far down I scroll. http://www.reddit.com/r/skyrimmods/comments/33r0r9/a_genuine_appeal_to_the_true_sons_of_modding_the/cqnvk2z Edit 2: The mod maker of SkyUI in response to people on the Nexus pointing out what a lovely move moving such a crucial mod to a paid setup is posted:Oh, it's only money. This was before the backlash he received when most people knew what he was trying to do. Now he's trying to walk it back with talk about the mod community never having existed. Keep in mind that his remarks are especially bullshit since his mod is so linked to the mod community he says doesn't exist. Any mod more complex than a weapon replacer requires it at this point. Dude is a grade A shitlord. And he just keeps making it worse for himself every time he opens his big dumb mouth. Archonex fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Apr 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
Skyrim's store page is funny: http://store.steampowered.com/app/72850/
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
I still can't believe how one of my major hobbies is completely hosed in less than 48 hours. Great. The mod pirating scene is hilarious though .
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 16:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 14:17 |
|
|
I think Valve's heart was in the right place with this, but the implementation has got to be one of the absolute worst I have ever seen. This should have been a way to donate money to mod creators for their Cool poo poo, not a way to sell your lovely sword you made that quite literally only the person who bought it will be able to see. It's weird because haven't they traditionally had a very good understanding of the mod community? Shouldn't they have known this would be in a disaster?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2015 16:24
|
|
