Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Valve shuts down paid mod system after pressure from gamers

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 282 posts

Re: Valve shuts down paid mod system after pressure from gamers

#241

Post by walterbell »

random28345 wrote: post #185
michaelt wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At first they tried to give passionate content providers a way to also make some money. Given that the "passionate content providers" only make 25% of what users pay, I think that's a very generous interpretation. Edit: It doesn't matter if it's Valve or Bethesda or the tooth fairy that takes the remaining 75% - the fact is this system does little to accomplish the goal of "giving passionate content providers a way t…

So the closest analogue to computer game "mods" in the book publishing world is "fan fiction". Note that 25% is pretty generous when you're creating a derivitive work off of someone else's IP. See Kindle Worlds http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html?docId=1001197421 for an example of the kind of deal you'd be lucky to get.

Amazon Publishing will acquire all rights to your new stories, including global publication rights, for the term of copyright.

Yikes.

Re: Valve shuts down paid mod system after pressure from gamers

#242

Post by mcphage »

llama052 wrote: post #235
mcphage wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some are, true. But the ones with lots of features, that everyone really wants to use—the ones that you can make games for multiple platforms, and that big development houses use—those... are not free.

[0] Actually if you look at some of the big engines, they are becoming free, or require a small royalty to use, and it sure as hell isn't a 75% cut. [0] https://www.unrealengine.com/what-is-unreal-engine-4

It's much less than 75%—but then, you only get the engine, you don't also get the multimillion dollar award winning game to build on top of. If you make a mod for Skyrim—say, a new dungeon—you're adding that to the existing game and assets and dungeons and all that. You don't have to build everything from scratch, and you don't need your new content to be enough by itself to get people to buy it. A game with 1 dungeon, who would buy? But a mod that adds 1 dungeon to Skyrim, sure.

So yes, 75% is high, but the conversation should be, what cut should everyone receive, not, why does Bethesda deserve a cut at all, which most of the conversation actually is.

Re: Valve shuts down paid mod system after pressure from gamers

#243

Post by mcphage »

paulmd wrote: post #212
mcphage wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically, GitHub offering a service where users could charge for software, and get the source code as well? And not just a core dump, but be part of a community building up that source? ...That's a pretty solid idea.

My understanding is that that's how software distribution used to work back in the mainframe days - you'd get the source to build in your specific environment, and you could modify it to add whatever functionality you needed. Then binary distribution took over as platforms became more intercompatible.

And you still can do that—supply the source when you sell an app. But to be able to not just give your customers the source, but to give them access to a GitHub project that they can follow, and submit pull requests to, and pull new updates and so on from... plus, to not have to set up your own storefront, and manage the source permissions and whatnot. That would be a very nice feature for GitHub to have.

Re: Valve shuts down paid mod system after pressure from gamers

#244

Post by mcphage »

mxfh wrote: post #190
mcphage wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so Valve slapped on another 30% while not providing any or minimal QA from Valve Valve was charging 30% for operating the storefront, handling payment, the value of having spent years building a site where people are willing to come and pay for things, the value of having built a service that would allow modders to make money building off of another company's work, and so on. Valve's 30% was well deserved.

Heaving dealt with Valve customer service a few times, the 30% is definitely not going into training, hiring more or providing responsive and helpful customer service. Valve only get's away with it because they run a de facto monopoly.

> the 30% is definitely not going into training, hiring more or providing responsive and helpful customer service

It should, certainly, and it's not, but I didn't claim that it was.

Re: Valve shuts down paid mod system after pressure from gamers

#245

Post by ChikkaChiChi »

I would try a subscription model similar to Spotify.

Let Bethesda charge 2 dollars a month for access to their workshop. Modders then get a piece of the kitty for the number of subscribers to their mod.

Quality would increase because modders would want more subscribers, they would work to keep their mods up to date so that people stayed subscribed to them, and modders would not have to build an infrastructure to service and support a customer base as if their entire enterprise was a single mod.

Re: Valve shuts down paid mod system after pressure from gamers

#246

Post by ChikkaChiChi »

cupofjoakim wrote: post #22

I actually think that most people missed the big issue with paid mods. If anyone can upload a mod to steam, that means that it would force modders of free mods to upload these as well - otherwise they're in danger of someone else uploading their content and earning money on it.

You also enter into a Looney Toons lemonade situation where someone can release your exact mod for slightly cheaper.

Re: Valve shuts down paid mod system after pressure from gamers

#247

Post by Raphmedia »

skizm wrote: post #240
Raphmedia wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bethesda did not ask for the fix. They have no obligation to compensate them financially. This is why this isn't about Bethesda paying or not paying modders. This is about why the hell should Bethesda get 75% of the profit out of a modification that was made on someone's own time and sold through a third party. It's not as if Bethesda was doing quality control, providing support, hosting the mods or providing a mar…

If the community didn't accept it, they wouldn't sell the mods. Just mark them all as free. This is opt-in. Also, for the record, Bethesda only gets 45%, Valve get 30%, and the modder gets 25%. > The game company is getting free content, free publicity, free developers. They shouldn't also get the majority of the profit. You have it backwards, the modder is getting free content (the base game), free publicity (Bethes…

Your argument makes a lot of sense for developper that would create their mods for profit and profit only. They would get free publicity for their products. In that sense, yes, the game company is providing them with free ressources.

However, from my point of view, most mods are not seen or developed as products to be marketed. Most are work of love, personal projects, team projects. Fans getting together to fix a buggy but otherwise good game. In that sense, those developer couldn't care less about the fact that the game company is providing the game for free... they are fans, and all that they want is to make something cool. They add content to existing games for the sake of making the experience better.

Those are the ones that would rather work for free than being insulted by a 25% cut.

I believe the modders should get the majority of the pie. Steam should only get a cut for the hosting, support and mod store. The game company should only get a small cut. They already get a community and free content creators from the modding community. They shouldn't expect to make money out of thin air.

Should EA get money from old Battlefield 2 mods? Should Bohemia Interactive get money from Arma 1 mods? In my eyes, no. The only reason people are still playing those games is because of the modding community. Do take advantage of the presence of those players. Create events, contests, hire modders to create official content. But don't simply get the big part of the pie for simply being the creator of a game you don't even support, release bug fixes or content for.

That being said, I understand that there is a legal side to all of this and the game company must still get money for the use of their game. I however believe that 25% is too small a cut for the modder.

Re: Valve shuts down paid mod system after pressure from gamers

#248

Post by random28345 »

dysfunction wrote: post #239
random28345 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the closest analogue to computer game "mods" in the book publishing world is "fan fiction". Note that 25% is pretty generous when you're creating a derivitive work off of someone else's IP. See Kindle Worlds http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html?docId=1001197421 for an example of the kind of deal you'd be lucky to get.

Fan-fiction doesn't require you to have bought the original work to read (though having read the original may affect your enjoyment of the fanfic). Honda doesn't get a cut if I have my car modded at an independent shop.

> Honda doesn't get a cut if I have my car modded at an independent shop.

Not yet at least. However car (and tractor) manufacturers are moving to make such activity illegal using encryption and intellectual propertly laws.

I'm not saying this is a good thing, just that our current regulatory regime supports this model.

Re: Valve shuts down paid mod system after pressure from gamers

#249

Post by random28345 »

yebyen wrote: post #204
random28345 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But Bethesda who developed the actual game that brought the modders and gave them a platform to derive their work on, not to mention creating the actual game and game engine and putting it in the hands of the actual customers; they should just get nothing out of this whole deal? Mods represent value added to the game that wasn't provided by the original publisher. Each mod "fixes" a deficiency in the game, adds, ch…

I don't see how the idea that Steam should get a share approaching 30% is any less repugnant than that. Visa gets less than 4%, and they are the ones that are really processing the charge. Valve eats that much, and whatever they get paid over that is simply for their role in facilitating the transaction If any of these three parties declined to provide their own involvement, a sale does not happen. So all of them are…

> I don't see how the idea that Steam should get a share approaching 30% is any less repugnant than that.

If you don't understand they 30% is reasonable, then you haven't tried to sell a game in the last 5 years.

That 30% you're paying increases your sales by a factor of 50x, and game developers are quite happy to take 70% of a much larger pie.

Re: Valve shuts down paid mod system after pressure from gamers

#250

Post by [deleted] »

skizm wrote: post #240
Raphmedia wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bethesda did not ask for the fix. They have no obligation to compensate them financially. This is why this isn't about Bethesda paying or not paying modders. This is about why the hell should Bethesda get 75% of the profit out of a modification that was made on someone's own time and sold through a third party. It's not as if Bethesda was doing quality control, providing support, hosting the mods or providing a mar…

If the community didn't accept it, they wouldn't sell the mods. Just mark them all as free. This is opt-in. Also, for the record, Bethesda only gets 45%, Valve get 30%, and the modder gets 25%. > The game company is getting free content, free publicity, free developers. They shouldn't also get the majority of the profit. You have it backwards, the modder is getting free content (the base game), free publicity (Bethes…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN