59 réponses à ce sujet

[Lance Botelle]

Hi All,

I learned today that "Steam" are setting up a service to allow Skyrim modders to be paid for their work, with a view to include other games in the future.

STEAM article: http://store.steampo...com/news/16509/



(Great video for pointing out the pros and cons.)

BBC news article: http://www.bbc.co.uk...nology-32449141

Now, whether this will include the likes of NWN2 I imagine is still in question. However, my questions are as follows:-

1) Would you be prepared to pay for a NWN mod?
2) What are your feelings about Steam's announcement?
3) How would you consider shared content from a paid mod?

It may be worth checking out the first video link to hear the pros and cons about this before answering. However, I am certainly interested in people's comments.

Thanks,
Lance.

[rjshae]

1) Would you be prepared to pay for a NWN mod?

 

For NWN? Probably not.

 

2) What are your feelings about Steam's announcement?

 

Meh, it'll work itself out. Very few mods are worth more than a few coins in entertainment value, and I don't see myself paying for a minor improvement in game play. Maybe if it was a well-received expansion with plenty of value.

 

3) How would you consider shared content from a paid mod?

 

Pretty much the same as licensed commercial content.

[kamal_]

Steam users aren't exactly happy about it.

http://steamed.kotak...mods-1699803962

 

I've already seen some Skyrim mods go pay and remove themselves from the Nexus that were previously free and on the Nexus.

[PJ156]

At its extreme it will kill social sites like ours where everyone shares and helps out. Why would Tchos proof all of Andy's work for gratis if Andy was going to make $10 per download (no offence meant just an recent example).

 

If I use custom model packs then should I give the modder who posted it more than a mention in the credits. Would anyone post free to use material any more?

 

Just some thoughts. I don't see it doing the modding community at large any good in the long term.

 

PJ

[MokahTGS]

This is the worst possible scenario hands down.  Supporting this idea is akin to supporting Nazi Germany in WW2 because you think they have progressive civic order policies.

 

1. Mod authors get 25% of the mod sales.  The Publishers and Valve get 75%.  [sarcasm] Sure...that seems fair.   [/sarcasm]
2. This system actively discourages innovation by dangling the $$ carrot in front of mod authors with the promise of riches and glory.  Tempted mod authors will pull their free versions for the promise of this golden carrot.
3. Steam will not moderate the sales and the mod authors will be liable for support.  In America, this means lawsuits.  I don't care what EULA you agree to by downloading the mod.  It will happen.  At the very least you will see online harassment and even possible RL harassment of mod authors from disgruntled players.
4. A wedge will be shoved between mod authors and players as more and more authors fall for the golden carrot.  Players won't blame the publishers...they will blame the mod authors.
5. Resources will be stolen and sold.  The storefront is not monitored.  It's open season on making a few bucks off of stolen content.
6. Modding communities will be hurt in the long run and publishers will make it so games can only be modded through Steam.

This is very bad and should not be supported by players or mod authors in any way.  There has been a perfectly acceptable way of supporting mod authors for years...AdFly, Paypal, and Patreon all offer ways of showing your support for mod authors...directly...no publisher cut.

 

Don't be fooled into thinking that this is anything but a way for publishers to control and profit from modding.  It isn't about supporting the author.  You can already do that without the greedy publisher sticking their fingers in.  That's the point.  The greedy publishers know this and they want to stop it.  Modding is huge and why many of these games still get sales.  NWN2 still is selling...not because of the OC...it's because of the modding community.  We all know this.

 

I will never buy a mod.  Mods are fan made, 3rd party software.  Mods are made as a hobby, out of passion for the game.  Selling them, turns this into a cheap garage sale or craft fair.  I will have no part of it and I strongly encourage everyone else to do the same.

[kevL]

will just say i appreciate open source

( if it's good enough for the Theory of General Relativity its good enough )

[Lance Botelle]

Hi All,

Thanks for the feedback.

I did wonder how the EULA agreements would be handled. At the moment, even if somebody did want to "show their appreciation" to somebody for some work, there is no easy way to show it without coming up against potential legal issues. And while I am also adverse to seeing Steam take 75%, I have not seen any other viable means to give somebody credit for a mod (or some work) they have written. i.e. Using Steam would appear to overcome the legal constraints.

In other words, an author could provide two links to their work .... one to the completely free download and then offer the Steam link as a legal way for the user to provide an appreciation of the work they have used. The end user would then have complete control of whether they pay for anything or not, and a mod-builder could have some potential income for putting the time into their projects. In essence, the market would then govern itself. If a particular mod proved to be "worth it", then players could use the Steam platform to reward good builders, which in turn, could serve to encourage more work from them. Look at how many builders have had to abandon projects due to real life requirements. This, could, potentially help against this kind of problem in a legal way.

I repeat, it's a shame Steam would take 75% cut, but at least a builder would feel as though they had "paid" the right to have their work paid for (as it were). Let me consider this as an example as well ...

Say, for instance, a mod (not mine) was a particular favourite of the community and it used something I had created, like my "Fog of War" system. Now, if that mod was put onto the Steam platform for "sale" as well as a free download, then players could reward that mod builder for his or her work. Personally, I would NOT be concerned that they had used my content, because I respect that people were showing appreciation for the mod, rather than just my FOW system. However, say for instance, I also put my FOW system up on Steam for people to "show appreciation" if they wanted to. Then, if a player appreciated that particular system and wanted to help promote that, then they could choose to do so independently of whether they liked it within the other person's mod or not.

So, my argument would be that builders should *NOT* stop giving stuff away free, but could use the Steam platform to help gain support for their work if the player felt so inclined. For while I think it would be great for the builder to gain a greater chunk, I also see that "shared work" and "buying into an EULA agreement" to allow publishing would all have some bearing.

So, in conclusion, I think that if the player can still gain access to the mod for free, then having Steam provide a system where the mod builder can be "rewarded" at the discretion of the player is not such a bad idea.

I.e. Use the Steam platform to help support builders, rather than replace free lovingly created content.

EDIT: I wonder if they (would) have a "Pay What You Like" option? That would be great!

EDIT 2: Is it the case that NWN2 material cannot be "sold" at the moment, or a modder even accept "donations" for something they have created?

Cheers,
Lance.

[kamal_]

EDIT 2: Is it the case that NWN2 material cannot be "sold" at the moment, or a modder even accept "donations" for something they have created?

Cheers,
Lance.

Some PW's have a paypal donation button on their websites, as did BouncyRock (Misery Stone). I suppose it's a distinction between sending money to BouncyRock because you think they are cool people, and sending money to BouncyRock for Misery Stone. That or the lawyers never noticed or never cared to make it worth their time to pursue.

[Tchos]

This is the relevant part of the NWN2 EULA:
 

If the Software includes a feature that allows you to modify the Software or to construct new variations (an "Editor"), you may use such Editor to create modifications or enhancements to the Software, including the construction of new levels (collectively the "Variations"), subject to the following restrictions. Your Variations: (i) must only work with the full, registered copy of the Software; (ii) must not contain modifications to any executable file; (iii) must not contain any libelous, defamatory or other illegal material, material that is scandalous or invades the rights of privacy or publicity of any third party; (iv) must not contain any trademarks, copyright-protected work or other property of third parties; and (v) may not be commercially exploited by you, including but not limited to making such Variations available for sale or as part of a pay-per-play or timesharing service.

It does not explicitly forbid accepting voluntary donations for the time you spent in creating work that is available for free.

[rjshae]

This is the worst possible scenario hands down.  Supporting this idea is akin to supporting Nazi Germany in WW2 because you think they have progressive civic order policies.

 

To me this practice looks fairly similar to what you see on asset sites such as TurboSquid. Yet you see hobbyists building and giving away some pretty nice 3D models for free. New Modders will always want to create a reputation for decent quality contributions, and a good  way to do that is to just give them away. Hobbyists (like me) who already have a decent job might not even care about making some paltry sums for modding; it's just something to do for enjoyment.

 

It's not the end of the world. Not even close.

[Lugaid of the Red Stripes]

I don't think the free hobbyist scene will ever go away, rather this is a step towards a new kind of relationship between modders and professional game developers.  Basically this has modders creating all the content that goes into micro-transaction expansions.  The 25/75 split might seem like a raw deal for the modders, but that 75% going to the developers means they have an incentive to make their games easy to mod, with a polished toolset and simplified access to the game engine.  And all without having to plan, create, QA and promote all that new content. 

 

I doubt it will make modders greedy and stingy, but it will make the developers take the modding community seriously.

[PJ156]

I cannot find it right now so it may not exist but  believe there is another section of the EULA which states that all content created in the toolset is the property of the game manufacturer. It was the bit that always needled me and it is that bit that concerns me most in relation to this post.

 

There will be good and bad that comes of this I know and perhaps RJS is correct but I suspect not. I've been five years and counting on Tales', I did it for a hobby true enough but it could not have happened without a lot of free support from experts (self made or professional). In turn time I have play tested in detail many mods, It's that free collaboration that I think will be damaged but we shall see.

 

PJ

[Shallina]

you can ' t do it for NWN2 beceause of NWN2 policy.

 

Now for modding, when we did BGR we used a lot of custom content and content made by others modders,  without it, our mod wouldn 't be what it is today. Modders who use others modders stuff are legions, if the chain is broken by "right and money", those type of module won' t be possible.

 

 

But if you look the other way, making a monster module with as much content as the main game is a monster work, beeing paid for it might trigger  vocations and maybe more poeple will do it.

[BartjeD]

Steam is doing this because it benefits its bottom line. Another argument is that it may benefit games and gamers by encouraging modding and customization efforts. That increases product longevity and value.

 

I don't think it will work when 75% of the money is siphoned away from the modders. You presumably end up with too little to make it worth your while professionally, and it discourages investment by purchasing other mods to learn from or incorporate (if allowed). Of course modders may waive payment when another modder asks them, but I suspect many will just ask for payment too, regardless of purpose.

 

This scheme therefore only benefits games that are very, very, very big. In those cases you have a large target audience. The constraints it imposes on modding would also be mitigated because of the amount of content available to use and learn from, so you can probably get some of it for free to start with.

 

Assuming this is correct then pay-for-mod wouldn't work for NWN / NWN2 and other non-mainstream games. An exception are sold professional grade modules containing an adventure. Those can be sold quite well as NWN 1 demonstrated, provided the proper framework is in place. Steam could serve as that framework. Still... the profit margin is very low so I don't imagine it would have a big attraction. You may end up with competing free modules that are better and of course free.

 

I oppose the effort to monetize the efforts of hobbyist gamers and modders. When I pay for a game I feel cheated when the seller promises me a long lived and valuable product that actually depends on me buying further "options" down the line. For that reason a company shouldn't advertise the mentioned longevity and added value by mods and moddablity (toolset) unless they also explicitly mention that those extra products have to be paid for separately. They are deceiving me otherwise.

[Tchos]

I cannot find it right now so it may not exist but  believe there is another section of the EULA which states that all content created in the toolset is the property of the game manufacturer. It was the bit that always needled me and it is that bit that concerns me most in relation to this post.

 

That's in the NWN1 EULA, not NWN2, but that's an incorrect reading of what it says.

[PJ156]

I guess that's why I could not find it 

 

It's been a long while since I saw it, I just remember it bugging me at the time.

 

PJ

[Raygereio]

There has been a perfectly acceptable way of supporting mod authors for years...AdFly, Paypal, and Patreon all offer ways of showing your support for mod authors...directly...no publisher cut.

AdFly spreads malware via its adds. While I'd never accept money for mods, I'm cool with the idea of donating to a modder you want to support. But posting an AdFly link should not be acceptable.

Anway. Yeah, I'm firmly in the "This is a monumentally stupid idea and if allowed to continue will cause problems"-camp. Personally I think if you're into modding for any reason other then to have fun, you're doing it wrong. And I'm very much a Cathedral kind of guy.
More importantly, it's also bad for modding in general: When people aren't thinking about money, they do things like release work under open source, let other people use their work to make derivatives or allow their work to be included in other work and help others to create similar work.
It's that sort of colaboration that's responsible for some of the best mods out there and I'd say allows modding to even really exist.
But in a pay-for-mods scenario why would I release my work open source so that someone else can use it to make money? Why when someone posts a question asking how create a new feat would I help that person? After all he could use that information to create a mod that could compete with mine! Etc, etc.

And let's not even get into the myriad problems this particular implementation of pay-for-mods has. Just to name one, let's take quality control: There is none. You can dump pretty much whatever you want on the Workshop and as long as it isn't an obvious joke mod, it gets approved. Why is this a problem? Well, just take a look.
Additionally Steam's ToS states you can only get a refund within 24 hours. However it's very easy to code savefile destroying infinite loops in Skyrim if you don't know what you're doing (which happened quite frequently back in the early days of Skyrim modding). And that is not something which you're likely to notice as a user within 24 hours. So have fun paying money for something that can easily wreck your game!

[kamal_]

Buy this mod and eliminate popups.... I'm not kidding.

 

https://i.imgur.com/TdmNvAF.png

[Tchos]

If money were my primary motivator for modding, I wouldn't be modding NWN2.  I seriously doubt NWN2 mods will be affected by this.

 

That said, Wrye's venerable Cathedral vs Parlour argument is a false dichotomy (I would not call myself either a cathedral or a parlour sort of person), and does not give a fair representation of the "other side" that he's both opposing and portraying as being the only other position.

[Lance Botelle]

Hi All,

I read all the posts since my last one and note the following from a personal perspective:-

1) I enjoy building my NWN2 mod. It's one of the few things I can do (with the health condition I have), which I can keep doing bits to and keep me sane. Those that know me from my posts will know that this is a work of love as opposed to one of money.

2) Without doubt, I would always want to GIVE my work away to any and all who wanted it. And I would always want to fix any problems anyone encountered, simply because I would not want to have spent so many years on the project just to leave it full of bugs.

3) I do NOT fully understand the law around what can or cannot be sold with NWN2, but if Steam created a way (after talking with "Atari" or whoever they needed to), then I would not be adverse to using their system as a SAFE and LEGAL way for other players to show appreciation of one's work.

4) With respect to other people's content within work that is sold, then I would simply leave that to the conscience of the one who used it. e.g. If a mod (not mine) was making a lot of money and it happened to use some of my coding (like my "Fog of War"), then I would hope the builder may like to contribute to my own work by "showing appreciation" to the "Fog of War" code I may have uploaded for them to return the appreciation. HOWEVER ... I don't think such a big deal needs to be made over this. WHY? Because the people who do this kind of thing for a hobby (like me) are happy to give their stuff away. And as a community, I have hope that community members would support those who genuinely do the work, which also benefits themselves in some way.

Let me expand on my last example ....

1) "Someone's Amazing Mod" (Uses my "Fog of War" code.) On sale at Steam for £4.00
2) "My Fog of War Hak" On sale at Steam for £1.00

Now, if (1) sells 20000 copies and they make 25% of that: £4000, then I imagine they may like to consider paying £1.00 for the code they used of mine and pay the £1.00 for my code. Furthermore, if players bought the mod (1) and really liked the "Fog of War" addition, and they wanted to encourage the coder for their input, then they could potentially pay another £1.00 for the Fog of War hak, just out of appreciation.

The point being, *anything*, *absolutely anything* I received would be a real appreciation as a sign of "Thanks" for what I have spent time doing. And, to quickly add, it's not like builders like us are looking for thanks, and I know that people do thank builders, which is really appreciated. However, when somebody thanks you to the point of buying you a drink, or taking you out for a meal, then that really does make one feel even more appreciated. That's just human nature!

Furthermore, such appreciation means one can realistically put time into something because they know people *are* prepared to pay something for it. That may sound like a contradiction, but truly, it is not. I speak from experience as one who used to fix all their friend's computers before someone offered me a job doing it. Did it stop me fixing my friends computers for free? Of course not, but my hobby/interest became worthwhile and gave me a feeling that what I did was actually worth something.

And to bring the argument back full circle, the reason I have had more time than most to spend doing my own module is due to my ill health. I am too ill to hold down a "normal" job nowadays ... and as I say above, I thank the fact that I can do some modding now and then to help keep me doing something when I am able. Now, if the past few years of slow work on my mod had any chance for people to be able to legitimately and legally "give a donation" as a way of thanks, then why would I turn it away? I am NOT asking for such a thing, but neither would I turn around to a friend offering to buy me a drink and say "No thanks". In a sense, it's almost normal social protocol to be ready to receive a thanks from somebody who appreciates the work one has done.

There is even a little reverse logic and psychology at work here .... Why wouldn't somebody want the means to reward a builder if they wanted to?

To stress, this is not about making stuff cost something (although I can see those who would want to try to exploit the system that way), but about giving players the ability to reward good modders! That, surely, can only be a good thing!

Over to you ...

Lance.

[kevL]

Lance,
if there is any mod that deserves to have a nice shiny Donate btn, it's Althea

[Lance Botelle]

Lance,
if there is any mod that deserves to have a nice shiny Donate btn, it's Althea

Hi KevL,

Well ... That would be nice to have, but whether it would be used is another question.

I like to think there are some things that are worth rewarding, but whether that would include my own style of module for players, that is something else. For instance, there are some players who would be adverse to the idea of my "Fog of War" in my module and may stop playing just because of that. More to the point, I may be able to "donate" to others who I appreciate.

Anyway, it's early days, and who knows whether NWN2 will ever get "Steamed"?

Cheers,
Lance.

[andysks]

Hi Lance. A thank you to the modder, with a donation feature... anyone can have on their blogs. As KevL said, you can easily add such a thing to yours. I don't think it's a bad thing, and probably people should do it. I wouldn't, because I'd feel silly. My work uses CC from the whole community, and I think they're the ones who deserve it. The story of my campaign, will be judged once it's out. But anyway, to the steam thing.

 

It is weird. When a game offers an editor, I always thought that it offers it as a hobby to the people, and perhaps as a scouting mode to see potential good builders to employ...

 

Paying for mods, would encourage the moding. Maybe more people would do it, and as the guy on the video says, perhaps we wouldn't have so many unfinished ones because people would see a way to make some money by the end of it. But it has so many bads too. I don't agree with the buying of a mod, but I would donate for a good one. And as I watch streamers of Twitch receiving a load of money on donations, I think that people do donate in general. So instead of making me buy a sword for 2$, put it there for free and add an appreciation donation. Share the money more fairly with the moder, because that 25% is just funny and every one is happy.

 

But I find it funny and interesting that the first game to introduce this comes from Bethesda. Same company to release a crappy MMO, with prescribes as well. Perhaps they are getting greedy, or perhaps ESO didn't sell as much as they hoped. Because I'm certain that from that 75% an amount goes to Bethesda. There's just no other way.

[Jfoxtail]

I think there is a fair amount of "hyperbole" in some of the reactions here. Anecdotal not statistical evidence. 

 

I don't necessarily believe this is the beginnings of an online totalitarian state.

 

Disclaimer: I have never produced a mod for any game. I have play tested and helped "debug" for a number of online friends but I have nothing contributed that serve as an examplifier of this issue.

 

I would hardly classify this first attempt as "the best and most definitive solution going forward" . Its first step. Its a trial balloon.

 

I would ask ???

 

1) If you were a hobbyist and you had the opportunity to earn a few royalties to do something you love doing anyway are you still still against it ?

 

2) If the share of the revenue is reflective of "the ownership of quality control" is that not appropriate ? I mean if the game studio undertakes to certify the QA .... (which seems to be missing in this example?? Have not read the specific details). Is it really simply a matter of "how much is fair"? Would a 75%-25% reverse change minds ?

 

3) Doesn't this engage the community hobbyist knowing they can earn a few bucks for their gaming hobby ?

 

4) Doesn't this likely add hundreds of hours to beloved games ? 

 

4b) Doesn't this likely add hundred of "scenes" of areas and geographical content to beloved games ?

 

5) Wouldn't this be an "legitimate entry path" to a career (even as a contractor) with a game development studio ? 

 

I realize some will have strong feelings in the matter; but really a game studio engaging the indy-hobbyist to support a game with a little financial incentive need not be perceived as a pathway to big brother and on-line lawsuit Armageddon.

 

I suppose the devil is always in the details. This is likely far from perfect or fair; buts its the first attempt (?)

 

It just seems to me that there are a number of authors/artists posting on these very boards that are frankly deserving and could be rewarded for their beautiful contributions to a game. 

 

In all likelyhood the indy-hobbyist will never get rich at it. That's just how Capitalism works. Too bad  

 

To get rich you will have to found your own game studio - sell a smash hit based on your reputation - take the company public on the NASDAQ - tell your shareholder to "go flog it" - wait to be bought out by some larger conglomerate like <<insert here>> and retire at age 31 living beside Zuckerberg from Facebook ....

[Lance Botelle]

Hi Lance. A thank you to the modder, with a donation feature... anyone can have on their blogs. As KevL said, you can easily add such a thing to yours. I don't think it's a bad thing, and probably people should do it. I wouldn't, because I'd feel silly. My work uses CC from the whole community, and I think they're the ones who deserve it. The story of my campaign, will be judged once it's out. But anyway, to the steam thing.<SNIP>

Hi andysks,

That's the question I am raising though ... I'm not sure if a NWN modder *can* have a donate feature that is legal, can they? I would be up for a "Donation Button" associated with somebody's NWN work ... *IF* it was legal. The Steam arrangement appears to make a deal with the Editor makers that makes such "Payments" or "Donations" possible legally.

NB: I must make it clear that I am referring to "Donations" rather than any "Guaranteed Payments".

If, however, we can legally add a "Donate" button in some way associated with our work now, then I would do that now and this makes the whole Steam discussion redundant.

Can anyone confirm or deny that we legally can add a "Donate" button/option for our NWN2 contributions now?
 

If so, how can it legally be done?

Many Thanks,
Lance.