|
Post by amgepo on May 9, 2015 11:48:05 GMT
Not much to add, both Emma and Piper's posts covered so far everything I would have said. But I think there won't ever be enough focus on what piper comented. Maybe beth didn't try to earn money directly, but just destroy a comunity that didn't consider fitting for it's business model anymore.
It's really difficult not to predict the backlash that would happen, and is difficult to believe a great company would act with such incompetence in so sensitive matter, unless it's desire was exactly to cause what happened.
Too many people ponders on this theory to ignore it and I even made an experiment, telling someone totatally oblivious to modding and even videogames, what happened (I think I tell it in an objective way: there's a game, a comunity of people made modifications just for fun and for sharing a hobby, developers tried to make people pay for modiffications, 25% for people madding them, some people accepted, people have been throwing at each others throat for a while) just to be answered "it looks like they do it on purpouse to destroy that comunity".
If that's the case, it didn't matter much if we want to acept paid modding or not.
|
|
|
Post by Emma on May 9, 2015 12:22:06 GMT
Not much to add, both Emma and Piper's posts covered so far everything I would have said. But I think there won't ever be enough focus on what piper comented. Maybe beth didn't try to earn money directly, but just destroy a comunity that didn't consider fitting for it's business model anymore. It's really difficult not to predict the backlash that would happen, and is difficult to believe a great company would act with such incompetence in so sensitive matter, unless it's desire was exactly to cause what happened. Too many people ponders on this theory to ignore it and I even made an experiment, telling someone totatally oblivious to modding and even videogames, what happened (I think I tell it in an objective way: there's a game, a comunity of people made modifications just for fun and for sharing a hobby, developers tried to make people pay for modiffications, 25% for people madding them, some people accepted, people have been throwing at each others throat for a while) just to be answered "it looks like they do it on purpouse to destroy that comunity". If that's the case, it didn't matter much if we want to acept paid modding or not. Well, I have been thinking the same, too, just not putting it into words. Tear the technically competent Skyrim modding community apart before they reach the fine-wine-state of the much smaller Morrowind community. The Oblivion community... don't know what to say about it, it lost a lot of blood when Skyrim arrived. If one checks the Bethesda boards, there is a huge activity going on in the Morrowind mods section, there is a moderate activity in the Skyrim section, the Oblivion section is like an almost empty waiting hall. It does seem unlikely that neither Bethesda, nor Valve could predict the result of their move, and the whole idea with keeping it a secret until it landed on our heads - what could it cause but not a rage, and then a huge rift in the community. But, was it a good move from their perspective? Didn't this even increase the likelyhood of established and knowledgeable modders that are interested in earning money will turn into competitors instead, competitors that could easily attract good modders to work with them on an alternate sandbox game? That's where I fail to find the logic. From the devs perspective, it ought to have been much more attractive to do their very best to implement paid modding in an acceptable way, so that they can earn money from it. Still... if the idea is to introduce paywalls in FO4, it must be in their interest to rip apart the Skyrim community so that established modders quit modding for free for Skyrim and instead make mods for money for FO4. And as the player base for FO4 is rather different than the playerbase for the TES fantasy rpgs, the players won't have any idea of being "entitled" to free mods in their bone-marrow. Yes, that makes kind of sense. Of course, there are some of us who, like me, have absolutely zero interst in modding a radiated, ruined, post-war America gameworld. But we are probably not that many.
|
|
|
Post by loriel on May 9, 2015 13:21:08 GMT
I am struggling to understand the viewpoint expressed by everybody here. Perhaps it's the understandable attitude of "This is the way it has always been..." I admire the noble motives of those who do not wish to charge for their work, and mod for love rather than for money. But it seems unfair to try to banish others whose motives are less pure. Perhaps the modding community should explore the possibility of splitting into two, if the thought of sharing with others of different persuasions is too painful. It should be fairly easy to devise a suitable licence under which mods could be released to allow re-use only for non-commercial purposes (see the creative commons licences for example). I am sceptical that it's a plot by Bethesda to drive away modders, though I wouldn't rule it out. It seems more likely to me that it was an attempt to increase income (like the DLC scheme) - from their viewpoint, what's not to like about taking a 45% cut from the sale of somebody else's work... It certainly seems plausible that the next releases in the ES and FO series will be constructed to accommodate professional modders, which raises the question of where this community wishes to move next. There are numerous alternatives around, but few with the popularity of the Bethesda products. Loriel
|
|
|
Post by Emma on May 9, 2015 13:57:41 GMT
I am struggling to understand the viewpoint expressed by everybody here. Perhaps it's the understandable attitude of "This is the way it has always been..." I admire the noble motives of those who do not wish to charge for their work, and mod for love rather than for money. But it seems unfair to try to banish others whose motives are less pure. *Everybody*? I would have thought that a wide variety of opinions have been expressed here over the past few days. I agree that every modder has the right to mod for his or her own reasons. I don't think anyone*)(edit below) has a grudge towards the modders who was involved in the paywall trial (or other modders that are expressing an interest in earning money on their mods), but the 25/75 split doesn't seem fair to modders. I'm not sure what you are saying in the first sentence? As for modders resources, I also think (like I said before) that if it is clear that resource makers own their own content, there shouldn't be a problem, as they can then stipulate in their conditions what their resources can and can not be used for. Even if the next titles will be constructed to accomodate for "professional modders", I dearly hope there will also be free mods and a community that helps and encourages new modders. If not, who will be willing to test their new mods, who would invest their money in buying a mod that isn't granted as polished. I think Wolf's post about ABC for Barbarians and Barbarian modders has been a very interesting part of this discussion: For those who haven't read it, here it is again: ABC for Barbarian and not Barbarian Modders by Wolf Lycanthrops A like in Attitude (The position of the unborn child in the womb or the position of the thoughts in our brains) The Attitudes of a Game Developing Company Are - making money. There is nothing wrong with that. - pleasing their customers, and giving them a product they enjoy and like to pay for. The Attitudes of Modders Are - having own personal fun with “playing” the Creation Kit or Construction set, creating new models and textures or even worlds their very own way, doing something creative and letting ideas run free. - sharing fun and entertainment with the others all around the world. - getting appreciation for what they are doing. They get it by posts, PMs, new friendships, endorsements and recently also with donations. - giving their mod entirely for free The Attitudes of Independent or Fee-Based Developers Are - similar to the interests of a game developing company. It’s also earning money. And again, there is nothing wrong with that. B like in Bethesda (yet obviously undetected city in Tamriel and well known well in Jerusalem with healing waters. There is also a game developing company in Rockville, Maryland) Bethesda consists of people, real people who are working hard to earn their living and they put a lot of their heart and soul into what they are doing. They are art creators, historians, lore developers, story writers, modelers, texture artist, animators, programmers, technicians, administration staff, managers and a lot more. It’s a bunch of creative and excellent people. It doesn’t make them less excellent just because they are paid for their work and have to please the mainstream up to a certain limit due to commercial interests. (The more I delved into the depth of modding and I learned to see every small detail of the games the more I came to admire the work of these people. I tried out the game developer software Unreal Game Engine IV. And I realized that, although I am in a modest way capable of editing, modelling, texturing, animating and voice acting, it would take you maybe ten times my lifespan to complete a game like an Elder Scrolls game on my own. This made me feel exceedingly humble and small. And so some posts on forums insulting the people working for Bethesda made me very sad. ) Bethesda is the proprietor of the games. Still Bethesda voluntarily grants everyone who has bought the game permission to modify the games and to build up on a complete existing virtual world and provides us with the editing software for free. From the time in which computer gaming was more liberal and to the favor of the players and more to the disadvantage of the companies, Bethesda’s permission to mod their games initiated a symbiosis between Bethesda and the modders. Other game companies invest a lot of money for customer behavior field research. Bethesda has her community of modders that comes up with new ideas, develops new features, technical improvements and exactly shows up the interests of the players; what will sell and what won’t. A lot of developments made by the modding community have been integrated in the games since. C like in Community (bunch of stubborn individuals thinking stubbornly they have something in common) A community is based on sharing, supporting and equal rights. Rising individual interests higher above the interests of all the others will break a community. That’s why it is not in order for a single modder to charge for his mods. He first had his advantage of the community, letting them do playtesting, getting support, getting feedback and even getting permissions to use work of other community members for free. In the modding community permissions and all legal terms are based on the simple condition that mods must be for free. So the community idea in itself definitely excludes charging for mods. It’s simply not possible. Preview on D like in DLC or DeveloperDLCs are downloadable contents in the courtesy of Bethesda and not released on the Steam Workshop. It’s Bethesda who is liable and ensures the legal correctness and the quality. Developers are developing game contents. Either they are employed and working for a company, completely independent or are working fee-based. If Bethesda is interested in selling mods, which was obviously the case, the mod can be turned into a DLC, released and in the courtesy by Bethesda. The former modder will advance to a fee-based developer. Bethesda will buy the DLC-developer’s intellectual property and work with a negotiable sum for each download. If a developer is using contents from modders, permissions from within the modding community are not to be considered as valid. The modder or creator of the used content has to be named as a co-author in the developing team of the DLC and as such be paid proportionally. For example if such a DLC made by a fee –based developer is using a model created by a modeler, who has released this model as a free modder’s resource, must of course be paid because his work is used to gain money. Bethesda has also sort out how the free software and tools developer (SKSE, NifSkope etc) have to be treated. And there won’t be any need to withdraw a relevant sum of the incoming money for the superfluous services of a workshop on a game selling platform. In the end this will increase the gain of the developer and Bethesda’s. There must be a definite line drawn between mod and DLC, between modder and developer, just as it is with privacy and business. One can’t merge both. Otherwise there will arise: E like in Envy (Feeling like taken an arrow to your knee) We are just people, people with different (see under “A”) attitudes. Some of us can afford to share mods for free and some are hoping for a way to support their living by creating new game contents. We should not envy each other. The free modders have the advantage to use all the free resources, to have fun sharing, to not be forced into business management, and the others have the advantage of making their beloved hobby a profession. Separating free mods from DLCs released by Bethesda would definitely reduce the negative feelings between both groups. The cost of this book is my 50 cents I’ve given you here. But as I do not know for sure whether it’s such vital knowledge, you get it for free. *) EDIT: I should have said "I don't think that anyone HERE ON THESE BOARDS..." Within the Skyrim player community, and in particular the Steam community, I have also seen and heard about a lot of ongoing hatred towards the modders who took part in the paywall project.
|
|
|
Post by loriel on May 9, 2015 14:53:36 GMT
I am struggling to understand the viewpoint expressed by everybody here. *Everybody*? I would have thought that a wide variety of opinions have been expressed here over the past few days. They seem to range between "Paid mods are evil" and "Paid mods are evil", but I am probably missing the subtle differences. I can certainly agree with the first. My reading of various posts led me to believe there is a strong dislike of the concept of paid modding, so it seems to me there probably would be a grudge towards paid modders. On the 75/25 split we are definitely agreed - it's a greedy ripoff by Bethesda/Valve as far as I am concerned. See "Community" in Wolf's ABC - perhaps a separate community is needed for "paid" modders, if they are not to be allowed into the "unpaid" community. Agreed, resources should be easy. But looking at it again, mods are potentially much more difficult. The CK EULA appears to grant Bethesda a licence to your mods, under which Bethesda can allow other modders to re-use the contents of those mods - including paid modders. That could be challenged as unreasonable, but going to court to prove it would be expensive. A possible solution would be to develop and use a CK independent of the Bethesda/Steam one, and to avoid using any Bethesda resources in your mod - which should then make the mod yours, without Bethesda having any rights to it. Not a trivial task, and a task for the wider community rather than for a single modder or team. Loriel
|
|
|
Post by Emma on May 9, 2015 15:34:12 GMT
*Everybody*? I would have thought that a wide variety of opinions have been expressed here over the past few days. They seem to range between "Paid mods are evil" and "Paid mods are evil", but I am probably missing the subtle differences. Although the opinions vary regarding paid modding, I think that rather than saying "paid mods are evil" everyone has been agreeing that "last weekend's paywall was astonishlingly ill executed and caused a lot of grief and anger". I think everyone, regardless if pro or agains paid modding, are agreeing on that, not only in this thread but all over the community. Probably, modders who are 100 % pro paid mods are even more upset than those of us who are not aiming for that career. In one way we are already so many different communities... Skyrim players community, Skyrim modders community, Nexus community, Bethesda-community, Morrowind community, this little community here... There will continue to be different communities, and no doubt that also paid modders will interact in a community only for paid modders. I'm hoping there won't be a rift that tear the various parts of the total modding community apart. Well, for resources wouldn't this be clear enough?: Modder A makes a set of new meshes, and release them without an esp, just meshes and textures folders and a readme that states that these meshes and textures may not be used in commercial purpose without explicit permission (or whatever the expression for payed mods would be). If he wants to display them in another way, he asks his friend modder B to make a free "demo-mod" of his meshes and textures. This demo-mod won't contain the meshes and textures, only the esp. So the creator of the meshes and textures has never associated these with an esp, so how can Bethesda under any circumstances claim any right to use them. The "explicit permission" would of course be an agreement between the resource maker and the modder who is charging for mods. Are you saying that this would fail, as if modder C includes the meshes from modder A in his house-mod, modder A has in fact given Bethesda permission to use the meshes for their own purpose? If so, I can see downloading mods get a lot more complicated, as resource makers are unlikely to agree to that their contents are included directly with a mod.
|
|
|
Post by Dova on May 9, 2015 15:47:47 GMT
It does seem unlikely that neither Bethesda, nor Valve could predict the result of their move, and the whole idea with keeping it a secret until it landed on our heads - what could it cause but not a rage, and then a huge rift in the community. But, was it a good move from their perspective? Didn't this even increase the likelyhood of established and knowledgeable modders that are interested in earning money will turn into competitors instead, competitors that could easily attract good modders to work with them on an alternate sandbox game? That's where I fail to find the logic. From the devs perspective, it ought to have been much more attractive to do their very best to implement paid modding in an acceptable way, so that they can earn money from it. Still... if the idea is to introduce paywalls in FO4, it must be in their interest to rip apart the Skyrim community so that established modders quit modding for free for Skyrim and instead make mods for money for FO4. And as the player base for FO4 is rather different than the playerbase for the TES fantasy rpgs, the players won't have any idea of being "entitled" to free mods in their bone-marrow. Yes, that makes kind of sense. Of course, there are some of us who, like me, have absolutely zero interst in modding a radiated, ruined, post-war America gameworld. But we are probably not that many. Exactly this. When paywall was suddenly removed, I dearly hoped what I've written was wrong. But to my disappointment, not quite. Much of what I have read are endless discussions of justifying perspectives, or picking one small aspect and discuss it to death. Yes, there are some thoughts circulating about how we should move forward, but these thoughts tended to be drowned rather quickly. We don't need to overanalyze now and the past, what we need are more thoughts that can be presented to the companies about how to keep everyone happy while maintaining what we believe modding is about. And we have less than a month until E3 2015, when I believe everything's decided for. Wolf had made me rethink - why did Valve deserve a cut from the previous paywall when they obviously didn't do anything for the modding community except having the Steam Workshop (with Nexus being equally as good, if not better)? I am convinced that it was Valve who persuaded Bethesda to even start thinking of paid mods, with their previous *success* of selling "mods" for other games. And why had Bethesda agree? Should think about that. Existing TES/FO modding communities will remain free, there's little doubt about that, because of Bethesda's EULA clearly stated they are of non-commercial use. So why did they even dare to open that can of worms in the first place and bit back on their words was clearly just to create a rift. Look at the discussions we are still having right now. Some places have quiet down, others are still struggling on the previous implementation. One thing that is uniform though, is the community as a whole is accepting to idea of mod authors getting paid, but not an agreement on an effective method. That's what we should talk about. We must not isolate modding and just discuss it exclusively. Nothing happens in a vacuum by themselves. Let's not forget about the possible business agreements between Valve and Bethesda, and between Valve and other game companies. With TES/FO branded as AAA game titles that have large modding communities and large revenue potential, what will happen can be very influential to modding for any games in general. --------- Some other minor thoughts - Wolf's idea of paid DLC is quite good. The main problems is how much I can and am willing to afford, and what would be the quality of the remaining free mods and the sharing spirit, when it will become so acceptable to sell mods as custom DLC? - Jet has once mentioned about ad revenues without the users paying anything. I really don't think the amount of ad revenues is attractive enough for the companies to let go of paid mods, nor enough to allow the mod authors who needs the money to survive. I think it's fair to assume youtube is the gold standard of really high ad revenues, and yet if you take a look at Gopher's Patreon, he admits that youtube doesn't earn him enough money to sustain his family consistently, and I don't think he's exaggerating.
|
|
|
Post by amgepo on May 9, 2015 16:04:06 GMT
Well Loriel, paid mods are evil indeed. We have something good here and we are talking about introducing a great change that will cause a lot of other changes. The only advantage is arguably, that modders can earn money. In other words that money goes from one pocket to other. If modders making money is so wonderful, players (and specially modders, as modders are the players using more mods) losing that said money needs to be awful, isn't it?
We are not talking about earning enough money for living. There will never be enough for that (maybe for a little number of modders). It's only increassing earnings for a little time at the cost of making ones live a little more misserable (having fun is important and when money goes in, fun goes out).
So, a series of disadvantages and a single advantage that isn't an advantage at all. Evil.
Of course modders agreing on joining this have received a lot of hate. I think some people even threatened the lives of some of those modders and I'm sure some of them mean it. There is a lot of awful people in the world and there is a lot of people on internet. There are people killing other people for their sexual tendencies, for the color of their skin, always eager to kill everyone that they perceibe as a challenge for they live stile. The modding comunity is big enough. it would be too gullible to assume there is no people like this there.
And there is where the modding comunity need to show it's maturity. Stopping the hate tide when it arises, as it's not something to take as a joke. It's something really dangerous, that needs to be put down each time it arises.
I have read some posts of people deffending modders having acepted to be paid, despite not agreeing. This obviously means the hate wave had happened and also that there have been people doing something about it. To say the truth, that hate wave thing is a problem way bigger than any paywall.
|
|
|
Post by loriel on May 9, 2015 17:46:43 GMT
Well, for resources wouldn't this be clear enough?: Modder A makes a set of new meshes, and release them without an esp, just meshes and textures folders and a readme that states that these meshes and textures may not be used in commercial purpose without explicit permission (or whatever the expression for payed mods would be). It's worth considering using a formal licence, to give a better chance that it would be enforceable. In the case of contracts, any ambiguity in the wording is construed against the drafter of the contract - I don't think this automatically applies to copyright / licence situations, but it should be borne in mind. You raise an interesting point here. One that is worth further research. My initial reaction is that the wording of the Skyrim CK EULA appears to give Bethesda a licence to everything in the mod, including those meshes. That does not appear reasonable to me. Bethesda's licence applies to "New Materials", defined as "..created using the Editor" ("Editor" being defined as the CK). That ought, in my opinion, to cover the esp but not the various linked files (meshes, sounds, textures, etc). It's a pity the EULA wording leaves its intentions unclear, but perhaps that is deliberate to allow Bethesda some flexibility in how they present it... Loriel
|
|
|
Post by Seyheb on May 9, 2015 18:30:05 GMT
It does seem unlikely that neither Bethesda, nor Valve could predict the result of their move, and the whole idea with keeping it a secret until it landed on our heads - what could it cause but not a rage, and then a huge rift in the community. But, was it a good move from their perspective? Didn't this even increase the likelyhood of established and knowledgeable modders that are interested in earning money will turn into competitors instead, competitors that could easily attract good modders to work with them on an alternate sandbox game? That's where I fail to find the logic. From the devs perspective, it ought to have been much more attractive to do their very best to implement paid modding in an acceptable way, so that they can earn money from it. Still... if the idea is to introduce paywalls in FO4, it must be in their interest to rip apart the Skyrim community so that established modders quit modding for free for Skyrim and instead make mods for money for FO4. And as the player base for FO4 is rather different than the playerbase for the TES fantasy rpgs, the players won't have any idea of being "entitled" to free mods in their bone-marrow. Yes, that makes kind of sense. Of course, there are some of us who, like me, have absolutely zero interst in modding a radiated, ruined, post-war America gameworld. But we are probably not that many. Exactly this. When paywall was suddenly removed, I dearly hoped what I've written was wrong. But to my disappointment, not quite. Much of what I have read are endless discussions of justifying perspectives, or picking one small aspect and discuss it to death. Yes, there are some thoughts circulating about how we should move forward, but these thoughts tended to be drowned rather quickly. We don't need to overanalyze now and the past, what we need are more thoughts that can be presented to the companies about how to keep everyone happy while maintaining what we believe modding is about. And we have less than a month until E3 2015, when I believe everything's decided for. Wolf had made me rethink - why did Valve deserve a cut from the previous paywall when they obviously didn't do anything for the modding community except having the Steam Workshop (with Nexus being equally as good, if not better)? I am convinced that it was Valve who persuaded Bethesda to even start thinking of paid mods, with their previous *success* of selling "mods" for other games. And why had Bethesda agree? Should think about that. Existing TES/FO modding communities will remain free, there's little doubt about that, because of Bethesda's EULA clearly stated they are of non-commercial use. So why did they even dare to open that can of worms in the first place and bit back on their words was clearly just to create a rift. Look at the discussions we are still having right now. Some places have quiet down, others are still struggling on the previous implementation. One thing that is uniform though, is the community as a whole is accepting to idea of mod authors getting paid, but not an agreement on an effective method. That's what we should talk about. We must not isolate modding and just discuss it exclusively. Nothing happens in a vacuum by themselves. Let's not forget about the possible business agreements between Valve and Bethesda, and between Valve and other game companies. With TES/FO branded as AAA game titles that have large modding communities and large revenue potential, what will happen can be very influential to modding for any games in general. --------- Some other minor thoughts - Wolf's idea of paid DLC is quite good. The main problems is how much I can and am willing to afford, and what would be the quality of the remaining free mods and the sharing spirit, when it will become so acceptable to sell mods as custom DLC? - Jet has once mentioned about ad revenues without the users paying anything. I really don't think the amount of ad revenues is attractive enough for the companies to let go of paid mods, nor enough to allow the mod authors who needs the money to survive. I think it's fair to assume youtube is the gold standard of really high ad revenues, and yet if you take a look at Gopher's Patreon, he admits that youtube doesn't earn him enough money to sustain his family consistently, and I don't think he's exaggerating. Did Bethesda do what they did to deliberately create a rift? I'm not saying it isn't plausible, it is for the reasons Emma mentions, it is just that if they were being so Machiavellian, didn't they take into account the possibility that the backlash could damage their own reputation? I do realise that it is possible they were prepared to take some damage to achieve a long-term goal, but on balance I am not totally convinced. Will existing TES/FO modding communities remain free? We hope so, but don't forget that Bethesda's EULA was amended by the addition of the following passage and it is still part of the EULA, so whilst I don't think a paywall will return to Skyrim in the same form, we cannot be absolutely sure that something won't return in some other form: However, I agree with Dova that although we could go on analysing what happened for ever, the priority now is to focus on the way forward from here and have something prepared that we could present if needed. In the absence of knowing what exactly will come next, that's going to require some alternatives of course. [edit - I've just seen Loriel's post and agree with the comments on the EULA]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2015 18:58:06 GMT
Theres an awful lot here I agree with , you can use the word mature or adapt or evolve and still be uncertain exactly what that may mean to different people and your right there probably isn't one single path by which modding will get to where its going , but whatever way in which you think of modding you have to realize their are people who are thinking of it in market terms and if people in the modding community are not cognizant of the way that side of the equation is thinking they are not going to be prepared for what comes and will have little to no voice on how it matures , evolves or adapts or whatever adage you choose to use. Also I get the whole , sharing , forging friendships , helping each other part of modding and how when that settles out into a really comfortable working relationship it can give you a sense of a mature community or as Pink Piper put it in regard to MW community they have matured like fine wine , but to people who want to monetize modding thats meaningless to them , the kind of maturity they look for is not that and I can give you the perfect example of what they do look for . In Nexus when you download a file it now says for many files you need x y z to make this work , it didn't always do that , that ease of use , that functionality of design is the kind of maturation that tells them this is becoming something. Also I'm not saying paid modding is the solution or alternative to consoles , in fact I dont believe paid modding ever would of worked for what the FO/ES modding scene is. We all know how complex modding can be in FO/ES and consoles would require something far more simplified than what FO/ES modding is . And if you add in the cost it would incur , using myself as an example modded Skyrim to about 200 mods , was running but a wee bit unstable , cut it back to 176 and had a great game going , but that doesn't include 50 - 75 other mods I tried and rejected . So even at $1 per mod with cost of game your talking a $300 + game and if on another playthrough wanted to change things up could be another $100 or more. Thats just insane . Your right someone will make PC games . One thing I've been saying is modding is the goose that lays the golden egg for Bethesda , well if they did go to paid mods and I was one of the other game companies first thing I would do is make game like the FO/ES games with free modding (better tools whatnot ) and steal the goose. Just like you can look at the future of modding from a modder, a player and a commercial perspective, one can look at the maturity of modding from these perspectives and get very different results. Each game has its own culture; whereas the Morrowind community has matured like fine wine (and I'm desperately longing for a sip of that fine wine right now), the Skyrim community culture is more about grab and take, use and abuse, although also this community has matured over the years, it's still a mis-behaving kid lying on the floor banging its fists and screaming for attention. So, is Bethesda worried that their goose will walk away? There is a team from the TES Alliance community that have started their own indygame project, Witanlore, a game that is supposed to be moddable once it is finished. Should this happen, it would be a game developed by people who are totally aware of what modders need and what modders want, as this is where they came from. If their project comes true, I'm sure many will want to explore their toolset. Now, if you put into the picture that modders from the really matured community could decide that they would want to build their own moddable TES-independant world just for fun, you have even a group that isn't in it for the money but for the love of it... People who neither count success in dollars, nor in endorsements, but in raising the bar for what could be done with modding. OMG, I would love to be part of that! THIS In fact Emma I would say that the apex (The highest point, the most mature point) in TES modding was at the height of the Oblivion phenomenon with the developement of OBSE and OBGE. I have seen nothing for Skyrim that comes close to that type of technological development. The only feature that I think has progressed is the "sliders for character developement" but there has been no other new ground discovered. I think the Skyrim modding community has gone backwards. I don't see the progression at all.
Look at what they have done with Morrowind in the last 5 years. mgeXE and the shaders that continue to be made for it is absolute beautiful. The incredible accomplishment of MGSO 3.0 that combines a type of “compilation” of the best mods out there, packed together with care for detail and user-friendliness. In fact you will be able to install hundreds of beautiful mods at once, with a simple installer. That is maturity!
Also Emma, I don't think it is fair to judge the Oblivion community just based on traffic over at Bethesda Forums. It is dead over there. For such a big gaming company there are sometimes less that 20 people online there. There have been amazing mods created for Oblivion this past year like; Oblivion Reloaded - OBGE by Alenet - Timeslip - Scanti - ShadeMe - Ethatron www.nexusmods.com/oblivion/mods/45749/? Oblivion looks better than Skyrim now. They have also redone all the trees and grass.
The only real good thing about Skyrim is the rocks. They really made the rocks and mountains look good. And the moving water.
Not much to add, both Emma and Piper's posts covered so far everything I would have said. But I think there won't ever be enough focus on what piper comented. Maybe beth didn't try to earn money directly, but just destroy a comunity that didn't consider fitting for it's business model anymore. I actually really don't believe what I wrote. I was just putting it out there. In truth, I believe this will be remembered as one of the dumbest moves a gaming company has ever done. There has not been a successful modder that I have spoken with that thinks it will work. And by success I also mean success in life outside of modding. I don't think paying for mods will ever work in the TES modding community. Not for little swords and armour models. Perhaps for DLC type content. So a months ago I was told by someone from a Fallout NV private forum. it was right after I wrote my blog where I predicted that people would sell their mods in the future. This person read my blog and reached out to me and told me that Betheasda invited him and his group to make a DLC type mod to sell for them. He also said that another forum was contacted as well. This one. So this is not over. This is where Bethesda wants to go. Why? I can only surmise that they think it is cheaper (less employee salary and taxes) to go this route. Thoughts... Not much to add, both Emma and Piper's posts covered so far everything I would have said. But I think there won't ever be enough focus on what piper comented. Maybe beth didn't try to earn money directly, but just destroy a comunity that didn't consider fitting for it's business model anymore. It's really difficult not to predict the backlash that would happen, and is difficult to believe a great company would act with such incompetence in so sensitive matter, unless it's desire was exactly to cause what happened. Too many people ponders on this theory to ignore it and I even made an experiment, telling someone totatally oblivious to modding and even videogames, what happened (I think I tell it in an objective way: there's a game, a comunity of people made modifications just for fun and for sharing a hobby, developers tried to make people pay for modiffications, 25% for people madding them, some people accepted, people have been throwing at each others throat for a while) just to be answered "it looks like they do it on purpouse to destroy that comunity". If that's the case, it didn't matter much if we want to acept paid modding or not. But, was it a good move from their perspective? Didn't this even increase the likelyhood of established and knowledgeable modders that are interested in earning money will turn into competitors instead, competitors that could easily attract good modders to work with them on an alternate sandbox game? That's where I fail to find the logic. From the devs perspective, it ought to have been much more attractive to do their very best to implement paid modding in an acceptable way, so that they can earn money from it. Very interesting point... this is another reason why I am am starting to laugh at all this... The more I think of this mess the dumber it looks. Why would they risk what they spent years in creating and supporting... it has to be the potential revenue but to cut yourself and bleed out like this just doesn't seem worth it. I am struggling to understand the viewpoint expressed by everybody here. Perhaps it's the understandable attitude of "This is the way it has always been..." I admire the noble motives of those who do not wish to charge for their work, and mod for love rather than for money. But it seems unfair to try to banish others whose motives are less pure. Perhaps the modding community should explore the possibility of splitting into two, if the thought of sharing with others of different persuasions is too painful. It should be fairly easy to devise a suitable licence under which mods could be released to allow re-use only for non-commercial purposes (see the creative commons licences for example). I am sceptical that it's a plot by Bethesda to drive away modders, though I wouldn't rule it out. It seems more likely to me that it was an attempt to increase income (like the DLC scheme) - from their viewpoint, what's not to like about taking a 45% cut from the sale of somebody else's work... It certainly seems plausible that the next releases in the ES and FO series will be constructed to accommodate professional modders, which raises the question of where this community wishes to move next. There are numerous alternatives around, but few with the popularity of the Bethesda products. Loriel Yes the potential revenue that Valve must have shown Bethesda must have been very attractive for them to have agreed. Still I don't think it will work anyway. Too many mods and too many modders out here. They will just be in competition themselves. I ddon't think a mod can sell for more than $1 dollar. I also suspect that the numbers of purchases on the Steam website was false and maybe even faked. They could have bought the mods themselves as a marketing scheme... the mods for sale were not that good anyway.... I don't see people paying 7 dollars for that wet and cold mod. I tried the mod and removed it. I found it to be a waste of computer resources. ANd 5 dollars for an armour mod??? Ridiculous. I do not believe that people are that stupid to pay that amount. Did anyone see Arthmoor mod he put up for sale? It is free now and I looked at it. So what, it wasn't so special. How many homes do you need in Skyrim? The whole experiment was a disastrous failure from beginning to end. I think it also spoils that big conference they are hosting. I almost feel bad for them because this farce now becomes the main attraction. *Everybody*? I would have thought that a wide variety of opinions have been expressed here over the past few days. They seem to range between "Paid mods are evil" and "Paid mods are evil", but I am probably missing the subtle differences. I can certainly agree with the first. My reading of various posts led me to believe there is a strong dislike of the concept of paid modding, so it seems to me there probably would be a grudge towards paid modders. On the 75/25 split we are definitely agreed - it's a greedy ripoff by Bethesda/Valve as far as I am concerned. See "Community" in Wolf's ABC - perhaps a separate community is needed for "paid" modders, if they are not to be allowed into the "unpaid" community. Agreed, resources should be easy. But looking at it again, mods are potentially much more difficult. The CK EULA appears to grant Bethesda a licence to your mods, under which Bethesda can allow other modders to re-use the contents of those mods - including paid modders. That could be challenged as unreasonable, but going to court to prove it would be expensive. A possible solution would be to develop and use a CK independent of the Bethesda/Steam one, and to avoid using any Bethesda resources in your mod - which should then make the mod yours, without Bethesda having any rights to it. Not a trivial task, and a task for the wider community rather than for a single modder or team. Loriel History already shows us that every time a gaming company tries to monetize modding the community ends up being torn apart more often then not. Blizzard Diablo 3 store, Sims, Second Life are just a few examples. i am sure others can post more. Well Loriel, paid mods are evil indeed. We are not talking about earning enough money for living. There will never be enough for that (maybe for a little number of modders). It's only increassing earnings for a little time at the cost of making ones live a little more misserable (having fun is important and when money goes in, fun goes out). So, a series of disadvantages and a single advantage that isn't an advantage at all. Evil. Of course modders agreing on joining this have received a lot of hate. I think some people even threatened the lives of some of those modders and I'm sure some of them mean it. There is a lot of awful people in the world and there is a lot of people on internet. There are people killing other people for their sexual tendencies, for the color of their skin, always eager to kill everyone that they perceibe as a challenge for they live stile. The modding comunity is big enough. it would be too gullible to assume there is no people like this there. And there is where the modding comunity need to show it's maturity. Stopping the hate tide when it arises, as it's not something to take as a joke. It's something really dangerous, that needs to be put down each time it arises. *APPLAUSE* Your posts have been inspiring and I couldn't agree any more with what you have been posting that last couple of days. However, good, evil... these terms only help divide the community even further. The community have been fractured. The younger generation has been mesmerized into believing they could make a living from modding. They suffer from grandiose delusions. I fear for their mental health. Only 1% of all mods are even worth anything and at most could only be sold for $1 dollar so these kids are dreaming. Like a child dreaming of becoming a movie star, sports star and a pop star... the odds of probabilities are not in their favour. I am all for dreaming... dreams move us forward but I am also aware of the reality. The cost of food and shelter... I fear children will spend their time modding for money like digging for fools gold and forget about school and work. There are serious mental health issues at play. The more I think about it, the more I worry.
|
|
|
Post by amgepo on May 9, 2015 20:30:13 GMT
Of course, using the word 'evil' refering to paid mods, is exagerating. Using the threat of relocation as a leverage to lower salaries is evil, making mods paid, is naughty at most. I used the word as loriel was saying he found here an attitude of paid mods are evil. My point being that while he is right on that perception, said attittude is more than justiffied.
About Bethesda not damaging it's own reputation and what they have achieved over years. Two points:
first a person could change, but it will always be the same. That can't apply to a company. The mind of a company (assuming we can call mind the set of priorities of a company) is the result of the relationships between the different persons taking decisions. In order to have an entirelly different entity, there is not even any need to change the composition of said group. Just changing their respective power balance, you have an entirelly different set of priorities and there is no need to change the power balance on the top of the piramid even. The Beth we know now, is not necessarilly the same entity that put the CS on our hands.
Besides and here comes the second point, Bethesda is part of Cenimax. When we judge if a move helps or hinders the interests of the one in charge, we shouldn't look at Beth. Most of the time, the best for Bethesda is the best for Cenimax, but it's not unthinkable the same move sinking bethesda, benefitting Cenimax, even at the expense of the lost of the smaller company.
At this point, I almost feel the need to say that I didn't consider neither of those companies to be the incarnation of evil. Their earnings determine the well being of the families of all their employes after all. It's only natural on their part to seek benefits, over playing nice with their clients, as far as they didn't do something more serious than ruinning our hobby.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2015 20:42:57 GMT
The Beth we know now, is not necessarilly the same entity that put the CS on our hands. ...we shouldn't look at Beth. Most of the time, the best for Bethesda is the best for Cenimax.., At this point, I almost feel the need to say that I didn't consider neither of those companies to be the incarnation of evil. Yes... interesting point. The company is not the same any more... Yes Cenimax... they have been on my mind. Who are they, what is their history... who owns them... members on their board from what other companies... a very interesting train of thought. Of course they are not evil but my point is just the continuation of using the word in these threads across the internet do have a polarizing effect. I wasn't blaming you for that... although maybe I should start blaming you for everything. We need someone to blame!
|
|
|
Post by Emma on May 9, 2015 20:48:25 GMT
So a months ago I was told by someone from a Fallout NV private forum. it was right after I wrote my blog where I predicted that people would sell their mods in the future. This person read my blog and reached out to me and told me that Betheasda invited him and his group to make a DLC type mod to sell for them. He also said that another forum was contacted as well. This one. So this is not over. This is where Bethesda wants to go. Why? I can only surmise that they think it is cheaper (less employee salary and taxes) to go this route. Do you know if these projects are still ongoing after the Skyrim paywall incident? Or, rather, if Bethesda still wants to make them DLCs? Were these projects DLC-sized mods, or just medium-sized? I think that the sound of this, from just reading your lines, is far nicer than what happened with Skyrim. The developers contact a group of modders and ask them to make a DLC as a freelance project - that is something completely different from trying to squeeze money out of mediocre sword-retextures. (Again, if I'm understanding what you say correctly).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2015 21:00:17 GMT
So a months ago I was told by someone from a Fallout NV private forum. it was right after I wrote my blog where I predicted that people would sell their mods in the future. This person read my blog and reached out to me and told me that Betheasda invited him and his group to make a DLC type mod to sell for them. He also said that another forum was contacted as well. This one. So this is not over. This is where Bethesda wants to go. Why? I can only surmise that they think it is cheaper (less employee salary and taxes) to go this route. Do you know if these projects are still ongoing after the Skyrim paywall incident? Or, rather, if Bethesda still wants to make them DLCs? Were these projects DLC-sized mods, or just medium-sized? I think that the sound of this, from just reading your lines, is far nicer than what happened with Skyrim. The developers contact a group of modders and ask them to make a DLC as a freelance project - that is something completely different from trying to squeeze money out of mediocre sword-retextures. (Again, if I'm understanding what you say correctly). yes I always thought that this PAYWALL could only work for large community project DLC type mods. That is the only way it makes sense to me. Like imagine TESAlliance all working on a new world mod that added an Island like your wolf of lokkan mod for morrowind. Then everybody works and creates an incredible DLC andd they share in the profits or it goes to pay for the costs in running the community. In this context the idea works for me. I have not been in touch with them as I have been a little busy But I guess I can reach out to a friend or two and see what is going on... thing is the other community that I didn't link is already set up a "patron" site so they are basically selling mods anyway... I'll find out about the status of their projects.
|
|