Valve is throwing steam off a cliff

[Nowak]

I made a post 5minutes ago and nobody replied! People must be ignoring me!

No, I'm not saying that. I'm still saying that Bethesda is the one at fault here; in fact, they get the biggest cut of that 75% cut at 45%; Valve gets the remaining 30% of that 75%, and then the remaining 25% goes to the mod developer. Now I'm wondering why Valve is getting a bigger cut than the mod developer, especially since they contributed nothing to the mod... and I'm aware of the obvious answer, but there has to be another reason why other than money.

[ShadowCaptain]

Relevant also.

 

I think TB sums it up perfectly, I literally agree 100% with what he said 

 

Paid mods are not a bad idea, just this implementation, it needs revising - it should be fair for customers, developers and mod makers - why not make it a 33% split

 

33% to Valve

33% to the Dev

33% to the mod maker

 

Something like that seems fair (maybe steam could just take 20% and have a 40;40 split for the others)

 

Or a Patreon system or pay what you want 

[zappian]

I think TB sums it up perfectly, I literally agree 100% with what he said 

 

Paid mods are not a bad idea, just this implementation, it needs revising - it should be fair for customers, developers and mod makers - why not make it a 33% split

 

33% to Valve

33% to the Dev

33% to the mod maker

 

Something like that seems fair (maybe steam could just take 20% and have a 40;40 split for the others)

 

Or a Patreon system or pay what you want 

 

I think a donate button / patreon system would be better.

You would pay for the mods if you really liked them , and you know how popular some mods get.

Valve would get their money just the same and wouldn't have this consumer backlash.

[Dabombinable]

I think TB sums it up perfectly, I literally agree 100% with what he said 

 

Paid mods are not a bad idea, just this implementation, it needs revising - it should be fair for customers, developers and mod makers - why not make it a 33% split

 

33% to Valve

33% to the Dev

33% to the mod maker

 

Something like that seems fair (maybe steam could just take 20% and have a 40;40 split for the others)

 

Or a Patreon system or pay what you want 

 

I think a donate button / patreon system would be better.

You would pay for the mods if you really liked them , and you know how popular some mods get.

Valve would get their money just the same and wouldn't have this consumer backlash.

Both ways would work, but if game publishers weren't so uptight about 'copyright' (even when its the developers themselves who truly own said copyright) moders would have already been able to ask for donations and/or a small payment for their mods (though a short trial period for the mod would be a good idea in that case, just to be sure).

[ShadowCaptain]

I think a donate button / patreon system would be better.

You would pay for the mods if you really liked them , and you know how popular some mods get.

Valve would get their money just the same and wouldn't have this consumer backlash.

 

Agreed! hopefully they can still fix this and make it better for everyone!

 

Also after a while the "greedy" factor will wear off - hopefully mod makers that want to continue making free mods - will be able to use that as a value proposition "Hey guys, we are still doing our mod for free"

Also - it might also stop shitty/poor/broken mods being used as nobody will buy them and hopefully that person will stop developing mods - meaning more talented people can come in and do good work

 

Both ways would work, but if game publishers weren't so uptight about 'copyright' (even when its the developers themselves who truly own said copyright) moders would have already been able to ask for donations and/or a small payment for their mods (though a short trial period for the mod would be a good idea in that case, just to be sure).

 

I would be too, have you seen the rip off games that try get on greenlight and stuff? there is nothing wrong with protecting your IP - NOTHING wrong at all

 

 

 

Personal Disclaimer

Never modded a game, probabaly never will

[Dzzope]

How are you at ransom? Just stop buying games through steam, it's not like you lose any you already have and you can add non steam game if you want to launch etc from steam anyway...

 

 

Not that I don't think steam has gone down-hill in the last few years..

[Dzzope]

Both ways would work, but if game publishers weren't so uptight about 'copyright' (even when its the developers themselves who truly own said copyright) moders would have already been able to ask for donations and/or a small payment for their mods (though a short trial period for the mod would be a good idea in that case, just to be sure).

Publishers "own" the rights in their region.. so no it's not the developers, They sold that right (for the term of the contract at least)

[zappian]

How are you at ransom? Just stop buying games through steam, it's not like you lose any you already have and you can add non steam game if you want to launch etc from steam anyway...

 

 

Not that I don't think steam has gone down-hill in the last few years..

 

What ? lol.

Every game that I have on steam and the saves and every MP game i have there would be gone lol.

How is that not ransom?

Thats like 900 dollars on steam that would go down the toilet.

[Dzzope]

huh?

 

Totally missing your point... Do you mean you would want to stop using steam to manage your games or that you would just stop supporting them by not buying games from them again... Both equate to the same thing though.. No money from you..

 

You can use steam for free.. It's only the buying of games where there is any issue with the points in this thread..

 

And as said you can use steam to manage non-steam games too if you want to have everything in one place.. Unless you have ea games that require origin of course..

[Guest]

What ? lol.

Every game that I have on steam and the saves and every MP game i have there would be gone lol.

How is that not ransom?

Thats like 900 dollars on steam that would go down the toilet.

 

You don't need to delete your steam account, you just shouldn't buy more games on that account. You can still use it, valve isn't making any real money by you just playing the games that you already bought, just buy your next game(s) DRM free or via another service. You're not "at ransom" for your established library, maybe for games that only launch on steam, but that's why we hope for alternative services.

[itachipirate]

Valve is trying to make money off of other people's work, like they've always done. This time they're screwing over the little guys though. People like the developers of ENBSeries and Script extender are making amazing content, paying to host a website, and saying "oh yeah if you want you can donate but you don't have to." If I see a developer of a mod actually require money for their work, I'll remove all of the mods I have from that author. The small modding I've done has all been as a side project, and living off of creating content for someone else's game is ridiculous to me. Valve/Bethesda are acting like they're trying to help out mod creators but taking 75% of a micro transaction is really just taking advantage of mod creators who weren't asking for money in the first place

 

Honestly if I find a website to pirate mods, I'll do it. I've donated much more to mod creators then I will EVER "pay" for a mod. The workshop is already complete garbage and the fact that you have to pay for it, then you can only use it via the workshop is awful

[itachipirate]

The cut is not a fixed value, and is determined by the game developer. We should be directing our anger at Bethesda for the 75% cut, not Valve.

Bethesda is just mad that ESO sucked and they're trying to recoup their losses. People asked for something like a 4 player Skyrim and got some crappy MMO instead

[shert73]

Thing I don't like is that if I buy a hardcopy, its still just a steam key. Last time I played pc games you got a disk and played the game. Oh the good ol times.

[Elapo]

The cut is not a fixed value, and is determined by the game developer. We should be directing our anger at Bethesda for the 75% cut, not Valve.

 

That's what I thought. If it was valve alone, they'd be asking more than double the percentage they ask from a full game. I assumed the dev at least would get a part.

[RZeroX]

Bethesda is just mad that ESO sucked and they're trying to recoup their losses. People asked for something like a 4 player Skyrim and got some crappy MMO instead

But Bethesda didn't make ESO before Tamriel Unlimited the game wasn't really good but it is now.

[Dabombinable]

Publishers "own" the rights in their region.. so no it's not the developers, They sold that right (for the term of the contract at least)

That's the big problem, publishers apparently 'buy' the rights to what is essentially the thoughts of devs instead of 'renting' them. If publishers had to pay devs every so often to actually be able to legally use what they create, we'd have a lot less problems with new releases as devs could switch to another publisher if their work was at risk of being shamed for bugs, glitches and day 1 DLC (bugs and glitches equals games getting pushed out the door as soon as they are even semi playable) .

[Dzzope]

That's the big problem, publishers apparently 'buy' the rights to what is essentially the thoughts of devs instead of 'renting' them. If publishers had to pay devs every so often to actually be able to legally use what they create, we'd have a lot less problems with new releases as devs could switch to another publisher if their work was at risk of being shamed for bugs, glitches and day 1 DLC (bugs and glitches equals games getting pushed out the door as soon as they are even semi playable) .

They buy or lease the rights.. the effect is the same although obviously with lease (rent, whatever) once the contract has expired, the studio can then re-negotiate. Either way they have the right to charge what they see fit and take as much as they want (unless it's stated in the contract.

 

Problems arise when either the devs don't have enough clout or make poor choices in who they get to be publishers or the terms of the contract.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

I thought this would encourage more well done mods like the sofia follower mod. But nope first mod I saw was a freakin sword mod. Nexus has had a donate button for creators iirc.

[minibois]

Oh man Valve.. Please don't screw it up..

Don't become some place where you can't say anything bad about a product..

And the mods.. Don't see it happening.

 

I thought this would encourage more well done mods like the sofia follower mod. But nope first mod I saw was a freakin sword mod. Nexus has had a donate button for creators iirc.

Yep, Nexus has a donate button on many (if not all) mods.

Would have  hoped the mods were better if they were paid..

But yeah, mostly just some item mods and stuff

[Sammael]

My guess is that there are 3 cuts.

 

-mod creator

-game creator

-valve

 

if valve took a flat 30% that would leave 70% left to split between the mod creator and game creators.  And if game creators get to dictate the other portion of the payout some will be greedier than others.

 

 

I think all 3 should get some cut in a paid model.

 

Valve provides an easy robust platform, the game creator provides the basic game and structure, the the modders provide added value.  Preferred breakdown?  Something like

 

-valve ~20%

-game creator ~ 20%

-mod creator ~ 60%

 

That seems fair.  Popular mods could bring in major cash to both the mod creators and game creators, this also incentivizes mod friendly games since they can be more easily monetized after the sunk costs, and based off other peoples labor.  This seems like a virtuous cycle.... unless they want to shake down the mod creator with lesser fraction of the total cut.  I always think the entity that put in the greatest work ought to get the larger cut, that comes with game sales and mod creation.

 

 

I still think 30% from valve game sales is too steep a cut.

[topsu]

this is why i allways get discs!

 

lmao your physical copies will use steam as dmr anyways       

[Misanthrope]

I made a post 5minutes ago and nobody replied! People must be ignoring me!

I have been saying it repeatedly on the main news thread for a while now. I'm not saying everyone ignores it but the focus is really on fuck valve to the point Bethesda is being absolved.

[zappian]

I have been saying it repeatedly on the main news thread for a while now. I'm not saying everyone ignores it but the focus is really on fuck valve to the point Bethesda is being absolved.

 

Fuck Valve in general for introducing this absurd idea that never worked in any level.

Valve always set up absurd mark ups for things .

This is not the way to do it and there are much better ways like a donate button or patreon.

This is just silly.

And it has tons of problems:

 

1- People stealing nexus mods and trying to get money from it.

2- People making mods out of copyrighted content and then asking money for it .

 

And many other things.

Its already happening.

[Misanthrope]

Fuck Valve in general for introducing this absurd idea that never worked in any level.

Valve always set up absurd mark ups for things .

This is not the way to do it and there are much better ways like a donate button or patreon.

This is just silly.

Which brings the second point most ignore: they have a pay what you want option. AFAIK there are no restrictions on similar mods by the author so you can have the free version as well as the paid version with a pay what you want option basically meaning donate if you want, play for free if you don't wanna.

This exact model is already being used by a modder.

Your other problems are very real and very serious flaws. I can add another one: modders will be susceptible to false DMCA claims just like youtubers.