Oh no! Not this again! Valve Paid Mods

[Master Disaster]

3 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

I don't see it. Valve offers the best value in gaming through Steam's sales, gives quality F2P gaming, and gives Steamworks' usage for free to publishers / developers. There's nothing that changed in the past however many years: Valve / Steam has continually improved and expanded to give greater user /community tools, and also to devs / pubs. Valve's interest looks to be doing everything they do to the best quality it can be done, which simultaneously is good for business.

Zero customer support

30% of everything sold on Steam goes into Gabe's bank account

Total monopoly of the sector

Zero company work ethics and Valve Time

They only make changes that benefit the consumer when they're forced to

 

The only thing Valve have expanded on and improved is their ability to take your money as quickly as possible. Don't kid yourself into thinking anything they've done that might seem positive was done with consumer well being in mind because it wasn't, it was done in the interest of saving Gabe's bank account.

 

Steam sales - much more 30%s.

Steam refunds - a direct response to a lawsuit brought by the Australian government over consumer protection laws.

Quality F2P - contradiction of terms. Also 30% of any micro transaction sales.

SteamWorks is free - intended to lock devs into the Steam platform so Gabe gets more 30%s.

Expanded tools for devs and pubs - see Steamworks is free.

 

They literally had to be sued before they would abide by the law in most countries and offer refunds.

 

And at what point do you have to wonder if Valve have become the very thing they started out trying to avoid? Does 90% of the market not make them a monopoly? Are they not now classed as a publisher? So would I be incorrect if I said "Valve are now greedy publishers?', I mean they take 30% of 90% of the entire market and keep it as pure profit for literally zero work, and yes I know running Steam is not free but neither is running a publishing house so why is there a double standard here exactly.

 

Its time people removed the rose tinted glasses and started to see alve for what they really are.

[Master Disaster]

Sorry for the double post, just wanted to add...

 

They've also worked out how to make millions of dollars a year through the sale of items which don't even exist, they're literally a few pixels on a screen yet they sell for hundreds, if not thousands, and of course Gabe takes his 30% on them every time they're sold, and there's no limit on how many times they can be resold.

 

Now that's what you call greedy, money grabbing and anti consumer.

[Humbug]

1 hour ago, Delicieuxz said:

I don't see it. Valve offers the best value in gaming through Steam's sales, gives quality F2P gaming, and gives Steamworks' usage for free to publishers / developers. There's nothing that changed in the past however many years: Valve / Steam has continually improved and expanded to give greater user /community tools, and also to devs / pubs. Valve's interest looks to be doing everything they do to the best quality it can be done, which simultaneously is good for business.

most people on this forum want valve to police the content on steam.

personally I am 100% against it. I don't need some valve dude deciding on what's a good game. I like the current setup where I can do research, read user reviews and buy a game which I think suits me. Yes most games are not good and nobody buys them but that's ok IMO. That has to be there in every industry. Movies, music etc..

[eyecantseeover24fps]

special custom games in Dota 2 shouldn't be a monthly fee, it should be a 1 time purchase. 

[Sakkura]

3 hours ago, Humbug said:

But also wouldn't the financial rewards allow some talented modders to justify spending more hours and in larger groups to create content? And that will blur the lines between what can be done by a mod vs more ambitious content?

 

I see more people being able to make money off the PC gaming industry as a natural evolution. You are still allowed to distribute your content free either via steam or elsewhere.

Those people should be licensing game engines, like what Paradox has done many times. See games like Darkest Hour. 

[crystal6tak]

So can anyone tell me what percentage are the modder getting this time now?

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

Good job Volvo.

 

You need to understand that this is not a matter of cost, but a matter of principle. Mods have been free because they allow the user to choose for themselves, taking into consideration the risk of incompatibility. When you pay for a mod that ends up breaking the game at a random point of time, what are you supposed to do then? Also, the association between price and value, thanks to the prevalence of modder wannabes, is up the air and is therefore an unreliable metric.

 

As for getting a payback for their work, there is this thing called a donate button. If people like the mod, they will pay there. Much better than being forced to pay a lot of money for potentially shoddy work (getting Ubisofted, if you will).

[Doobeedoo]

I can see pain mods to be a good thing for those mods that are worth the payment and also that creators get deserved credit and proper % profit out of it.

[Orangeator]

This is horseshit. The whole point of a modding community is that it is a community that does it for the fun and others, not to make money!

[SaladFingers]

What's wrong with paid mods guys? Wth? You think someone that wishes to make money by making mods, is just going to say "Meh Valve isn't making it possible for me so I may as well give everything out for free". I guess some will do. Others will find other ways to monetize their work, or do something else to feed their families.

 

Why is everyone feeling entitled to get everything for free? You aren't forced to install any mods. Those people making them have lives too and there's nothing wrong with them making money off their work. If you really like mods, you should be willing to pay a little bit to help them, otherwise here's a word for you: Hypocrisy.

 

The mod creators should be free to charge for their work. Valve is merely giving them a platform to do so. What's so hard to understand?

[2FA]

29 minutes ago, SaladFingers said:

What's wrong with paid mods guys? Wth? You think someone that wishes to make money by making mods, is just going to say "Meh Valve isn't making it possible for me so I may as well give everything out for free". I guess some will do. Others will find other ways to monetize their work, or do something else to feed their families.

 

Why is everyone feeling entitled to get everything for free? You aren't forced to install any mods. Those people making them have lives too and there's nothing wrong with them making money off their work. If you really like mods, you should be willing to pay a little bit to help them, otherwise here's a word for you: Hypocrisy.

 

The mod creators should be free to charge for their work. Valve is merely giving them a platform to do so. What's so hard to understand?

I know of a Skyrim modder that charges for a few of his mods on his own website but the majority are free on Nexus. It's one thing if the modder has their own platform such as a personal website that they sell from, it's another when Valve and the Developer of the game are part of the selling taking the majority of the profit. I buy games from Steam to support the Dev for their work along with Valve for the platform. Buying a mod through Steam hardly gives anything to the modder in most cases after the Dev and Valve cut which I don't agree with. 

 

TL;DR: The issue for the most part is paying, it's the way that Valve and the Developers are going about it. 

 

Another note, I see modding more as a hobby and not a platform for profit. Also, I would rather donate to the modder such as on Nexus then have to pay for the mod. Paying brings up the point of liability issues which as far as I know, the modder isn't liable.

[Killmeplsok]

1 hour ago, Orangeator said:

This is horseshit. The whole point of a modding community is that it is a community that does it for the fun and others, not to make money!

Who are you to define the "modding community" as such?

 

Just because they do it for fun they should not get paid for their work? If someone decides that he wants to do something he love full time he deserves to live a poor live?

 

I have some musician friend that does it for fun and others, and people are fine for them to make money doing that, people are fine with pro gamers making money playing games nowadays unlike a decade ago, what makes you think modders should remain the same forever?

 

Also this doesn't mean all modders have to charge for their work, they can stay free if they want, this just added another option for them to feed their family.

[Delicieuxz]

8 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Zero customer support

30% of everything sold on Steam goes into Gabe's bank account

Total monopoly of the sector

Zero company work ethics and Valve Time

They only make changes that benefit the consumer when they're forced to

"Zero customer support"

 

There is customer support, just not the fastest customer support. Over the years, their support has dealt with all situations I've sent their way - even if it took some days for replies in many cases. Add to that Steam's new automated system for game returns. Steam doesn't have bad support, unless timing is the only factor you take into consideration.

 

 

"30% of everything sold on Steam goes into Gabe's bank account"

 

30% of everything sold on Steam goes to Valve as a company, not Gabe. So you know, before Steam came along, publisher + other costs would typically take up 87 - 96% of the proceeds from a game, with it being standard that the publisher would own the IP for the game which they funded the development of. This made developers completely controlled by publishers, and games become increasingly generic as publishers, who were generally not gamers, would opt to make whatever game and genre was the safest in the current market.

 

Valve came out with Steam, and changed everything. Now it's 70% that goes to self-publishing developers, and when there is a publisher involved, the rates are far better for the developer - and additionally, now developers regularly keep ownership of their of IPs, and have far greater decision-making capability over what they do. Complaining that 30% of Steam proceeds go to Valve is sort of like complaining that your salary only went from $80,000 per year to $800,000 per year along with receiving the rights to all proceeds from your future work, instead of going from $80,000 per year to like $900,000 per year. Or, potentially, it might be like complaining that your salary went from $80,000, to a non-salary-based amount of millions of dollars per release-year.

 

Plenty of games made today are only possible to make because of the pro-developer revamp of game funding and publishing that Valve gave the PC games industry.

 

Also, 30% is now the industry standard due to Valve's precedent. And if Valve had not set such a low take for themselves, the industry standard would be as high as other platform-makers felt they could push it - which is just the way publishers treated developers before Steam changed everything. If other platforms wanted to take less, and give those who use their platforms more, then they would, and that would serve as an incentive for developers to gravitate towards their platforms. But other platforms are not offering better deals than Valve, and the only thing making other platforms take only only 30% is that Valve has set that standard while being the best platform, and if other platforms take more, developers won't have any reason to use them. Valve was the reason why a standard as low as 30% came about, and is the reason why everyone else has to offer only 30% as a platform take.

 

 

"Total monopoly of the sector"

 

And what's to complain about regarding Steam's prominence in the PC gaming market? It's not like that prominence has resulted in inferior quality in the market - Steam is the leader in platform development, and the alternatives are not even trying to keep up with Steam's development. A monopoly isn't bad because it's a monopoly. A monopoly is bad when it leads to a decline in quality and possibility. Since Steam is the premier platform for quality and possibility, for sales to gamers, for publisher and developer options, there's no negative connotation to Steam's prominence in the PC games market. In fact, it's been a good thing, by setting the example for other platform developers to follow - but other platform developers haven't shown interest in putting in the work that Valve have done with Steam, and offer only the most basic functionality and service through their platforms.

 

 

"Zero company work ethics and Valve Time"

 

How a company runs itself internally is not really your concern. Valve's Steam is leagues ahead of all other PC platforms, so if you have an issue with Valve for their development effort, then you must think far worse of the competition (which isn't really competition because they aren't doing anywhere near as much with their platforms as Valve are with theirs). And if there is no better example to contrast against Valve, in regards to their Steam platform, then by what measurement do you claim a lack of work ethic?

 

 

"They only make changes that benefit the consumer when they're forced to"

 

Valve is the premier company who makes changes by their own will and desire to improve. Perhaps they didn't make a particular change you want to see, but no platform developers progresses, and updates their platform as much as Valve do with Steam.

[Johnny K.]

13 hours ago, That Norwegian Guy said:

Lots of creative talent getting bloodsucked by zero-talent accountants, leeches and shills. And you support the latter more than you do the prior.

Accountants have nothing to do with this.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Some good modders I've spoken with in the past are keeping their mods free. They're not interested in involving any sort of moves that makes modding more business like. 

 

Keeping the mods free also allows them to change permissions as and when they want. Involving money wouldn't. Most don't see till they realise how important changing permissions is to them.

[Katorice]

14 hours ago, CtW said:

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

no.

[Master Disaster]

3 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

"Zero customer support"

 

There is customer support, just not the fastest customer support. Over the years, their support has dealt with all situations I've sent their way - even if it took some days for replies in many cases. Add to that Steam's new automated system for game returns. Steam doesn't have bad support, unless timing is the only factor you take into consideration.

 

 

"30% of everything sold on Steam goes into Gabe's bank account"

 

30% of everything sold on Steam goes to Valve as a company, not Gabe. So you know, before Steam came along, publisher + other costs would typically take up 87 - 96% of the proceeds from a game, with it being standard that the publisher would own the IP for the game which they funded the development of. This made developers completely controlled by publishers, and games become increasingly generic as publishers, who were generally not gamers, would opt to make whatever game and genre was the safest in the current market.

 

Valve came out with Steam, and changed everything. Now it's 70% that goes to self-publishing developers, and when there is a publisher involved, the rates are far better for the developer - and additionally, now developers regularly keep ownership of their of IPs, and have far greater decision-making capability over what they do. Complaining that 30% of Steam proceeds go to Valve is sort of like complaining that your salary only went from $80,000 per year to $800,000 per year along with receiving the rights to all proceeds from your future work, instead of going from $80,000 per year to like $900,000 per year. Or, potentially, it might be like complaining that your salary went from $80,000, to a non-salary-based amount of millions of dollars per release-year.

 

Plenty of games made today are only possible to make because of the pro-developer revamp of game funding and publishing that Valve gave the PC games industry.

 

Also, 30% is now the industry standard due to Valve's precedent. And if Valve had not set such a low take for themselves, the industry standard would be as high as other platform-makers felt they could push it - which is just the way publishers treated developers before Steam changed everything. If other platforms wanted to take less, and give those who use their platforms more, then they would, and that would serve as an incentive for developers to gravitate towards their platforms. But other platforms are not offering better deals than Valve, and the only thing making other platforms take only only 30% is that Valve has set that standard while being the best platform, and if other platforms take more, developers won't have any reason to use them. Valve was the reason why a standard as low as 30% came about, and is the reason why everyone else has to offer only 30% as a platform take.

 

 

"Total monopoly of the sector"

 

And what's to complain about regarding Steam's prominence in the PC gaming market? It's not like that prominence has resulted in inferior quality in the market - Steam is the leader in platform development, and the alternatives are not even trying to keep up with Steam's development. A monopoly isn't bad because it's a monopoly. A monopoly is bad when it leads to a decline in quality and possibility. Since Steam is the premier platform for quality and possibility, for sales to gamers, for publisher and developer options, there's no negative connotation to Steam's prominence in the PC games market. In fact, it's been a good thing, by setting the example for other platform developers to follow - but other platform developers haven't shown interest in putting in the work that Valve have done with Steam, and offer only the most basic functionality and service through their platforms.

 

 

"Zero company work ethics and Valve Time"

 

How a company runs itself internally is not really your concern. Valve's Steam is leagues ahead of all other PC platforms, so if you have an issue with Valve for their development effort, then you must think far worse of the competition (which isn't really competition because they aren't doing anywhere near as much with their platforms as Valve are with theirs). And if there is no better example to contrast against Valve, in regards to their Steam platform, then by what measurement do you claim a lack of work ethic?

 

 

"They only make changes that benefit the consumer when they're forced to"

 

Valve is the premier company who makes changes by their own will and desire to improve. Perhaps they didn't make a particular change you want to see, but no platform developers progresses, and updates their platform as much as Valve do with Steam.

I'm really sorry about this, I assure you I mean no offence by it in any way but my god, your just about the biggest Steam fanboy I've ever encountered.

 

1) A month to get a copy pasta response which 9 times out of 10 isn't even relevant to the topic or is telling you to do something which you've clearly told them you've already done is not acceptable from a company as big as Valve. Both EA & Ubisoft have live support where you can join a queue and within 10 minutes get a real person who is actually able to help you with your problem or forward it onto someone who can help you. Valves customer support is amongst the worst on the face of the planet, and that is a fact.

 

2) What your forgetting is the publishers still take their cut from it after Gabe has taken his 30%. The publishing houses haven't just disappeared overnight, they're still there and taking the same amount as the always did, its just Valve created a new slice of pie which they take before anybody else gets a look in.

 

3) Its not like their prominence has resulted in inferior quality? WTF, like seriously? Have you never watched any Jimquisition videos? Have you never ventured onto Greenlight? Valve have single handedly been responsible for selling more shovelware than every other platform that's ever gone before it combined and they just don't give a fuck either. Literally anybody can use the system to get anything published, Valve have no quality control system in place at all.

 

4) Valves work ethics are my concern when I am supposed to be trusting them with my money, personal information and using their platform as my primary base for gaming. I honestly cannot be arsed to go into this one any more because I feel as though everything I type will just fall on death ears and I could rant about Valves work ethics for days. Just know this, Valve, as a multibillion dollar company, based in the USA and trading in just about every country on the planet, has zero structure inside their HQ, none, nothing. Employees are literally free to do whatever they want to, I mean obviously they're given a task to achieve but how they achieve it is entirely up to them. If you honestly believe that is a reasonable way to run a business, especially one as big as Valve is then there is just no hope for you. Valve time is real and it is real because employees don't actually have to do anything while they are at work.

 

5) I could very easily quote you SPUF & SPUD posts from 6 or 7 years ago, from people asking Valve to implement a refund system. They didn't even refuse to do it, instead they just ignored the issue. People pointed out that in most of Europe, parts of Asia, the whole of Australia and even parts of central and southern America it is actually illegal to sell products online without offering a refund, Valve ignored them. The EU stepped in and asked Valve to consider a refund policy so they met the laws which they have to abide by in order to trade in Europe, they ignored them. It took the Australian and European governments taking Valve to court and beginning legal proceedings against them before they relented and put the refund system in place. Your premier platform refused to honour your rights as a customer until someone threatened them with court.

 

And with that I am done with this discussion, I've said all I have to say on the matter and I am sure your gonna post some huge retort which is cool, I will read it and all but I honestly believe in this instance its better we agree to disagree.

 

I'll finish with one last summary, They started Steam with good intentions and for a while they did seem to care but over the last 6 or 7 years Valve have made it abundantly clear they only care about money and nothing else.

[GeekJump]

the funny thing is they didn't even wait that long to reintroduce it.

 

Valve get's metric shit ton of back lash for testing out paid mods > Valve takes paid mods down, issues refunds, and apologies > *few months later* > Paid mods are back!

 

I'm for supporting modders that make quality content but they're in the small minority. There is also the issue of modders marking up higher than they should so they could squeeze some profit out of the share with valve. Either way, there is still going to be backlash aimed towards Valve.

 

Valve, why you be greedy son?

[Delicieuxz]

11 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

I'm really sorry about this, I assure you I mean no offence by it in any way but my god, your just about the biggest Steam fanboy I've ever encountered.

 

1) A month to get a copy pasta response which 9 times out of 10 isn't even relevant to the topic or is telling you to do something which you've clearly told them you've already done is not acceptable from a company as big as Valve. Both EA & Ubisoft have live support where you can join a queue and within 10 minutes get a real person who is actually able to help you with your problem or forward it onto someone who can help you. Valves customer support is amongst the worst on the face of the planet, and that is a fact.

 

2) What your forgetting is the publishers still take their cut from it after Gabe has taken his 30%. The publishing houses haven't just disappeared overnight, they're still there and taking the same amount as the always did, its just Valve created a new slice of pie which they take before anybody else gets a look in.

 

3) Its not like their prominence has resulted in inferior quality? WTF, like seriously? Have you never watched any Jimquisition videos? Have you never ventured onto Greenlight? Valve have single handedly been responsible for selling more shovelware than every other platform that's ever gone before it combined and they just don't give a fuck either. Literally anybody can use the system to get anything published, Valve have no quality control system in place at all.

 

4) Valves work ethics are my concern when I am supposed to be trusting them with my money, personal information and using their platform as my primary base for gaming. I honestly cannot be arsed to go into this one any more because I feel as though everything I type will just fall on death ears and I could rant about Valves work ethics for days. Just know this, Valve, as a multibillion dollar company, based in the USA and trading in just about every country on the planet, has zero structure inside their HQ, none, nothing. Employees are literally free to do whatever they want to, I mean obviously they're given a task to achieve but how they achieve it is entirely up to them. If you honestly believe that is a reasonable way to run a business, especially one as big as Valve is then there is just no hope for you. Valve time is real and it is real because employees don't actually have to do anything while they are at work.

 

5) I could very easily quote you SPUF & SPUD posts from 6 or 7 years ago, from people asking Valve to implement a refund system. They didn't even refuse to do it, instead they just ignored the issue. People pointed out that in most of Europe, parts of Asia, the whole of Australia and even parts of central and southern America it is actually illegal to sell products online without offering a refund, Valve ignored them. The EU stepped in and asked Valve to consider a refund policy so they met the laws which they have to abide by in order to trade in Europe, they ignored them. It took the Australian and European governments taking Valve to court and beginning legal proceedings against them before they relented and put the refund system in place. Your premier platform refused to honour your rights as a customer until someone threatened them with court.

 

And with that I am done with this discussion, I've said all I have to say on the matter and I am sure your gonna post some huge retort which is cool, I will read it and all but I honestly believe in this instance its better we agree to disagree.

 

I'll finish with one last summary, They started Steam with good intentions and for a while they did seem to care but over the last 6 or 7 years Valve have made it abundantly clear they only care about money and nothing else.

 

I'm no fanboy, but I'm able to look at the matter objectively, while understanding a lot of the details involved.

 

1) I never had an issue take more than a week and a half, and the responses I've had resolved the issues I had with returns, or payments, or account issues. Valve is not who should be contacted regarding technical support for one of the games or applications sold through their platform. Those questions should go to the publisher of those products, or the community forums.

 

2) I didn't forget anything. Before Steam, a developer would typically keep 6 - 13% of the revenue from their products. With Steam, they can keep up to 70%. And I said that the full 70% applies to self-publishing developers, which there are a lot of on Steam. I also said that the split with publishers, when a 3rd party publisher is still involved, has greatly improved for developers who use Steam. With Steam, developers are now typically keeping many times what they used to - as well as regularly holding on to ownership of their IPs, which is a massive improvement.

 

3) You can't blame Valve for people making games of qualities which you don't like. The quality I was referring to is the quality of the platform, and of the industry. There is more low-effort product available now, but there also is far more middle, and high level product available now than there ever was when the industry was publisher-controlled.  The content produced is not the fault of a platform developer - but the possibility for that content to have an outlet is due to platforms providing those outlets, and making them financially viable. Talking about the ways people use services which Steam created, as an argument that Valve's monopoly has resulted in inferior quality, is forgetting your own initial argument. It's also proving your initial argument as false, by acknowledging that Valve's influence has resulted in the doors being more open to people for them to create and publish content. It's sort of like you're arguing that a monopoly should restrict people's abilities to produce content, so that there's less bad stuff available (along with less good stuff)... but that's exactly what makes monopoly's bad, and what gives the term "monopoly" a bad ring to it. And because Valve's influence has been the opposite, their industry prominence has not been bad for the industry, but good for it.

 

4) Valve's ethic's of allowing employees to work on the things they choose is a work ethic, and it's an opportunity given to people who show they can be creative and productive in that environment. People who don't produce good work are not kept on at Valve.

 

5) That is one example, of a stand-out particular issue that took time to work through, just as Valve pioneered just about every aspect of digital distribution. And that's not fanboyism, that's reality. And that issue doesn't outweigh constant platform improvements and innovations to the Steam, client, website, security, portability, dev / pub services, community services, promotions, family sharing, streaming... - which other platforms don't seem to be pursuing for their own platforms. 

 

I think Steam has continued to improve with age, and that what's clear is that Valve value quality above money. If that were not the case, we'd already have Half-Life 5, L4D5, and Portal 4. And as I've already said in this thread, paid mods seems to me like it is the well-reasoned reaction to wanting modding on PC to be stronger, healthier, and higher quality for gamers and content creators alike:

 

Paid mods will give opportunity to content creators to-be, and will allow content creators to work on their hobby and passion as a paid job. And for those who just work on it as a hobby, it will encourage many of them to aim for a higher level of refinement.

 

Paid mods will encourage more custom content, more support for custom content, larger custom content, and higher quality custom content. It will also encourage game developers and publishers to include mod tools with their projects.

[kuddlesworth9419]

18 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

if they gave more percent of the payment to the modder there isnt really a big problem in fact i think it could be a good thing

It should be like 90% to the creator. 5% to Valve and the other 5% to the original games creator. I think that is fair.

[Delicieuxz]

59 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

2) What your forgetting is the publishers still take their cut from it after Gabe has taken his 30%. The publishing houses haven't just disappeared overnight, they're still there and taking the same amount as the always did, its just Valve created a new slice of pie which they take before anybody else gets a look in.

Here's an old article which gives a bit of insight into how much more profitable Steam actually made things for developers.

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/opinion-retail-vs-steam

 

Note that other platforms don't offer better revenue splits with developers, even though they all could, if it was their desire to. Steam is the anchor that has kept the platform share standard so positive for developers. For the developer writing that article, it multiplied their income per sale 6.66 times over.

[Delicieuxz]

Here's one more relevant link, showing where costs go in a retail game - and also demonstrating how much more profit Steam put into the developer's hands, which they never received before:

http://kotaku.com/5479698/what-your-60-really-buys

 

The platform royalty mentioned in that graph goes to Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, etc. With Steam and other digital platforms, that figure is adjusted to 30% of the sale price.

 

The developer take would come as a small part of the publisher's take - unless the developer is also the publisher. With digital releases, the publisher's role is less, and so the developer can have better rates with their publisher.

[SaladFingers]

16 hours ago, DeadEyePsycho said:

I know of a Skyrim modder that charges for a few of his mods on his own website but the majority are free on Nexus. It's one thing if the modder has their own platform such as a personal website that they sell from, it's another when Valve and the Developer of the game are part of the selling taking the majority of the profit. I buy games from Steam to support the Dev for their work along with Valve for the platform. Buying a mod through Steam hardly gives anything to the modder in most cases after the Dev and Valve cut which I don't agree with. 

 

TL;DR: The issue for the most part is paying, it's the way that Valve and the Developers are going about it. 

 

Another note, I see modding more as a hobby and not a platform for profit. Also, I would rather donate to the modder such as on Nexus then have to pay for the mod. Paying brings up the point of liability issues which as far as I know, the modder isn't liable.

That guy you are talking about can keep going about his business plan without caring if Valve adds anything or not. Others that can't be bothered / don't know how to do all that might welcome the chance to sell within a store and having someone else take care of things for them. It's still a decision, no side is forced to do either buy or sell. But what is the cut Valve is taking?

[Carde]

I really don't have a problem with the idea of paid mods, the point lies as others have noted where the money goes to, At least 50-60% should go to the creator the rest the platform and publisher can fight over.

 

As for which mods deserve money and which don't let the market sort it out, if people see value they can pay, if they don't they can pass.

[FruitBasketSilex]

Fuck off, valve! Jeez, just let us gamers be gamers!