DUST Search - Well, the steam community is exploding

Knight Soiaire wrote:

25% is **** all for doing most of the work on the mod. Think its also the fact that other **** companies like EA/Ubisoft will see the potential here and begin allowing people to mod their games and then sell those mods.

Only problem I see is the 75% cut. I think an option to donate or allow the customer to control where most of the money goes much like Humble Bundles would fix this problem.

Quote:

This is the most relevant question. Paying for mods on its own is not a bad idea, as long as its done in a reasonable fashion. I would gladly pay for mods that actively add value to my gaming experience.

HOWEVER!

In a world where Steam can not be trusted to keep quality control over full-blown games and early access titles, can we trust that this system won't be abused?

The answer is plain to see already, only a few days into this matter: People stealing mods from each other, and posting horse genitalia at unbelievable prices. And let's not even talk about the actual quality of the mods - hell if anyone checked compatibilities / incompatibilities with the current game version / other popular mods. Or if the mods work in the first place, which is an entirely different matter - who's to say whether or not I deliver on what I claim my mod does? Or how smoothly it accomplishes it?

Again, if we can't trust Steam to do Quality Control on full-fledged games, we can't even begin to fathom to trust Steam to do Quality Control on mods.

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Scheneighnay McBob And the ButtPirates 6216	Posted - 2015.04.26 02:45:00 - [1] - Quote And all about giving modders the option to put a price tag on their mods. What does everyone else think of this? I personally think it's ridiculous that so many entitled fucks on the internet think that modders shouldn't be able to make the decision to sell their mods if they so desire. If it's overpriced and/or ******, people won't buy it anyway. Apparently the internet is against the freedom of choice. Some details can be ignored
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2806	Posted - 2015.04.26 03:14:00 - [2] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: And all about giving modders the option to put a price tag on their mods. What does everyone else think of this? I personally think it's ridiculous that so many entitled fucks on the internet think that modders shouldn't be able to make the decision to sell their mods if they so desire. If it's overpriced and/or ****, people won't buy it anyway. Apparently the internet is against the freedom of choice. It's not about modders being able to sell their stuff. It's about companies taking a 75% cut among a great ing deal of other issues. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.** I have a few alts.
Scheneighnay McBob And the ButtPirates 6217	Posted - 2015.04.26 03:22:00 - [3] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Scheneighnay McBob wrote: And all about giving modders the option to put a price tag on their mods. What does everyone else think of this? I personally think it's ridiculous that so many entitled fucks on the internet think that modders shouldn't be able to make the decision to sell their mods if they so desire. If it's overpriced and/or ****, people won't buy it anyway. Apparently the internet is against the freedom of choice. It's not about modders being able to sell their stuff. It's about companies taking a 75% cut among a great ing deal of other issues. So? 25% is still something. At least give mod developers the CHOICE of getting **** in that aspect. Some details can be ignored
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2809	Posted - 2015.04.26 09:03:00 - [4] - Quote You do not know enough about this topic for me to adequately debate with you. Educate yourself. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Fristname Family name Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation 109	Posted - 2015.04.26 09:39:00 - [5] - Quote Scheneighnay McBob wrote: And all about giving modders the option to put a price tag on their mods. What does everyone else think of this? I personally think it's ridiculous that so many entitled fucks on the internet think that modders shouldn't be able to make the decision to sell their mods if they so desire. If it's overpriced and/or ****, people won't buy it anyway. Apparently the internet is against the freedom of choice. welcome to the internet home of everything and anything and the place where no one has common sense apparently. people are ****** just accept it... just to say I ahve no knowledge of anything on the toppic never even knew about this. AKA:Wings,Wingman,Inmortal,Slayer,Frist,Fristname,ThatWeirdGuy,Mumbles PREPARE THE BATTLE HAMMOCK AND PURPLE GARDEN HOSE
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2809	Posted - 2015.04.26 10:41:00 - [6] - Quote http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33tlt0/eli5_valvesteam_mod_controversy/ Educate yourselves. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Fristname Family name Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation 109	Posted - 2015.04.26 10:51:00 - [7] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33tlt0/eli5_valvesteam_mod_controversy/ Educate yourselves. redit is gay :P 4CHAN FTW!!!! AKA:Wings,Wingman,Inmortal,Slayer,Frist,Fristname,ThatWeirdGuy,Mumbles PREPARE THE BATTLE HAMMOCK AND PURPLE GARDEN HOSE
Knight Soiaire Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5994	Posted - 2015.04.26 14:39:00 - [8] - Quote 25% is ** all for doing most of the work on the mod. Think its also the fact that other ** companies like EA/Ubisoft will see the potential here and begin allowing people to mod their games and then sell those mods. Only problem I see is the 75% cut. I think an option to donate or allow the customer to control where most of the money goes much like Humble Bundles would fix this problem.
Scheneighnay McBob And the ButtPirates 6220	Posted - 2015.04.26 14:57:00 - [9] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33tlt0/eli5_valvesteam_mod_controversy/ Educate yourselves. Knew all of that already, and it changes nothing. A choice is a choice, both for the modder and the guy "modding it until it breaks, then modding it some more" Some details can be ignored
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4582	Posted - 2015.04.26 15:51:00 - [10] - Quote Knight Soiaire wrote: 25% is ** all for doing most of the work on the mod. Think its also the fact that other companies like EA/Ubisoft will see the potential here and begin allowing people to mod their games and then sell those mods. Only problem I see is the 75% cut. I think an option to donate or allow the customer to control where most of the money goes much like Humble Bundles would fix this problem. Indeed. Even if there are reasons why the direct slider could not be applied at least allowing the modder to define - or at minimum have some input into - the price distribution ratio would be reasonable. Then there's also this Quote:** This is the most relevant question. Paying for mods on its own is not a bad idea, as long as its done in a reasonable fashion. I would gladly pay for mods that actively add value to my gaming experience. HOWEVER! In a world where Steam can not be trusted to keep quality control over full-blown games and early access titles, can we trust that this system won't be abused? The answer is plain to see already, only a few days into this matter: People stealing mods from each other, and posting horse genitalia at unbelievable prices. And let's not even talk about the actual quality of the mods - hell if anyone checked compatibilities / incompatibilities with the current game version / other popular mods. Or if the mods work in the first place, which is an entirely different matter - who's to say whether or not I deliver on what I claim my mod does? Or how smoothly it accomplishes it? Again, if we can't trust Steam to do Quality Control on full-fledged games, we can't even begin to fathom to trust Steam to do Quality Control on mods. He's got a point if indeed Valve/Steam provides no posting/listing standards or QA not only does it open the door for all sorts of messes (mods when done wrong can mess with your gaming experience in a number of ways, even when done right they don't all play well together). So you ave a situation where a modder can make a thing in good faith and then be lambasted as making a 'cash grab' because his mod uses some of the same base assets as another more popular mod thus making this new mod "broken" on any of the clients running the more established mod. Beyond that there's the interesting question of "30% for what?" Bethesda charging 45% for holding the IP rights is arguably high (I tend to think it's high but there's at least a debate to be had there) but if Steam is providing no QA, no customer service, fact checking to avoid mod/mod asset theft from other content creators et al then what is their cut based on? Why is their cut a solid 30% while the IP holder (Bethesda) and the content creator (mod maker) have to exist in a Zero Sum relationship with each other? The internet being what it is maybe Valve has put forth their answer to this and I haven't seen it (if so I'd love someone to link it here), but it seems like a very pertinent question that needs answered and frankly "because steam is huge" cannot qualify as a sufficient justification, being bigger than someone else does not equate to the right to define the dynamics between yourself and other parties... ability to do so? Yes sometimes. Right to do so? Not so much. 0.02 ISK CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!

MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2809	Posted - 2015.04.26 16:00:00 - [11] - Quote Part of the bad thing about mods being paid for now is potential copyright trolls (yay DMCA takedown notices) and largely a big shift from mods being a collaborative endeavour where people want to make mods so as to make better mods, with lots of code sharing and other things to a cooperative endeavour where people want to make mods to get paid. Modding tools can also become expensive paid for things too and people can become very protective of their 'trade secrets' in games that are hard to mod and then there's also a huge slew of problems involving quality control and other stuff. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Scheneighnay McBob And the ButtPirates 6220	Posted - 2015.04.26 16:10:00 - [12] - Quote As far as ** like mods being copied, then perhaps it could be fixed to where mods need to be registered to have a price tag. Some moderators hired with that 75% cut could look over mods to make sure something is a legit project, and not already registered under another creator. Perhaps when something is approved, the moderator could hide some secret watermark/s in it to check for in later mods. But again, something is better than nothing, and I'm sure this is all going to cool down in a couple of months. Most of the ** mods being posted with massive pricetags are most likely upset kids, like the ones that want mods to be free for the sake alone of not wanting to pay. Some details can be ignored


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page