UESP Forums

Although I love mods the same as anyone else and I enjoy them being free, I'm kind of with Deandra on this one. If modders would like to be charged with their work, then they have that right. It's their free time and even though most are ammaturish (sp?) mods are like any other artform in a sense. Regarding most of the funds not going to the modders, that's a decision they are willing to take: get a little bit of cash vs nothing. Gaming is a business and businesses are always looking for more ways to make the dough.

Will this shake the gaming/modding community? Yes. But with all things chaotic, things will get figured out and settled. It may not be that bad. We just need to give Steam a bit of time to work out the kinks. I use Nexus mods so whatever, but I do also think that it's more about the cash than us gamers. Kind of used to that with most things though.

I'm not sure if you understand the way market competition works. Mods could only compete with DLC either if they offered the exact same content for free or if they forced consumders to make a choice with their limited capital. The only mod so far that offers anything on the level of the official DLC is Wheels of Lull, which is still a distinct experience from Dawnguard and Dragonborn. More to the point, it's not actually something you have to pay for, so consumers aren't forced to choose between it and the DLC when they can have both. Of course, if you grant modders the option to charge for their mods then you might inadvertently introduce this competition and harm your product's sales, which is one of the many reasons why this new practice is so incredibly stupid. Although I doubt many quest mods will actually be made by money-hungry authors because spending hundreds of tedious hours creating a £20 quest mod is hardly as efficient as spending 20 hours creating a few £1 swords and armour sets hacked together from Dark Souls and Witcher 2 resources.


Why do modders suddenly have a right to charge for their work? Up until yesterday afternoon it was taken as a given that mod authors did what they did for reasons other than financial incentives. Whether it's to build a portfolio, hone their skills, enjoy themselves or just out of a love for others they all had motives other than expecting to be paid for their work. The people willing to defend this new system have repeated the same mantra over and over of "modders should be paid for their work" but they've never actually justified why that is.

Now, if you were to say "we should be able to reward modders for their effort" then you have a better argument, and probably the one that Valve and Zenimax are trying to convey to the public underneath their corporate buzzwords and shiny ads. Is this new paywall the best way to provide that? Absolutely not, not by a long shot. I'd like to emphasise that modders get a measly 25% of the profits in this system, and only if they manage to break an income threshold (it might be $100 but I can't remember off the top of my head). The other 75% goes to Valve and Bethesda who have made absolutely no contribution to the process other than tightening their stranglehold on the limited ways to earn financial support for mods. Oh, and did I mention that all payment for modders goes itno their Steam wallet rather than their pockets? It reminds me of Finkton in Bioshock Infinite, where employees are ruthlessly exploited from a lack of any other options and paid only in company coupons to ensure that they funnel the local economy as much as possible.

If Valve and Zenimax actually cared about rewarding modders they'd lift their restrictions on donations. There's plenty of mod authors who I'd gladly support on Patreon, Paypal and Kickstarter if they asked for a little help, and if Bethesda was actually interested in the creative flourishing of the community then they could sponsor projects/events, maybe even release some of those Game Jam resources they're sitting on and allowing to rot away. This is just a cynical cash grab by two very greedy and apathetic corporations who have managed to find a way to get gullible rubes to plug the holes in their game and reap profits from it, all without actually having to pay a penny themselves.

I've heard the income threshold is $100 AFTER Valve/Bethesda have taken their cut. How true that is I don't know, but it seems likely that not many modders (If any at all) will actually get anything from this without grossly overpricing things.

Sticking to free mods with the option to donate is the better route. At least then all/most of the money actually goes to the modder.
Locking things behind a paywall is a good way to lose a chunk of the community that can't afford to be constantly buying mods. A few people have tried to estimate the cost of their load order and got close to $500, assuming people charged a few dollars per mod. How many people are actually going to be able to pay for that? I know I wouldn't be able to. Even then I wouldn't because I know most of that money is just going to go to two corporations that don't need it. If I had money, I'd choose to donate it so the modders would actually get it.

That would have to be done through the Nexus. Unfortunately, I've seen modders on Steam trying to offer an alternative of donating instead of paying for the mod and Valve removed the donation link.


I just don't think paid mods are a good idea... There are too many things that could go wrong.
Content stealing, charging for things that aren't yours to charge for (FNIS, SKSE, modders resources), and so on... I don't like it one bit. I will continue not liking it until it is either gone, or until I can no longer play games.

The reason they suddenly have that right is because the game developers/distributors have decided to grant it to them. Previously, it would have been illegal for modders to charge for work they've based off of the game they didn't write.

If you used to volunteer for a job because you felt it was important to the community, but then the organization you're volunteering for came to you and said, "Would you like for this to be a paid position since you're doing such a great job?" How can you possibly argue that people shouldn't be allowed to choose to earn money this way? Modders aren't slaves who owe you or anybody else their time. And if some modders decide they'd rather earn something rather than nothing, how is that anybody's decision but their own?

That's hardly an accurate anecdote. Maybe if you were actually approached by the company that made you pay for the tools to perform that job, who then offered you a new job where you knocked together poor quality stuff cobbled together from other people's assets for a pittance. Of course that company wouldn't actually help you in any way other than providing you with a room to perform this job in, but they still expect to take 75% of the profits. Oh wait, I actually meant 100%. See, they're not actually paying you, they're just giving you coupons every now and then that are refundable in their company store. Unfortunately they don't sell you food or housing so you can't actually live off this job but hey, at least you get to buy some of those items that you would have been able to get for free anyway...

So maybe you're right, and a few words from Zenimax and Valve suddenly grants people like Chesko and Isoku the right to ignore licenses and intellectual property and profit off of other people's hard work and willingness to share free assets. Maybe the evidence from the Dota and Sims that clearly shows how for-profit ventures turn modding into a toxic and uninspired cash-grab is just of the mark and Skyrim will somehow dodge all those problems. But even if you accept all of that, arguing that this new policy is a step in the right direction is still utterly absurd. As I've already established the mod authors get a horrendously bad deal out of this, with 100% of the profits actually going towards the companies behind it. The ridiculous secrecy behind this project has left the whole thing a mess, with many mod authors changing their former free use policies to demand an end to for-profit use of their assets. Of course it hardly seems to matter, as Valve has shown its willingness to do outright illegal things by breaking these free mod licences to make a quick buck and shows no signs of caring. And even if you are the kind of mad person who believes that these companies are entitled to earn all this money from other people's works, the system in place of delivering content is laughably bad. There's already links up to pirated versions of this debut Workshop content floating around the web thanks to people who paid for it, copied the provided assets and demanded refunds within the 24 hour period they get to do so. I honestly don't know what was going on in the heads of Valve and Zenimax when they set this system up, or the modders who have destroyed their reputations by agreeing to it and I don't know how anybody can look at it and defend it as a fair and effective way of funding modders.

Edit: It's worth pointing out that the Nexus has just now added a feature that allows users to donate a bit of money to mod authors, if the modders opt into it. It's too early to make any claims about how effective this might be at actually funding modders but I feel far more inclined to send a pound or two towards a few authors on there than I do towards having to pay Workshop authors just to access their potentially awful mods. I wouldn't be surprised if this method actually proves to be more profitable than directly paying is. It's certainly a lot less risky for the consumer, given that you can actually play a mod and judge its quality before throwing any money at the person behind it.

This has been around for ages.

I think the theft of work is a whole other issue, but here's how I see it.

A modder creates a fantastic mod that they've poured many hours of work into. This mod is popular and gets tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of downloads, along with thousands of endorsements. Now, the more features a mod has, the more demanding users become when they ask for more features, compatibility patches, and that sort of thing. So this popular mod encourages a lot of whining and begging. Being disposed towards a certain level of professionalism, the modder tries their best to keep their mod updated and relatively compatible with other popular mods. They try to offer support and advice to people asking for more features and people who encounter issues. As a single hobbyist, they are unable to fix every issue, of course, but they do make an effort.

Now, a year or two later, they've lost interest in Skyrim, but the work of supporting the mod continues. What was once fun and interesting is now a chore. They don't want to walk away from this work that they've poured so many hours into, but it stopped being enjoyable for them a long time ago. Now all of a sudden they get an option: they can start charging for downloads of the mod. Realistically, how much will they earn if they take that option? Probably not much. But it offers so much more--the chance to walk away from all of the crap. "You want my work? Fine. Pay for it. Want my support? Let's see you put your money where your mouth is." If nobody wants to pay, yay! It's a clean break and they can walk away. And if people *do* pay, you know that they actually care about your work, and you're compensated for your time.

So you think it's a bad choice. So you think they won't earn anything. Who cares? It's the modder who's making that decision. They don't want to keep modding for free. They probably have hated supporting their work for months if not years now, and they've only kept doing it because they thought they had no other choice. Well, now they've got another choice, and I think that's a good thing.

Yeah, the option to donate on the Nexus has been available for ages. They're just making it more prominent in places so that more people might consider donating. The new option adds a donation message before the download.

I'm happier with the addition of a new check box in the permissions to show that we do not allow our mods/assets to be sold for profit. It's probably not going to stop anything, but... Still. It's nice to have that.

It sets an extremely bad precedent.

I would like to point out that absolutely nothing about this is illegal from the point of view of Valve or Bethesda. Some people have mentioned that it might be but it isn't. Part of what you agree to when using the Creation Kit is that Bethesda owns the copyright to everything you make. The relevant section is here:

"If You distribute or otherwise make available New Materials, You automatically grant to Bethesda Softworks the irrevocable, perpetual, royalty free, sublicensable right and license under all applicable copyrights and intellectual property rights laws to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, perform, display, distribute and otherwise exploit and/or dispose of the New Materials (or any part of the New Materials) in any way Bethesda Softworks, or its respective designee(s), sees fit."

So nothing here is illegal. If you believe otherwise, I'd like to hear your reasoning.

Depending on where you reside part or none of that agreement might be legal binding, for example EU laws trump EULA agreements.

I'm not quite sure if I'm following you. Surely by putting up their mods behind a paywall modders are setting themselves up for putting in even more work? If you're going to start charging people for mods then you're no longer just fixing bugs and making patches for the sake of helping people make more stable games, you're doing it because people are paying you for it and you're obligated to give them the experience you're suggesting they get. Of course, that's how it would work in an ethical system, although there's absolutely no safeguards in this one to ensure that modders do actually meet certain standards of quality. Yet another reason why this setup is so incredibly awful.

As for "it's the modder's decision", I think it's naive to assume that every modder exists in a bubble and doesn't affect others. Take, for example, the recently announced decision by SkyUI's author to stick his mod into this system:

http://forums.bethsoft.com/topic/1516818-discussion-for-workshop-paid-mods-thread-4/page-5#entry23943540

Now, anyone who's paid attention to Skyrim modding will be aware of just how terrifying the prospect of this is for the future of Skyrim modding, especially if the current version of SkyUI is removed from the Nexus. SkyUI is essential for an enormous amount of mods to function properly and I'd argue it's even essential to actually make Skyrim playable on PC in the first place. By making it a paid mod you're doing exactly what we're constantly chewing out EA and Ubisoft for, forcing the consumer to pay extra to actually get a proper gaming experience. Making SkyUI a paid mod has horrific consequences for Skyrim mods and the author may have singlehandedly killed off the potential for authors to use his MCM feature for free mods. The dark days of using powers to configure mods may be on us again because of this.

As for the donate button, the fact that not many people were aware of it goes to show how it could have been better promoted. Hopefully bringing it to the forefront will let mod authors earn support in a way that doesn't screw over the user.


How about mods not made within the Creation Kit, such as FNIS? There's already been a debacle over that ridiculous early access fishing mod using FNIS without anyone seeking permission from Fore and it's likely that without Chesko doing the right thing and pulling it it would have stayed up. And even beyond that, resource mods and the like aren't actually made in the Creation Kit. I'm not familiar with the licence arrangements of programs like Blender and GIMP but given that they're open source I imagine the users get to claim licences of their own. Of course Valve and Zenimax clearly don't give a damn about the rights of the user here so it seems these modders are just pulling out of the game and refusing to release any more resources out of a desrie not to be exploited for financial gain. Guess that's the "flourishing" we've been promised with this paywall, huh?

That's Bethesda. The main issue I've been having is the selling of a mod that has used assets by another author who does not approve of or doesn't want their mods being sold. Does the fact that Bethesda technically owns everything we have done (does that include things made without the CK?) mean that another modder can just come along and take another's work, sell it without their permission, and profit from that? If it does, then that is [&@%!] up. I know that happens frequently anywhere, but that doesn't change how strongly I dislike it.

Chesko's animated fishing mod was taken down after it was revealed he used assets from FNIS. The creator of FNIS did not want his mod monetized.
How many more times is something like that going to happen? So many mods use or depend on things created by others.
It's at least part of the reason why people are upset with Isoku. His Wet and Cold mod uses assets created by many other authors and they aren't getting anything from the mod he has on Steam.

Edit:


Oh, [&@%!] that. [&@%!] that [&@%!] right there. If he isn't [&@%!] joking, so many people are going to be [&@%!]. Me included, if you can't tell.
If he locks SkyUI behind a paywall... I really have no comment. It's like what the author of Skyforge Shields/Weapons did, but worse since SkyUI is used by many people (like me). Most of us will wind up either pirating the mod or using older versions. That's assuming we aren't forced to stop using the MCM for free mods. If that's the case... RIP Skyrim. I'll play on PS3 only thank you very much (I'm starting to consider it anyway).

*downloads backup copy of SkyUI just in case*

As far as the far reaching prospects of Steam and Bethesda's decision, I think we're going to see modders split into to groups, those you make mods for profit, and those you make mods to share their creativity with the world (in other words, build a chicken bazooka), sort of like the split between Windows and GNU. The creation of Microsoft Office led to the creation of a counterprogram, Open Office; and I see the same thing happening here: Creating a cost for something like SkyUI will ultimately lead to the creation of an "OpenSky user interface" maybe not as advanced or optimised, but a functional replacement.

It doesn't matter if the art assets were made in another program. As soon as they enter the creation kit, which they must in order to make it into the game at all, you transfer all copyright claims to Bethesda. ANYTHING that enters the creation kit and then is published somewhere becomes theirs. Also, in the Steam terms and conditions you are not allowed to claim other people's work as your own, and there is a takedown request form for modders who feel their work has been published by someone else without their permission, regardless if it is for Skyrim or any other game that supports modding. I would have to assume that the form applies here as well. The major issue people seem to be having is that someone will steal their work and profit from it. But Valve has been taking down plagarized mods from games for years when the original author contacts them informing them about it. Why do people all of a sudden think they'll stop now?

Now the amount of money that the Mod author gets is a legitimate issue, but the legality and the inability to block someone from making a profit off your mod isn't.

Why not just add a donate button to all mods everywhere instead of locking them behind a paywall? That way people can give money to a mod if they want to and aren't obligated to pay for mods that might break their games or mods that might be plagiarized. Valve and Bethesda can also take a percentage of the donation if they feel they need to make money off mods. It's a much better solution to giving quality mods support than the current system which will break modding in its entirety. If mods like SkyUI go behind a paywall then it pretty much breaks every other decent mod out there. This idea has merit but the implementation is absolutely poor. I too would like to support good modders out there but I don't want to feel obligated to pay for something that has no guarantee of quality, could break save games, and might even be stolen. Not to mention, there are mods out there that use assets from other mods. How do you even begin to ask for money for content created by someone else? Asking for permission seems dubious. How do you even enforce that?

I still believe this turns modding into paid DLC. Perhaps if Valve had opened up their scheme with more substantive expansion-type mods I might be more receptive to the idea.


But that's just my opinion.

So, that's another thing that isn't actually accurate. The Modder isn't paid in Steam Wallet funds. They are paid with an electronic money transfer into your bank. In fact, you have to go through some rigorous bank and tax submitting information before you are allowed to post a paid mod. They only pay in US dollars, and it doesn't ever go into your steam wallet unless you add money to your wallet from your bank account after the fact. So... I'm not sure where people got that idea from.

EDIT:Also, they require that you ask the permission of any mod authors whose content you use in your mod, regardless if you are charging money for it or not. Also, any copyrighted material (for instance, if you made a game of thrones mod) is illegal regardless if you are charging for it or not, so any complaints that people may be profiting from other peoples work seem to be unfounded.

If that is true then I will edit my post to accept facts.

You can see the extremely complicated banking information required here, http://steamcommunity.com/workshop/workshoppaymentinfofaq

I'm too inclined to believe dubious sources, my mistake. So that's one tiny little redeeming feature of the system there. You may be getting a pittance for your work but your gracious betters at Valve have decided you're old enough to have it in real money.

A texture replacer does not have to be put through the CK to make it into the game. All that has to be done is put the file in its correct place in the data folders. If it has the same name as a file in the .bsa, it will overwrite it.
The CK is only used to upload the mod to Steam, or to edit the texture sets.
It's similar to mesh replacers. You could make your own mesh with your own textures and overwrite the vanilla ones without using the CK at all.

What if, then, that texture replacer (or even a mesh replacer) does not use the CK in any way? Does Bethesda still own that? Their tools didn't touch it.

They don't own the texture creator itself no, but as soon as a texture created with it enters the CK and is then published, they own that. What Fore should do is separate his custom textures from the texture creator itself, and release them separately. The textures, which he knows is going into the game, would be owned by Bethesda, but he would retain all ownership over the tool itself.

From reading all the legal information, it seems that the 25% value modders are getting was set by Bethesda, not by Valve. None of the Valve stuff says any specific value, only that the value will be determined by the publisher. If there is enough gripe about it, Bethesda may raise the amount that modders get. But I don't think Valve is at fault in any way for this. In fact, I think they have already provided a donation system that you all want built into the workshop. In addition to setting a specific price, or no price at all, a mod author can set their mod as "pay-what-you-want" letting the person buying it choose how much to pay. That sounds to me like a donation. You can choose to pay nothing (or maybe a nominal 1 cent), or you can pay $200. It would be up to the mod author if they wish to release their mod like that.

This is the start of the death of the modding community as we know it. It will end up going the way of DLC and soon, it'll be a challenge to even find working mods without having to pay for patches or paying for mods that make the PC versions better/playable. I won't be surprised if certain mods end up costing more then the game itself. Hopefully, this idea will die a fiery death and a donation system is replaced or advertised more.

This'll likely start more anger against them, but according to the legal documents, Valve and Bethesda reserve the right to lower or even eliminate the fee you are charging for a mod. So Arthmoor can't just charge like $200 for the Unofficial Skyrim Patch or something. They'd step in and lower it to something else, or (more likely given how ubiquitous it is, and how many mods depend on it) remove the fee entirely.

Fore's involved in animations (so meshes) rather than textures. FNIS itself doesn't interface with the Creation Kit at all to work, not even through its scripts. There is murky water regarding how it and SKSE are sort-of reverse engineered from Skyrim though, which is probably why the SKSE team refuses to take a stand.


I think the backlash against Valve is really just the final straw in a long period of what was once gaming's most beloved company becoming just as bad as its competitors. There was a time when people viewed Valve as the bastion of ethics and supporting the little man in the sea of nastiness that is gaming, but now they've given in to the money and built a very harsh monopoly. I can only hope that stuff like GOG takes off to counter it all.

As for Arthmoor and the Unofficial Patch, thankfully he's only the compiler and not the actual author. For them to go up the patch's full team would presumably need to give permission, and they likely won't given the nature of the patches as a long and benevolent venture. I am thankful that Arthmoor isn't the one able to make the call because by all accounts he's completely mad and has no regard for other people's opinions, as his Gategate scandal showed.

But they don't own it if it's not put through the CK and published on Steam. It would have to be for somebody to sell it, but if they don't...
A simple texture replacer created in Photoshop (or something) and uploaded onto the Nexus, for instance, would not be put through the CK (in that case it's pretty much pointless). If I'm understanding it, Bethesda does not own what isn't put through their official modding tools or what isn't made from their files. So... In this case... It's a theoretical texture replacer made in Photoshop without using resources from Bethesda, tested in-game to make sure it actually works, put into its correct folders, packaged using 7zip, and then uploaded onto a free site like the Nexus. Do they still claim ownership over something like that if it was not made using their tools or files at all?

It's just a question. I'm starting to see massive texture overhauls on the Workshop as paid mods (Skyrim Realistic Texture Overhaul) and I'm wondering what would happen if somebody tried to steal a texture overhaul to sell. A Nexus exclusive like the aMidianBorn textures. Or maybe even Gamwich's Rustic textures. Any popular texture replacer, really. Especially one without an .esp file.