Vapourware Steam is (NO LONGER) charging for mods now lmao

[sser]

I see a ton of shilling in the vein of "all work must be payed", but am yet to read of a single solution in place for the elephant in the room: 1) zero guarantee of continued support through games' patches and inter-compatibility between mods and 2) lack of accountability for such.

Simply put, if I can't keep your mod, why should you keep my money?

How about this: 24 hour grace period, after which - instead of a lump sum - you pay a rent per hour played with the mod. Steam allows for such statistics, so technically it's not a problem.

Well there's the debate over the principle of it and then the debate over the mechanics of how you'd go about selling mods.

I honestly have no idea how it's feasible in the first place from a legal standpoint. Many mods cross over one another, they use assets from other sources which have legal protections, stuff like that.

 

[taxalot]

There is also something terribly hypocritical and sad about this all issue.

Modding really took off with Doom. I realize there has been Wolf3D and other attempts earlier, but Doom is the first game I remember seeing a lot of things being offered for free in magazines : CDs full of hundreds of extra maps and other things. Doom was released in 1993.

We are in 2015. For twenty two years, people have doing mods for free, nobody minded. Nobody attempted to earn any money for it, (except the few ones who wanted their mods in a portfolio to find a job), everybody was fine with that when they went to develop mod. When you sat down on your computer and started designing and coding, you KNEW you were not going to earn any money. You were doing this for fun.

Now, all it took was an announcement. A small banner on steampowered.com and a huge numbers of these fuckers go all "Why, yes, I should be getting money for this. I deserve it after all."

Twenty two years of disinterested modding down the drain in one announcement. Now, all a sudden, it's like those twenty two years were slavery and people who argue that mods should stay free whatever are triangular traders. This is how powerful is Valve. It can rewrite opinions and history in just two paragraphs and a click. If anyone else tried to pull that off, they wouldn't have been able to get away with it.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Look, I know y'all are on the fucking war path about this, but not everyone who gives it an inkling of moderate consideration is some dumbass shill.

paying

for

mods

It's indefensible, bruh. Sorry.

 

[Damned Registrations]

I see a ton of shilling in the vein of "all work must be payed", but am yet to read of a single solution in place for the elephant in the room: 1) zero guarantee of continued support through games' patches and inter-compatibility between mods and 2) lack of accountability for such.

Simply put, if I can't keep your mod, why should you keep my money?

How about this: 24 hour grace period, after which - instead of a lump sum - you pay a rent per hour played with the mod. Steam allows for such statistics, so technically it's not a problem.

How about this instead: I write a series of mods with planned obsolescence, and you have to buy my latest version every 2 weeks if you want your game to keep working. I deserve to be compensated for my hard work making all these updates to the mod after all.

 

[FuriousGamer87]

I honestly have no idea how it's feasible in the first place from a legal standpoint. Many mods cross over one another, they use assets from other sources which have legal protections, stuff like that.

It is feasible for Steam due to the fact for quite a while already in the workshop, they put 100% of the legal responsibility onto the uploader/"creator", due to a lot of prank mods in the workshop that precede this fiasco.
They are just the innocent kind-hearted distributor who charge for their service and make money off it.
Even if you download a paid mod that rape your PC raw and give it BSOD, you can't sue Steam, they got the legal issues worked out already.
You can sue the uploader, but good luck trying to get financial compensation from a 12 years old kid from Russia who don't have more than $100 to his name.

 

[mastroego]

Probably you all know that Italy has insanely high taxes on fuel.
Politicians know that people are by now accustomed to that, and they consider the fuel tax their own little ATM to extract some quick buck when they need (want) it.

A couple of years ago, in combination with a raise of the cost of oil, the cost for fuel at the distributor hit (and surpassed) the 2€/l mark.
You'd think "yeah, more tax income for us to steal from!", right?
Wrong.
Turned out, people picked up their bikes, started to organize better to make groups for a single vehicle and so on.
NET result: the TOTAL fuel tax income was lower than the previous year's.

There is a saturation point.
And there's no going around it.
If playing a game will end up costing an average of 150$, people slowly but surely will start finding other entertainments.

And mind you: if I discover that I'm having a lot of fun cooking, which I picked up to kill time, I might not get back to gaming EVEN when the insanity stops.

 

[Damned Registrations]

I honestly have no idea how it's feasible in the first place from a legal standpoint. Many mods cross over one another, they use assets from other sources which have legal protections, stuff like that.

It is feasible for Steam due to the fact for quite a while already in the workshop, they put 100% of the legal responsibility onto the uploader/"creator", due to a lot of prank mods in the workshop that precede this fiasco.
They are just the innocent kind-hearted distributor who charge for their service and make money off it.
Even if you download a paid mod that rape your PC raw and give it BSOD, you can't sue Steam, they got the legal issues worked out already.
You can sue the uploader, but good luck trying to get financial compensation from a 12 years old kid from Russia who don't have more than $100 to his name.

This is actually another amusing potential problem. What exactly is to stop people from grabbing a mod, stuffing in some sort of malware, and then reselling it?

 

[Multiple Sarcasm]

How about this instead: I write a series of mods with planned obsolescence, and you have to buy my latest version every 2 weeks

Thing is, I don't have to, and I doubt the scheme you suggest would work even on today's imbecile buyers.

 

[sser]

Look, I know y'all are on the fucking war path about this, but not everyone who gives it an inkling of moderate consideration is some dumbass shill.

paying

for

mods

It's indefensible, bruh. Sorry.

How many people bought Arma to play DayZ? People pay for good mods all the time, they just don't see it that way. I see a possible way for modders to support themselves that doesn't include selling out to some investor/being shackled to a market genre (read: FPS). It's probably a long shot, but not outside the realm of possibility. Selling little items or minor mods? I dunno. I can't defend that anymore than I could for it being Developer Approved DLC, to be honest, and I know that's what is going to happen/is happening.

Also, I'm a libertarian at heart when it comes to these things so if someone wants to charge $5 for something they've done, more power to them.

Welp, isn't Valve one big, bloated and fucked up state if you want to pursue this analogy? This is 75% taxes we're talking about here. See, even considering this whole "if they want to charge for a creation let it be" this model is shit.

But here's the main thing, why are you using a market mindset to consider what's always supposed to be a hobby creation made in the spare time and using a fuckload of assets and code from other people because it's a fucking community thing? While we're at it why not theorize about the monetization of completely random stuff you make as a hobby like playing with Legos and creating nice looking little robots with them (just don't forget you'll have to pay 75% of the profit to Lego though)

From what I understand it is Bethesda who set that percentage, although it doesn't really matter. 25% of residuals is about right for using a larger service to sell your products. The other option is zero. IMO, places like Nexus should have been offering modders some residuals based on how much traffic they were bringing to the website.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

This is actually another amusing potential problem. What exactly is to stop people from grabbing a mod, stuffing in some sort of malware, and then reselling it?

Once I brought up that point in Steam's forums, regarding the total lack of quality control with greenlight/early access titles, that allowed stuff like Earth 2066 to make it into the store. They said I was paranoid. Surely Gaben would check each game in person to ensure all files are 100% clean. I wish I could remember which thread was it so I could necro it with a huge ASCII Pepe smugface.

 

[FuriousGamer87]

I honestly have no idea how it's feasible in the first place from a legal standpoint. Many mods cross over one another, they use assets from other sources which have legal protections, stuff like that.

It is feasible for Steam due to the fact for quite a while already in the workshop, they put 100% of the legal responsibility onto the uploader/"creator", due to a lot of prank mods in the workshop that precede this fiasco.
They are just the innocent kind-hearted distributor who charge for their service and make money off it.
Even if you download a paid mod that rape your PC raw and give it BSOD, you can't sue Steam, they got the legal issues worked out already.
You can sue the uploader, but good luck trying to get financial compensation from a 12 years old kid from Russia who don't have more than $100 to his name.

This is actually another amusing potential problem. What exactly is to stop people from grabbing a mod, stuffing in some sort of malware, and then reselling it?

the same thing that will be stopping people from ripping other people free mods/unofficial patches and upload it into steam as paid mods while shutting down the original to put salt into the wound.

Spoiler

nothing

 

[Night Goat]

Probably you all know that Italy has insanely high taxes on fuel.
Politicians know that people are by now accustomed to that, and they consider the fuel tax their own little ATM to extract some quick buck when they need (want) it.

A couple of years ago, in combination with a raise of the cost of oil, the cost for fuel at the distributor hit (and surpassed) the 2€/l mark.
You'd think "yeah, more tax income for us to steal from!", right?
Wrong.
Turned out, people picked up their bikes, started to organize better to make groups for a single vehicle and so on.
NET result: the TOTAL fuel tax income was lower than the previous year's.

There is a saturation point.
And there's no going around it.
If playing a game will end up costing an average of 150$, people slowly but surely will start finding other entertainments.

And mind you: if I discover that I'm having a lot of fun cooking, which I picked up to kill time, I might not get back to gaming EVEN when the insanity stops.

OTOH gamers are some of the dumbest and weakest-willed people in the world. Maybe even worse than Italians.

 

[mastroego]

True that, but monthly budget HAS to become an issue at some point.
What I meant is that, when you are already close to the saturation point and you keep applying pressure because you want "more", you may end up risking the good thing that you already had running.

 

[Destroid]

I honestly have no idea how it's feasible in the first place from a legal standpoint. Many mods cross over one another, they use assets from other sources which have legal protections, stuff like that.

It is feasible for Steam due to the fact for quite a while already in the workshop, they put 100% of the legal responsibility onto the uploader/"creator", due to a lot of prank mods in the workshop that precede this fiasco.
They are just the innocent kind-hearted distributor who charge for their service and make money off it.
Even if you download a paid mod that rape your PC raw and give it BSOD, you can't sue Steam, they got the legal issues worked out already.
You can sue the uploader, but good luck trying to get financial compensation from a 12 years old kid from Russia who don't have more than $100 to his name.

Funny that this defence works for Valve but not for The Pirate Bay or Megaupload. And Valve is much more tightly connected to the revenue generated from infringing/illegal content than TPB are.

 

[FuriousGamer87]

I honestly have no idea how it's feasible in the first place from a legal standpoint. Many mods cross over one another, they use assets from other sources which have legal protections, stuff like that.

It is feasible for Steam due to the fact for quite a while already in the workshop, they put 100% of the legal responsibility onto the uploader/"creator", due to a lot of prank mods in the workshop that precede this fiasco.
They are just the innocent kind-hearted distributor who charge for their service and make money off it.
Even if you download a paid mod that rape your PC raw and give it BSOD, you can't sue Steam, they got the legal issues worked out already.
You can sue the uploader, but good luck trying to get financial compensation from a 12 years old kid from Russia who don't have more than $100 to his name.

Funny that this defence works for Valve but not for The Pirate Bay or Megaupload. And Valve is much more tightly connected to the revenue generated from infringing/illegal content than TPB are.

Funny how in life, you get away with more ridiculous bullshit when you sided with the group who have the biggest pile of dosh to hire the best lawyers and lobbyists than when going against them.

Seriously though, if you report stolen commercial intellectual property, Steam going to remove it just like that.
But don't expect them to take any legal flak for it. Or give back their $$$ take from it, aside from throwing you worthless steam bucks.
After all, they are the ones teaming up with the publishers who owned all the copyrights in the first place.

 

[Lyric Suite]

"The one little socialist community" Love the wannabe commie retards living in the most capitalist counties in the world and wanting them to become like USSR,China and other shitholes. To understand what real commies are just look at how the "socialist" Skyrim modding community jumped on board with Bethesda and Valve the moment they offered some shekels,some of them ready to disregard morals and principles too.

He forgets that modding was free because modders couldn't legally sell their work or even accept donations, and not because of any "socialism".

 

[Dexter]

Also, I'm a libertarian at heart when it comes to these things so if someone wants to charge $5 for something they've done, more power to them. It's literally no skin off my back to say, "Nah, no thanks." Losing my gourd over it being 'once free' is pointless. It's not free now. So my option is to pay for it or not, just like it was the modder's decision to charge for it or not. If a modder makes $10k off a mod that was once free then obviously he was right to charge for something that had market value, and we were all being assholes for convincing him it only had value being free.

I think you're more of a dumbfuck at heart, if anything. Your argument is:
Situation a) You pay say $60 for a game, get dozens if not hundreds of Mods fixing it by people that put said effort into it in their time off due to passion full well knowing they won't get any money and possibly some total conversions or expansions for free.
Situation b) You pay $60 for a game, there are some Mods fixing it, if you buy 20 of them you rack up another $60 cost to make the game playable and then maybe large conversions or whatnot at $20-30 a piece.

Okay, now for someone buying a game as a consumer there should be an obvious choice there... What is better, spending $60 or $150+? Now if you're not an absolute dumbfuck or underwent a voluntary lobotomy there should be a clear answer to this question.

And you even addressed something more, there could be a Mod that is so good or well-liked that it makes people buy your game as a developer. Good examples for this would be things like DOTA for WarCraft 3, Counter Strike for Half Life or DayZ for ARMA II. Now as a company I would think this is a good thing. People are providing added value for free and it drives up the demand for my product. You could always go full retard and think that this isn't enough. Getting a free sale isn't a good enough proposition. But there's a problem here. Say you have product A with Mods B and C that are really great. What is more likely, that people will buy A for say $40 because they know they'll get B and C thrown in for free or that they'll buy A for $40 and know that they have to pay additional $20 for B and $20 for C? You don't add value by putting a customer in that conundrum, you are making him question if he wants your product in the first place.

People already have to deal with Pre-Order Boni, Day 1 DLCs, On-Disc DLCs, Season Passes, Episodic Gaming, Early Access, Microtransactions, Macrotransactions and Subscriptions and you want to add Paid Modding to that???

You're also not thinking some of the further stuff through, Newell himself mentioned this stuff: https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/33uplp/mods_and_steam/cqoj40a

Q: Considering valve is a company that owes many of its early games to mods, do you think that if you had to pay 5 dollars for the original Counter Strike, or Dota mod, would they have ever taken off?

A: No, they wouldn't. Which is one of the reasons that we didn't charge for them after they stopped being MODs (at least part of the time).

Free to play is an extension of that and is based on the aggregate incremental value of another player to all the other players.

So he admits, that his company would probably not exist in this form (and Steam would have most likely not been made) if they required paid Mods back in the day, because the initial impulse to take off would have likely not been there if only a very limited amount of people "bought" DOTA or Counter Strike before they became popular. There's a very good reason why Valve made DOTA2 F2P even now.

This is just some of the immediate stuff, as for the rest:

- Nowadays there's people buying Sandbox games and installing hundreds of Mods, do you think this will stay the same if they have to pay for them? How many do you think will be in the top spots of the store? Will these be the "best" or most qualitative Mods or those that manage to do PR well?
- Drama and hostility that we've already somewhat experienced. When something is done for passion you'll much easier allow someone to use your work or collaboratively work together than if you're arguing over scraps, who owns what, who gets how much etc.
- No more themed Mods of Copyrighted content e.g. no more popular figures or franchises (Star Trek, Star Wars, Game of Thrones etc.): http://www.moddb.com/mods/crusader-kings-2-a-game-of-thrones-ck2agot
- Mods will be locked in to a closed Marketplace ecosystem to be better controlled (compare Diablo II + StarCraft on Battle.Net with Diablo III + StarCraft II on Battle.Net 2.0)
- Longest term goal (3-5 years I'm guessing) is probably to get rid of "free Modding" altogether and conquer this field for Monetization

All of this shit because Valve didn't think it made enough free money yet. You and many people keep coming back to the poor Modders, but nobody put them up to start work on anything and Valve most likely couldn't give less of a shit without their part of the 75%. It's about corporate greed, not "starving Modders".

At this point if there were "Mod teams" willing to do major work to sell, they might as well develop their own game and get a much larger part of the pie, Unity 5 and Unreal Engine 4 are free.

 

[SCO]

I'll just leave this right here shall i

http://garry.tv/2015/04/24/paying-for-mods/

Admiral jimbob

 

[DramaticPopcorn]

I'll just leave this right here shall i

http://garry.tv/2015/04/24/paying-for-mods/

Admiral jimbob

Whoa, what a massively obnoxious self-centered CUNT

 

[SCO]

The thing is, gary's mod is built on copyright violations. Just image google it to see the true horror of modding unleashed.

 

[Unkillable Cat]

Look, I know y'all are on the fucking war path about this, but not everyone who gives it an inkling of moderate consideration is some dumbass shill.

His reply was to a previous post of yours where you came off as nothing else than a deer in a car's headlights, in complete denial about the fact that you're 0.75 seconds away from becoming roadkill.

Also, I'm a libertarian at heart when it comes to these things so if someone wants to charge $5 for something they've done, more power to them. It's literally no skin off my back to say, "Nah, no thanks." Losing my gourd over it being 'once free' is pointless. It's not free now. So my option is to pay for it or not, just like it was the modder's decision to charge for it or not. If a modder makes $10k off a mod that was once free then obviously he was right to charge for something that had market value, and we were all being assholes for convincing him it only had value being free.

BRB while I register the Crimson Corporation under my name.

Oh look, I just purchased the ownership and exclusive rights to a gas mixture comprised of 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen and 1% various other gases. There's a limited supply of it though, surely no one will mind if I start charging people for using it?
While I'm at it, I'm also gonna purchase this round-looking piece of property up there, it's giving off all this light and heat, that'll come in handy for the upcoming energy crisis.

What, I don't have a right to charge people for using MY air and MY sunlight? I went through a lot of effort to secure those rights, you better damn well pay up or I'll have you arrested for theft! Entitled little piece of scum!

...

This is what the combination of capitalism, libertarianism and plain old greed leads to: If there's money to be made from it, then you must pay.

It's because people like you have allowed everything to be monetized that everyone having to pay for air and sunlight is not a piece of fiction, but an inevitable fact. I'm obviously not saying that all money should die, but the decision of whether something's free or not rests with us, not them. We choose what we pay for, not them. If they charge for something we don't wanna pay for, we don't fucking buy it.

Pretty much every one of us are to blame for things being as they are today, but people like you are further ahead in the blame queue for saying "There's nothing wrong with this!"

 

[sser]

Also, I'm a libertarian at heart when it comes to these things so if someone wants to charge $5 for something they've done, more power to them. It's literally no skin off my back to say, "Nah, no thanks." Losing my gourd over it being 'once free' is pointless. It's not free now. So my option is to pay for it or not, just like it was the modder's decision to charge for it or not. If a modder makes $10k off a mod that was once free then obviously he was right to charge for something that had market value, and we were all being assholes for convincing him it only had value being free.

I think you're more of a dumbfuck at heart, if anything. Your argument is:
Situation a) You pay say $60 for a game, get dozens if not hundreds of Mods fixing it by people that put said effort into it in their time off due to passion full well knowing they won't get any money and possibly some total conversions or expansions for free.
Situation b) You pay $60 for a game, there are some Mods fixing it, if you buy 20 of them you rack up another $60 cost to make the game playable and then maybe large conversions or whatnot at $20-30 a piece.

Okay, now for someone buying a game as a consumer there should be an obvious choice there... What is better, spending $60 or $150+? Now if you're not an absolute dumbfuck or underwent a voluntary lobotomy there should be a clear answer to this question.

And you even addressed something more, there could be a Mod that is so good or well-liked that it makes people buy your game as a developer. Good examples for this would be things like DOTA for WarCraft 3, Counter Strike for Half Life or DayZ for ARMA II. Now as a company I would think this is a good thing. People are providing added value for free and it drives up the demand for my product. You could always go full retard and think that this isn't enough. Getting a free sale isn't a good enough proposition. But there's a problem here. Say you have product A with Mods B and C that are really great. What is more likely, that people will buy A for say $40 because they know they'll get B and C thrown in for free or that they'll buy A for $40 and know that they have to pay additional $20 for B and $20 for C? You don't add value by putting a customer in that conundrum, you are making him question if he wants your product in the first place.

People already have to deal with Pre-Order Boni, Day 1 DLCs, On-Disc DLCs, Season Passes, Episodic Gaming, Early Access, Microtransactions, Macrotransactions and Subscriptions and you want to add Paid Modding to that???

You're also not thinking some of the further stuff through, Newell himself mentioned this stuff: https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/33uplp/mods_and_steam/cqoj40a

Q: Considering valve is a company that owes many of its early games to mods, do you think that if you had to pay 5 dollars for the original Counter Strike, or Dota mod, would they have ever taken off?

A: No, they wouldn't. Which is one of the reasons that we didn't charge for them after they stopped being MODs (at least part of the time).

Free to play is an extension of that and is based on the aggregate incremental value of another player to all the other players.

So he admits, that his company would probably not exist in this form (and Steam would have most likely not been made) if they required paid Mods back in the day, because the initial impulse to take off would have likely not been there if only a very limited amount of people "bought" DOTA or Counter Strike before they became popular. There's a very good reason why Valve made DOTA2 F2P even now.

This is just some of the immediate stuff, as for the rest:

- Nowadays there's people buying Sandbox games and installing hundreds of Mods, do you think this will stay the same if they have to pay for them? How many do you think will be in the top spots of the store? Will these be the "best" or most qualitative Mods or those that manage to do PR well?
- Drama and hostility that we've already somewhat experienced. When something is done for passion you'll much easier allow someone to use your work or collaboratively work together than if you're arguing over scraps, who owns what, who gets how much etc.
- No more themed Mods of Copyrighted content e.g. no more popular figures or franchises (Star Trek, Star Wars, Game of Thrones etc.): http://www.moddb.com/mods/crusader-kings-2-a-game-of-thrones-ck2agot
- Mods will be locked in to a closed Marketplace ecosystem to be better controlled (compare Diablo II + StarCraft on Battle.Net with Diablo III + StarCraft II on Battle.Net 2.0)
- Longest term goal (3-5 years I'm guessing) is probably to get rid of "free Modding" altogether and conquer this field for Monetization

All of this shit because Valve didn't think it made enough free money yet. You and many people keep coming back to the poor Modders, but nobody put them up to start work on anything and Valve most likely couldn't give less of a shit without their part of the 75%. It's about corporate greed, not "starving Modders".

At this point if there were "Mod teams" willing to do major work to sell, they might as well develop their own game and get a much larger part of the pie, Unity 5 and Unreal Engine 4 are free.

It is about corporate greed by its very virtue of coming from a business. I don't really disagree with anything you've said. My only disagreement would be that I don't expect the market to give cheap-o mods water. But we'll see, I guess. If the "mod market" has stuff like, say, Long War floating around, it's going to be hard for tiny bullshit to sell. That said, the price setters are the modders themselves who probably don't have business sense to begin with, nor any data whatsoever to know the value of their work. I expect the prices to be chaotic as fuck for a good while if Valve continues down this path.

Look, I know y'all are on the fucking war path about this, but not everyone who gives it an inkling of moderate consideration is some dumbass shill.

His reply was to a previous post of yours where you came off as nothing else than a deer in a car's headlights, in complete denial about the fact that you're 0.75 seconds away from becoming roadkill.

Also, I'm a libertarian at heart when it comes to these things so if someone wants to charge $5 for something they've done, more power to them. It's literally no skin off my back to say, "Nah, no thanks." Losing my gourd over it being 'once free' is pointless. It's not free now. So my option is to pay for it or not, just like it was the modder's decision to charge for it or not. If a modder makes $10k off a mod that was once free then obviously he was right to charge for something that had market value, and we were all being assholes for convincing him it only had value being free.

BRB while I register the Crimson Corporation under my name.

Oh look, I just purchased the ownership and exclusive rights to a gas mixture comprised of 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen and 1% various other gases. There's a limited supply of it though, surely no one will mind if I start charging people for using it?
While I'm at it, I'm also gonna purchase this round-looking piece of property up there, it's giving off all this light and heat, that'll come in handy for the upcoming energy crisis.

What, I don't have a right to charge people for using MY air and MY sunlight? I went through a lot of effort to secure those rights, you better damn well pay up or I'll have you arrested for theft! Entitled little piece of scum!

...

This is what the combination of capitalism, libertarianism and plain old greed leads to: If there's money to be made from it, then you must pay.

It's because people like you have allowed everything to be monetized that everyone having to pay for air and sunlight is not a piece of fiction, but an inevitable fact. I'm obviously not saying that all money should die, but the decision of whether something's free or not rests with us, not them. We choose what we pay for, not them. If they charge for something we don't wanna pay for, we don't fucking buy it.

Pretty much every one of us are to blame for things being as they are today, but people like you are further ahead in the blame queue for saying "There's nothing wrong with this!"

Hocking air, sunlight, or I guess Legos as someone mentioned earlier, aren't really the same as creating something and then trying to sell it. You've gone way too far extreme to set an example here.

Modders would have more than likely sold their products if they could have, but the fact is it just wasn't a possibility until recently, the same way the indie games market exploding wasn't a possibility until recently.

And yes, you don't buy what you don't want to buy. That's pretty basic. I didn't buy DLC for years and years, and I presumably won't be buying mods left and right, either. (Most likely never, actually, unless something like Long War goes up for sale.)

The decision of whether something is free or not rests with its owners. What if I think your car is free? Do I just fucking take your car? That decision rests with me? Nah man, it rests with the creators or the owners. Like I said, if they want to charge $10 for horse cock, let them. If the market says $10 horse cock is worth $10k in sales, whose fault is that? Certainly isn't yours or mine's. Are we supposed to blame Valve for revealing the monetary value of $10 digital horse cock? Do we blame the modder for bestowing upon us the uncomfortable truth that $10 horse cock is worth thousands? Nah. It's nobody's fucking fault. It just is. If you or somebody else can't go off and make some digital horse cock on your own and sell it for free, then maybe that dude's $10 cock really is worth $10.

 

[svvvs]

Im gonna charging plants for my carbon dioxide output it a air mod for plants to enjoy photosynthesis more.

 

[agentorange]

I'll just leave this right here shall i

http://garry.tv/2015/04/24/paying-for-mods/

Admiral jimbob

"It’s bought me two houses, a bunch of cars. It’s created a company that has hired 30+ people."



30 plus person company? What do they need that many people for? They've released Garry's Mod, which was a mod and didn't get that much new content for the retail version, and Rust - some half finished perpetual early access multiplayer survival thing.

 

[Destroid]

I'll just leave this right here shall i

http://garry.tv/2015/04/24/paying-for-mods/

Admiral jimbob

I bet the Gmod guy gets better than 25%.