But is it though if I am content with the value received for the money paid? The fact that I was able to get all content (whether sliced off or not) for less than the price I was paying in 2008. The time delay doesn’t bother me since I barely have time to play and frequently am behind. Again I was happy to purchase that title on release which is skewing my example a bit. I could of easily waited the full 7 months to pick up the title and all DLC for far less then what I paid in my example. Games have a very long tail now and we all enter at the point where personal value meets interest.
No one is talking about whether you are happy with your purchase or not - We are talking about whether the trend we are seeing here is beneficial to the consumers, and whether you end up paying more to get the full game contra pre-2009.
I have a lot of concerns with Valve’s approach on paid for mods, including what looks like a complete hands off for any responsibility in the role they played in that fishing mod issue… however, it’s not exactly fair to point to one trend and ignore another. When large publishers start moving in a direction consumers don’t like this presents opportunity in the market. Paradox has an interesting take on DLC, although I don’t really know where they stand on paid for MODs, or where some Song of Fire and Ice mod might stand should anyone actually try to profit from that clearly copyrighted material, but it seems like when someone comes in with a half-ass game, tries to load DLC on top of that while only somewhat fixing it… they open the doors for a game like Skylines to be hugely successful.
I almost never looked at indie type or small scale games years ago. I look at them all the time now that the triple AAAs are producing less satisfying experiences for high prices and loading all their games with nickle and dime DLC.
So maybe from the triple AAA perspective, season passes, an endless parade of rather expensive DLC, and game of the years no longer being a complete experience might happen… but games like Don’t Starve (and Together), SkyLines, Trine and the fact that consumers can play games on pretty good settings on hardware that is four or more years old. Things are looking pretty good for the consumer in the PC front at this point.
It’s not that hard to do it these days. That small corner is most of the games that are actually good.
I really believe the AAA business model that is doing all of these tactics- is ultimately going to implode solely due to the effective cost of their games becoming so high people can’t buy more than 1 or 2. I think some of this money-gouging that’s been going on has been a function of people buying fewer mega-monster games and playing the ones they have longer.
I’m not worried about PC gaming in general. I do think it could survive Valve hitting itself over and over with massive idiot balls, there are competitors who would gain from it (especially GOG)
I think I understand what you are saying and agree. With sales and my backlog, I don’t even notice DLC because I get it all at once. Only ME2 and 3, have been out of my reach. And truly, it means more support for a game rather than wait for a full length sequal.
I don’t agree with that at all. Despite some appalling business practices and the steady erosion of customer rights, many of my favorite gaming experiences remain outside that corner. And they’d be even better if people had taken a stand to prevent those practices and that rights erosion to begin with. Like we have a chance to do now, with modding. I just don’t think people will in this case either.
I’m not worried about PC gaming’s existence either (well, maybe a little, but only because of the amount of server-requirement DRM). Only its scope and quality of life.
Modders are like volunteer workers. They do it for the good feeling of creating enjoyment for others. It is an art form (most of the time), and it is made for all to use freely. That’s one of the differences between mods and DLC. Mods are made for fans by fans of games. Another difference with charging for DLC and mods is that many games have DLCs that are like expansion packs. Origin did it decades ago with Ultima VII add ons (Forge of Virtue and Serpent Isle). Dragon Age Inquisition recently did it with Jaws of Whatever. So dropping around $20 for these is feasible. But with mods, many people will add dozens of mods to a game. $20 will not cover even 1/4 of the mods people use now if they had to pay for each one. How many mods have you downloaded ever? 200-300? Imagine the extra money for that so you can see naked people in Skyrim ;) ?
Last random thought: Valve should not suddenly monetize mods that are currently free. Duh. Instead they should commission mod makers to create Valve Mods ™ that are created specifically for games through Steam that they can charge for. So you can either download mods made by the community for the community, or buy Valve mods that are not repackaged, pre-existent mods, but are more like DLC that Valve puts out. This way they can commission consultants to create mods for them (or the modern can pitch their idea to Valve) and modern can make money. Hopefully there would be quality control this way, and modders who cannot successfully pitch their mod can release it as normal. Modders get respect and money well deserved, but the integrity of the community is not destroyed by bigwig pigs in suits with lustful dollar signs in their eyes.
I’ve said it before: this whole debacle is rooted in pure greed. Airlines used to give free food and it was horrible food. Then they started charging for meals on flights, but the food never got better. So Valve saying this will improve mods - I say bullshit to you Valve.
See, I read this, and I start to think, whose greed? I think it’s the greed of the consumer, insisting on free things from the community at no cost to them. Obviously, Besthada and Valve want to make a dollar or two, but in this case, the consumer is demanding stuff and not willing to pay for it. This whole volunteer thing is complete hot air, a rationalization for consumers who want more free stuff.
Artists (painters, musicians game designers, engineers) are always are doing what they love for the community or for fun. I’m sure that this was true of the Beetles, Rolling Stones, Andy Warhol, Michael Anglo or even Steve Jobs. Any artist you can name. I would think they were all motivated by something other than greed, because they loved their medium and enjoyed the attention or got laid. In the end though, they all charged for there labor. They still asked for a buck or two (or several thousand).
Now, because these thread already went down the Godwin route, I feel that this next statement is fair game.
Feeling upset about paying for someone else’s work when it was at one point free makes sense, it really does. I’m sure the plantation owners in the south felt the same way back during the civil war as well.
Sorry it was late and beer made me forget the ;) BUT what i did say was i’m against Valve (and Bethesda) taking a cut of the proceeds from other peoples modding work, certainly at the high levels they have set.
Just to get the full correct context of that. If say on the Nexus site you had a section for paid for mods (to go alongside the current normal free mods thing), and the authors of mods wanted to be paid, then no problem. And no problem on a ‘reasonable’ fee going to the Nexus for hosting the downloads etc. Reasonable is not 70% btw.
Or better if a mod author put up their mods on their own site (some of the bigger mods do this) and wanted to charge for them then ok. Donation options are ok too (i’ve donated to a few a number of years back for Morrowind). Now if the argument is that without (in this case) Bethesda, there would be nothing to mod, so they deserve something…well that is a bit different to what is going on here (i think). And yes maybe they do, but again only at a reasonable percent. If Bethesda are not happy with that then maybe they can employ the modder and give them health care etc? Or be reasonable in taking from others works that improve their own games most of the time?
Illegal. You want to sell stuff on top of someone else’s work? Better have an agreement with them. This is Bethesda setting the terms of that agreement.
I suspect, though no proof, that you’ll find the fees for working in other people’s worlds is steep anywhere you go (Star Wars, Marvel, etc). The bulk of the revenue will be going to the original creatorsowners. I actually wouldn’t be surprised if 25% is high for these kinds of things.
I have no idea if 25% to the modder, 25% to Valve, and 50% to the license-holder is fair or not. It’s not like modders had a choice previously on how much money they could legally make off their mods before.