kryptopyr

I can't really blame him; I've certainly experienced similar feelings over the past week. However, as much as I'd like to deny all the selfish entitled users access to my free work, I can't do it without also denying that work to the (often silent) majority (I hope) of users who actually do respect and appreciate the time that goes into these mods. I wish there was a way to ban one group but not the other. I'm constantly impressed with how sensible and calm most discussions (even arguments) are on this site. It's a very welcoming atmosphere, and it has helped keep me sane when dealing with comments on Nexus.

I wondered about that. I was really surprised that MO wasn't on the list of service providers; it seemed like a rather blatant oversight (TES5Edit is another). I would have loved to list MO as a service provider for any mods I released. Your work certainly deserves some compensation.

Looks like hishutup beat me to it, but yeah, the fees are charged to the person who receives the payment, not the payee. It's actually I think it's 2.9% + $0.30 by default unless you've changed the settings to non-profit, which is 2.2% + $0.30 (I'm not positive about that, but I don't think non-profit is the default setting). Actually, most mod authors should be made aware that they can set their paypal accounts to 'micropayment' option, which will reduce the fee to 5% + $0.05. While the percentage is higher, the reduction in the flat fee makes this the better option if expected transactions are generally less than $10. Edit: turns out this option is only available if you have a business or premier account, which probably rules it out for most people. I've been thinking about writing an article about this to post on Nexus, but I'm worried it may be perceived as a request for donations. However, mod authors would benefit from knowing about this setting, and I think there is a lot of uncertainty from users about how exactly these transactions work (no surprise given that it's been something of a taboo topic to discuss donations).

That's correct. Donations are tied to the user's account, there's no way to tell which mod the donation was for (unless we get a comment from the user that mentions a specific mod). I suspect there are some major hurdles to refining the donations. Nexus would have to set up and start managing an entire payment/shopping cart system. I'm sure that would place a major burden on the site's overhead costs and management. As it currently stands, Nexus does not handle any of the money. They aren't involved in the transaction at all; it's a direct transfer through paypal. If Nexus started playing middleman, it might also trigger certain tax burdens, require a different type of business licensing, etc (I don't know any of that for certain, but it wouldn't surprise me).

Wow, I'm shocked they actually did that. Honestly, I would like to see them try again. They really do need to engage the community in a more ongoing way, talk to more modders, look at what is really involved in modding Skyrim, and figure out a way to make this truly work. The increased show of donations was pretty nice, but I also suspect that it's now over and donation rates will once again flatline. I also hope this prompts Nexus to continue thinking about adding a shared ad revenue system for mod authors. I hope I'm proven wrong, but I just don't think the donation system is ever going to prove particularly sufficient as a means of financial support for mod makers.

I definitely agree with you on that. Compatibility concerns are something that both mod users and mod makers should be aware of, even more so with paid content. Personally, I wouldn't want to release a complex mod on Steam at all just for that reason. It won't stop others, of course, but there's going to be a bit of a learning curve for everyone involved. I think mod reviews and mod guides will become even more important to help users navigate which mods can be used together. I also suspect that newer mod authors may take it upon themselves to create and release patches for their mods and the larger, popular mods as a way of boosting their own mod's ratings. This is already what tends to happen on Nexus (in general, at least, not necessary in every case). Edit: I think Z's analogy is probably dead on.

Yes I can. Purchasing a mod entitles them to certain expectations of support. The author should make sure the mod works as advertised and be active in addressing any bugs or problems within that mod. It does not, however, entitle them to the mod author's infinite time or the expectation that the mod author will drop everything and spend hours and hours of additional time to support compatibility with every other mod out there. That's completely unreasonable, and that level of support cannot be expected from any purchase of any item costing a few dollars or less.

That sounds amazing! It shouldn't have to fall to outside utilities to rescue Steam from itself, but all the more power to you for attempting to do it. Having MO manage Steam mods in that way could actually make its system semi-functional.

I feel if you're charging for a mod, then you are responsible for providing a certain level of support. However, I do not believe that creating compatibility patches for other authors' mods fall under an author's required responsibilities, regardless of whether or not they charge for their mod. Mods that conflict with other popular mods may have their value decreased if compatibility patches aren't made available, but neither author is required to provide that compatibility. I would see such efforts as providing exceptional support for their mod, but it's beyond the baseline support and customer service that a paid customer should expect to receive by default.

I've never played Unity either...sort of my point though. I wouldn't pay $5 for that game after everything I've heard (though, to be fair, I'm also not a AC fan). You may have a point about Civ. I'm not overly familiar with that franchise, just going off of what my husband has said. I'm willing to concede that it might not have been the best example. However, again, my primary point is that it will continue to fall to the game developers to make a game that is good enough (or in this case, different enough) that people want to buy it. We got the new Civ for free as part of a special offer. My husband, as much as he loves the Civ games, felt the same way you did. He wasn't willing to purchase the new game based on the reviews and what he'd read about it.

Because the base game still has to be good enough for people to want to buy, play, and mod it. Here's an example. My husband likes Civ. The last Civ game (Beyond Earth, I think it was called), didn't do very well. The game before that had a fairly active modding community and some nice mod options available to change the game. The newer Civ:BE seems pretty decent at it's core, but from what I've seen and heard about it, it sounds like it was released only 90% finished. It's just missing a lot of the polish that the game before had. As such, there is much less interest in the game, and modders don't seem to be producing very much content for it, even though you could argue that it would really benefit much more from mods than its predecessor. Now, the introduction of money will help encourage modders a bit, but modders who are inspired by the financial incentive are also going to want to devote their time to making mods for the most popular games. The game developer still needs to produce an initial game that is good enough and finished enough to grab the initial interest of users, get enough positive reviews that people are willing to purchase the game, and then develop enough of a following for the game that modders feel it is worth investing their time into modding it. Neither the modders who are in it because they love a game or those in it for the money, will be interested in modding a poorly made game that flops on release. Paid or not, how many modders do you think would have been willing to devote their time to fixing Ubisoft's Assassin Creed Unity?

Wow, that is pretty bad.

Yes. Many of the leveled actors use a 'template' actor that determines their base stats. If the actor in question uses a template, then this will be listed in the actor record. Also many of the stats and settings in that actor's record will likely be grayed out since they are instead referencing the settings used by the template. You might need to track these connections to determine which bandits trace back to which templates, since there may be several base templates that control different types of bandits. There may also be bandits that, for one reason or another, don't use the templates or only use parts of the template record (there are check boxes that control which part of the template actor gets referenced by a specific actor record, and anything not checked will be overwritten by the settings on the individual actor record). In these cases, you may need to individually edit those bandit records. Another tip for helping track where template actor records are used, is to right-click on the record and select the "used by" option. This will give you a list of other records that are referencing that actor record.

I'm a bit torn about the pop-ups in Midas Magic. On one hand, pop-up adds in a free mod seems pretty awful. On the other hand, people have been objecting to the 24 hour trial period (with refunds being given as Steam credit and not a true refund) as too short and limiting to fully try out a mod. Or the restrictions that paid mods place on modders who might want to double-check compatibility or other issues between mods. I don't necessarily see this as a ridiculous compromise. It's not really a free mod with pop-up adds. It's a free unlimited trial version for the paid mod. Maybe that wasn't the author's intention here, but I can see gimmicks like this as one way for modders to legitimately offer less restrictive, no money changing hands, trail periods for their mods.

There are a lot of different variables that affect NPC. There's of course the actor records, but also their race, class, factions, and combat styles. All of these are different records. These pages describe what many of the different settings in the Actor records do, and where I'd recommend starting: https://ck.uesp.net/wiki/Category:Actor https://ck.uesp.net/wiki/Stats_Tab Without more specific questions, that's about the best I can suggest.

I don't have a moral objection to offering a mod for a charge on one site and free on another, easily found and accessed site. Nexus is far from an obscure site, and so having a free mod there should make it fairly easy to find for anyone who bothers to look. Many people view Steam as easier and more convenient. They don't want to deal with mod managers or worrying about having to update their mods. Now we all know the downfalls to this, but regardless, that seems to be what some people prefer. You only have to look at how many people are still subscribing to the free mods on Steam to see this. If people view Steam as more convenient and are willing to pay for that, then that's their choice. While it's not a perfect analogy, I see it a bit like deciding whether to get a book for free at the library or order it on Amazon. Also, there is an additional value you get when purchasing a mod from Steam...the guarantee that you will continue to have access to that mod. How many of us have been disappointed when we see a great mod disappear unexpectedly from Nexus? By purchasing from Steam, you are paying for the assurance that no matter what happens elsewhere, you'll be able to continue using that mod. And on the matter of Valve refusing to remove mods, this is their standard policy, not just for mods but applies to the big game companies as well. If a company removes their game from Valve's store, those titles will remain available for users who bought them before removal. I think this is fair. If you've purchased a game and it becomes unavailable later, you shouldn't lose the right to continue using that game. If Steam didn't guarantee that, then everyone would be insisting on physical copies of their games instead of direct downloads, and Steam's wouldn't be able to even exist in the form it does. Edit: I do see it as the responsibility of the mod author to make sure their mods, and any updates to those mods, will work within the automatic update system that Steam uses. Any mods uploaded for sale should be designed with this consideration in mind. That definitely is something I'd feel largely responsibility for and would want to assure my customers that future updates won't cause issues with their current game.

Shoot, I guess I finally let my true nature slip.

Yeah, I'm hoping it calms down before we lose more good modders. I'm really tempted to upload something to steam to lure those idiots to my mod pages where I would have the ability to ban them from ever using any of my free mods.

Well, I'm beginning to agree. The 'community' on Nexus is really starting to show it's true colors. Not that mod users have ever been particularly appreciative, but these attacks on mod authors are a terrible reflection on what this 'community' really stands for. Honestly, I'm not sure I really want much part of that community anymore.

I do understand that the worst comments are all coming from a very vocal minority (hopefully?) of users, but even the comments that aren't outright abusive or threatening are still pretty unsupportive of the mod authors. The whole "we've got to protect these poor modders from themselves" attitude is getting really tiring. I don't think Chesko, Isoku or any of the others needed to be protected. They knew the terms, agreed to the terms, and were apparently willing (if not necessary completely happy) to abide by those terms. That was, and should be, their right and their choice. It's not up to the community to make that choice for them or any other individuals and then to claim they are protecting those poor, naive modders from the greedy, villainous companies. Just don't buy the mods if you don't want to support this system. Straight donations will always be better for the mod authors, no question about that. But if some people wish to give this system a try, as a producer or consumer, then that should be their right, and they shouldn't have to put up with being treated as a pariah by the modding community.

Are you kidding? The abusive idiots who are "protecting" this community are the ones driving these modders away. While Valve and Bethesda may not be acting particularly noble (they do appear to have taken Chesko's mods down in the end, though), why don't we stop blaming them for all the crap the community is bringing on itself. And did you fully read schlangster's comment? It sounds like the ONLY reason we're even getting a SkyUI update is because of the financial incentive. It's not something they were planning to do and then just decided to release it as a paid mod. You aren't losing out on something you could have otherwise had for free. The update was planned only after finding out there was some additional incentive for investing several weeks of their time into making it. The update would not exist at all if it wasn't for this move.

All this speculation about the legalities and what Valve will and won't do in certain circumstances will get worked out (for better or worse). I'm positive that Bethesda and Valve have had their lawyers looking into these issues long before they made this decision. This isn't something they did blindly, and I'm sure they've already considered and have at least some idea of how to address most, if not all, of these issues. For all of the anger directed at Valve, I think some of the things they've done show a real interest in truly wanting to support the modding community. The ability to list contributors and designate a share of the proceeds is an incredibly important feature, even if we're currently a bit uncertain how this will work on a practical level. The fact that they've already considered the importance of community provided tools and other utilities and have allowed modders to designate a portion of Valve's revenue to go toward these service providers is another positive sign. I think this will end up being a good, or at least neutral, change to the modding community. I think the vast majority of smaller mods will remain free (and if not, then other people will come along and make free equivalents). However, this could well provide the added incentive for modders to create more large, dlc-quality mods, and I think that would be great thing. Edit: I completely agree with Phyree56's comment.

Ah, with the follow up about the job, I just assumed that's what you meant. My life is currently in a somewhat transitional and uncertain stage, mostly because of some major changes involving my husband's career. I expect that within the next few years I'll be doing a lot more travel where I might be gone for weeks or months (maybe years) at a time. I can't take on the responsibility of a pet if I'm likely to be leaving for long periods like that. Not only would it not be fair to the animal, but I wouldn't want to have to keep asking my friends or family to provide pet care services. And for the record, I'm a dog person. Though I've known some pretty wonderful cats.

Because I like my current job (I just miss the 'well-paying' part). I do a hodgepodge of things, but my primary source of income comes from creating digital patterns and other images, basically freelance graphic design.

Yep, it's not horrendous, but if someone wants to donate a dollar or less, than that flat $0.30 fee starts becoming a fairly significant percentage. Paypal does have a micropayment option as well (which is 5% + $0.05), but that depends entirely on how the mod author has their account set up, and I suspect most people just use the standard rate.