Print

Add to Reputation:  

What do you think of this post?

I agree I disagree  
Comment:

[Rick Astley]

As you all are aware that Valve is Adding a pay for mods option for games such as Garry's  Mod and Skyrim and etc

http://au.ign.com/articles/2015/04/26/valve-adding-pay-what-you-want-option-to-steam-workshop-mods

So here is what I had for an idea what if you guys created maps for goldeneye source or weapon models (like the new models teased in the community update months ago) or even character models such as the new soldiers,etc

But port them first in Garry's mod as an exclusive for a couple of months so that fans can purchase them (personally since I use Garry's mod a lot I would certainly love to be able to create machinima using GES stuff like recreating the funhouse scenes from the man with the golden gun with cy's funhouse,etc)

I just thought it would be an idea to help fund GES in a different way, I know goldeneye assets would be tricky but I figured releasing character models like the scientist, soldiers with names, etc (original characters) would help you guys out and may generate some more interest in goldeneye source...even if it's a small thing

It's just an idea so yeah just thought I would ask you guys what your thoughts ?

[Torn]

For a free mod that has been going for 10 years now and has been largely praised by the modding community, I personally think it would be in poor taste to do something like that. The backlash at this new paid system Steam has implemented has been pretty strong. Whether you agree with this new system of theirs or not, there's no denying people are largely upset.

I personally think the implementation of it was poorly handled. Under the guise of "helping the modding community", the modders only get a 25% share of the profits, the rest going to Steam and (in this case) Bethesda. They say they will implement a "donate what you want" method also, but time will tell what happens. But I'm going off track here.

People would pay for assets in Garry's mod, to discover that those same assets have been offered for free as part of GE:S. I don't think it would do anything positive for the mod. Not to mention any legal issues there might be to dance around, which have been cautiously avoided for so long. But I'm no expert on the legalities of these things, so someone else could probably answer that part better than myself.

There's been tons of time and great work put into GE:S, and yeah it would be great to see people compensated in some way for that. But this new Steam system is a bad idea, and to risk being labelled as sellouts just to make a few quick bucks on Steam is the wrong way to go.

Anyways, that's my 2 cents on it.

[killermonkey]

I like the idea of putting "donations" in front of customers of free content, aka mods for games. It provides a lot of motivation for modders to put out a better product to elicit donations. Even if 10% of people gave $5 for this mod and/or specific content added to this mod we would see about $250,000 in donations over the past 10 years (roughly 500,000 downloads).

So taking my generous example, if only a handful donated $5, say 1%, we would have still seen $25,000! Now take valve's cut of 75% and we still have $6,250 which provides much left over money after considering expenses of website hosting and other errata.

[kraid]

Would still be a risky thing, because if money gets involved, it's more likely that some of the greedy IP holders would come after us.

If we'd do something for GMOD, all references to GES and the 007 IP would have to be removed.

Lots of the generic stuff you find in every game would be suitable.
Also the things modelled after real world references, as long as they are not iconic for the bond universe (golden gun) or based on an Actor who's likeness is recognizable on the character.

And what about the stuff made by artists no longer with us?

If you ask me, the possible legal issues that might come out of it and the odd taste of charging money (or begging for donations) for something that was released for free, overweights the benefit of a few extra bucks.

I'm also sure that Valve excluded content based on IPs of other companies from beeing sold through this.

[Mangley]

So far it's only Skyrim, and I'm willing to bet Gmod won't have paid mods on it's workshop for reasons below.

Our thing with Gmod has always been if people want to use GE:S content in it they can do so so long as it's for private use and they don't upload it anywhere.

Of course that doesn't stop people. Gmod is basically rampant with ripped content from virtually every popular game anyway, it's a mess.

I think it's safe to say we don't have any interest in this. Legally we could find a way to do it and not put the mod in any jeopardy but the amount of money we'd actually see is laughable and not worth the effort.

[Proxie]

Removing Payment Feature From Skyrim Workshop
http://steamcommunity.com/games/SteamWorkshop/announcements/detail/208632365253244218

[Rick Astley]

Would still be a risky thing, because if money gets involved, it's more likely that some of the greedy IP holders would come after us.

If we'd do something for GMOD, all references to GES and the 007 IP would have to be removed.

Lots of the generic stuff you find in every game would be suitable.
Also the things modelled after real world references, as long as they are not iconic for the bond universe (golden gun) or based on an Actor who's likeness is recognizable on the character.

And what about the stuff made by artists no longer with us?

If you ask me, the possible legal issues that might come out of it and the odd taste of charging money (or begging for donations) for something that was released for free, overweights the benefit of a few extra bucks.

I'm also sure that Valve excluded content based on IPs of other companies from beeing sold through this.

Yeah good point

[Rick Astley]

Sorry guys I just tried to find a reason to try and help out but yeah :/ maybe the pay for mods thing isn't the best idea (I'm against it but since I'm a big fan of GES I thought it could be a way of helping you guys out)

[Jonathon [SSL]]

Even if we somehow ever found any way to make money off the original content we've produced over the years, the logistics of the distribution among developers would be impossible. There are many developers who have content still in the mod but haven't been seen or heard from in years, others who have contributed a single large asset, or a large number of small assets scattered throughout the mod.

[Wake[of]theBunT]

Well anyone still not around shouldn't see any money even if they have assets in the mod still since they chose to move on and not keep a watch or continuing production in the mod (see retired developer list). For instance baron and spider and loafie. All have significant assets in the mod to this day. However fourtecks, km and luchador are active members who never really went cold on the mod would have shares, even if they did not produce content for months and years they were around.

This premise in action has been seen by the TEAM having the prerogative to give permission for assets to be used by 3rd parties asking for it, when the creator is known to be out of contact for approval. When someone goes off base intentionally or incidentally, we retain intellectual license over the content.

But i see your point.

[Kratos]

I agree about the IP holders. Too risky.