75% to Valve sounds extremely greedy - I tried finding the share that phone app developers get (because it seems like a fairly equivalent thing), it seems to be 70% to the developer, 30% to the App store.

So this is the new, less funny version of the Hitler videos?
Jesus, at least Hitler had a decent performance.

As for paid mods, if this means mod developers can get paid for their work, I'm all for it. Those that do it "for the love of it" can still do so, but hey, no need to mention that in the video.

As for the 25% figure, the maths are actually pretty simple. Valve takes a 30% cut of everything sold through Steam. This is standard industry practice as @ghark pointed out.

For the remaining 70%, it is up to the publisher of the game to set the split. In this case, Bethesda decided to split the remain 70% 45/25.

Anyway, they've already rolled back this feature so we can add "out of date" to unfunny, unoriginal and disingenuous on the list of this videos attributes.

I'll give you 2/10 for troll effort ChaosEngine

@ChaosEngine

"at least Hilter had a decent performance" ..wtf... really?

You sound like Comic book guy, with an even greasier ponytail.

Chill out bruh

@NaMeCaF I'm not trolling; the video is shit. It's boring, it's unoriginal and it's wrong. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way, right?

And yeah @GenjiKilpatrick, Bruno Ganz was amazing in Downfall, so at least the scene actually works. This just sucks.

No, you definitely sound like you're trolling. But to give you the benefit of the doubt...

All meme-based clips can be said to be "unoriginal" but I found it funny and truthful. What about it do you think is "wrong"?

More steam does shit like this more I hit the torrents

First, it doesn't mention that paid mods are optional. It's up to the mod developer to decide whether they want fixed price, free or pay what you want.

Second, Valve doesn't get 75%, they get 30%. The remaining 70% is split at the discretion of the publisher (again, in this case, Bethesda, who decided on a 45/25 split). src

First Valve gets 30%. This is standard across all digital distributions services and we think Valve deserves this. No debate for us there.

The remaining is split 25% to the modder and 45% to us. We ultimately decide this percentage, not Valve.

I mentioned that pretty clearly in the description. And it wasnt originally going to include pay what you want until the backlash started.

I also never said Valve gets the full 75%. They get their cut and the publisher of the game gets the remainder. Dont you think if their real intention was for the mod maker to make a living off their work the split would be 70-30 in favor of the mod maker? They're clearly shortchanging the mod-maker giving them only 25% and taking the rest. Which is of course going to make the mod-maker push up their price so they see more money.

Implementing built-in donations option for all mods on the workshop of which 70%-80% goes to the mod maker and the rest to Valve and the game maker makes much more sense. It doesn't close off or segregate the modding community and is a more democratic way of making sure the good, quality mods get promoted and get more money than shit, money-grubbing mods.

Bethesda has as much blame here as Valve do. And besides, both see they were completely wrong on doing this...

https://np.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/3434it/paid_mods_in_the_steam_workshop/

"We missed the mark pretty badly"

Actually, you seem to have said it's up to Valve and the game developer (also Valve often enough), not the mod developer. Did I misunderstand?

True, you didn't do a break down of the 75% (apparently actually 70%?)....but in the case of Valve games, Valve gets 75% (70%?) and the mod developer 25-30%.

The mod maker seems to not get the option of making their mod free...at least that's how I read your description and took the video.
It makes sense to me that the mod maker only gets 25-30%....they only worked with the tools that the game developer spent hundreds of thousands-millions to develop. I think if you count total man hours to create, they would be getting over paid quite a bit at 25%. It's like saying people who write fan fiction should get 75% of anything they can make, and the series creators and distributers should split what's left.

I think they should leave it up to the mod developers how much to charge, but I can support the split. If you make a good mod that 100000 people 'buy' for $10, you just made $250000 for what amounts to playable 'fan fiction' made at home on your free time.
Just how I see it.

i hate steam. avoid it when i can. its fulll of absolute rubbish and all valve care about is releasing as much on it as possible wether its dross or great. its mostly rubbish thats released on there. too many "indie" rushed money grabbing amateurish titles. valve are greedy and care not for the gamers nor quality!

What's the first paragraph of the description say?

"...making Workshop mods now have the *option* for the developer to lock them behind a paywall..."

I understood it to be 25% goes to the mod maker and the remaining 75% goes to valve and bethesda (splitting to 30% to valve and 70% to bethesda). But maybe its 30% to valve then 70% to mod maker and bethesda (splitting it into 25% to mod maker and 75% to bethesda)? Either way its stupid.

Do you think auto repair and service centers should pay the car companies a percentage of their profits when they paint your car or make modifications to it?

The fact is modding has been grand for the last 30+ years without anyone doing it for the money. Some have gone on to make full games based on their mods and sold them, and there's no problem with that, because the mod still remains free.

Game companies like Bethesda release mod tools because it is good business for them. It extends the life of their games, grows their community and brings in more people who buy their games FOR the mods. Just go and have a look on the Nexus to see how many mods there are for the Elder Scrolls and Fallout games.

Both Valve and Bethesda are now just in PR mode and trying to put out the fires. Do you think their sole intent was purely for the money to go to the mod makers like they say? Then why is the split so heavily in their favor and the mod makers are getting a pissy 25%. Its contradictory.

And if you think it's "playable fan-fiction" then you obviously have no idea what you're talking about

Yes, but who's the developer...developer of what? The game, or the mod? If that means the mod developer has the option, that's better.
I read it as 25-30% to Valve/Steam...the remaining 70-75% to be split between the game creator, and the mod creator, on a split to be determined by the game creator, usually giving the mod developer what amounts to 25-30% of the total. That seemed fair to me, since that means the work product is worth 75% of selling price, and the original creator did way more than 2/3 of that work...meaning the mod developer gets a great deal at 25%.
Auto repair is not analogous. Making a replica/kit car is closer, and I believe they do pay royalties...certainly replica car makers do. If the mod makers were fixing the game, that would be different, but they are not. Shelby and Ford had contracts where they shared profits, as do many other professional car modders.
It is a problem if someone takes a game, mods it, then sells the mod as if they created the entire thing...they did not. They used someone's work product to create something else. Without the original program, they would have nothing.
These companies are under no compulsion to allow mods, and if they believe charging for the privilege is a good business model, they have every right to try. I think it's a toss up. People expect them for free at this point, but developers have a right to demand payment for their product...and any new product based on their product.
Really, I have no idea what I'm talking about? I've played many a mod, and 'playable fan fiction' is an apt description to my eyes. (see Blood Dragon) It's taking a known series and skewing it in some way. What you end up with is BASED on the original, is created using the original as a 'template' (and in the case of games using the program itself), is using/riding the popularity of the original to be seen at all, and would not exist without the original. To me that's pretty damn close.
I think it's actually more analogous to plagiarism, which is actionable...or may be condoned and/or licensed....but it's up to the creator of the original to decide that.

@ChaosEngine

First world fuckin'.. PROOOBLEMs.

That's my new song. I made it to remind everyone that.

OMFG complaining about the inaccuracy of a parody is pedantic as fuuuck.

But I mean.. that's what the Sift is all about, it seems.

@NaMeCaF I enjoyed the vid. Even tho I already knew about the situation from @EMPIRE's Factual Gamer vid.

But you probably have a problem with all the facts in that vid too. Not factual, enough.

"The performance from the Valve & Bethesda guys IN REAL TIME was WAAAY more factual" right?

I find it baffling how poorly thought out and executed this was.

Skyrim? Ok, I get that it's got the largest mod scene, but if they'd done their research they'd know that a lot of Skyrim mods have complicated inter-dependencies with script extenders, assets borrowed from other mods, other mod resources such as animation behaviors or skeleton rigs, patches for compatibility, load order management, SkyUI....the list goes on.

The cynical part of me thinks that they knew their micro-transaction model wasn't really a good fit, but they just wanted to see if they could get away with it. Donations or a Patreon type of system would seem to fit modding a lot better, but I don't think Valve or Bethesda can make themselves the middlemen in that arrangement nearly as easily.
The naive part of me thinks that perhaps they just badly misjudged this...I'm not sure that level of incompetency is really better.

I'd love to see some of the more prolific modders able to make it a fulltime profession, if not just so they could hire some decent voice talent...

The way it was set up, the mod developer did have the choice whether to charge or not. The final price point was also at the mod developer's discretion.

The 25% figure sounds low, but it's the same cut that developers of hats and skins for TF2 and Dota 2 get for their sold items--and there are people making a living at it.

Also, after Valve's 30% cut, the Bethesda looked at what a fair breakdown of what was left would be. Valve--30 Bethesda--45, and modder--25. If you just look at the portion after Valve takes its cut, Bethesda took 65% of what was left, and the modder took 35%. Which is typically what a development studio gets back from sales from a game publisher.

The 25% sounds really low if you're not familiar with how this kind of thing usually works, but it's actually about what content creators typically get when they're given a percentage from a publisher. It's a lot higher than some industries--authors usually only get 10-15% royalties on book sales, and even then only after the first 10,000 books sold.

I was fine with the pay for mods, no issues what so ever. Valve was going to offer tip jars and pay what you want options, and as with all valve things they'd be tweaked after launch... and as always, it was an option, not forced on anyone.