5 ms·

> I don't really get why giving only 25%? Valve took their ~30% platform charge, and left the remaining amount to be split per the discretion of the publisher

by clinth 11y ago

> I don't really get why giving only 25%? Valve took their ~30% platform charge, and left the remaining amount to be split per the discretion of the publisher of the game, in this case Bethesda. Bethesda chose to give mod makers roughly 1/3 of the money left, resulting in a final split of Valve 30 / Bethesda 45 / mod author 25.

bontoJR 11y ago
It was more a financial question honestly, I know the split was btw Bethesda and Valve, but I can't justify why a 75% should go to Valve and Bethesda. That's the key point, I can understand the 30% of Valve, it's actually a samilar rate of other stores/platforms, but what's the financial necessity of the publisher? I mean, the game has been already released, it's making money and mods are usually a very high sales pusher (if well made, e.g. Counterstrike for Half Life). Why keeping 45%? I can't see any financial justification for such a higher rate, I would understand a 10%, max 15%, but no more.
- Alphasite_ 11y ago
  Valve provides hosting, advertising, support, billing etc. Bathesda is essentially providing licensing for the ip and taking a risk they you mod won't harm their product or users, also a little bit of plain old capitalism. Frankly I'm okay with this, it creates a monetary incentive for publishers to create modding Apis etc which can only help in the long run.
masklinn 11y ago
Ah that explains the 25%, I saw references to it but had no idea how that had come to be. So Valve's base offer was a standard 30/70 cut, the issue is the game publisher got to decide of the split for the 70%, and Bethesda decided they deserved the vast majority of it.
ohitsdom 11y ago
Honest question- why should Bethesda get any money from mod sales? You need to have purchased the game to use the mod, and mods add something to the game experience that Bethesda didn't have to pay for themselves.
- probablyfiction 11y ago
  Because modders are using Bethesda's copyrighted intellectual property as the base for their mods. Bethesda deserves a cut because it's their IP.
  - speeder 11y ago
    Still, Bethesda is notoriously greedy... I think many people still remember their Horse Armour DLC.
    - nazgob 11y ago
      This silly item kickstarted whole DLC market. I'm not saying its a good or bad thing but its a very big market now.
  - stevejones 11y ago
    They already got their cut for the use of their IP.
  - LMAlVvQjSGj 11y ago
    How are all mods using Bethesda IP? Surely one could make a simple sphere, import it to the game (and any other game) and call it a mod.
    - donatj 11y ago
      It's the same as making a remix of a song. The base of your new version is still the original authors work, so the author deserves a cut. A mod is akin to a remix of the game, and that remix is still mostly Bethesda assets, not to mention running atop their engine.
      - yincrash 11y ago
        The game still has to be paid for to play the mod. Bethesda _already_ got their cut when the user paid for the game before even considering the mod.

by clinth 11y ago

bontoJR 11y ago

It was more a financial question honestly, I know the split was btw Bethesda and Valve, but I can't justify why a 75% should go to Valve and Bethesda. That's the key point, I can understand the 30% of Valve, it's actually a samilar rate of other stores/platforms, but what's the financial necessity of the publisher? I mean, the game has been already released, it's making money and mods are usually a very high sales pusher (if well made, e.g. Counterstrike for Half Life). Why keeping 45%? I can't see any financial justification for such a higher rate, I would understand a 10%, max 15%, but no more.

Alphasite_ 11y ago
Valve provides hosting, advertising, support, billing etc. Bathesda is essentially providing licensing for the ip and taking a risk they you mod won't harm their product or users, also a little bit of plain old capitalism. Frankly I'm okay with this, it creates a monetary incentive for publishers to create modding Apis etc which can only help in the long run.

masklinn 11y ago

Ah that explains the 25%, I saw references to it but had no idea how that had come to be. So Valve's base offer was a standard 30/70 cut, the issue is the game publisher got to decide of the split for the 70%, and Bethesda decided they deserved the vast majority of it.

ohitsdom 11y ago

Honest question- why should Bethesda get any money from mod sales? You need to have purchased the game to use the mod, and mods add something to the game experience that Bethesda didn't have to pay for themselves.

probablyfiction 11y ago
Because modders are using Bethesda's copyrighted intellectual property as the base for their mods. Bethesda deserves a cut because it's their IP.
- speeder 11y ago
  Still, Bethesda is notoriously greedy... I think many people still remember their Horse Armour DLC.
  - nazgob 11y ago
    This silly item kickstarted whole DLC market. I'm not saying its a good or bad thing but its a very big market now.
- stevejones 11y ago
  They already got their cut for the use of their IP.
- LMAlVvQjSGj 11y ago
  How are all mods using Bethesda IP? Surely one could make a simple sphere, import it to the game (and any other game) and call it a mod.
  - donatj 11y ago
    It's the same as making a remix of a song. The base of your new version is still the original authors work, so the author deserves a cut. A mod is akin to a remix of the game, and that remix is still mostly Bethesda assets, not to mention running atop their engine.
    - yincrash 11y ago
      The game still has to be paid for to play the mod. Bethesda _already_ got their cut when the user paid for the game before even considering the mod.