Good for consumers, this is a damn basic consumer right long coming. Any developer that has problems with this policy either adapts, by making demos, using other sales platforms, or whatever, or die.

All this drama about refunds reminds me how RIAA thought CDs would kill the music industry, or how MPAA thought VHS would kill the film industry, no, DVDs will kill it for sure!, no, the internet will kill it dead!!!

Or how publishers think the used game market is killing the industry.

This is relevant to this thread.

This was pretty underwhelming. The graphics are horrible for this day and age and I don't like the vibrant colors. Fallout was all about the greys and browns of a devastated landscape.

And yeah, no doubt this will be the game that will officially make the paid mods a permanent fixture, unfortunately.

Guess the Germany and EU policies regarding refunds have finally bore fruit. Good to see Steam drop their stupid refund policy for something more sensible at last.

Although I'm happy about FO4 happening, I can't but dread that Bethesda will use this to implement paid mods on Steam in a definitive manner.

After the clusterfuck that SimCity was one would think EA would not try the same trick twice. Then again, it's EA, of course they would do it again.

They even use the same fucking excuses, benefits for players. Soon they'll be saying it can't be played offline due to reasons.

Oh noes, I'm killing virtual people, I'm going to be arrested, oh noes!!!

It's a fucking game, it's not real. Next I will be told playing D&D will invoke almighty satan and damn my soul to eternity because witchcraft.

Good to see Cities: Skylines back after the patch. Even with W3 I still consider CS GOTY for me.

I played Bard's Tale I, II and III on my old C64 back in the day and loved every moment of them. Looking forward to this one.

So, is this out of Early Access yet?

MAME has come a long, long way. A great emulator that allowed me to relive a lot of my arcade life years, here's to more years of MAME.

Patch has literally broken the game. Users are complaining it wiped clean all their saved data, plus it fucked up the resolution of the game, it's now zoomed in so much it's unplayable.

In other news, the Banjo-Kazooey spiritual sequel broke the million pounds mark in just 6 hours.

As long as they ban all the cheater scum and not someone for posting a negative review or criticizing a game, I'm all for it.

Sepharo wrote on Apr 26, 2015, 16:15:
These Forbes blog things lend a bit of authority/professionalism where they shouldn't. Just some blogger dude. Not a real "Forbes" article.

He is absolutely correct in his assessment of the situation though.

Aero wrote on Apr 26, 2015, 14:13:
...but the sense of entitlement...

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

descender wrote on Apr 26, 2015, 11:58:

If Valve had put a donate button instead of a buy button I would be totally for it but the way this has been implemented is the worst way it could have been.

Why do people keep saying this? The modders CAN actually DO this but they are choosing not to.

Valve didn't put anything anywhere. They allowed the modders to reveal themselves for the greedy fucks that they are, and they jumped through that hoop feet first.

Yes, I agree, many modders have shown their true colors and you are correct that the burden on making a mod paid or not falls solely on the modders but god damn, the system implementation could have been a lot better. That's why I think this will be very bad because, as you've mentioned, modders can be greedy fucks and if enough of them become greedy fucks then the rest may be left with no other choice than to sell their mods as well.

Also, it appears Steam is under a very heavy DDoS right now, for at least one hour straight at least.

Cutter wrote on Apr 26, 2015, 11:16:

ASeven wrote on Apr 26, 2015, 10:49:

Aero wrote on Apr 26, 2015, 10:29:
I find lots of the uproar disappointing. Valve could be handling it better, but mostly what I hear (more elsewhere than here) is moaning from people who seem to feel entitled to other's peoples work.

This argument would be valid if mods hadn't been free these whole years and if the whole mod culture hadn't been founded in making mods for fun and NOT for profit.

I swear, most of the people who throw this stupid entitled argument are more often than not not modders. Not to mention each time someone uses the entitled word against consumers, they prove to be nothing more than idiotic mouthpieces of corporations that don't care for them. Useful idiots to sum them up.

But it's not because it's just not consumers but people in general, particularly the younger generations that feel self-entitled to everything under the sun. It's as if they should through life without ever being insulted or upset by anything.

And as it applies to consumerism it's no different. People deserve to paid for their work. That's a basic social tenet - time + labour = reward - unless they choose to volunteer it. Now, whether their work is considered to be actually worth anything at all is an entirely different matter. That's why the vast majority of people who think they're going to make a small fortune selling shit that would have otherwise been free are in for a rude awakening. It's why they have a donate button on Nexus, and why most people will choose that option on Steam.

It'll take a while to shake itself out and come back to equilibrium but it will. So relax and have a drink or something. No one is forcing anyone to do anything.

I wish I could share your optimism on this situation, I really do, but I think we both know full well that when you offer the promise of riches, or easy money, to a whole lot of people, in this case modders, in the long run everyone will be charging for their own mods. It's economical sense to do so in fact, why make a mod for free when you can charge for it and have people buy it, no matter how shitty it is? It's the factor of human greed I fear will destroy the modding scene and that's what's upsetting me a lot. I'm in my forties and have seen this scenario happen time and again so I know that once you introduce money into a system that sustained itself well without financial backing things change, drastically, for the worse, always.

In the long run it's economically illogical not to charge for mods and it's that scenario that worries me. If Valve had put a donate button instead of a buy button I would be totally for it but the way this has been implemented is the worst way it could have been.

Remember, people said that Greenlight and Early Access would also sort itself out and increase quality of the games that would be submitted to it and we know today that that isn't the truth. This is the same system, only with mods. It won't increase the quality of the mods, instead, much like Greenlight, it will open the door to a deluge of shitty mods, all trying to make a quick buck.

I just can't see this getting any better or coming back to an equilibrium, not unless there's a massive pushback.

HorrorScope wrote on Apr 26, 2015, 10:46:
Question: When I see a price for a mod. What that determined by the author and their choice? Or did Steam/Bethesda simple strong armed and said this mod now costs X? Thanks.

Their choice, but remember, 75% of the income goes to Valve and the publisher, they only see 25%, forcing them to jack up the prices even further.