Europa Universalis IV
10 days 3 hours
2 days 3 hours
Hearts of Iron IV
36 days 4 hours
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
10 days 12 hours
9 days 7 hours
And the rich are a lot richer than when they started a few centuries ago.
yep... and the poor are becoming homeless, and so are our vets becoming homeless as well... That number is rising too btw thanks to how poverty is big in my country.
These days? No one has liked price hikes EVER. People have been making the same complaints about the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer for literal centuries now.
I think to be honest, alot of people are still against "paid mods" because of income issues. Games are improving and adding in better things but our wallet is not... people hate going broke and hate it that we have so many more choices and possibly requirements to spend on, but our wallets and wages are still stuck in minimum wage land... now if we never was in minimum wage land, I think people will be more acceptable so they do have money to spend on things like this.
I think overall people just hate spending 60 bucks on a game in the future, plus addition 60 bucks if you want VR, and a certain amount of money to pay for some good mods you might considered a requirement to get the best experience, you probably spending 200 or 300 already on a single game, just like how normal people probably spend more then that on League of Legends or other games.
To answer one of your questions, yes, you have to pay 60 bucks to buy the game once again for VR, look at the steam page for Fallout VR... they putting a hefty price point for a VR re-released game.
Second off, like I said, the game industry is improving but our wallets are not, in reality we are stuck in minimum wage land, and many people can't afford alot of things, which is why you see alot more people complaining about paid mods more like it's a draconic symbol and how bethesda is making this greedy system just to make a quick buck out of the modding community that once was free since many decades. If you have not heard already, which is why there so much protest against this.
Games have slowly risen in price, climbing faster than inflation. There’s a limit to how much people can/want to invest into gaming, but there's also a value for everything. Mods at the moment are a way for avid fans to invest into the community and help develop/grow the game they love. There's a market for that, both the devs and the players benefit from this (increased content + increased sales). This is not something that would change. Content creators whose goal is to entertain (not profit) would continue the same way. Many modders are against paid mods, and there’d be no requirement for them to charge people for their content. The benefits for a system such as this though, are rather clear.
I believe the logic of paid mods is to increase the size of a games modding community. To offer a cash incentive to premium quality modders is an efficient way of drawing more modders to the scene, as well as improve the quality of the mods in general. New modders would appear and develop content for games that wouldn’t have existed without the cash incentive. It is not like the free mods community would notably shrink because of this platform, but instead that new content previously unfeasible for the mod community could now be produced to sell.
To talk about money, I’d have to start with correcting your off-predictions. To begin with, why do you believe you’ll have to buy the game twice to play it in VR? Are you accounting for the cost of VR hardware? Or is this Bethesda trying to charge again for Skyrim/Fallout VR. Either way, it is still arguable whether or not VR is the best experience, considering the low pixel-count for the large field-of-view the screen takes up. Also, for those willing to invest into a VR headset, I’m sure paid mods is not the largest addition to invest into. Then within the mods section, you seem to think it’ll cost you $100-200 to get the ‘premium experience’. Paid mods would not be something required. In just the same way as how you’d invest into LoL or a game’s official DLC, you don’t need to own a paid mod at the start of the game. You can comfortably buy it later should you find it has good reviews and like the look of the content, or should you decide otherwise you can always watch a Let's-Play to experience the content 2nd-hand. It's worth noting again that this paid content would not be available for free either way. You'd still have all your free mods available to download/enjoy, there'd be no shortage of content.
Modders are investing large amounts of their time and effort into content for people to enjoy. I can totally get behind a method for the mod creators to charge for their content, so long as the premium taken by the service provider isn't too high (personally, I think it should be the same as Steam's deal to devs: 70% goes to the modders, 30% to service providers + game producers). At the moment I agree that these platform providers are being greedy (as Braneman pointed out), but that does not change my stance on the matter: paid mods is something that should be offered to content creators. It will only improve the quality of the mods and increase the longevity of the games. To argue against a paid platform; requesting that people shouldn’t make more premium content because your scared it’ll make you invest more; seems idiotic to me.
The rest of the world don't like the paid mod, giving the middle finger to the devs who come up with this since the community believe that mods should be forever free, and Bethesda should keep their greedy hands off their mod access.
I think this was their third attempt on trying to introduced paid mods, and watch as this will ultimately backfire against them.
I found it so funny how people jumped to blame Bethesda for the paid mods front. They were never pocketing any money from the Steam's paid mods development. Valve was taking their standard rate for data holding/distribution, and the rest was going to the mod creators.
Problem is as you say: mods have been free up to this point, so nowadays people believe they are entitled to the things. Introducing a paywall would increase the range and depth of mods, resulting in a larger experience with more longevity to each game community. It is a plus for everyone, assuming the public stop throwing a tantrum over it, selling $1000 iron swords and other rubbish to try and abuse the system.
I believe this is what Bethesda are trying to do here: lock the mod list behind there own security checks, to ensure the market grows sensibly. If the modders taste the money, they should get interested enough to invest more into the game for people to enjoy. Conversely, if the paid mod list grows large enough with enough high quality new content, the public will start investing into it. A secondary currency sounds like a bad idea to me (using Gems/Coins instead of £/$) since it introduces a second paywall between the user and them owning the mod. Either way, we should hope this time they succeed. Introducing profits to the content creators is the way to fuel the economy's growth.
Ouch, yeah that would be horrible. I'm very hopeful any anti-cheat stuff MS bake into Windows will be restricted to online.
And even then probably just UWP games anyways!
Mass Effect has always been the 50+ hour epic RPGs. They even said this is there largest game yet