Official PC Thread

[Tain]

If the developers are cool with paid mods I'm cool with paid mods.

[Fe 26]

So it's 2003 again and we're paying for doom and start raft level packs again?

[YellerDog]

So it's 2003 again and we're paying for doom and start raft level packs again?

Is that like a River Raid prequel?

[Joust Williams]

LOL.

I didn't even know people paid for StarCraft packs. I had D!Zone...it let you randomize the objects in the maps. Cyberdemons would clip in the environment

[Some Stupid Japanese Name]

The modder gets 25% of the price, btw.

This is a most important observation.
This isn't being done for the modder's sake.

[Joust Williams]

So is technical support provided for these mods? I doubt it

[Yoshi]

This is a most important observation.
This isn't being done for the modder's sake.

I suspect that's the same cut they get on stuff like the TF2 hats. I'm not sure what cut you expect when you use someone else's IP and someone else's store and delivery system. I know digital authors that release books on iTunes only get 30% if they use a service to format and publish, so it's hardly out of line with precedent.

I guess the fact that Gabe isn't running a charity is also an important observation.

[Frogacuda]

This is more or less what Epic was planning for the business model for Unreal Tournament 4. I don't really have a problem with it as long as all parties are on-board. It's kind of a good way for people to break into development, and maybe reinvest.

[Fe 26]

better be some awesome fucking shit, is all I have to say. Better be the best mods, ever.

[Some Stupid Japanese Name]

I suspect that's the same cut they get on stuff like the TF2 hats. I'm not sure what cut you expect when you use someone else's IP and someone else's store and delivery system. I know digital authors that release books on iTunes only get 30% if they use a service to format and publish, so it's hardly out of line with precedent.

I guess the fact that Gabe isn't running a charity is also an important observation.

It seems to me that the people doing the least of the work yet receiving the most of the reward would be the ones receiving charity, not the other way around.
Just because exploitation is the precedent doesn't make it correct.