The public selling their mods.

Emerick

Hi,

First off I have to say that I am not against people earning money from their labor. While some of people will give some time for no pay it shouldn't be expected all the time. Secondly: one of the most liberating aspects of the internet, as well as the movement of information, is that individuals who don't have access to industrial processes or who want to be self-employed can, by themselves, make small things and find a large enough distribution to sell them and earn a living wage. Or at least pocket money. (I have a cousin who earns a bit of cash knitting scarves and bags and selling them online. Good for her). I think it's great that something so modern has revived something as old as the cottage-industry.

So I don't have a problem with Beamdog releasing new content and charging for it. But I was wondering if Beamdog were going to allow others to do the same, or is it a closed shop?

My ideal would be to allow people to sell. It could either be utterly open (mods could even be sold on eBay), or it could a moderated, vetted process much like Apple have for apps.

I like my mods. The more the merrier. I think, commericially, they increase the appeal and longevity of a game. I think allowing people to make a career of it while controlling a standard can only be a good thing, as it would result in good mods. (Especially with BG2:EE on the horizon.)

I haven't found this discussed elsewhere, but if it has please point me in the right direction. What is Beamdog's stance on this?

Tschakong

The big problem has to be: There has to be a quality control for mods. I think most players won't pay for any mod, that is not fully reviewed, checked for bugs and for gameplay.

For example: I won't install any mods that don't fit into the game itself, like the black pits of the official game. I don't like it, because it's not implemented into the game itself.

For good written mods i would pay money, but there's no way to see whats a good mod and whats not, especially if its a new one.

Just my perspective of the problem.

Severon

I would agree with Tschakong. If I were to pay for a mod, it would have to be largely bug free, as well as reasonably up to date. No point in paying for a mod if its no longer compatible.
I admire the people who do mod the game and greatly appreciate the time they invest in doing so. Perhaps what could be setup is donations towards the mod makers.

I think also another issue is the fact that if modders did get paid, would they be under the same contractual limits that beamdog was under?

Emerick

Tschakong said:

The big problem has to be: There has to be a quality control for mods. I think most players won't pay for any mod, that is not fully reviewed, checked for bugs and for gameplay.

I agree that quality has to be maintined. But if this is a problem then it's there to be solved. And if it's a big problem then break it down into smaller bits.
A document could be written that lays out expected standards. It could even define a 'house style' to keep everything in harmony. This is standard business practice.
If it's a matter of gaining the public trust before they will hand over there money, well that one has been around since the first person paid for a theater ticket in ancient Greece. This is why we have beta-testers, reviewers and critics.

You have highlighted the major concern of the customer so I hope I'm not sounding glib. And it's good that it was mentioned first. But the problem isn't unsolvable.

If you want a big of sage advice: the difference between success and failure isn't inspiration or persperation or whatever blah Edison came off with, it's the difference between the problem-solvers and the, well, err... non-problem-solvers type people.

mars0124

I suppose it would be a to easier to sell mods for the original Baldur's Gate as it isn't currently promising to change, subsequently breaking mods.

Emerick

Severon said:

I admire the people who do mod the game and greatly appreciate the time they invest in doing so. Perhaps what could be setup is donations towards the mod makers.

I think also another issue is the fact that if modders did get paid, would they be under the same contractual limits that beamdog was under?

I'm not sure how effective donations are. And it's just shifting the boundaries between not paying someone for work and charity.
The contractual thing would need addressed. That's why I was wondering what Beamdog's stance was. If everything was sold through the website as per their own additional content then they would, in effect, be sub-contracting. And that's not unusual.

Cuv

Emerick said:

So I don't have a problem with Beamdog releasing new content and charging for it. But I was wondering if Beamdog were going to allow others to do the same, or is it a closed shop?

It's a closed shop. Overhaul has a contract with Atari and WotC that allows them to create new content. Mods by definition modify game files which is and has always been a violation of the EULA that each player accepts when purchasing a game or other software. This has never been enforced by the IP holders due to the game's popularity. Modders have been allowed to create content and distribute for the games for free and taking responsibility for the content on themselves. Once someone asks for money for mod work, that opens up a whole can of worms you do not want to see opened unless that modder has obtained specific permissions and obtained their own contract with Atari and WotC, and now Overhaul (since they hold the current rights to distribute the game). Once the EULA gets enforced, it will ruin and stop modding for everyone.

Emerick said:

I haven't found this discussed elsewhere, but if it has please point me in the right direction. What is Beamdog's stance on this?

The reason you don't see this discussed is because these threads get shut down.