The reason I don't like the auto-update is because I run usually 100+ mods. If I use the workshop, and it updates 25 mods out of my load order, now I've got to go through my entire list, figure out which ones updated, look up what the updates were, and run the updated mods through TESVEdit for cleaning. Much easier IMO to run the version check in NMM, see which mods have a new version, pull only those mods up, decide if I want to update or not, and run TESVEdit on only the mods I've updated.

And I understand the reason for waiting for the money to accumulate before paying out, but what happens if a mod only sells $350 or $375 worth, and sits there for 6 months or longer not making that $400 mark for the $100 payout? Does the mod author never get their money if the mod doesn't make at least $400? Or was there at least a "We'll pay out every $100 or Monthly if the minimum payout amount isn't reached" type deal?

Totally with you on supporting GoG though. I've rebought games I already own just to support them & have a DRM free copy.

Again, this isn't a fault with their update system, anymore than it is with the one everyone and his dog accepts for the games themselves without question. You can't even disable auto-update for games. You WILL be forced to update at some point and you'll be LOCKED OUT if you refuse and the client knows an update is pending.

No. The only actual problem is poorly made mods. It's not Valve's responsibility to know that you could have 50 compatibility patches. It's the responsibility of the mod author to do what they can to ensure their mod updates smoothly. If nobody does this because they're lazy and counting on NMM to save them, that's the real problem.

Where does this $400 thing keep coming from? The payout is based on the amount of money in the modder's account. When it hits $100, you get paid. They pay out the entire amount in there at the time too, they don't dribble it out in $100 chunks like some people claim. That would be insane because it would just cost them even more in transaction fees.

How is it the mod author's fault if a compatibility patch made by a third party for a mod he never even heard of isn't instantly updated whenever he releases an update for his mod? Or when his mod's newest version expands upon the territory of another mod, should he avoid doing that entirely or provide automatic counter-measure for every conflict possibilities among the thousands of other available mods?

Maybe I wildly misunderstood your post. Please elaborate if you don't mind.

I think it's from the 25% modder cut from the original implementation. So to reach the required 100$, you would need 400$ in sales.

You are not making any sense here. I agree with what Logorouge said and would also appreciate a better explanation so I can try and understand what you are saying better.

Maybe the quality of compatibility patches has nosedived for Skyrim. I've updated plenty of mods though that have them and nothing bad happened. Used to be standard fare in Oblivion's days too. A properly made compatibility patch should not simply break just because the mod it's patching got updated.

There's only ONE case I can think of from Oblivion where this happened and it was because the author of the mod deliberately renumbered form IDs in TES4Edit which then caused most of the patched built for it to break. I cannot think of any cases where something like this happened in Skyrim.

So I don't get the argument. It sounds more like an unreasonable fear than something with actual data to back it up. Regardless, the auto-update system is not to blame if a mod author does something to break a patch made by a 3rd party. It requires a simple defense. For the authors to be less careless when updating their mods.

Well, considering, people already "crippled" their free mods and includes ads for the "pay"-version within these short 2 days, I wouldn't exactly say there "was never a a threat" - because thats not true. Besides that, the cut Bethesda and Valve took and the "you should pay for updates" probably were the points why that much people run against that payed mod system. I absolutely don't think that most of the users believe modders shouldn't be rewarded for their work, but I surely think, every involved party who planed that stuff behind closed doors (Beth, Valve and also the involved modders) never really deeply thought about what exactly they are doing. And because of that, I think in general that backlash was well deserved, sorry. However, I also think, some people and some reactions were a bit harsh.

No, they did. The backlash was not deserved.

There are many reasons other than "modder carelessness" why a compatibility patch may need to be updated when one of the mods it patches is updated. For instance, a landscape mod makes further changes to the landscape, rendering the previous compatibility patches incompatible because of the new changes. I don't see how you can say that never happens. It happens all the time.

You want a specific example? Better Cities released an update from 5.4 to 5.5 a while back and many of the patches for Better Cities then needed to be updated. It took a few months for that to happen. That is not the fault of the Better Cities team. They did not "deliberately renumber" Formids. They improved their mod, which required the patches to be updated to take the changes into account

You want a Skyrim example? Requiem recently released a significant update that included changes to the way that mod handles NPCs among other things, thus rendering many of the prior the compatibility patches for other mods incompatible, which in turn triggered the need for updated patches. That is not the fault of the Requiem team. They did not "deliberately renumber" Formids. They made improvements to the Requiem mod that rendered many of the old patches for Requiem 1.7 incompatible with Requiem 1.8. It took a few months for people to update the compatibility patches.

I don't understand how you can say that stuff like this almost never happens unless it is someone's fault for being "careless" with their mod. In fact, this type of stuff happens all the time with many popular mods, and it is no one's fault. It's not because of modder carelessness. It is a consequence of the way mods work and the fact that there are literally thousands of mods available and they cannot all be compatible with each other without patches, which will on occasion need updates when one of the mods they patch is updated.

The Midas Magic author reportedly put pop-up ads in his free version advertising the paid version. I could not verify it because by the time I went to download it, he had already hidden his free version entirely. It is still hidden. http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/3413/?

Midas Magic.

I didn't say it never happens. I said it only happens rarely.

You have also pointed out the exact example I was referring to. You also didn't bother to anolyze WHY most of those patches needed to be redone. They absolutely DID renumber the form IDs. Ask anyone who is remotely familiar with it due to having to field "is it compatible" questions about it all the time. They could tell you the same. When those form IDs changed, and they had no valid reason to change, it broke stuff. If it's not the fault of the Better Cities team, then who else WAS to blame? Bethesda? Valve? No, I don't think so. Auto-update would not have broken anything the mod changes themselves wouldn't have.

What happened with Requiem is an extreme example as well. Those kinds of massive overhauls to how mods work is not the norm, it's the exception. Plus, the Requiem team knew they were doing this and if they didn't tell the people making patches then that's on them. Who else could you blame? Valve? Bethesda? No. Auto-update would not have been to blame for any problems arising from that either.

The kinds of things I'm getting at here absolutely ARE due to carelessness. Renumbering your form IDs? Careless. Demonstrates a lack of regard for the users. Massive overhaul of how a mod operates without giving people time to prepare? Carelessness of a different sort, but still careless.

You seem to be operating from an assumption that nothing can be done about it and that every single update ever will always cause problems of the same scale. Not true. Most updates, even if the author makes zero effort to care, won't cause problems at all. You also seem to be operating from an assumption that I'm not familiar with how all of this works. I assure you, I am quite well aware of how it all works. I'm also quite well aware that 99.9% of it is entirely preventable and requires no action from Valve or Bethesda to make it happen.

I'm also aware these are truths the community simply doesn't want to hear, which is why I don't usually get into crapfests like this.

There are screenshots out there. It did happen.

ads aren't really crippling it. I feel ads are more an exercise in testing patience. (Bad in a different way)

So now you are calling the makers of Better Cities and Requiem careless?

It sounds like maybe you are expecting too much of people who are making these mods as a hobby in their spare time. It's not the responsibility of the Better Cities team or the Requiem team to scour the internet to determine which mods require patches and communicate with the various patch makers to make sure all patches get updated on the exact same date as their mod.

The simple solution in both cases is to just wait a couple months to upgrade to the new edition if you are using mods that need updated patches. Automatic updaters cannot do that.

The simple solution is to put an announcement up a few weeks before release to say "Hey, we're making massive changes, write us if you need to update your patch."

That might help, but again, a lot of these patches are being made by a wide variety of people who are doing it in their spare time, and the patches tend to trickle in over an extended period of time that can take several months or more. They also may need a final version of the mod to work with in order to make their updated patches. So, unless the maker of the mod wants to delay their release by several months to wait for patches, you are not likely to get a high percentage of the patches done by release day.

The BC guys, yes, absolutely. There was no reason whatsoever to reindex their form IDs. It's not something the game needs to have done, ever.

Requiem, perhaps, but only if they didn't give anyone any warning.

Funny, because I know plenty of authors who would say exactly this about even the littlest thing that might be wrong with a mod. That users are expecting far too much. I doubt I need to tell you where I stand on that kind of entitlement mentality.

See above response as I was ninja'd while replying. Also one does not require remaining subscribed to a downloaded mod, rendering the entire auto-update issue moot.

i'm a person who doesn't play on pc and doesn't know pretty much anything about the issue that i keep hearing about: "paying for mods."

well, i'm also a simple man who knows how to get the heart of what i deem important.

therefore, this is what i think, lol--

mods should be allowed to be made by everyday gamers who can then choose to go to official sanctioned entities, websites, companies, whatever, to sell their creations for profit, but, being forced to sign whatever contracts, agreements, whatever, those entities put forth. if you don't like it, then, don't try and make a profit off of a game you didn't create.

if gaming companies and other entities make it illegal to make everyday mods for personal use at no profit (make gamers buy all mods), then, those companies are corrupt and immoral and all pc gamers should instantly discontinue buying their products. see how long that policy lasts.

to me, to categorize this as mod-user v maker is laughably ridiculous. it has no bearing on the argument, as i currently understand it;)

to me, all i'm worried about is less consumer power and whether or one mods for fun is irrelevant.

without being forced to research this issue, exactly, what don't i understand?...

Yes, I have never downloaded from Steam workshop and have no plans of doing so any time soon, but that is the advice I have heard to use and it makes sense to follow. Subscribe, download, backup and then unsubscribe.

Well, thanks for clarifying.

Well, there are a lot of different opinions on both sides of this issue. My own opinion is that if Bethesda allows modders to sell their mods, it will change the fabric of the community that has developed and risk undermining the sprit of sharing and cooperation. For the past 13 years, Bethesda has mandated through the EULA that all mods for its games must be purely non-commercial., so no one ever really expected to profit directly from their mods, although you could profit indirectly by building a name for yourself and using that to get a job with a game developer or starting your own company. But their was no expectation of selling your mods.

Despite the fact that there was no expectation of making money, thousands of modders from across the globe spent thousands of hours making thousands of mods, many of which are simply incredible. Requim, for instance reportedly took over 2,000 hours to create. I am sure Better Cities took many more hours than that, since it was started by Bannasplit and then he moved on to other things and let the project be taken over by others. Its now being managed by Vorians, but many people have contributed over the years.

Throughout the past 13 years of TES modding, there was a spirit of sharing and cooperation. Granted, not everyone has always wanted to share all their works all the time, but by and large it has been about sharing. I am not just talking about sharing mods with users, but of sharing resources (like texture and mesh files and other mod components) with other modders. Introducing paid mods risks shattering that atmosphere of sharing among mod makers, since people will naturally be more protective of their creations if they think there is money to be made.

Large mods like Better Cities and Requiem are just too big to be realistically made by just one person. They require a team of people working together over an extended period of time, and they require resources made by others. As long as no one is making a profit, people tend to share their time and their creations freely, which makes these large mods possible.

Under a system where people can sell these mods, I fear that you would not see any of these larger mods being created since it would be difficult to get everyone to cooperate and share, unless you ran it like a business. And as soon as you start running it like a business, then profit motive is going to take over, like it must in all businesses. At that point, instead of getting mods like Requiem that deliver an old school hardcoe roleplay experience, you are going to get the same kind of streamlined, watered down stuff that Bethesda releases in its vanilla games. Because that's where the money is.

So, that in a nutshell is why I am against paid mods. It's not out of any sense of entitlement. I personally don't think that mod users are entitled to anything, and they should be very happy for what they get. It's not because I don't want to pay for mods. I earn plenty of money in my day job to pay for mods. It's not because I don't think mods are worth paying for because some of them are priceless. But I do think there is a significant risk that introducing the ability to sell mods will shatter the modding community and make people more protective of their own creative work and less willing to share it with other modders, which in turn could lead to fewer really big and truly inspired mods and more high quality but smaller mods with a few really big ones that are aimed at the mass market instead of the much smaller market of serious roleplayers.

ah, thanks for the info.

i think i see that the issue is sorta the ole', letting the cat outta the bag, then. i know you know that up here in washington state weed was made legal and now there's no going back to what it was before, no matter how much wiser it was to have been illegal. it has been fundamentally altered forever. same with cigarettes, since, without blatant corruption they could never be deemed a safe and legal product.

i definitely see how introducing paid mods will fundamentally and forever alter the system at it's been for a decade plus.

in fact, i think you are absolutely correct. capitalism will have negative effects on a "sharing" community and its quality. and, so, i'd be inclined to be against paid mods, as well.

and, so, it looks like it would be up to bethesda to keep it as it is or decide they want in on the action and see some serious profits to be made.

yep, i'd go with hoping beth says no to "paying for mods." let other companies sell themselves out and make those modders who want to make a profit do it with some other game.

Which also means that the safest way to use the Workshop is to not use it in the intended way - a shining recommendation for the system ;P

He's absolutely wrong though.

Anyone who touts a "spirit of modding," a "spirit of sharing and cooperation," or a unified "community" where everyone shares the same attitudes, values, beliefs, and goals, is merely politicizing the issues.

If you want practical, thoughtful insight grounded in real-world experience, read these articles:

• http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/articles/50159/
• http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/articles/50180/