Surface Reflection wrote:graf, your first post is based around the notion of monetizing all mods so its irrelevant to anything i am saying. Your second barely touches on what i am actually saying at the end of it.
It seems that you didnt really read what i am suggesting but rather read comments about it from others and then replied to everything.
I disagree. I did read your post and that is what I had to say. I talked about my thoughts on mod monetization in general, about specific problems with doing small "mod packs" of good mods, and possible solutions or processes to handle the development of such high quality mods, while attempting to prevent piracy, and maintain the benefits of mass user testing that mods get. As the actual topic is called "Should mods be free?", I think that the discussion of mod monetization in general, as well as specific instances of ideas, is on topic and relevant. If we are going to discuss some mods costing money, whether they be good mods or otherwise, the discussion of the other mods being monetized, even just to compare, is necessary and relevant.
To be clear, I said mod monetization in general, I think would be, from my perspective, bad. However, my take on your idea would be small mods of particularly excellent caliber, perhaps ones that Josh uses himself, be included in the base game, with the modder receiving payment for his or her work. As your idea was very similar, the only difference being you wanting to release mod packs instead of just bundling them with the base game, I thought that my suggestion was very relevant, as my take removes the sting of the players paying for third party DLC (as the base price would cover the costs of paying contributing modes, or at most a small price increase of the base game if Josh decided to give a contributer more than a one time payment), Josh has some of his work load relieved, and the game is improved. Pretty much everybody wins... except for those who don't play the game.
There would still be issues, but at least if the game gets bundled, the development process for the mod can stay the same, and the modder still gets paid when the dev cycle is finished, assuming it gets bundled with the game. It wouldn't matter if everybody already has it, because the funds from sales of the game itself, rather than from the audience; which in a traditional dev cycle would already have one version of the mod or another. The dev gets payed, doesn't have to worry about his mod being pirated to his or her detriment, and Josh gets to include a new feature or two without any more sleepless nights.
All of the information and theory making I am using is based off of my knowledge and experience with the KSP modding community. Let me know if you don't think that is a good analogue, but I think it suits LT pretty well, as both games are very open to modding, and allow simple changes, new features, or near total conversions using the tools provided by the devs. Sure, KSP is in Beta (than ever) now, but it has more content than most AAA games out on steam right now, without mods, and exponentially more so with them.
I went on an explanation of why I don't support general monetization, as forms the infrastructure upon which I base my ideas on small degrees of monetization. If done correctly, it could avoid the issues with the "slippery slope" I mentioned, leaves the community intact, and allows best modders to get paid for their work, assuming they want to be paid.
In and among that suggestion, I responded to other peoples ideas about mod monetization, as that is what the thread generally is about, and that is what they were and are talking about. As this is a group discussion, responding to other peoples posts as well as yours, is important, else we would all be talking about 4 or 5 different things... which has happened already so I guess I really shouldn't be worrying.
I am pretty sure I touched on all of your points throughout my posts here in this thread, but if you want to show me which ones I have overlooked, I would be glad to clear up any misunderstandings.
So, sheesh dude. No need to get yourself all riled up. Instead of saying "You didn't read what I wrote," say "You didn't touch on points x, y, and z. You wouldn't mind responding to those more clearly, would ya?" Rest assured, I did read what you wrote, as well as what everyone else wrote. The only person coming off aggressive and/or confrontational here is you.
So please, as my father used to say in the 80's (70's???), keep it mellow, man. And stay puft. (I made up the last bit. All mine. What!
) I should probably work on Calculus now... at 3:30 AM. Really hope I have off tomorrow.
" (not directed at you =P )
