This is different from Skyrim’s Creation Club program, where previous paid mods were housed, as those modders were hired and paid by Bethesda as contractors.
They sought out modders and paid to have them make content to be included in a DLC. This change lets any mod, including already existing ones, become paid.
I don't think that's correct. There's a vetting process (so it cannot be "any mod"), and it can't be an existing free mod.
Creations must be standalone, so it cannot depend on other community releases, free or paid.
Creations must be all-new to qualify for release. You cannot re-purpose older releases – or work by other authors, unless contracted.
Creations cannot contain anything produced through generative AI.
On the flip side the only people that have a moral ground to be against paid mods are the creators of the base game. As a player you are not entitled to someone else's work for free.
Easy on the revisionist history, there. Valve's previous attempt to introduce paid mods broke the existing mod system, and took the lion's share of the profits for Valve and Bethesda. The math on how much modders would make was absurdly low compared to the effort they put in, and most of the available mods were built on a community's worth of contributions. There was no curation, no protections for creators or consumers, and the door was left wide open for scammers and charletains to sell other people's work.
It was a terrible plan.
This isn't about players demanding work for free. Players bought the game (sometimes more than once) and many of the mods fixed significant bugs and problems. Mods provided ui improvements and new content to keep the game fresh.
Quite the contrary, this is Bethesda capitalizing on the free labor provided by the modding community over the years. This new system has already broken SKSE, upon which hundreds of additional mods are built. The SKSE team has already patched the problem, but that's just one free mod. Who compensates them for fixing the thing Bethesda broke?
People who didn't live through it and only read news articles are going to get the impression that players revolted in 2015 because everybody wants a free lunch. If it was just unhappy freeloaders, why would they have pulled the feature so quickly? Surely losing the choosy beggars all at once would not have had any effect on revenue, so how can that possibly explain the unmitigated PR disaster and public apology?
I agree that a person has a right to charge for their work. I just feel mods are a real legal quagmire. The best way around all of this is a Pateron style system where a creator is supported but not directly charging for mods.
The issue is that mods often use some part of the original creation so ownership is a tricky issue. However if the company is willing to pay creators then I guess that is OK, like this case.
That's a different legal problem as there are situations where if you don't protect your trademark you can lose it. But I'm not a lawyer and don't know if that situation would apply to mods.
Even in that case, it's easy enough to solve: grant permission explicitly under the condition that the assets remain in the context of the game (eg, don't export them to other games).
Consider other games that explicitly provide a blanket grant for people permission to use their game footage in videos (Team17).
No, but modders fix Bethesda's games for free.
Turning around and charging for those is a bit meh.
I'm not entitled to anything, but still doesn't mean I'd shell any money for crowdsourced fixes to a 12 y.o. game.
You are missing context and the knowledge of the modding culture. Morrowind modding scene is alive and well and that's because peıple keep modding for the community and because they love the game, it is not a for profit effort. When the aim shifts from making a great mod to making money it isn't genuine anymore it is corrupt.