The pricing structure for one? The publisher, Bethesda in that case wanted 40%, Valve taking 30% leaving the author of the mod 30%. I was up in arms because that split should be the opposite way around.

According to this article:

>We have a model that allows us to give more than 50 percent of revenue to the creators

So it seems worse than both of those?

> So it seems worse than both of those?

That was a single model (40% Bethesda + 30% Valve + 30% Creator), not two separate models from Bethesda and Valve.

Edit: Never mind, after a re-read it looks like this has nothing to do with the PC version... for now.

Who said it was okay? I for one am disgusted with it. I'm sure they'll catch my kids eye with some lame skin or map and I'll have to have yet another argument with him about how it's absolutely insane to buy virtual clothes in exchange for real money. He's already done it, and I've caved, several time with the XBox version. He moved to PC about a year ago so it hasn't been an issue. I knew MS was going to turn this great game into a shit hole as fast as they could. This game will eventually be completely centralized.

That sounds like bad parenting. Kid wants skin? Fine, make them understand the value of it and work for it though. Teach them that buying an overpriced skin will cost them eg. 10 hours of actual work - like chores.

My kid didn't understand until the vurtual items he bought with his hard earned money, about 80usd, vanished when the company shut down. It was a brilliant educational moment. Alas Minecraft is probably good for another decade!

Yeah your kid probably wouldn't have felt the 'blow' if he didn't work for that money.

The problem isn't virtual items, everyone pays money for non material experiences/services - and on a long enough timescale even material things wear down/break.

The important thing to teach a kid is if the value they derive from buy a skin eg. and whatever it brings to them (happiness, bragging rights) is more important that opportunity cost of paying for that.

If the cost is always zero (daddy pays) - then the kid will not stop to think about it ever.

Something about telling a kid that the iron is hot vs the kid needing to burn himself to learn.

Why are you assuming that we're OK with it? The top 3 or 4 threads here are critical of it.

Both are OK.

Steam already had a history of problematic mod behavior--people posting copyrighted material, stolen mods, etc. Allowing for mod sales made it from a nuisance to actual IP theft/stolen revenue.

I suspect the exact same for this minecraft store, unless MS actually starts whooping ass for IP theft.

edit: oh yeah, the steam revenue sharing model was a hilarious joke, IIRC.

>I suspect the exact same for this minecraft store, unless MS actually starts whooping ass for IP theft.

Seems like they are only allowing accredited (by them) companies to use it, so they should have less problems...

If you want to see IP theft and stolen mods on a grand scale, check out Roblox. Complete with micro-transactions on a grand scale as well.