the potential stability / gameplay errors the player may experience is solely in their own hands at this point.
This is the stance taken by pretty much all game publishers who don't simply ban mods from the outset. Modding support being talked about here is probably more along the lines of access to tools/assets so the modders don't have to decompile the game just to figure out how to change something, not support in the "technical issue support" sense.
Then again I could just be misreading the room.
In any case, games with robust systems to enable player expression of creativity have much better staying power, often remaining well played (and bought/sold) long after the traditional assumptions about a game's lifespan suggest they should be. Unfortunately for players and modders alike, as is generally the case with corporate structures, upper management and marketing departments that are actually capable of planning that far ahead are outcompeted in the short term by short term planners running headlong after the closest thing they can find to instant gratification. Avenues for user creativity become monetized, trivial benefits are locked behind fees, problems are created post-release so the 'solution' can be sold to players, etc. Management and marketing departments may completely ignore efforts to provide access to players because they can't stomach the short term loss of extremely low effort ways to instantly generate revenue (new skins sold for cash, for example), even if in the long run the game benefits more from a more open access to assets/features/etc. Management especially wants to preserve DLC schemes as much as possible, because it gives them an easy way to briefly inflate their sales numbers if shareholders come looking (or if they want to make themselves look better to get hired for an even higher level position elsewhere in the games industry, as evidenced by the staggering lack of employee promotion present in general in the software industry, creating an environment where the most common avenue for employees to get appreciable promotions or raises is to abandon their current employer for a new, less stingy one - that lack of corporate loyalty to employees is one of the reasons gamedev has such an abysmal turnover rate, which carries its own set of problems in regards to crippling a company's ability to plan in the long term from every part of their corporate hierarchy).
The existence and persistence of the indie gaming scene, especially since it is reliably competitive with large publishers these days, is pretty much a direct consequence of that top-down rot in the games industry. It's an issue inherent to corporations in capitalism, unfortunately - it notably happened to Apple over much of the last decade, happened to Microsoft from the late 1990s to early 2000s, and Intel is currently trying to dig itself out of it as we speak (and as AMD has, so far, been able to avoid much of the worst of it by keeping engineers in charge rather than marketers). The video games industry is a lot like that right now, especially in its efforts to preserve its current legal loophole of selling casinos to children, but on the plus side in general it's an industry that evolves very quickly relative to other software sub-industries, so change tends to be rapid.
In short, plan ahead. Hire people who know how to make things, show them some level of loyalty and respect, and never put the people whose primary focus is selling things in charge of making them. Help your customers make things, even if it means you lose out on some short term gains, because building the best relationship with your customers is more involved than buying a bunch of targeted advertisements and reaching into their wallets repeatedly. Alternatively, put the marketing department into executive positions and watch your product quality take a nosedive while you burn whatever community goodwill you have left just to keep the lights on as you start to run out of new marks to exploit and you can no longer hide behind a veneer of 'future growth' that consists of little more than reckless expansion that just ran out of places to recklessly expand into.
I'd also like to add that I don't hate marketing departments - I just hate when corporate leadership 'cuts costs' everywhere else and we end up with nothing actually worth marketing.
