373 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

That's nonsense. Is fairness even a meaningful concept? I'm confident that justice isn't, and the two are often used together.

And unequal isn't synonymous with dissimilar; equivalence is much more precise.

 

Fairness is certainly a meaningful concept. Are you going to argue that fuzzy sets are meaningless? Any word that lacks a definite meaning is just a verbal equivalent of a fuzzy set. Justice is a different but related concept. 

 

Fairness captures a particular idea of equality, namely, equal distribution in accordance with some pre-prescribed moral guideline. Literal equality is a much more narrow definition of identical shares.

 

Justice is an about the right procedure that one is granted when, for example, resolving disputes. It's not about distribution (which is the concern of fairness). 

[AlanC9]

Oh, great. Now we're going to have to work on the definition of "meaningful" for a few pages.

[Setiweb]

Oh, great. Now we're going to have to work on the definition of "meaningful" for a few pages.

The plate from the great feast has been licked clean and we are left with a dirty bowl of gruel.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Fairness is certainly a meaningful concept. Are you going to argue that fuzzy sets are meaningless? Any word that lacks a definite meaning is just a verbal equivalent of a fuzzy set. Justice is a different but related concept. 

 

Fairness captures a particular idea of equality, namely, equal distribution in accordance with some pre-prescribed moral guideline. Literal equality is a much more narrow definition of identical shares.

 

Justice is an about the right procedure that one is granted when, for example, resolving disputes. It's not about distribution (which is the concern of fairness). 

Given that you actually referred to equality in your definition of fairness, I don't think equality can imply fairness.  Otherwise your definitions are recursive.

[In Exile]

Given that you actually referred to equality in your definition of fairness, I don't think equality can imply fairness.  Otherwise your definitions are recursive.

 

But definitions are recursive in confusing ways when it comes to words. Because words don't have exclusive meanings, and don't have strict logical relationships between the term and the definition. 

[ladyoflate]

See, this why I don't like to bust out the dictionary definition for social concepts, but am fine with it for scientific stuff. Lexicographers don't get out enough.

[I Miss Minsc]

If you did it for Two other games, on what real basis do not for this one? (see Bioware Quote below). #22

Allan Schumacher

Posted 21 May 2014 - 08:33 PM

• 
• BioWare Employees
• 
• 5,742 posts

Texhnolyze101, on 21 May 2014 - 4:03 PM, said:

Skyrim is moddable because Bethesda undertands how the modding community is beneficial to them and their games as a whole.

 

BioWare has released two games with end user toolsets, including one game effectively built around the entire concept.  We're not oblivious to the pros and cons of a toolset.

[Realmzmaster]

If you did it for Two other games, on what real basis do not for this one? (see Bioware Quote below). #22

Allan Schumacher

Posted 21 May 2014 - 08:33 PM

• 
• BioWare Employees
• 
• 5,742 posts

Texhnolyze101, on 21 May 2014 - 4:03 PM, said:

 

BioWare has released two games with end user toolsets, including one game effectively built around the entire concept.  We're not oblivious to the pros and cons of a toolset.

 

 

Bioware owned the entire engine and tools used to create those two games NWN and DAO. DA2 and DAI used more middleware that Bioware does not own. Bioware does not have the license to release that middleware in a toolkit without paying royalties to the developers of that middleware assuming Bioware could get permission to do so.

[SomberXIII]

Well. Don't blame Bioware.

[Fast Jimmy]

Bioware owned the entire engine and tools used to create those two games NWN and DAO. DA2 and DAI used more middleware that Bioware does not own. Bioware does not have the license to release that middleware in a toolkit without paying royalties to the developers of that middleware assuming Bioware could get permission to do so.

And, for the record, royalties and licenses can cost thousands of dollars FOR EACH LICENSE SOLD.

Bioware can fork over 100 licenses to other companies for their employees to make a game, as that $100K theoretical investment helps produce a multi-million dollar revenue generating game. There is no feasible way for Bioware to ship copies of middleware that costs that much with millions of PC units. Nor could they charge more for a modkit for those players that want one, as unless there is a large market of players who are willing to pay thousands of dollars for a modkit, then this would be equally impossible/pointless.

Bioware isn't just being mean just to hurt anyone's feelings.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Bioware owned the entire engine and tools used to create those two games NWN and DAO. DA2 and DAI used more middleware that Bioware does not own. Bioware does not have the license to release that middleware in a toolkit without paying royalties to the developers of that middleware assuming Bioware could get permission to do so.

There is another option. They could release a toolset with the middleware missing, and also release the source code so modders could put it back together.

[AlanC9]

Release a non-functional toolset? Who'd use it? You'd have to already have the middleware licenses yourself.

[In Exile]

There is another option. They could release a toolset with the middleware missing, and also release the source code so modders could put it back together.

 

It wouldn't be a toolset and that point, would it? It seems like that would just be 2/3rds of an engine, with code ripped out in who knows what kind of ways. The modders would effectively have to design all of that middlewear themselves. 

[Fast Jimmy]

There is another option. They could release a toolset with the middleware missing, and also release the source code so modders could put it back together.

It would depend on how much middleware is used.

For instance, what if the UI of the system was a piece of middleware, developed by an outside firm? It's entirely possible, as lots of companies outside hire UI designers.

And even if not, what if the proprietary portions of the kit cause the entire program to become unstable to the point of constant crashing when they are pulled out? Modders would have to take the broken application and repair it just to get to square one.

At the level the kit could look if Bioware just yanked out the middleware and said "here you go," I'd honestly think modifying the existing game files with open market tools might be faster.

[Sylvius the Mad]

It wouldn't be a toolset and that point, would it? It seems like that would just be 2/3rds of an engine, with code ripped out in who knows what kind of ways. The modders would effectively have to design all of that middlewear themselves.

Or replace it with cheaper alternatives.

But either way, it would be better than not getting a toolset.

[bjuandy]

Read the posts, understand that a toolset is highly unlikely and the reasons are integral to the Frostbite engine itself. However, another thread noted that things like the override folder in previous games can still be included to make the game more mod friendly. Would such a thing be cost ineffective? I understand that new file formats are present and said file formats may not be readable, but will there be an override folder at least, or is that something that needs to be built?

[kleovic]

Well, I always thought back when they released Origins. It was a nod to Bioware's old Dungeons and Dragons RPG's. And one notable game is Neverwinter. Initially, it wasn't that great compared to other games. But the game is still going strong because of one thing. Mods. People were given tools to create their own DnD campaigns using the neverwinter modding tools. That's what I've been hoping Bioware or any RPG developer to do. To give people the tools they need to create a story of their own in the  Dragon Age universe.

 

But I know they won't create such an expansive toolset since given the huge expense they're already using for the singleplayer campaign. And I don't know if the rumors of multiplayer are legit but I'm hoping that they just allow for us to create a side character and play co-op. Imagine playing as agents of the inquisition or soldiers in the multiple ongoing wars and in tandem with a campaign editor. This would make this the best RPG of the next gen in my opinion. And the gameplay looks solid already with the previews and alpha builds they've shown.

[Realmzmaster]

Or replace it with cheaper alternatives.

But either way, it would be better than not getting a toolset.

 

Unless the cheaper alternatives are free and you do not need permission to use it you still have the same problem. You have to get permission from the developer of the middleware to include it in any toolkit create by modders.

 

If Bioware did send out a "toolkit" with all the middleware ripped out it then becomes how long (if ever) the modders will be able to repair what is missing. If it takes 6 to 7 months to get it into workable form the window of opportunity may have passed. 

[Setiweb]

If Bioware did send out a "toolkit" with all the middleware ripped out it then becomes how long (if ever) the modders will be able to repair what is missing. If it takes 6 to 7 months to get it into workable form the window of opportunity may have passed. 

Considering mods are still being made for DAO (and DA2) I request clarification on what is this window of opportunity  you speak of.

[Fast Jimmy]

Considering mods are still being made for DAO (and DA2) I request clarification on what is this window of opportunity  you speak of.

I believe he is referring to the window of opportunity where the majority of fans eligible to use such mods would, which would be in the first six to nine months of release. Anything after that is a exponentially smaller base of players. Meaning any work that. Bioware would do to help modders, but still result in no mods within that same time frame, would only reach a small fraction of players and would not be an incentive for increased sales and revenue worth speaking of.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Unless the cheaper alternatives are free and you do not need permission to use it you still have the same problem. You have to get permission from the developer of the middleware to include it in any toolkit create by modders.

A lot of modders use third-party tools to create content even when those tools aren't included in any toolkit. For example, the toolkit doesn't need to contain Maya in order to accommodate content produced in Maya.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I believe he is referring to the window of opportunity where the majority of fans eligible to use such mods would, which would be in the first six to nine months of release. Anything after that is a exponentially smaller base of players. Meaning any work that. Bioware would do to help modders, but still result in no mods within that same time frame, would only reach a small fraction of players and would not be an incentive for increased sales and revenue worth speaking of.

Which is why I'm trying to minimise the amount of work BioWare would have to do.

[AlanC9]

A lot of modders use third-party tools to create content even when those tools aren't included in any toolkit. For example, the toolkit doesn't need to contain Maya in order to accommodate content produced in Maya.

 

 

I see. Meaning that some folks in the community will have access to the middleware even if Bio doesn't bundle it in.

 

It's difficult to evaluate the proposal without knowing exactly what middleware is in the toolset and how integrated the stuff is.

[Fast Jimmy]

Which is why I'm trying to minimise the amount of work BioWare would have to do.

Fair enough.

But it also comes back to the statement Bioware made that if they released something, they would want to make sure it is released "right." Which would be something you would need to convince them to change their stance on.