104 réponses à ce sujet

[Hanako Ikezawa]

That is your own personal taste and opinion.  Some people can eat chopped liver with onion and be perfectly content.  Playing the same game forever without mods is like eating chopped liver with onion to me.  If you wish to do that, then great.  Bon a petit.  That's no valid reason for forcing others to do the same though.

 

Yes, modding does provide my life something more than entertainment, because I don't just play the mods -- I develop them.  It allows me to both have a worthwhile hobby that I look forward to expanding my abilities and learning with and it also allows me to contribute something to the rest of the world for free: added entertainment value.  Not only that, but it provides the game developers themselves with more sales.  Games with mod tools are proven to sell more copies over a long period of time, because their value stays fresh due to the work of their modding communities.

So in a thread where you ask for people's opinions, you hand wave away those that you disagree with. Interesting. 

 

Let me end with this. Video games are a video game company's property. Their opinion is the only one that matters. If people don't have permission to make mods for that company's game, they shouldn't make mods. Case closed. End of story. 

[Shapeshifter777]

A few may be able to, but most people aren't rich enough to not need a return on investment that would go out to hundreds, or thousands, of people.  Per RL economics, if one is going to buy something then it's either super generous, or pretty much unlikely that they'll give out their end product for free.  What could end up happening, according to human nature, is some brilliant someone will find a means of copying the code and sending it around to be pirated (either the base tool, or whatever mod has been created) for those who can't afford play richie rich and buy-mod their games up the wazzoo.

 

Bioware could have an always online DRM for their tools similar to the Starcraft II world editor.  Good luck pirating that.  No one has been able to beat Blizzard's DRM yet.  There are literally no bootlegged copies of Diablo III floating around and the game came out over 2 years ago.

[Shapeshifter777]

So in a thread where you ask for people's opinions, you hand wave away those that you disagree with. Interesting. 

 

Let me end with this. Video games are a video game company's property. Their opinion is the only one that matters. If people don't have permission to make mods for that company's game, they shouldn't make mods. Case closed. End of story. 

 

Right, which is why myself and many others are formally asking Bioware's permission and blessing to help them expand the life of their game by creating more choices and options for their player base.    Thanks for your contribution though. :]

[Stormy]

Bioware could have an always online DRM for their tools similar to the Starcraft II world editor.  Good luck pirating that.  No one has been able to beat Blizzard's DRM yet.  There are literally no bootlegged copies of Diablo III floating around and the game came out over 2 years ago.

 

But how many games werent' supposed to have mods, and do?  Not saying it would be easy, but never underestimate the Broke & Determined.

[Shapeshifter777]

But how many games werent' supposed to have mods, and do?  Not saying it would be easy, but never underestimate the Broke & Determined.

 

True.  It all just depends on how hard-coded the game in question is.  I figured out a way to mod Prototype 2, after all, with nothing but hex editing the executable file itself.  Haha, so I guess where there's a will, there's probably a way.  Still, there's usually limitations with what you can do without an official set of tools.

[Innsmouth Dweller]

depends. on quality and functions those mods would offer. modding is fun for me, so yeah, i'd pay even more than for the game.

 

Replayability has no set value. For example I've played Bioware games dozens of times without needing to mod and I still find it enjoyable. 

 

There are no practical benefits to video game mods. Do they provide anything to your life other than entertainment, which the original product already does?

this is personal opinion.

 

modding is simply fan creation, something like cosplay or fan fiction... just usually utilized by people who find scripting more interesting than writing/drawing about their favourite npcs. does it have some additional value? that depends. some of fan mods are pretty neat and imho are worthy enough to be included in original games at some point (i.e. hardcore mode in f:nv), others are trash (making Wynne more hot or other crap)

 

another fine example is thief and dark mod project - created entirely by fans and still alive (irrc - it was using doom editor). and devs of the original game acknowledged this, they even created contest for best mod/story to it.

 

so yeah, for me - modding is fun. if you say modding is something like defiling the game and devs would be outraged... i think i should reconsider being a fan.

[Stormy]

True.  It all just depends on how hard-coded the game in question is.  I figured out a way to mod Prototype 2, after all, with nothing but hex editing the executable file itself.  Haha, so I guess where there's a will, there's probably a way.  Still, there's usually limitations with what you can do without an official set of tools.

 

Precisely  and being forced to pay for the toolset would leave just that much more vulnerability to the "have nots", and leverage to the "haves".  If, like DA:O, one was available then those who know, for example how to add casual clothing to the scene in the keep, or an extra touching moment to an LI encounter, can share it with those of us who have no clue but think it would be nice... through our 40th, or something, playthrough.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I don't like how people change what someone spent months or years working on just so they can like it better. That's like approving of someone who gives the Mona Lisa a mustache because they think it'd be better with one.

As long as I only deface my copy of the Mona Lisa, and everyone else is still free to enjoy the original if they so choose, why would that be a problem?

[Sylvius the Mad]

A little, yeah. You're disrespecting someone else's work.

If that disrepect makes no material difference, why should we care?

There are no practical benefits to video game mods. Do they provide anything to your life other than entertainment, which the original product already does?

Increased enjoyment. Are you arguing that enjoymemt isn't a practical benefit?

Does the game developer benefit more from me buying his game and modding it, or from me not buying it at all?

[Nimlowyn]

A little, yeah. You're disrespecting someone else's work.

 

While I can't say I'm opposed to modding, I do appreciate this point of view. Personally, I find the "pretty mods", where a characters facial structure is altered to make them more "attractive", disrespectful to the artist, the character, and in poor taste. 

 

That said, I have a mod in DA2 that changes a female Hawke's common clothes and what she wears to the MOTA party to something that is, to me, more aesthetically pleasing. I felt her vanilla casual clothes were out of character, as was the men's outfit she wore in MOTA (I read somewhere that she had a man's outfit because they didn't have time to get her a female one). I felt they were both too masculine for her. I didn't mean any disrespect to the outfit, I just wanted another, to my mind, more character appropriate choice, and as for the MOTA outfit, they perhaps would have if they had time. It also seems fine to me because I'm giving myself an additional clothing option, not totally changing the morphology of a character, which is designed with purpose and very important to who they are.

 

I'm wondering if it is the character altering types you find objectionable, or really, *all* types of mods, no matter what, even extra clothes, longer eyelashes, etc? I will respect your answer, I'm just genuinely curious. 

[Fast Jimmy]

This thread is irrelevant.

No amount of money will cover the costs that all the third party tools require to license. Such licenses costs hundreds, if not thousands, PER license (of which there might be a dozen for the whole engine).

In terms of developing mod tools that don't use the third party software, this is equally impractical. Creating tools to make a game is far from a trivial task. It would require a team of individuals working up to six months to a year (if not more) to create supplemental programming to fill all the gaps from the third party software.

Let's just make up some numbers to show how much of a losing proposition this would be. All artificial numbers, but they go to show how this extra donation would be a drop in the bucket of Bioware's total cost.

Say it takes a team of 10 individuals six months to create all of these extra tools. Let's say these individuals get paid $50K a year salary average (could be higher for manager/leads, while lower for more grunt positions, but let's just simplify), which means $250K.

Now let's assume that the PC market is one million sales of DA:I (about average for a Bioware game, if VGChartz can be trusted). If you made the price $60 extra for the modkit, this would be over 4,000 modders who would be willing to pay to cover this cost. If the cost was half of that, $30, it would be 8,000 modders needed to cover costs. If it was the price of a DLC, such as $15, it would be 16,000 added donations, a total of over 1.6% of every PC gamer that buys the game.

To put that in perspective, if you go to Nexus mods, you can find a little over 2,000 mods on the site for Dragon Age: Origins. That's 2,000 mods... not 2,000 individual modders. And that is the number of mods created for a free toolkit, not for one that would result in a price tag just to use it.

And that's just to get the toolkit. This isn't testing or providing any polish, where the tools themselves would go through the rigors of actual game development and have all of the kinks worked out. This would be fitting a round peg in a square hole and could be incredibly buggy, highly unintuitive and, overhaul, a pain in the ass.

So the end result is not only unlikely to provide the final product that people would be looking for, but the chances of getting enough people to buy the extra would be not enough to cover the cost. And I'm sure I'm DRASTICALLY underestimating the costs involved with creating tool software from the ground up that is compatible with Frostbite. It's a losing proposition for Bioware and gamers both.

[Shapeshifter777]

This thread is irrelevant.

No amount of money will cover the costs that all the third party tools require to license. Such licenses costs hundreds, if not thousands, PER license (of which there might be a dozen for the whole engine).
 

 

Not so fast jimmy.  If we wanted to modify the game in the Frostbite engine, this would be the case.  What I am asking for though is new software, like a tool kit, that can modify certain aspects of game without having to use the actual engine Bioware used to develop everything.

[Fast Jimmy]

Not so fast jimmy.  If we wanted to modify the game in the Frostbite engine, this would be the case.  What I am asking for though is new software, like a tool kit, that can modify certain aspects of game without having to use the actual engine Bioware used to develop everything.

And the vast majority of the rest of my post goes on to prove how this is a losing proposition as well.

[Shapeshifter777]

And the vast majority of the rest of my post goes on to prove how this is a losing proposition as well.

 

You do make some good arguments.  It's a shame, but I will continue to hope, if even only deluding myself as to there being any hope of seeing mod tools for this game.

[Sylvius the Mad]

This thread is irrelevant.

No amount of money will cover the costs that all the third party tools require to license. Such licenses costs hundreds, if not thousands, PER license (of which there might be a dozen for the whole engine).

In terms of developing mod tools that don't use the third party software, this is equally impractical. Creating tools to make a game is far from a trivial task. It would require a team of individuals working up to six months to a year (if not more) to create supplemental programming to fill all the gaps from the third party software.

But it could encourage future games to be developed without extensive use of third-party tools.

 

And that would be relevant.

...if VGChartz can be trusted...

If they don't count digital sales (Steam, Origin), they can't.

 

Do they count digital sales?

[TurretSyndrome]

If the supposed 2000 DA modders could make some noise for mod tools once DA:I gets released, they might do it. 

[Fast Jimmy]

I agree with what you have said but a better perspective would just to take into account the development time needed for such a project. Testing is usually incorporated into the development time especially if you are using a scheme like agile.

From my understanding, I think the Bioware team actually uses Scrum, which is one of my favorite PM styles for software. That being said, I totally agree - I was merely pointing out that the cost to get the work done, not even to ensure decent quality, would require payment of exponentially more people than who actually used the toolkit to mod for DA:O, a game that had a free toolkit and roughly the same PC market share.

Another issue would be what if they are heavily using third party tools for the majority of the engine? imagine if frostbite 3 is rigorously using a rendering tool for it's graphical operations? Removing that third party software would require something to be build from the ground up. At times it is just not worth it.

I'd say it's never worth it, honestly. At least if the only benefit is to create a modkit. When studios that own and use all of their own tools like CD Projekt or Bethesda release toolkits, it requires none (or at least little) of this re-investment in items that how low financial return value. To do a complete rework of the entire engine just for a modkit could never be a winning proposition outside of finding some way to monetize the mods themselves using some form of DRM to facilitate payment and deter piracy.

[Fast Jimmy]

If the supposed 2000 DA modders could make some noise for mod tools once DA:I gets released, they might do it.

Unlikely. For one, there isn't 2,000 of them. For two, these were mods for a game released five+ years ago. While many are likely still active, many others will have moved on. It's a hobby, not a profession.

[Fast Jimmy]

But it could encourage future games to be developed without extensive use of third-party tools.
 
And that would be relevant.

Frostbite is the future for all EA games. I'm no expert, but if the core of the engine relies on third party software, then the concerns of a fraction of the smallest platform for one development studio is likely not going to change the will of the corporate policy and vision.

If they don't count digital sales (Steam, Origin), they can't.
 
Do they count digital sales?

I don't think they CAN count digital sales directly (because Steam doesn't release those numbers, for reasons I can't even begin to fathom), but I still believe they include estimates in their results.

But for games where their developers did release sales numbers, they match up decently well, so there's little reason to assume that the trends, even if bucked, would come out radically different.

[TurretSyndrome]

Modders are modders. My logic is that if people were passionate enough to take the time and mod the previous DA games, it's not hard to believe that they will come back just as easily as they left. I bet DA:I has made many modders drool over the prospect of modding it already. All it takes is some initiative to be taken on the Bioware forums to let the devs know.

 

But honestly, now that I think about it, I don't think that's even necessary. Bioware is well aware of all the mods on nexus and the number of things modders were able to create despite the games being so restrictive on access and assets. Mark Darrah already mentioned during the gamespot stage demo that they are interested in it but just not at launch. We'll see what happens.

[AlanC9]

A few may be able to, but most people aren't rich enough to not need a return on investment that would go out to hundreds, or thousands, of people. Per RL economics, if one is going to buy something then it's either super generous, or pretty much unlikely that they'll give out their end product for free. What could end up happening, according to human nature, is some brilliant someone will find a means of copying the code and sending it around to be pirated (either the base tool, or whatever mod has been created) for those who can't afford play richie rich and buy-mod their games up the wazzoo.

That didn't even attempt to answer my question, you know. Unless you're trying to deny that such a situation could arise.

[Fast Jimmy]

Modders are modders. My logic is that if people were passionate enough to take the time and mod the previous DA games, it's not hard to believe that they will come back just as easily as they left. I bet DA:I has made many modders drool over the prospect of modding it already. All it takes is some initiative to be taken on the Bioware forums to let the devs know.
 
But honestly, now that I think about it, I don't think that's even necessary. Bioware is well aware of all the mods on nexus and the number of things modders were able to create despite the games being so restrictive on access and assets. Mark Darrah already mentioned during the gamespot stage demo that they are interested in it but just not at launch. We'll see what happens.

I'd be curious to see what they do (if anything), especially after launch. The window of players still playing the game (and hence would use the developer mods) shrinks by the month following release. Still, one could hold out hope if one were so inclined.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Frostbite is the future for all EA games. I'm no expert, but if the core of the engine relies on third party software, then the concerns of a fraction of the smallest platform for one development studio is likely not going to change the will of the corporate policy and vision.

Does the core of the engine rely on third party software?  Is that necessarily the case going forward?

 

And doesn't an active call for mod tools drive EA's competitors as well?

 

You're being far too defeatist.

 

I will never accept that modding isn't allowed.  This computer sitting here is mine.  I own it.  The electrons on the HDD are also mine.  I can do what I like with them.

[AlanC9]

To put that in perspective, if you go to Nexus mods, you can find a little over 2,000 mods on the site for Dragon Age: Origins. That's 2,000 mods... not 2,000 individual modders. And that is the number of mods created for a free toolkit, not for one that would result in a price tag just to use it.

However, one need not release a mod to find a toolset useful. I've used the DA:O toolset for research and personal modifications. This isn't relevant to your overall point unless they go for a really low price, of course.... $5 or so.