It already is a reality. No one is harmed by me modding games for my own use. I should have complete control over the software on my system.Keep thinking that. You won't make it a reality.
One of my favourite mods for Skyrim was the Zelda music mod (honestly wandering around with Windwaker violin themes was awesome and using the forest temple themes in the dungeons just made them so much more epic) but it's rather doubtful a mod like that could get on consoles.
The first time i bought Skyrim it was on PS 3 and that was a big mistake because i saw on you tube what the mods could do to the game. So i bought it again on PC and with all the mods i used ( i don't know the names of the mods i'm not on my gaming computer now ) it looked so much better especially the scenery mods by far my most favorite ones.
And that's to bad i would really want to see such mods on console as well.
The first time i bought Skyrim it was on PS 3 and that was a big mistake because i saw on you tube what the mods could do to the game. So i bought it again on PC and with all the mods i used ( i don't know the names of the mods i'm not on my gaming computer now ) it looked so much better especially the scenery mods by far my most favorite ones.
And that's to bad i would really want to see such mods on console as well.
Yeah i did the same for xbox 360, so much better when you can add mods and customize your game the way you want it, just makes for more immersion in my mind which is what RPGs should be about,if your immersed in the game then your enjoying what the game has to offer which is what i love about the ME games and the DA games
Honestly don't care I'm getting this for the PC 
It already is a reality. No one is harmed by me modding games for my own use. I should have complete control over the software on my system.
If I want to decrypt some files and move them around, why not?
If it was "already a reality", then we wouldn't have threads discussing whether a developer is going to add mod support for consoles.
I see we were talking past each other.If it was "already a reality", then we wouldn't have threads discussing whether a developer is going to add mod support for consoles.
If it was "already a reality", then we wouldn't have threads discussing whether a developer is going to add mod support for consoles.
To be fair mod support only really makes modding easier to do, but we could currently do it anyway. That and you aren't as likely to be banned from online services for doing it if there's official support behind it.
Although in general I think the usefulness of modding is overstated, even though I think it's a great thing myself. As much as we like to talk about Skyrim and how you can basically mod the game to whatever you want at this point, Skyrim is not the standard for modding. It's the single most popular modding scene there is on PC.
If we look at the 5 most popular games to mod on nexus right now: Skyrim, Oblivion, New Vegas, Fallout 3, Fallout 4. They're all games with Bethesda's name on it.
The vast majority of PC games have little to no modding scene to speak of, and if you want to tailor the game to your specific wants you are either out of luck or have to learn modding yourself and put in a lot of time to do it.
You do realise that Bethesda have been making games with an engine designed for modding for decades right? And the only reason mods are just now coming onto consoles is based on that.
The way we have to mod Mass Effect just wouldn't be feasible on a console with the way Microsoft and Sony are with their platforms. I've got no issues with parity between platforms, but being realistic it isn't going to happen outside of Bethesda or CDProjektRED (the only other company I can think of that officially support modding their RPG's) any time soon.
Bioware would be foolish to dismiss modding tools outright and they have said as much in the past. They want to do it and see the value in it; not just for gamers' sakes but also financially. From what I understand, a lot of the processes that were handled by third party solutions are now being handled in-house which removes some of the barriers of licensing software to be used by the general public. Whether this will be enough for them to greenlight the project, we'll just have to wait and see.
I think there is a far greater chance with MEA than there ever was with DAI (which was a complete non-starter) but as with all things, they will weigh up the costs and potential gains before moving forward. If console modding is a success for Bethesda, it can only help the case for making a toolkit for MEA. BW are far more likely to implement a feature that 100% of its customer base can benefit from.
BW and EA like to include features that are cool and fun but also features that add real value and drive up sales. They know how to do their jobs and they are not blind to Bethedsa's successes or the excitement in the community about console mods. If it's possible to replicate that success in their own game, they will do it. It's why ME3MP happened. It might have seemed like a massive undertaking, there were probably discussions about whether or not it was needed or "belonged" in a Mass Effect game but in the end it was a total success and well worth the time and money it took to put together. Even if I don't play it myself, it still adds value to the game that translates into cold hard, cash. Bethesda are proving that this can also apply to mod support.
or they could just take it from their Austin studio. Make people pay real money for it.
Not happening. I can't think of any significant mods for Frostbite games and seeing as Mass Effect isn't a franchise renowned for its modding community, there is an exactly 0% chance of Bioware/EA creating an official modding platform for PC or consoles.
You're never going to get proper mods for consoles on any games that aren't Bethesda titles.
Not happening. I can't think of any significant mods for Frostbite games and seeing as Mass Effect isn't a franchise renowned for its modding community, there is an exactly 0% chance of Bioware/EA creating an official modding platform for PC or consoles.
You're never going to get proper mods for consoles on any games that aren't Bethesda titles.
I'm not saying people should get their hopes up but the chance is far from zero. Bioware have released mod kits in the past and said it is something they would like to do again. The climate is right for it, coming of the heels of FO4's successful mod support launch and they *may* just do it. I just have this feeling. I wouldn't put money on it but I don't know. We may find out on Sunday.
Would I want them yes, but this is EAware not awesome Bethesda. EAware don't even try to support mods, so I doubt Andromeda will have console mods.
This is an example of just how uniformed gamers are, it shows contempt for Bioware by calling them EAware again showing just how uniformed the poster is. EA has had MULTIPLE developers confirm their position that they do NOT micromanage their developers. To imply that EA is doing so by calling Bioware EAware is to display one's ignorance.
Bioware should NEVER EVER open up mods for their frostbite engine games.
"But I like mods, Bethesda has mods so it is possible," says the typical uniformed gamer.
Modding tools open up your engine to changes that directly impact game play that is the intent of mods. In a single player environment that is fine but in a multiplayer environment that is not fine. Cheats and tweaks and anything that gives you an advantage over another player in MP can ruin the experience for players that don't have these cheats. Mods tools allow this to happen more easily because that is their intent by design. If you create mod tools for Inquisition and Andromeda you destroy the 'integrity' of the frostbite engine which means EVERY frostbite engine game future or past will be MORE vulnerable to cheats. Battlefield 1, star wars battlefront present and future all vulnerable to people using Andromeda mod tools to create tweaks for other games.
The multiplayer scene was terrible for cheats in the late nineties and early 2000's this led to creating more "closed off" more secure engines so that fewer players could hack them and create cheats. Overwatch just experience massive bans on cheating players because cheaters RUIN people's gaming experience and like it or not Bioware games are not created in a vacuum they are part of the frostbite engine ecosphere.
So in actual fact EA is awesome for not allowing players to have their experiences RUINED just because some self entitled gamers think their gaming experience trumps everyone else's. Adding official mod support to Andromeda will make other gamer's life craptastic ergo gamers as a whole shouldn't want that but gamers are the MOST self entitled selfish group of consumers and if they want something they don't care who's gaming experience is ruined.
Just as an FYI I am not a multiplayer gamer I love mods but I am not such a pr!ck that I would put my desire for mods ahead of ruining other gamers' gaming experiences just so I could have my mods. And no I don't think EA is a great company but I am tired of ill informed gamers caging everything EA does as it must be bad because EA did bad stuff before. That is how children think. EA should be judge on the individual choices they make. And Again I ask what terrible thing has EA done in the last two years? They changed direction years ago now and it shows they didn't push out DA:I or ME:A but allowed both games to be delayed with DA:I it was delayed twice and for over a year in total. I'm not saying give them a pass I am saying stop caging the conversation that everything ea does is bad.
Bioware should NEVER EVER open up mods for their frostbite engine games.
"But I like mods, Bethesda has mods so it is possible," says the typical uniformed gamer.
Modding tools open up your engine to changes that directly impact game play that is the intent of mods. In a single player environment that is fine but in a multiplayer environment that is not fine. Cheats and tweaks and anything that gives you an advantage over another player in MP can ruin the experience for players that don't have these cheats. Mods tools allow this to happen more easily because that is their intent by design. If you create mod tools for Inquisition and Andromeda you destroy the 'integrity' of the frostbite engine which means EVERY frostbite engine game future or past will be MORE vulnerable to cheats. Battlefield 1, star wars battlefront present and future all vulnerable to people using Andromeda mod tools to create tweaks for other games.
The Frostbite engine isn't actually as complicated as EA/DICE like to talk about.
Any developer with a decent knowledge of how that stuff works will be able to pick the engine apart and then start making hacks for other people to use. Even if you managed to create an engine that is difficult enough to make it not worth the effort, we would just find alternative routes to cheating that bypass the engine.
The thing is that creating these cheats already requires programming knowledge regardless of how open the engine is, and obscuring parts of your engine doesn't tend to keep those people out. It just delays how long until they do.
The best way to stop cheating is taking a more active role in anti-cheat detection, not obscuring how your game engine works.
It already is a reality. No one is harmed by me modding games for my own use. I should have complete control over the software on my system.
If I want to decrypt some files and move them around, why not?
That is false and you know it.
Knowledge can not be contained you tweaking your game for your use will result in that knowledge of how to do so getting out which means OTHER people will use said knowledge to create cheats which WILL hurt gamers' experiences.
You should not have complete control of the engine because you are not BUYING the rights to develop for that engine. You are buying the rights to PLAY a game with said engine. That is not a subtle difference. This is why there are DEVELOPER licences for engines. The integrity of an engine is a selling point for a company an engine that is easily modded isn't marketable for MP and like it or not you are not the only fraking gamer on the planet so maybe you should think about how your actions might impact other people. So you don't have the 'right' to just move about files you have to actual purchase those rights with a developers licence.
But let me guess you don't care about that because you only care about your wants so who care if you actually ruin other gamers games or pay for the rights to develop using X engine, all that matters is that Sylvius the mad gets what he wants and damn the rest.
The Frostbite engine isn't actually as complicated as EA/DICE like to talk about.
Any developer with a decent knowledge of how that stuff works will be able to pick the engine apart and then start making hacks for other people to use. Even if you managed to create an engine that is difficult enough to make it not worth the effort, we would just find alternative routes to cheating that bypass the engine.
The thing is that creating these cheats already requires programming knowledge regardless of how open the engine is, and obscuring parts of your engine doesn't tend to keep those people out. It just delays how long until they do.
The best way to stop cheating is taking a more active role in anti-cheat detection, not obscuring how your game engine works.
It really bothers me when people don't fully quote me where I actually have a point salient to their post in the snipped bit.
The multiplayer scene was terrible for cheats in the late nineties and early 2000's this led to creating more "closed off" more secure engines so that fewer players could hack them and create cheats. Overwatch just experience massive bans on cheating players because cheaters RUIN people's gaming experience and like it or not Bioware games are not created in a vacuum they are part of the frostbite engine ecosphere.
Maybe the bold and underlined parts of my post you didn't include might just be a response to your point.
I never claimed it was fool proof but NOTHING you posted counters this point. Every I said is still 100% accurate.
That sounds more like an argument against multiplayer than an argument against modding tools to me.
Maybe they should just ditch the MP. It was adequate in ME3, but it's still completely unnecessary. They'd do better to just make a MP spin off and moderate it with an iron fist.
What i said is still 100% valid if ME:A is single player only. If you have mod tools for one game using engine X every game that uses engine X is now vulnerable. Removing MP in ME:A does nothing to the equation because ME:A is part of the frostbite engine ecosphere it is NOT developed in isolation.
The fact that people are ignoring this just show how accurate I was in my post, Games are so self entitle and selfish that they really don't care if they ruin someone else's gaming experience so long as they have fun.
It really bothers me when people don't fully quote me where I actually have a point salient to their post in the snipped bit.
The multiplayer scene was terrible for cheats in the late nineties and early 2000's this led to creating more "closed off" more secure engines so that fewer players could hack them and create cheats. Overwatch just experience massive bans on cheating players because cheaters RUIN people's gaming experience and like it or not Bioware games are not created in a vacuum they are part of the frostbite engine ecosphere.
Maybe the bold and underlined parts of my post you didn't include might just be a response to your point.
I never claimed it was fool proof but NOTHING you posted counters this point. Every I said is still 100% accurate.
I quoted the part that was relevant to what I was saying.
The 90s and early 2000s had other reasons for this being the case. Anti-cheat measures were a joke which is what lead to the rise of cheating. The closed off engines only helped because the internet had not yet become so massively prevalent that anybody could use Google to immediately find a community of people hacking a game engine. People were far more often left to their own devices back then, but that's not the case in 2016.
Overwatch should serve as an example of my point because the engine isn't open for people to look at, and see how many cheaters it got that Blizzard has banned an insane number of people less than a month after launch.
I quoted the part that was relevant to what I was saying.
The 90s and early 2000s had other reasons for this being the case. Anti-cheat measures were a joke which is what lead to the rise of cheating. The closed off engines only helped because the internet had not yet become so massively prevalent that anybody could use Google to immediately find a community of people hacking a game engine. People were far more often left to their own devices back then, but that's not the case in 2016.
Overwatch should serve as an example of my point because the engine isn't open for people to look at, and see how many cheaters it got that Blizzard has banned an insane number of people less than a month after launch.
You are not presenting a valid point at all. So because a more closed off engine is NOT fool proof your position is that they should make it MORE open just so you can have mods?
How is that not selfish and self entitled?
Many of the people banned on overwatch could NOT create the cheats themselves so they BOUGHT them which is yet more evidence strengthening my point. a closed off engine limits the number of cheaters because not everyone that wants to cheat can do so and some won't or can't afford to buy a cheat thus limiting the number of cheaters. You don't solve the cheater problem by making it EASIER to cheat you use better tools as you said while still making it DIFFICULT (never claimed it was impossible) for people to cheat.
What i said is still 100% valid if ME:A is single player only. If you have mod tools for one game using engine X every game that uses engine X is now vulnerable. Removing MP in ME:A does nothing to the equation because ME:A is part of the frostbite engine ecosphere it is NOT developed in isolation.
The fact that people are ignoring this just show how accurate I was in my post, Games are so self entitle and selfish that they really don't care if they ruin someone else's gaming experience so long as they have fun.
You are not presenting a valid point at all. So because a more closed off engine is NOT fool proof your position is that they should make it MORE open just so you can have mods?
How is that not selfish and self entitled?
Many of the people banned on overwatch could NOT create the cheats themselves so they BOUGHT them which is yet more evidence strengthening my point. a closed off engine limits the number of cheaters because not everyone that wants to cheat can do so and some won't or can't afford to buy a cheat thus limiting the number of cheaters. You don't solve the cheater problem by making it EASIER to cheat you use better tools as you said while still making it DIFFICULT (never claimed it was impossible) for people to cheat.
My entire point is that even in a closed off system people just make cheats and start handing them out to others, so restricting it is pointless because the cheats are already out there. They're not all costing money either. A cheater is a cheater, regardless of where they got the cheats from and in 2016 you require far less expertise to get your hands on cheats than in the 90s. Overwatch is a good example of this because there was a lot of cheaters despite it being a closed system.
With the internet being as prevalent as it is now making the engine open to modding doesn't increase the ease of cheating all that much. Yes it seems like a logical argument to say that it would but the reality is that you already need knowledge of programming in order to create the hacks even for an open engine, and any closed engine wont remain closed for very long anymore because those programmers get together to figure out how to break open an engine as a group.
I already said how you solve the cheater problem: By improving your anti-cheat measures. That does far more than closing off the system.
As for selfish and self entitled maybe we should talk about all the good modding has done for developers? I bet the guys who developed Counter-Strike love modding.
I explicitly don't care about multiplayer gaming. So I'm wilfully ignoring any possible effects there.That is false and you know it.
Knowledge can not be contained you tweaking your game for your use will result in that knowledge of how to do so getting out which means OTHER people will use said knowledge to create cheats which WILL hurt gamers' experiences.
You should not have complete control of the engine because you are not BUYING the rights to develop for that engine. You are buying the rights to PLAY a game with said engine. That is not a subtle difference. This is why there are DEVELOPER licences for engines. The integrity of an engine is a selling point for a company an engine that is easily modded isn't marketable for MP and like it or not you are not the only fraking gamer on the planet so maybe you should think about how your actions might impact other people. So you don't have the 'right' to just move about files you have to actual purchase those rights with a developers licence.
But let me guess you don't care about that because you only care about your wants so who care if you actually ruin other gamers games or pay for the rights to develop using X engine, all that matters is that Sylvius the mad gets what he wants and damn the rest.
I agree with mods on console 100%. If someone wants to add stuff why shouldnt they be allowed to? If companies want this to be a thing they (Bioware) along with Sony and Microsoft are going to have to police this. Add some form of software that detects modification and block it when you enter multiplayer. It's not hard they just don't want to.
Retour en haut