Firaxis, I urge you to ignore the shortsighted requests for advanced modding editors and the like. They are trivial and unimportant. Creating them will take valuable time away from actually improving Civ5's features.

We don't need a good map editor, the worldbuilder in Civ4 was fine. For those who disagree, you know you can open Worldbuilder files up in Notepad, right? All of the data for each individual tile, city, and the game in general was all well organized out. Anyone with some time to kill could have created a stunning scenario. A quality map editor would take a lot more time to create and would still not be very intuitive to use. It's simply impossible to create an interface that accurately gives all the options to edit a game in an easy manner. Civilization is too complex for that.

We don't need an XML editor. You can open XML up with an text editor. I've tried out some of the "utilities" in the Civ4 forums, but honestly, they are WAY more cumbersome than just editing the XML by hand. Any utility you make will still not satisfy the complaints of users here and they will not make XML modding any easier. It's just an excuse for more people to not learn programming. Instead of making a "universal translator" for the complainers here, spend more time improving the actual gameplay. Plus, the utilities will be rendered useless when modders add new XML fields for units, buildings, etc...

We don't need an intuitive python editor. Python is a fairly easy programming language to learn. An intuitive editor would only restrict what we can and can not do with the interface, nor would a truly intuitive editor ever be truly possible for a programming language, don't waste your time. If it was possible to make programming as simple as it was to speak your name, we wouldn't need Firaxis anymore.

We don't need a simple way to change the SDK. Just giving us the sources files is fine. We don't need hand holding. If you restrict what we can and can not do with some kind of SDK editor, it would be very damaging to potential mods. SDK mods are the best mods; losing those would mean FFH2, Rhye's Mod, and Revolutions would have never existed. Just make sure you DO give us the Source Code. The more the merrier.

Firaxis, we do not want an editor for unit art. The current art tools are very powerful, and any editor you create would not be able to match the likes of Blender or 3DSMax.

Firaxis, we don't simple and "intuitive" editors to make great mods. That would only ensure we get tons of simple and unoriginal mods. Rather, give us the source code; give us exactly what you used to create the game. Thank you.

Firstly who is this "we" ?

Secondly modding tools and editors have never stopped any dedicated modder from ignoring/working around them in any game.

Lastly, modding tools are quite convenient for some who would wish to make straightforward mods but actually have an ongoing life outside of the game.

Civ4's modding potential is very good. I hope we get a similar setup in civ5. That said, they really should take the time to build a better working and more intuitive, and external scenario editor. The WB in civ4 is pretty much rubbish, and editing the text manually in the WBS documents is tedious and difficult; it would certainly be worth their time to build a better way.

Agree on XML though, you can't really get much simpler then directly working with the XML in a text editor; XML utilities or other "ease of the user" type tools for hobby moders will likely just be more clunky then just digging into the XML anyway, and will likely end up causing more harm then good.

Please, quote the source confirming XML, python and SDK.

Otherwise, your post is groundless.

Please, quote the source confirming XML, python and SDK.

Otherwise, your post is groundless.

If there is no SDK, then modding will be groundless. :(

Secondly modding tools and editors have never stopped any dedicated modder from ignoring/working around them in any game.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you Civilization 3 as my evidence. I rest my case.


Lastly, modding tools are quite convenient for some who would wish to make straightforward mods but actually have an ongoing life outside of the game.

Straightforward mods are not that time consuming to make. Give yourself a good evening and you can add a few dozen new units or buildings to the game pretty easily; in Civ4.

There wasn't SDK in pre-civ4 games and we got to do a lot. I'd actually like a map editor and then edit the XML files for tiles, units, etc. You can always get XML editors online. There's a few on sourceforge, try them out and choose one.
For civ3, there wasn't any unitmaker program. So? FLICster appeared. Reverse engineering. All that is really required is the source code (Afforess is right) and -PLEASE- a world editor. But extra tools would always be nice. As long as they aren't the only tols that are usable :).

Firaxis, I urge you to ignore the shortsighted requests for advanced modding editors and the like. They are trivial and unimportant. Creating them will take valuable time away from actually improving Civ5's features.

These kinds of tools are often developed to make the development process itself easier. Take for example how we've seen two Civs so far (America and Germany if I recall). Now imagine putting in 16 more (Of course, I would assume that these are not the only two that are already being developed). If you developed a tool to put these other civs in faster and more efficiently, you're saving time. You can then just release this tool with the software for modders.

Civ 4 was pretty easy to mod though.

These kinds of tools are often developed to make the development process itself easier. Take for example how we've seen two Civs so far (America and Germany if I recall). Now imagine putting in 16 more (Of course, I would assume that these are not the only two that are already being developed). If you developed a tool to put these other civs in faster and more efficiently, you're saving time. You can then just release this tool with the software for modders.


I'm operating under the assumption they are not using such modding tools. I did state that if they were, they should release them to us:

Rather, give us the source code; give us exactly what you used to create the game.

I was going to come in here and complain about your title, but looking at subject of your text I need to agree with you.

The only thing I am against is when a game is created in a way that makes it impossible to mod the things you mentioned. Civ 4 was nearly a perfect example of how to make a game modable. I would complain if the game was made less modable (i.e. pulling stuff into the executable).

Actually, I first I thought this was a sarcastic joke - that you wanted all the editing tools. Because if there was a good mapbuilder and so on, yes, the community would want them...But then there is also this, which I agree with - the SDK and source are vital. And I wouldn't want them sacrificing superficial "modability" for actual access and utility- "hey, you can make your own map, but you can't actually mod anything else easily."

Anyway, if I even get civ V at all, I will be looking forward to some great mods...so thanks in advance to all the modders.

If there is no SDK, then modding will be groundless. :(

Not entirely true. Look at what scient has done for SMAC without one line of source code.

And then after looking at that, look at Call to Power 2 which came with no source code. There were some very major mods issued for that using the inbuilt script language. Firaxis don't even need to give us a Civ4 styled SDK (the direct VS2003 project files). If the engine has a good enough script language and API then we can still do anything.

One consideration you have to keep in mind is the licenses of the components they're using in the engine. If they strictly prohibit providing the source code for (such as GameBryo in Civ4) then we won't see it. What we will actually get access to in terms of modding is related to what they are allowed to give us.

As I said, where is the source of your confirmation of XML, Python and SDK? :)

And then after looking at that, look at Call to Power 2 which came with no source code. There were some very major mods issued for that using the inbuilt script language. Firaxis don't even need to give us a Civ4 styled SDK (the direct VS2003 project files). If the engine has a good enough script language and API then we can still do anything.

One consideration you have to keep in mind is the licenses of the components they're using in the engine. If they strictly prohibit providing the source code for (such as GameBryo in Civ4) then we won't see it. What we will actually get access to in terms of modding is related to what they are allowed to give us.

Anecdotal evidence is meaningless. I can throw around a bunch of games with no SDK that also have ZERO mods for them.

As I said, where is the source of your confirmation of XML, Python and SDK?

SDK is assumed, without it there is no "unprecedented modding tools...". It may not literally be the source files like Civ4, but if it is entirely omitted, modders can skip Civ5 for sure.

As for XML and Python, you are reading too much into it. Replace them with "generic scripting languages" if you will.

Civ4's modding potential is very good. I hope we get a similar setup in civ5. That said, they really should take the time to build a better working and more intuitive, and external scenario editor. The WB in civ4 is pretty much rubbish, and editing the text manually in the WBS documents is tedious and difficult; it would certainly be worth their time to build a better way.

Agree on XML though, you can't really get much simpler then directly working with the XML in a text editor; XML utilities or other "ease of the user" type tools for hobby moders will likely just be more clunky then just digging into the XML anyway, and will likely end up causing more harm then good.

Agreed on all counts.

Anecdotal evidence is meaningless. I can throw around a bunch of games with no SDK that also have ZERO mods for them.

You said without an SDK that modding is groundless. I was giving you titles where there was no SDK but still mods. Without an SDK modding is NOT groundless, just a lot harder.


SDK is assumed, without it there is no "unprecedented modding tools...". It may not literally be the source files like Civ4, but if it is entirely omitted, modders can skip Civ5 for sure.

I wouldn't assume anything is provided. Remember, it's marketing who write those PR details, not the devs. Remember, we were promised "unprecedented modding tools" with Civ4 Colonization but didn't see anything resembling that. ;)

As for XML and Python, you are reading too much into it. Replace them with "generic scripting languages" if you will.

That's better, but your OP was discussing XML and Python. I was responding to that. :)

You said without an SDK that modding is groundless. I was giving you titles where there was no SDK but still mods. Without an SDK modding is NOT groundless, just a lot harder.

Without an SDK, the mods we will see will be on par with current Civ3 mods. Civ3 mods pale in comparison to Civ4 mods. I would go as far to say that there aren't really any Civ3 mods so much as there are Civ3 game tweaks.


I wouldn't assume anything is provided. Remember, it's marketing who write those PR details, not the devs. Remember, we were promised "unprecedented modding tools" with Civ4 Colonization but didn't see anything resembling that. ;)

C4C was just an extensive mod of Civ4. They couldn't offer anything more than they already had with Civ4. Civ5 is a completely new game engine.

However, I do have a fear that by "unprecedented modding tools" they mean something like the creature creators in Spore. I will be very very unhappy if that's all it is.

Without an SDK, the mods we will see will be on par with current Civ3 mods. Civ3 mods pale in comparison to Civ4 mods. I would go as far to say that there aren't really any Civ3 mods so much as there are Civ3 game tweaks.
You should not be so openly contemptuous of civ III modders. We really love the game and we do the best we can to reverse-engineer some of the things that the uber-morons at Firaxis continue to refuse to release even after civ5 is announced so it's lost all commercial value.
C4C was just an extensive mod of Civ4. They couldn't offer anything more than they already had with Civ4. Civ5 is a completely new game engine.
Why would you want such a completely new engine except for incorporating hexagons and perhaps a better AI if civ IV is so good?
However, I do have a fear that by "unprecedented modding tools" they mean something like the creature creators in Spore. I will be very very unhappy if that's all it is.
Individually customisable units + hexagons? Where do I have to sign?

Firaxis, I urge you to ignore the shortsighted requests for advanced modding editors and the like. They are trivial and unimportant. Creating them will take valuable time away from actually improving Civ5's features.

As I said in my thread requesting a good, user-friendly editor, building an editor along side the game (by the developers who get paid to make the game) will not steal any valuable time from the game itself.

We don't need a good map editor, the worldbuilder in Civ4 was fine. For those who disagree, you know you can open Worldbuilder files up in Notepad, right? All of the data for each individual tile, city, and the game in general was all well organized out. Anyone with some time to kill could have created a stunning scenario. A quality map editor would take a lot more time to create and would still not be very intuitive to use. It's simply impossible to create an interface that accurately gives all the options to edit a game in an easy manner. Civilization is too complex for that.

The Civ 4 editor was very limited in its capability. For those of us that have lives outside of the game, if we wanted to build a map on our own, we had to start a custom game, enter the world builder, spend countless hours placing the terrain and features, placing the civs (making sure that there fog-of-war was cleared from their generated start positions), placing resources, and so on... and if we exited and tried to go back in later, we would run into a slew of problems.

You must never have played Civ III or used its editor. Because it was external, it was faster, much easier to use, you could save and come back without any problems and so on. Oh, and going into the notepad editor is purely a pain. I am not a programmer and don't want to have to scroll through 5 million lines to change a couple things. It can easily be done in an editor.

We don't need an XML editor. You can open XML up with an text editor. I've tried out some of the "utilities" in the Civ4 forums, but honestly, they are WAY more cumbersome than just editing the XML by hand. Any utility you make will still not satisfy the complaints of users here and they will not make XML modding any easier. It's just an excuse for more people to not learn programming. Instead of making a "universal translator" for the complainers here, spend more time improving the actual gameplay. Plus, the utilities will be rendered useless when modders add new XML fields for units, buildings, etc...

The utilities in the forums were being made by people who were sacrificing there time, for free, to work on these editors, which was taking time away from them being able to work on their own projects. I salute them for their efforts, even if nothing really good ever came from it. The XML files, like the worlbuilder files, were very cumbersome and a pain to sort through... not to mention having to go through multiple files to make sure that you covered all the bases for one little edit. Plus, as Dale said, who says they are using XML this time. Read the news, Civ V is built from a whole new engine.

We don't need an intuitive python editor. Python is a fairly easy programming language to learn. An intuitive editor would only restrict what we can and can not do with the interface, nor would a truly intuitive editor ever be truly possible for a programming language, don't waste your time. If it was possible to make programming as simple as it was to speak your name, we wouldn't need Firaxis anymore.

Easy for who... those who already know how to program? Many of us don't have the time to learn all of these things just so that we can play a game.

We don't need a simple way to change the SDK. Just giving us the sources files is fine. We don't need hand holding. If you restrict what we can and can not do with some kind of SDK editor, it would be very damaging to potential mods. SDK mods are the best mods; losing those would mean FFH2, Rhye's Mod, and Revolutions would have never existed. Just make sure you DO give us the Source Code. The more the merrier.

Obviously, if you do want the SDK, then you want the ability to mod... you are just being selfish and want the ability to do so to lay with those that have Computer Science Degrees. For them to release the basic tools mentioned above, it does not mean that they have to gimp the advanced tools for advanced modders. I want those too so that the experts can churn out some creative and advanced mod than I could ever dream of doing without a mod team.

Firaxis, we do not want an editor for unit art. The current art tools are very powerful, and any editor you create would not be able to match the likes of Blender or 3DSMax.

Unit (as well as Leader, etc) editors are not necessary. But they would be nice and other games have proven that they could be done. They don't have to be advanced like in those games. Just enough so that people can easily change colors, attire, equipment, etc of the models to diversify just a bit so that we could easily include them with a new civ, etc. Advanced modders can still use the high end, advanced programs to create new and unique models.

Firaxis, we don't simple and "intuitive" editors to make great mods. That would only ensure we get tons of simple and unoriginal mods. Rather, give us the source code; give us exactly what you used to create the game. Thank you.

Considering that what they used to create the game probably cost them a pretty penny (have you ever looked at the prices of the tools that game designers use?), I doubt that they would give us "exactly what they used to create the game"! Some of us just want to make simple and unoriginal mods for ourselves. Some of us want to make scenarios without having to take 5 months off of work and spend 16 hours a day doing so.

Please, stop being so selfish... let us have what we want and stop complaining about our desire for advanced tools that simplify some of the modding. As I have stated over and over, I want these tools so that the rest of us can modify what we want while those that are more advanced (like Rhyse and Dale to name a few of the generous souls that like to help us out) can spend more time working on their own projects.

You should not be so openly contemptuous of civ III modders. We really love the game and we do the best we can to reverse-engineer some of the things that the uber-morons at Firaxis continue to refuse to release even after civ5 is announced so it's lost all commercial value.
I don't want to start a Civ3 vs Civ4 debate. My opinion is already clear on the matter.


Why would you want such a completely new engine except for incorporating hexagons and perhaps a better AI if civ IV is so good?

You are misinterpreting what I am saying. I am saying that Civilization 4's modding capabilities are great. I want Civilization 5's to be even better.


Individually customisable units + hexagons? Where do I have to sign?


That would be terrible if they did that instead of what they have now for Civ4. We'd get 1 thousand look alike archers, 1 million units that try to look like reproductive organs, and no new depth to gameplay.

Of course there is no assurance that they will release the Civ5 source, but it would be foolish for them not to. How many bug fixes and additions were created by the community and then taken and sold by Firaxis? To many to count I would say and I personally would fire the marketing person that suggested giving up that source of free labor.

As far as license costs go, Civ4 is the perfect example. The only license that precluded release of source was Gamebyro's and they didn't release that part. XML, Python, C++, and plenty of other languages and libraries don't have such restrictions. From a monitary standpoint, there is no reason they shouldn't release their source code.

That said, if they don't release the source (and I'm not naive enough to doubt corporate execs can make such dumb decisions), then they will not get any of my money and they will have no one except themselves to blame for spoiling me with the open policies of Civ4. :)

I don't want to start a Civ3 vs Civ4 debate. My opinion is already clear on the matter.
Clear, rude, and unfounded.
You are misinterpreting what I am saying. I am saying that Civilization 4's modding capabilities are great. I want Civilization 5's to be even better.
You can improve on it with another civ4 expansion instead of forcing everyone to relearn the modding procedures.
That would be terrible if they did that instead of what they have now for Civ4. We'd get 1 thousand look alike archers, 1 million units that try to look like reproductive organs, and no new depth to gameplay.
You don't understand. Ever played Rome: Total War? You can upgrade every battalion's attack, missile attack, or defense stats individually. They have the same gfx and are exactly the same unit, with a few bonuses. Would having 5/6 lancers attack 6/6 lancers be the same as 6/6 attacking 5/&?

You must never have played Civ III or used its editor. Because it was external, it was faster, much easier to use, you could save and come back without any problems and so on. Oh, and going into the notepad editor is purely a pain. I am not a programmer and don't want to have to scroll through 5 million lines to change a couple things. It can easily be done in an editor.

I have played Civ3, and I do remember the editor. The editor was the only good modding tool the game had for a long time. You would never see a FFH2 or Revolutions mod with Civ3 -type editors.


The utilities in the forums were being made by people who were sacrificing there time, for free, to work on these editors, which was taking time away from them being able to work on their own projects. I salute them for their efforts, even if nothing really good ever came from it. The XML files, like the worlbuilder files, were very cumbersome and a pain to sort through... not to mention having to go through multiple files to make sure that you covered all the bases for one little edit. Plus, as Dale said, who says they are using XML this time. Read the news, Civ V is built from a whole new engine.


New Engine, yes. But I doubt Firaxis is going to invent a new programming language just for Civ5. They will just use standards. C++ is still a standard, python, if anything is more popular today, and XML is ubiquitous.


Easy for who... those who already know how to program? Many of us don't have the time to learn all of these things just so that we can play a game.


I learned programming by modding Civ4, not the other way around. ;)


Obviously, if you do want the SDK, then you want the ability to mod... you are just being selfish and want the ability to do so to lay with those that have Computer Science Degrees. For them to release the basic tools mentioned above, it does not mean that they have to gimp the advanced tools for advanced modders. I want those too so that the experts can churn out some creative and advanced mod than I could ever dream of doing without a mod team.

While I appreciate ad hominem attacks as much as the next guy, if you look at my profile, you will see I am only a student, with no degrees to my name. Lowering the modding entry level won't increase the number of quality mods, it will just increase the noise to signal ratio; making crappy, ill-balanced mods more prevalent.



Considering that what they used to create the game probably cost them a pretty penny (have you ever looked at the prices of the tools that game designers use?), I doubt that they would give us "exactly what they used to create the game"! Some of us just want to make simple and unoriginal mods for ourselves. Some of us want to make scenarios without having to take 5 months off of work and spend 16 hours a day doing so.

They did with Civ4, barring the GameByro engine, which we can't see due to licencing. The XML files were all made with XMLSpy and the SDK with VS 2003.


Please, stop being so selfish... let us have what we want and stop complaining about our desire for advanced tools that simplify some of the modding. As I have stated over and over, I want these tools so that the rest of us can modify what we want while those that are more advanced (like Rhyse and Dale to name a few of the generous souls that like to help us out) can spend more time working on their own projects.

I tell you again, look at spore. "Modding" spore is simple, but there are probably only 1 or two interesting mods for 100000 creatures. Do you want this? I guess wanting quality is selfish these days.

Afforess, please, use multiquote.

Clear, rude, and unfounded.

It's not my fault that's how you interpret it. I didn't make any claims, I just want to avoid starting a topic that will cause more flaming than the current one.


You don't understand. Ever played Rome: Total War? You can upgrade every battalion's attack, missile attack, or defense stats individually. They have the same gfx and are exactly the same unit, with a few bonuses. Would having 5/6 lancers attack 6/6 lancers be the same as 6/6 attacking 5/&?

That isn't modding, so much as it is just tweaking stats.

Afforess, please, use multiquote.

Your posting faster than I can respond, I can't refresh mid-reply.

Without an SDK, the mods we will see will be on par with current Civ3 mods. Civ3 mods pale in comparison to Civ4 mods. I would go as far to say that there aren't really any Civ3 mods so much as there are Civ3 game tweaks.

You keep referring only to Civ3. Civ3 was very locked down. But there are MANY ways indeed to open up for complex mods without supplying a Civ4 styled SDK. As I've already mentioned, CTP2. There were a couple big mods at least as complex and game-changing as the big Civ4 mods. There were also the minor mods, and even modcomps. And then there are also games based of Valve's engine. Mod's so complex and intricate (without an SDK or access to source code, only Valve's scripting language) that they became commercial successes. An SDK is NOT a pre-requisite for large complex mods. Only one way to allow them to happen.


C4C was just an extensive mod of Civ4. They couldn't offer anything more than they already had with Civ4. Civ5 is a completely new game engine.

Taken directly from Firaxis site for Civ4Col:

Mods and Community Tools: Players will have limitless options for modifying the game to suit their needs. Firaxis will ship the game with modding tools including a map editor using XML and Python.

http://www.firaxis.com/games/game_detail.php?gameid=21

We did not see such an editor. All we got was an untouched World Builder with all the identical flaws of Civ4. Just because the World is promised does not mean the World shall be delivered. :)

However, I do have a fear that by "unprecedented modding tools" they mean something like the creature creators in Spore. I will be very very unhappy if that's all it is.

We will have to wait and see. :mischief:

You keep referring only to Civ3. Civ3 was very locked down. But there are MANY ways indeed to open up for complex mods without supplying a Civ4 styled SDK. As I've already mentioned, CTP2. There were a couple big mods at least as complex and game-changing as the big Civ4 mods. There were also the minor mods, and even modcomps. And then there are also games based of Valve's engine. Mod's so complex and intricate (without an SDK or access to source code, only Valve's scripting language) that they became commercial successes. An SDK is NOT a pre-requisite for large complex mods. Only one way to allow them to happen.


Valve releases their SDK though. ;)

Now, but they didn't used to.

To me, modding tools means limitations. SDK means near limitless possibilities.

I don't really care if "modding tools" are provided with Civ 5 or not, but I will care a lot if we don't have the opportunity to tinker directly with the nitty gritty source code. Anything less than that (which I doubt) and I would question the use of "unprecedented" in the description of the game's modding potential.

EDIT
Damn, :lol: there were 7 more posts as I wrote this.

What I would like is a map editor. Not that I'd be editing any maps, but I liked Civ3's map generator and the ability to rip it out easily into a big graphic file so much that I'm willing to overlook the travesties that were Civ4's just so I can make me some fantastic maps of fantastic places.

I have played Civ3, and I do remember the editor. The editor was the only good modding tool the game had for a long time. You would never see a FFH2 or Revolutions mod with Civ3 -type editors.

I've seen some pretty impressive mods for Civ3, especially considering that there was no SDK or source code release.

New Engine, yes. But I doubt Firaxis is going to invent a new programming language just for Civ5. They will just use standards. C++ is still a standard, python, if anything is more popular today, and XML is ubiquitous.

And your point? We don't know what they are going to use at this point. And no matter what they do use, mod tools are for user friendliness. Those that want can still dig into the code. Why is it that everyone who argues against mod tools always seems to think that user friendly tools will somehow put limits on what advanced modders can do?

I learned programming by modding Civ4, not the other way around. ;)

Good for you. I just wish I had the time in my life to do so... but then again, my emphasis is on the creation aspect, not the coding.

While I appreciate ad hominem attacks as much as the next guy, if you look at my profile, you will see I am only a student, with no degrees to my name. Lowering the modding entry level won't increase the number of quality mods, it will just increase the noise to signal ratio; making crappy, ill-balanced mods more prevalent.

Are you a student in high school or in college (I only ask because your profile says you are 18, which could go either way. Whatever the case, you definitely have more time then I do... I work a full time job which I commute 5+ hours a day for, just so that I can afford the luxories of being able to play games (as well as tend to my other hobbies). Not to mention trying to have a social life, trying to go back to school to improve my life and all of the other responsibilities and worries that come with being an adult, I just don't have time to learn a couple programming languages just so that I can play a game the way I want to play it. Modding allows me to adjust a game to my own preferences beyond what the game options allow. And then, maybe, with practice, I could release something that would be accepted by at least some members of the community. The easier it is for me to do, the more likely I (and others like me) could do it. Thus, whether you have a degree in programming, or are just a young hobbyist still have leg up on me, but wish to limit my potential for your own selfishness. Not to mention that when you say that you want to limit the tools to the more advanced in order to prevent crap mods, you are attacking those that do not have the skills that you do... a very arrogant and self righteous attitude.


They did with Civ4, barring the GameByro engine, which we can't see due to licencing. The XML files were all made with XMLSpy and the SDK with VS 2003.

Well, correct me if I am wrong, and I am pretty certain that I am not, but a game's engine is the core of game. It is what makes it run... a very important and big part of the final product. In any case, I am sure that if you looked up the cost of buying a license to the engine, the price would be pretty high. The rest of that stuff (the XML and such) is just the icing on the cake.

I tell you again, look at spore. "Modding" spore is simple, but there are probably only 1 or two interesting mods for 100000 creatures. Do you want this? I guess wanting quality is selfish these days.

One thing to remember about Spore, the game practically throws everybody elses creations at you, so yeah, you are going to see a ton of the worst. As far as quality goes, I would like you to try something for me...

Go to a book store or a library. Look at all of the books on the shelf. Probably about 90 to 95% of them will not be interesting to you and you may consider many of them poor quality if you picked some up and looked through them. Of course, the person next to you may love every page of the book. That is called opinion.

Now, consider the best seller rack. All of the authors on that rack submitted many titles to a publisher. For many of those authors, a majority of the manuscripts that they submit end up in the publisher's round file (if they don't wind up in the author's round file first). Manuscripts that don't go to the round file wind up getting altered through the editing process... sometimes dramatically. Only the very few VERY lucky authors (or celebrities) find success right away. The point of all of this is that the ton of crap improves the creator over time, leading to works of art. This can be applied to any field. So, you ask me if wanting quality is selfish these days? The answer is yes, if it puts a limit on potential.

And your point? We don't know what they are going to use at this point. And no matter what they do use, mod tools are for user friendliness. Those that want can still dig into the code. Why is it that everyone who argues against mod tools always seems to think that user friendly tools will somehow put limits on what advanced modders can do?
I'm arguing against them for 2 reasons:

1.) Advanced Editors usually mean that there are limitations. This is not always the case, but there is a strong correlation nonetheless.

2.) Creating an Advanced Editor takes time. Time that the dev's simply don't have. I would prefer that they do something cool with that time, like add Revolutions, or Dark Ages, then an Advanced Editor.


Are you a student in high school or in college (I only ask because your profile says you are 18, which could go either way. Whatever the case, you definitely have more time then I do... I work a full time job which I commute 5+ hours a day for, just so that I can afford the luxories of being able to play games (as well as tend to my other hobbies). Not to mention trying to have a social life, trying to go back to school to improve my life and all of the other responsibilities and worries that come with being an adult, I just don't have time to learn a couple programming languages just so that I can play a game the way I want to play it. Modding allows me to adjust a game to my own preferences beyond what the game options allow. And then, maybe, with practice, I could release something that would be accepted by at least some members of the community. The easier it is for me to do, the more likely I (and others like me) could do it. Thus, whether you have a degree in programming, or are just a young hobbyist still have leg up on me, but wish to limit my potential for your own selfishness. Not to mention that when you say that you want to limit the tools to the more advanced in order to prevent crap mods, you are attacking those that do not have the skills that you do... a very arrogant and self righteous attitude.

Quite a paragraph there. Basically, it sums up to: I don't mod because I have other priorities in life. That's fine. I understand, real life > modding. But it's rather arrogant to demand that the dev's include last minute features so that you can continue your action-packed life and mod Civilization too.



Go to a book store or a library. Look at all of the books on the shelf. Probably about 90 to 95% of them will not be interesting to you and you may consider many of them poor quality if you picked some up and looked through them. Of course, the person next to you may love every page of the book. That is called opinion.

Now, consider the best seller rack. All of the authors on that rack submitted many titles to a publisher. For many of those authors, a majority of the manuscripts that they submit end up in the publisher's round file (if they don't wind up in the author's round file first). Manuscripts that don't go to the round file wind up getting altered through the editing process... sometimes dramatically. Only the very few VERY lucky authors (or celebrities) find success right away. The point of all of this is that the ton of crap improves the creator over time, leading to works of art. This can be applied to any field. So, you ask me if wanting quality is selfish these days? The answer is yes, if it puts a limit on potential.

I'm a very selfish person then. :p

I'm arguing against them for 2 reasons:

1.) Advanced Editors usually mean that there are limitations. This is not always the case, but there is a strong correlation nonetheless.

2.) Creating an Advanced Editor takes time. Time that the dev's simply don't have. I would prefer that they do something cool with that time, like add Revolutions, or Dark Ages, then an Advanced Editor.

I think perhaps the developers are a better judge of the time they have than you. With regards to adding something "cool", isn't that what modding is for ?
After all your definition of "cool" may differ substantially from mine.



Quite a paragraph there. Basically, it sums up to: I don't mod because I have other priorities in life. That's fine. I understand, real life > modding. But it's rather arrogant to demand that the dev's include last minute features so that you can continue your action-packed life and mod Civilization too.

The only arrogance demonstrated in this thread so far has been yours. You are demanding they don't do something that they have stated they ARE doing. People in glass houses etc.....




I'm a very selfish person then. :p

No just young and enthusiastic we all are/were once. Then generally we mellow.;)

I'm arguing against them for 2 reasons:

1.) Advanced Editors usually mean that there are limitations. This is not always the case, but there is a strong correlation nonetheless.

Maybe limitations when using the editors, but if there is still access to the raw files then it would be win-win if they release a user-friendly editor.

2.) Creating an Advanced Editor takes time. Time that the dev's simply don't have. I would prefer that they do something cool with that time, like add Revolutions, or Dark Ages, then an Advanced Editor.

Having created some editors myself, it doesn't take as much time as you would think. Besides, we don't know the current state of development so comments such as "Time that the dev's simply don't have" are pointless.

Quite a paragraph there. Basically, it sums up to: I don't mod because I have other priorities in life. That's fine. I understand, real life > modding. But it's rather arrogant to demand that the dev's include last minute features so that you can continue your action-packed life and mod Civilization too.

"Last minute features"? Considering the PR talks about modding tools obviously they'd been considered, designed, paid for and approved long before now. The tools are probably already in a state of completion by now since it takes a lot less time and resources to develop tools than the core.

I'm arguing against them for 2 reasons:

1.) Advanced Editors usually mean that there are limitations. This is not always the case, but there is a strong correlation nonetheless.

2.) Creating an Advanced Editor takes time. Time that the dev's simply don't have. I would prefer that they do something cool with that time, like add Revolutions, or Dark Ages, then an Advanced Editor.

1.) Again, I would have to argue with this. Just because an advanced editor is created, it does not mean that advanced editing will be limited. The only case where that would be true is if the game is built based on the editor, instead of the editor built based on the game.

2.) If the developers have been working on the editor parellel with the game, your point here is untrue, too. Even if work is begun on it later in the cycle, it still isn't necessarily true. Again, the developers are being paid to do it as opposed to fan modders. They have the resources of the game itself and access to the engine.

Quite a paragraph there. Basically, it sums up to: I don't mod because I have other priorities in life. That's fine. I understand, real life > modding. But it's rather arrogant to demand that the dev's include last minute features so that you can continue your action-packed life and mod Civilization too.

Hey, I just want to be able to do the basics. The ability to easily to change stats without scanning through lines of code that I can half read is priceless for that desire. (Call it tweaking if you want, but it is modding... it is modifying the original work, just like if someone were to add small line to the Mona Lisa because they felt that it needed it, they would be modifying the painting (of course, I am referring to a copy piece)... you don't tweak DaVinci). Anyway, beyond that, I might like to add some Civs (or other elements) of my own and would like to do so without too much hassle or frustration. Then, I may want to do a scenario which I could then share to those that want it. How is that arrogant?


I'm a very selfish person then. :p

I suppose you are then! ;)

I think perhaps the developers are a better judge of the time they have than you.

Generally, all game development is rushed for time. I have never heard a single game where the dev's after-word said "We had plenty of time, so we fiddled around..."


The only arrogance demonstrated in this thread so far has been yours. You are demanding they don't do something that they have stated they ARE doing. People in glass houses etc.....
Really? Where did they say they would give us editors? I don't want them to spend time making editors they don't already have, just because of community pressure, not that editors are inherently evil.

1.) Again, I would have to argue with this. Just because an advanced editor is created, it does not mean that advanced editing will be limited. The only case where that would be true is if the game is built based on the editor, instead of the editor built based on the game.

I just said that there was a strong correlation. No need to create a strawman or warp my words.


2.) If the developers have been working on the editor parellel with the game, your point here is untrue, too. Even if work is begun on it later in the cycle, it still isn't necessarily true. Again, the developers are being paid to do it as opposed to fan modders. They have the resources of the game itself and access to the engine.


Your statement hinges on the if. The If, which I already stated in the OP (read the last line), is fine with me.


Hey, I just want to be able to do the basics. The ability to easily to change stats without scanning through lines of code that I can half read is priceless for that desire. (Call it tweaking if you want, but it is modding... it is modifying the original work, just like if someone were to add small line to the Mona Lisa because they felt that it needed it, they would be modifying the painting (of course, I am referring to a copy piece)... you don't tweak DaVinci). Anyway, beyond that, I might like to add some Civs (or other elements) of my own and would like to do so without too much hassle or frustration. Then, I may want to do a scenario which I could then share to those that want it. How is that arrogant?


It seriously takes 15 minutes to learn XML. Most of it is written in plain English. Demanding an editor is pretty arrogant when you don't want to spend the short amount of time it takes to figure it out. The entirety of Civ4 XML is even documented! (With video tutorials to boot!)

Generally, all game development is rushed for time. I have never heard a single game where the dev's after-word said "We had plenty of time, so we fiddled around..."

Of the seven betas of AAA titles I've been on, 3 of those were completed on/before time.


Really? Where did they say they would give us editors? I don't want them to spend time making editors they don't already have, just because of community pressure, not that editors are inherently evil.

The Civ5 official website states "With unprecedented modding tools". I'd provide a link, but I'm sure you know the address by now. ;)

Of the seven betas of AAA titles I've been on, 3 of those were completed on/before time.

Hopefully you aren't counting CitiesXL as on-time. They cut so many features to make the deadline.



The Civ5 official website states "With unprecedented modding tools". I'd provide a link, but I'm sure you know the address by now. ;)

Weren't you the one pushing the idea that it's all marketing speak? You can't say that, then try to use it as evidence too. ;)

It seriously takes 15 minutes to learn XML. Most of it is written in plain English. Demanding an editor is pretty arrogant when you don't want to spend the short amount of time it takes to figure it out. The entirety of Civ4 XML is even documented! (With video tutorials to boot!)

Wow, it takes only 15 minutes to learn it? That is pretty amazing...

OK, sarcasm aside, XML is not so plain. Yes, it is readable, and I can understand and find a good amount of it for basic editing. Of course, there are many "functions" that I am clueless as to what they do (throughout all of the files) and when it comes to Schema, I am lost. Regardless of it's "ease" to learn, it is a pain to work through. All of the lines and cross referencing to make sure that file is edited so this will work and such. Give me a simple, user friendly editor any day of the week.

Now, I don't know programming (though I understand the basics of it from when I tried to teach myself way back when), but I am decent with MS Access and I am certain that I could make a pretty decent front end editor relatively quickly (especially if I had even a little more time to spare). It wouldn't be functioning because of the programming aspect, but it would be clear and user friendly and somebody with the programming knowledge could probably go behind and add the functionality (by programming it to edit the XML files. I would not envy the person doing that, so, along with my time issue, I never attempted up to this point. On my end (doing the front end portion), the hardest part would be translating all of the functions and what they are doing.

Anyway, my point is that yes, I can read the XML, but it is the hassle of editing it that is the problem. It is very time consuming and, quite frankly, tiring... especially for someone that is not a programmer. I am more of a designer! That is my passion and getting bogged down in code (be it C++, Python, or even XML) just takes me away from my passion and makes it a chore.

Dale, you beta'd CitiesXL... :(

Wow, it takes only 15 minutes to learn it? That is pretty amazing...

OK, sarcasm aside, XML is not so plain. Yes, it is readable, and I can understand and find a good amount of it for basic editing. Of course, there are many "functions" that I am clueless as to what they do (throughout all of the files) and when it comes to Schema, I am lost. Regardless of it's "ease" to learn, it is a pain to work through. All of the lines and cross referencing to make sure that file is edited so this will work and such. Give me a simple, user friendly editor any day of the week.

Yes, it only takes 15 minutes. I wrote a tutorial for some people in my forum. If you doubt me, read it. I included lots of pictures. ;)

You don't need to ever understand the schema unless you do SDK modding.

A prefect editor that is also easy to use is a pipe dream.


Dale, you beta'd CitiesXL... :(

Trust me, no great loss. It was easy to beta too. I had several extra keys I gave away.

Trust me, no great loss. It was easy to beta too. I had several extra keys I gave away.

Though I don't want to get off topic, I have to say that this was a bit of a let down. I was hoping that it would be what SimCity Society wasn't... a sequel to SimCity 4. The multiplayer feature killed it for me. By the time you go onto a "planet", all of the good spots were taken.

Here's to hoping for a true successor to SimCity 4.:beer:

Hopefully you aren't counting CitiesXL as on-time. They cut so many features to make the deadline.

Absolutely not. :lol:


Weren't you the one pushing the idea that it's all marketing speak? You can't say that, then try to use it as evidence too. ;)

Hey, you asked where it was mentioned, so I pointed to it. Whether it's true or not, we don't really know. Marketing speak or not, it's still evidence of where it was said there'd be modding tools. ;)

Yes, it only takes 15 minutes. I wrote a tutorial for some people in my forum. If you doubt me, read it. I included lots of pictures. ;)

You don't need to ever understand the schema unless you do SDK modding.

I think the point of the argument for a user-friendly editor is not how easy it is to read XML, but the complexity to add anything via XML.

Take a Civ. To add a Civ you need to edit:
- Civilization Info xml (to hold your new Civ)
- Leadhead Info xml (to hold your new leader)
- A_New_Text_File xml (to hold the Civopedia text and other texts)
- Art Defines xml (to hold the new icons and graphics)
- Sound Defines xml (to hold the new unit response sounds)
- Music Defines xml (to hold the new diplo music)
- Diplo Responses xml (to hold the link between stance and diplo text answers)
- Civ icon graphic (pretty pictures)
- Leader icon graphic (pretty pictures)
- Flag graphic (pretty pictures)

That's NOT 15 minutes. And that's not taking into consideration if you want to add a new UU and UB, which requires almost as much editing.

Would be MUCH easier (even for advanced modders) if we just had to fill in a GUI and then the editor put everything in the right spot.

I think the point of the argument for a user-friendly editor is not how easy it is to read XML, but the complexity to add anything via XML.

Take a Civ. To add a Civ you need to edit:
- Civilization Info xml (to hold your new Civ)
- Leadhead Info xml (to hold your new leader)
- A_New_Text_File xml (to hold the Civopedia text and other texts)
- Art Defines xml (to hold the new icons and graphics)
- Sound Defines xml (to hold the new unit response sounds)
- Music Defines xml (to hold the new diplo music)
- Diplo Responses xml (to hold the link between stance and diplo text answers)
- Civ icon graphic (pretty pictures)
- Leader icon graphic (pretty pictures)
- Flag graphic (pretty pictures)

That's NOT 15 minutes. And that's not taking into consideration if you want to add a new UU and UB, which requires almost as much editing.

Would be MUCH easier (even for advanced modders) if we just had to fill in a GUI and then the editor put everything in the right spot.

I'm willing to concede that much, but creating such an editor would be no simple task. That conflicts with one of your earlier statements, that editors are easy to make...

Actually they are easy. Using Visual Basic you could whip up a GUI on 4 or 5 tabs in a couple days, and writing out is easy. They are just ASCII files. Even easier just add in an XML extension into the Visual Basic project and feed the data into it and it'll auto generate the XML files correctly every time. Even have it all based on the schema, so if the schema changes (even if the GUI doesn't add the new tag) writing out will always work.

Yea, tools are not hard if you already have the infrastructure to read in and write out. The tool would have way more code to make the app look nice then it would to actually do the work of reading and writing the data.

Yes, it only takes 15 minutes.
I know a graphic artist who still has a hard time updating an xml file after 2 years, despite having both tools that do it automatically for him and the format being rather simple, so I think raw xml would indeed limit the abilities of several people.

Regarding map editors, I didn't feel civ IV to be that painful to use, but a separate map editor is probably not very expensive to create and Firaxis can use it internally so it's probably not wasted time.

I certainly hope that Civ V will come with at least as many modding tools as Civ IV when it was published, namely text files for editing the data (xml in civ IV, it would be nice if things weren't exploded in tens of files and files were separated in a better way - leaderhead mixes stuff that don't belong in one file imo) and a scripting language (python or whatever).

I also wonder whether the game engine Civ V uses comes with gaming tools they can redistribute. Tools for skinning characters or previewing 3d models for instance. If Firaxis could deliver these, it would cost them nothing but could help modders a lot.

I really doubt that making a rules/map/scenario editor with about the same functionality as the one in Civ III will take anything away from the features of the full game. It's not rocket science.

While I really enjoy a lot of the excellent mods for Civ IV I really miss an editor. I love creating small scenarios and maps for personal use in CivIII, and for that reason I still play III more than IV. Why can't we have both?

What would be common sense would be to incorporate the best features of civ 3 (e.g. better leaderheads, terrain editor) and 4 (e.g. SDK, Python/XML scripting and editing) and SMAC.

Actually they are easy. Using Visual Basic you could whip up a GUI on 4 or 5 tabs in a couple days, and writing out is easy. They are just ASCII files. Even easier just add in an XML extension into the Visual Basic project and feed the data into it and it'll auto generate the XML files correctly every time. Even have it all based on the schema, so if the schema changes (even if the GUI doesn't add the new tag) writing out will always work.

If it's so easy, why haven't you made an ultimate Civ4 XML editing tool then? ;)

I know a graphic artist who still has a hard time updating an xml file after 2 years, despite having both tools that do it automatically for him and the format being rather simple, so I think raw xml would indeed limit the abilities of several people.


And I know a 12 year old who can edit XML and has added units the the game. Anecdotal evidence is not useful.

Would everyone mind toning it down a bit?

I completely agree. With the exception of graphics, I can get everything done with Vim and the VC2003 compiler.

If it's so easy, why haven't you made an ultimate Civ4 XML editing tool then? ;)

Because I can think of 1000 things I'd much rather do. Just cuz it's easy doesn't mean I want to waste my time doing it. ;)



And I know a 12 year old who can edit XML and has added units the the game. Anecdotal evidence is not useful.

So what, I know a 65 year old who'd woop your ass in MP.

Actually they are easy. Using Visual Basic you could whip up a GUI on 4 or 5 tabs in a couple days, and writing out is easy. They are just ASCII files. Even easier just add in an XML extension into the Visual Basic project and feed the data into it and it'll auto generate the XML files correctly every time. Even have it all based on the schema, so if the schema changes (even if the GUI doesn't add the new tag) writing out will always work.

Why would I use Visual Basic?

Because I can think of 1000 things I'd much rather do. Just cuz it's easy doesn't mean I want to waste my time doing it. ;)

Total cop out answer.



So what, I know a 65 year old who'd woop your ass in MP.

This thread isn't about me, it's about Firaxis and modding, remember? ;)

Hey there Dale, I haven't heard from you in a year or so, back to your NORM i see:p

If I was to write a "civilisation creator editor", I'd first make a "clone an existing civ" tool (that duplicated all of the entries for an existing civ).

Using the modular XML mods, this wouldn't be that hard, because you'd just be creating a new civ.

The hard part would be validation. I'd have to reverse engineer what kinds of validation that the game does.

As a guess -- getting a crappy civ cloner/editor out the door might take 8 hours. Getting a polished one out the door would take many, many weeks -- really, the sky is the limit (do you include tools to edit leaderheads? Edit the look of units? How about merely the position and actions of units? (for UUs) etc).

Remember, to make a civ, you need to be able to:
1> Build a unique unit or two. These units should look different, or at least have the option. So you need a full-fledged unit editor! Or, you need a unit library tool and a seperate editor that creates units.

2> Build a unique building or two. These buildings should look different, or at least have the option.

3> Build at least 1, if not more, leaders for that civ. The leaderheads should possibly look different -- so you need at the very least a leaderhead loader (ie, some kind of leaderhead library management tool).

4> Set the attitudes of that leader. Remember, we want intuitive -- so you need descriptions of what each and every parameter does!

5> Set the properties of each such leader.

6> Easy stuff, like lists of cities, starting techs, etc.

7> You need to add civopedia entries for the unique units, unique buildings, leaders and civilisations

8> Don't forget stuff like preferred religion -- and a full description of what it does! Player colour, initial civics (for mods!), sounds, etc.

9> Setting art type styles. For a good editor, you need the ability to load libraries of art types, and pick them, and ensure that all units for your civilisation have art (and buildings).

10> After you did all that, you'd still have to rely on the game engine itself to validate that the generated XML is valid for a given mod of Civ 4.

These aren't trivial tasks. You need to replicate most of the civ4 config engine so you can do things like "make a civilization compatible with mod X", which can include XML files of various styles, possibly modified schemas (!), modularly loaded XML files, etc.

Unless you roll the leaderhead/unit/building/civopedia editor into the system, you need to have some kind of library management utility. See, UUs for civilsations aren't valid in a mod until the civilisation is there -- and the civilisation isn't valid until the UU is there. This is a chicken and egg problem for validation.

If we want polish, then you need to solve that chicken and egg problem. Which basically means you have to have "civ4 fragment libraries", like UUs that don't have a civilisation attached (and maybe not a tech or a base unit), and a library management system for them so you can "grab one" and use it elsewhere.

At this point, we are talking about building a suite of tools. And as the people you are making it for are command-line phobic, they all have to be GUI tools. And as the people you are making it for are scared by errors that don't happen immediately, you have to make everything self-diagnosing, idiot-proof and/or generate errors immediately, and not deferred.

So sure, such a GUI toolkit could be done. But civ4's engine is so much more flexible than most other games of the kind that there is a lot of work that would need to be done in order to make it "good enough". And even after all of this, you'll remember my mention of "mods with different schemas" right?

Someone can mod civ4 so that leaders have some new property. How that new property works is not anything that your editor will have a clue about, because how it works will be described in python or C++ and not in XML.

And I went and glossed over the entire "oh, create a leaderhead editor". People making leaderheads tend to spend multiple 100$ on the program that edits the graphics files, or pirate it -- neither of which is practical for someone shipping an official game editor.

But don't trust me. Try it!

And I know a 12 year old who can edit XML and has added units the the game. Anecdotal evidence is not useful.
Sure. So I'll use the same argument as you, with as much ground, proof, etc. It takes a lot more than 15 minutes to learn xml. Voilà. You based your claim upon nothing. You gave anecdotal evidence that you had made a website about learning it in 15 minutes, but it's anecdotal, so it's not useful. I could of course point you towards books about xml which you can't read in 15 minutes, but you wouldn't mind.
Personally, I think xml is extremely simple, but I know some people don't. I have some teaching experience, by the way. I doubt you have any given your age.
It's also pretty easy to make mistakes when editing xml files, particularly when they are as ridiculously big as those of Civ IV (all those mandatory fields that are never filled with any value so they only bloat the file to no avail).

Thank you Yakk. Making a huge suite of tools like that would take FOREVER! I'm glad someone else sees the light. ;)

Sure. So I'll use the same argument as you, with as much ground, proof, etc. It takes a lot more than 15 minutes to learn xml. Voilà. You based your claim upon nothing. You gave anecdotal evidence that you had made a website about learning it in 15 minutes, but it's anecdotal, so it's not useful. I could of course point you towards books about xml which you can't read in 15 minutes, but you wouldn't mind.
Personally, I think xml is extremely simple, but I know some people don't. I have some teaching experience, by the way. I doubt you have any given your age.
It's also pretty easy to make mistakes when editing xml files, particularly when they are as ridiculously big as those of Civ IV (all those mandatory fields that are never filled with any value so they only bloat the file to no avail).

You apparently don't grasp the concept of anecdotal evidence. When I said "You can learn how to mod XML in 15 minutes" that was claim, not anecdotal evidence. I wasn't saying I learned in 15 minutes, I was saying anyone could.

Thanks for playing though. :p

Yakk... why not just make a terrain editor (allows for placing of units, cities, etc. but not the editing of them) and leave the rest to XML scripts?

Firaxis, I urge you to ignore the shortsighted requests for advanced modding editors and the like. They are trivial and unimportant. Creating them will take valuable time away from actually improving Civ5's features.

We don't need a good map editor, the worldbuilder in Civ4 was fine.

Like said, not trivial, and improving the world builder to become a real modding tool would not be so difficult. In fact, i guess, we could mod it.
Would just need some more buttons, one to add a mod, another one, which reads the stats out of the buildings/units/whatever files, and if you've changed something there, automatically copies the right files to the mod folder and changes the values.
Could even be done for adding new graphics, i think.
For the guys, who've wrote the WB, this would be quite simple, for sure.


As I said, where is the source of your confirmation of XML, Python and SDK? :)

Just wondering if you seriously think, that they will not use XML...


I learned programming by modding Civ4, not the other way around. ;)


Yes, but we know, what you're studying ;).
If you look around in the mods section and look, who's modding, you'll sure see, that every mod with own python or SDK changes has somebody with a computer engineering degree, a student, who's studying this, or somebody else who's already been capable of programming before.

All of the lines and cross referencing to make sure that file is edited so this will work and such. Give me a simple, user friendly editor any day of the week.


Also with a editor you'd have to check the cross references ;).

In my opinion, you can't compare modding Civ3 to Civ4. If they wanna release tools, they might be useful but we still need access to everything possible up to and including source code. For a glaring example, without source code you can't mod the AI! I wanna mod the AI. I'm certain there will be no tool for that!

Anything less than source code will be a step backwards from Civ4.

I'm just here to throw rotten fruit at the OP. :ninja:

continue.

Thank you Yakk. Making a huge suite of tools like that would take FOREVER! I'm glad someone else sees the light. ;)

He "sees the light", yet, like you, he is still left in the dark. One of the points that I keep making that you keep failing to grasp is that Firaxis is a full time company and the people assigned to do such a thing (which would not be the entire Civ V team... but likely 2 or 3 people) are getting paid for a 40 (maybe more) hour work week to work on it. Not to mention that Firaxis has the resources and access to the entire code (including the engine) of the game.

I learned civ4 modding myself. In August of 2008 I opened my C:/ folder to install a mapscript and got a warning from windows that I shouldn't touch anything in there. By the end of November, I was able to release a mod that had extensive edits to XML and a few modifications to python.


When I first bought civ4, I thought that we would have an high-level GUI editor and it took over two years of playing the game to figure out how to actually mod on my own without one. I would say that the experience of modding civ taught me everything I know about coding and I would also say that I know a decent amount of stuff. If there had been a powerful modding tool, I may not know these things but then again I might know even more.

I would simply ask that the ciV team gives us what they used to make the game but provide a modding program later (maybe in a patch) for the people who don't already know how to mod.

Most people browsing this probably think Afforess is just an ass. The issue he isn't explaining effectively is that there is a strong correlation between pre made modding tools, and the developers hardcoding things in the program to make those tools work correctly. There is a very real possibility with civ5 we will get a souped up civ3 editor with no real ability to do in depth or concept modding.

As I said before though, they really should take the time to build a robust scenario editor. That would actually be worth it. Perhaps an easy to use unit editor may also be a good idea for the masses, but I worry about things like this causing the devs to lock out more interesting modding possibilities as often happens when they create ease of use tools for mass consumption.

Most people browsing this probably think Afforess is just an ass.
I think my chief character flaw is apathy. I don't care what people think about me. I appreciate the defense though. ;)


The issue he isn't explaining effectively is that there is a strong correlation between pre made modding tools, and the developers hardcoding things in the program to make those tools work correctly. There is a very real possibility with civ5 we will get a souped up civ3 editor with no real ability to do in depth or concept modding.

As I said before though, they really should take the time to build a robust scenario editor. That would actually be worth it. Perhaps an easy to use unit editor may also be a good idea for the masses, but I worry about things like this causing the devs to lock out more interesting modding possibilities as often happens when they create ease of use tools for mass consumption.

Exactly. As I pointed out several times, look at Spore. It bills itself as a "uniquely customizable game", but really it just has a very simple creator editor, with no real modding to speak of. There is a very strong correlation between GUI, user-friendly "modding" tools and locked down platforms.

Firaxis, I urge you to ignore the shortsighted requests of the original poster. He is trivial and unimportant. Listening to him will take valuable time away from actually improving Civ5's features.

Firaxis, I urge you to ignore the shortsighted requests of the original poster. He is trivial and unimportant. Listening to him will take valuable time away from actually improving Civ5's features.

Please discuss the topic; off topic posts about individuals is against the rules. ;)

I like the idea of having better modding tools come along with the game. If Fraxis has a chance to make modding in Civ5 any easier then i think they should have it included in this game. I support modding (i think we all do) even though i don't have the knowledge or time to do any modding in civ besides adding units into the game. I am happy to see Fraxis is still supporting of modding. I am looking forward to seeing the interesting mods civ fanatics create for the new game when it comes out.

Hmmm. The editor would be something for us noobs who don't know programming and as our jobs, studies, family lives, or whatever else, stop us from learning it, so that we can do some basic modding at least.

I wasn't saying I learned in 15 minutes, I was saying anyone could.

Thanks for playing though. :p
You don't grasp the concept of logic then ;)
You say anyone can learn, I said I know someone who couldn't, so there's at least one person who can't, so your anyone is wrong, but you dismiss it nonetheless. I may of course not grasp the difference between anyone and everyone, not being a native English speaker but I think you're just ignoring arguments that prove you wrong.

Hmmm. The editor would be something for us noobs who don't know programming and as our jobs, studies, family lives, or whatever else, stop us from learning it, so that we can do some basic modding at least.

How about BOTH mod tools AND release of SDK?

In the words of Jean-Claude Van Damme, "That way everyone is happy."

How about BOTH mod tools AND release of SDK?

In the words of Jean-Claude Van Damme, "That way everyone is happy."

If they do both, it takes time away from Civ5's development. There is an opportunity cost for every decision they make.

Most people browsing this probably think Afforess is just an ass. The issue he isn't explaining effectively is that there is a strong correlation between pre made modding tools, and the developers hardcoding things in the program to make those tools work correctly. There is a very real possibility with civ5 we will get a souped up civ3 editor with no real ability to do in depth or concept modding.

As I said before though, they really should take the time to build a robust scenario editor. That would actually be worth it. Perhaps an easy to use unit editor may also be a good idea for the masses, but I worry about things like this causing the devs to lock out more interesting modding possibilities as often happens when they create ease of use tools for mass consumption.

I'll take the contrary position here. There has been in the past a strong correlation between premade editors and everything being hardcoded (been gaming a loooong time).
However in the last few years development teams that make a feature/sales pitch from "moddability" will generally give you the tools AND expose the code.
Dawn of War 1 was the classic example of developer tools combined with wide open file formats. Civ IV fell short on the premade tools (partially due to licensing restrictions).
If I read correctly, and I believe I do, the OP is basically asking for the development tools (as that's what editors are generally..refined (or sometimes not) development tools) because he doesn't want HIS mod to be lost in the crowd.
I have been known to mod (mostly gave up 7 or 8 years ago). Modelling, animation and skinning is generally my thing,if you've played SFCII, DOW, UT2004, Oblivion more recently Fallout 3 you may even have used some of my models. Though I am familiar with xml and python amongst others.
Was intending to mod 4. Found it tedious however so didn't bother.
Just realised I started with lightwave on an Amiga and 3DSMax DOS in 1990, been modding longer than the OP has been alive.

Damn I'm old;)

Hmmm. The editor would be something for us noobs who don't know programming and as our jobs, studies, family lives, or whatever else, stop us from learning it, so that we can do some basic modding at least.

Yeah, I've made that argument too, but Afforess does not care about that... he must be afraid of the competition... that someone like you or me would put something out that would bury his hard-coded, extravegant, too many features mod in the database.

He constantly points toward Spore, which is for personal creations... not modding, as a comparison to Civ. He thinks that, for some reason, releasing official GUI based tools will cripple the moddibility of the game, despite the countless examples of "locked down" games that have some pretty drastic mods.

Dale and I spent a long time last night proving him wrong over and over, yet he still insists that modding tools would be the worst thing to ever happen to Civilization. It has become a pointless debate because he obviously doesn't care about what any body else has to say.

How about BOTH mod tools AND release of SDK?

In the words of Jean-Claude Van Damme, "That way everyone is happy."
Quoting from previous posts:
There wasn't SDK in pre-civ4 games and we got to do a lot. I'd actually like a map editor and then edit the XML files for tiles, units, etc. You can always get XML editors online. There's a few on sourceforge, try them out and choose one.
For civ3, there wasn't any unitmaker program. So? FLICster appeared. Reverse engineering. All that is really required is the source code (Afforess is right) and -PLEASE- a world editor. But extra tools would always be nice. As long as they aren't the only tols that are usable :).
What would be common sense would be to incorporate the best features of civ 3 (e.g. better leaderheads, terrain editor) and 4 (e.g. SDK, Python/XML scripting and editing) and SMAC.Yakk... why not just make a terrain editor (allows for placing of units, cities, etc. but not the editing of them) and leave the rest to XML scripts?
So, basically... yes!!! :yup: Make both of them non-exclusive. You can edit from an editor or tweak the XMLs with Notepad. how 'bout that?

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you Civilization 3 as my evidence. I rest my case.

I object. (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=351098)

The OP happens to be correct in that there IS a cost, and what for? So people who don't know how to program can make a simple mod in a very slow manner?

I would say its absolutely useless to make a program to edit the XML. We have Vim and Emacs for that.

The OP happens to be correct in that there IS a cost, and what for? So people who don't know how to program can make a simple mod in a very slow manner?

I would say its absolutely useless to make a program to edit the XML. We have Vim and Emacs for that.

So wht you and Afforess are saying is that people that don't know how to program should not be allowed to contribute?

Bravo, Bowsling!So wht you and Afforess are saying is that people that don't know how to program should not be allowed to contribute?It might just be that they're elititst, or should I say 1337ist?

The OP happens to be correct in that there IS a cost, and what for? So people who don't know how to program can make a simple mod in a very slow manner?

I would say its absolutely useless to make a program to edit the XML. We have Vim and Emacs for that.

And I will repeat, any development team worth its salt either uses purchased tools OR develops in-house tools (for Civ4 they used gamebryo for the graphics engine which has it's own built in workflow and licensing restrictions).
Knowing that they were going to offer "Modding potential" as a selling point, one would expect, logically, that there will be little to no licensing restrictions on the development tools..which will either be "polished" to become editors........ or released as-is if (relatively) user friendly.
On top of which, no development house is obliged to release anything, ever, other than the game.
Based on box sales there would be at least 100 people with zero interest in modding or mods to every 1 that does.
This site is called Civ"fanatics" for a reason.

If you had read my post carefully, you would notice the word simple.

If the tool can make a good, non-simple mod, then its fine. Else, its really better off to teach the novice how to do it without the tool instead of providing them with a crutch.

If you had read my post carefully, you would notice the word simple.

If the tool can make a good, non-simple mod, then its fine. Else, its really better off to teach the novice how to do it without the tool instead of providing them with a crutch.

A simple mod is still a contribution!

I understand that. What I'm saying is that if people are forced to learn how to do it with just a text editor, they could probably get good enough to start making more elaborate mods much faster.

If you had read my post carefully, you would notice the word simple.

If the tool can make a good, non-simple mod, then its fine. Else, its really better off to teach the novice how to do it without the tool instead of providing them with a crutch.

I disagree. why do you think ski instructors teach first-time skiers snowplow, while all the pros carve?

I don't really know anything about skiing, but I'd say that its probably different in the manner that a beginning skiier could probably get injured using a pro technique.

If I make a simple mod by either going into a GUI tool and using menus or editing XML by hand, which gives me experience applicable to more types of modding?

You do raise a good point. But there are still the people who just want to add a civ, change unit stat, make a simple scenario. Why do these people have to go to the trouble of learning a programming language just to make one or two little tweaks?

If you had read my post carefully, you would notice the word simple.

If the tool can make a good, non-simple mod, then its fine. Else, its really better off to teach the novice how to do it without the tool instead of providing them with a crutch.

You are so right. Nothing says n00b like using programs released by the developers.

Seriously, not everyone desires to code (really!). But many can enjoy creating.

Also it's a little pompous to make that statement, when your basically using an inplace framework and simply adding (modding) some variables.
Code an entire game framework from the ground up...THEN you can make that statement.

I wouldn't really consider XML a programming language. Its more or less just a way to store data.

Yes, but it can look quite overwhelming, with all these short-form tags, "i" at the beginning of some tags, "b" at the beginning of others. More complicated than simply opening a window and changing a text box from "15" to "16" or using a scroll menu to change a prerequisite from bronze working to iron working.

It might just be that they're elititst, or should I say 1337ist?
It's easy to paint someone you don't agree with as elitist. :lol:

I wouldn't really consider XML a programming language. Its more or less just a way to store data.

Where did I mention XML ?
If you did, then your comment is even worse. I was talking about python.

And it isn't more or less a way to store data, it is exactly that. It originally complimented HTML which is designed to display data.

It's easy to paint someone you don't agree with as elitist. :lol:Isn't the 'if you can't do it with my more advanced knowledge then get out' bit slightly elitist? :)

Actually, technically there ARE programming languages completely based off of XML. I would not call this storing data.

As for mentioning XML, it is inferred when you are talking about making small tweaks. Its not like you can really use a GUI tool to edit Python without knowledge of Python.

Isn't the 'if you can't do it with my more advanced knowledge then get out' bit slightly elitist? :)

Not what I said. I'm saying that its actually better to edit it by hand to gain experience so that you can move up to more advanced things. In other words, learning.

Not what I said. I'm saying that its actually better to edit it by hand to gain experience so that you can move up to more advanced things. In other words, learning.
I wasn't talking about you.

Thank you Yakk. Making a huge suite of tools like that would take FOREVER! I'm glad someone else sees the light. ;)

Dev houses I've had experience with (and that's a couple now) usually open tools programming up to interns/fresh graduates. They get an opportunity to prove themselves by developing the tools for the level designers (read that as Modding tools if you like). If they do a good job they usually get promoted to full time and start working on small parts of actual game engines.

You'll probably find there's a couple of these programmers working on the tools. They probably get around a year of the dev cycle to code the tools and keep them up to date with iterations of the engine.

That's been my experience with gaming companies. I do seriously think your concerns are not relevant, and I'm guessing here that your REAL concern is your mod being lost in the "noise" as you called it.

I'd rather 1000 people getting access to the modding tools and "having a go" than a tiny number of elitist mods. Sometimes the simplest mod is the best. Take a look at Civ4 Col. One of the most popular mods simply adds Portugal. Nothing else.

Actually, technically there ARE programming languages completely based off of XML. I would not call this storing data.

As for mentioning XML, it is inferred when you are talking about making small tweaks. Its not like you can really use a GUI tool to edit Python without knowledge of Python.

But isn't Python a high level programming language and hence a tool ?
I thought we didn't want use to any tools ?

(yes I'm being pedantic, yes I know it's annoying....)

Look at the majority of "quality" mods for 4 and consider how many actually use the same SDK mods but paint themselves as different, because they have a new tech tree or units......data changes.

Do you really think that releasing tools enabling these data changes to be made by many people will lower the overall quality of the BIG, popular packages ?

Of course it won't, it will free up more time to refine the SDK additions, instead of plodding through text files to change a number, test a number...wash rinse and repeat.
It will speed up the development cycle.

Look at the majority of "quality" mods for 4 and consider how many actually use the same SDK mods but paint themselves as different, because they have a new tech tree or units......data changes.

True, there are only a tiny amount of true SDK innovators. Most of the big mods are just packages of other mods.

Isn't the 'if you can't do it with my more advanced knowledge then get out' bit slightly elitist? :)

Can you please link a direct quotation rather than putting words in his mouth?

True, there are only a tiny amount of true SDK innovators. Most of the big mods are just packages of other mods.

It's very very easy to separate "big mods" that are conglomerations of pre-made stuff from real innovation.

Thank you for agreeing with me Dale. As someone who does mod for IV (I respect your patience) I'm glad you noticed.

True, there are only a tiny amount of true SDK innovators. Most of the big mods are just packages of other mods.

Again, true, but that's because a mod that limits its changes to ONLY sdk is probably pretty boring. The exceptions would be very focused mods like Better AI which are expected to be primarily sdk.

It's very very easy to separate "big mods" that are conglomerations of pre-made stuff from real innovation.

Note that I DID say "most". :rolleyes:

Again, true, but that's because a mod that limits its changes to ONLY sdk is probably pretty boring. The exceptions would be very focused mods like Better AI which are expected to be primarily sdk.

What was meant by the original comment, and my agreement is not about "only sdk" mods. What I'm talking about is there is only a tiny number of people creating NEW concepts for Civ. Most of the big mods just packages bits from everyone else's modding. Civ4 not only brought about a new level of modding, it produced the most popular and recognised modder TYPE: The Mod Packager.

The Mod Packager takes bits of other people's modding, combines them all together to form a new experience. I'm not being negative, some of these mods are really good. The skill is in picking which components to combine and the fine tuning to make those components hum together.

Whereas most of MY modding was producing new concepts for Civ. Combat Mod, Achievements, Ranged Bombardment, Air Missions, etc. There isn't many people who can do that. That's what the meaning of the comments were. :)

Done right, advanced editors could also enhance efforts for modders who prefer to get their hands dirty.

Something that would permit advanced editors for the XML and at the same time provide better information for people who just want to edit the XML in notepad, would be for Firaxis to include XML schema files providing metadata on all the XML fields, including a description of what each field does in the game. An advanced editor could combine this information within it, whereas modders could also use the schema file as a reference tool.

What was meant by the original comment, and my agreement is not about "only sdk" mods. What I'm talking about is there is only a tiny number of people creating NEW concepts for Civ. Most of the big mods just packages bits from everyone else's modding. Civ4 not only brought about a new level of modding, it produced the most popular and recognised modder TYPE: The Mod Packager.

The Mod Packager takes bits of other people's modding, combines them all together to form a new experience. I'm not being negative, some of these mods are really good. The skill is in picking which components to combine and the fine tuning to make those components hum together.

Whereas most of MY modding was producing new concepts for Civ. Combat Mod, Achievements, Ranged Bombardment, Air Missions, etc. There isn't many people who can do that. That's what the meaning of the comments were. :)

I don't think they are the most popular, but perhaps the most vocal. Mods that actually innovate, like RevDCM, FFH2, Ryhe's and Fall, etc... have 10-100x as many downloads as, say, a packaged mod like Quot Capita.

Afforess needs to be tarred and feathered.

Afforess needs to be tarred and feathered.

I doubt you would advocate that so quickly if you knew what it actually entailed. Tar and Feathering is probably in the top 10 worst ways to die. :p

I would like a separate map editor.

The Civfanatics community made a few good ones, this (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=144414) was my favorite as it let you load a picture in the background that you could trace. Much easier than going through the game and much much easier than trying to edit the terrain through notepad (!), though notepad was great for setting up players and making little adjustments if you knew what tile you wanted (like adding or removing buildings from a city, etc.).

I doubt you would advocate that so quickly if you knew what it actually entailed. Tar and Feathering is probably in the top 10 worst ways to die. :p

Maybe you should consider why I advocated such a demise for you. ;)

I don't think they are the most popular, but perhaps the most vocal. Mods that actually innovate, like RevDCM, FFH2, Ryhe's and Fall, etc... have 10-100x as many downloads as, say, a packaged mod like Quot Capita.

RevDCM is a package mod. ;)

What was meant by the original comment, and my agreement is not about "only sdk" mods. What I'm talking about is there is only a tiny number of people creating NEW concepts for Civ. Most of the big mods just packages bits from everyone else's modding. Civ4 not only brought about a new level of modding, it produced the most popular and recognised modder TYPE: The Mod Packager.

The Mod Packager takes bits of other people's modding, combines them all together to form a new experience. I'm not being negative, some of these mods are really good. The skill is in picking which components to combine and the fine tuning to make those components hum together.

Whereas most of MY modding was producing new concepts for Civ. Combat Mod, Achievements, Ranged Bombardment, Air Missions, etc. There isn't many people who can do that. That's what the meaning of the comments were. :)

Exactly, and modding tools I suspect will do next to nothing in terms of enabling people to make "new concepts". It will always be the "new concepts" mods I'm most interested in.

I think we are in fact in agreement mostly. The mod packagers as you call them, I've tended to call mergers. (Maybe merging implies combining SDK mods, I'm not sure)

Exactly, and modding tools I suspect will do next to nothing in terms of enabling people to make "new concepts". It will always be the "new concepts" mods I'm most interested in.

I think we are in fact in agreement mostly. The mod packagers as you call them, I've tended to call mergers. (Maybe merging implies combining SDK mods, I'm not sure)

Mod aggregators.

RevDCM is a package mod. ;)
I know what you're implying here, but it's bull; alot of work was done by glider getting your buggy code to stop breaking things, the process of getting DCM to stop causing crashes took literally months. So many of the pieces in RevDCM, just didn't work right and took a lot of work fixing them up, or getting them to play nice together. This isn't trivial packaging either dale, especially the parts about fixing broken code. Do to many of the more glaring issues, I ended up having to teach myself C++ and python from google, and getting lots of help along the way on forums from those like Emperor Fool. Currently I spend roughly 20+ hours a week working on RevDCM, and alot of that time is spent hammering out code.

I mean in the respect that most high level software is a package of varying peoples work, (no one sits down and writes 1GB programs themselves), sure, but as you are implying no. Also the main component in RevDCM is Revolutions, which along with Barbarian Civs was coded and created almost entirely by jdog, who is a developer of RevDCM.

I have been known to use the Morrowind Construction Set to tweak a few things in my heavily modded game to my liking. I am certainly not a modder. For this I am grateful that Bethesda released such a powerful tool. A quick perusal of the literally hundreds of mods that get somehow posted on modding sites "created" by people with even less talent than me (and none of my stunning personality traits) would probably advise most other companies not to do the same, considering the sheer dross that buries many sites. There are some great works, a lot of average but decent works and endless rubbish. As Sturgeon said, 90% of everything is crap and, with proper modding tools, the 90% dross is now suddenly in the hands of those who don't even realise this.

RevDCM is a package mod. ;)

That is the biggest lie in this entire thread; and that's not to demean the rest of you guys, there were some pretty epic ones. :lol:

But, I guess you don't really understand, do you? It's not like Jdog wrote the Better AI and Unofficial Patch from scratch; or anything. :rolleyes: And of course, Revolutions. Obviously, Jdog secretly stole that mod from you, yes? :lol:

Your statement is a complete load of bullocks and I DEMAND you issue an apology to Jdog, Glider1 & Phungus. You can insult me, or anyone else, but flat out lies; well you might as well state that the sky is a bright green today.

I know what you're implying here, but it's bull; alot of work was done by glider getting your buggy code to stop breaking things, the process of getting DCM to stop causing crashes took literally months. So many of the pieces in RevDCM, just didn't work right and took a lot of work fixing them up, or getting them to play nice together. This isn't trivial packaging either dale, especially the parts about fixing broken code. Do to many of the more glaring issues, I ended up having to teach myself C++ and python from google, and getting lots of help along the way on forums from those like Emperor Fool. Currently I spend roughly 20+ hours a week working on RevDCM, and alot of that time is spent hammering out code.

I mean in the respect that most high level software is a package of varying peoples work, (no one sits down and writes 1GB programs themselves), sure, but as you are implying no. Also the main component in RevDCM is Revolutions, which along with Barbarian Civs was coded and created almost entirely by jdog, who is a developer of RevDCM.

Ease off mate, if you read an earlier post I said that mod packagers are not a negative thing. Soren Johnson also talks positively about Mod Packagers and how they came to the forfront in Civ4 modding to provide some of the biggest and best Civ4 mods. But to call RevDCM innovative is a mistake. RevDCM is about packaging together a number of popular mods. Regardless of the code changing to get it to work all together, it is still using other people's mods combined to a total mod.

That is the biggest lie in this entire thread; and that's not to demean the rest of you guys, there were some pretty epic ones. :lol:

But, I guess you don't really understand, do you? It's not like Jdog wrote the Better AI and Unofficial Patch from scratch; or anything. :rolleyes: And of course, Revolutions. Obviously, Jdog secretly stole that mod from you, yes? :lol:

Your statement is a complete load of bullocks and I DEMAND you issue an apology to Jdog, Glider1 & Phungus. You can insult me, or anyone else, but flat out lies; well you might as well state that the sky is a bright green today.

RevDCM from their explanation of what the mod is (they even admit it themselves):


To integrate high quality mods onto the back of the brilliant Revolutions mod that add strategic richness to BTS, compliment Revolutions and yet still make for a compact download size. At all times basic BTS game experience and stability is it's reference guiding development.

Besides, it packagers a number of innovations together to create a total mod. So are you saying that Jdog, Phungas and Glider created every component of RevDCM? If you are then you are seriously deluded.

So a packaged mod is a mod that includes any feature not of their making, even if 80% of the content is new? I would say that the only non-packaged mods according to your standard are mod-components, which are generally unplayable. That would make FFH2 and Ryhe's and Fall packaged mods too!

I could be wrong but it seems to me that combining various extensive mods is often more difficult (from a programmer's perspective) than creating fairly isolated mods. What you're saying Dale, sounds like you imply the opposite (that Code Packagers have an easier job) and that will probably offend a fair number of modders. RevDCM is a pretty bad example, really. Its creation and development can hardly be summed up by calling it a "package mod". It would be like, IMO, calling DCM a rule tweak.

Anybody here interested in buying some baseball clubs http://www.civforum.de/images/smilies/barb.gif?

-> calm down guys.

Lol, nice smiley. ;)

I think you would make better sales with pitchforks and torches though. :lol:

Anybody here interested in buying some baseball clubs http://www.civforum.de/images/smilies/barb.gif?

-> calm down guys.

Can you buy them by the dozen? :trouble:

I think we're going a tad off topic too.

I might have a go at making a pitchfork/torch smiley next week.

I understand that. What I'm saying is that if people are forced to learn how to do it with just a text editor, they could probably get good enough to start making more elaborate mods much faster.

I don't want to learn how to code... I want to put more focus on balance and design. There is a big difference. I want to be able to make simple mods easily without having to sort through lines of cumbersome code. I don't want to waste time trying to learn computer language. I would rather leave that part to the experts who enjoy that sort of thing. I am a designer, not a coder. There is a big difference!

Come on guys. I did not say mod packaging was lesser. I said there was indeed a high skill level needed. And Afforess, it IS a package mod. Why?

1. Revolution is a separate mod.
2. DCM is a separate mod.
3. Better AI is a separate mod.
4. Influence driven war is a separate mod.
5. and so on
6. and so on

There's no point me continuing the list, you would get the point by now. RevDCM is a package of a number of separate mods. The innovation is the separate mods themselves. Revolutions is innovative. DCM is innovative. Better AI is innovative.

Say what you will, RevDCM is a package mod. Technically DCM is a package mod too as I developed most of the components of DCM as separate innovations. :)

So a packaged mod is a mod that includes any feature not of their making, even if 80% of the content is new? I would say that the only non-packaged mods according to your standard are mod-components, which are generally unplayable. That would make FFH2 and Ryhe's and Fall packaged mods too!

The components of RevDCM were innovated separately. Sure by the same people, but still created separately. If I wanted to, I could get Better AI by itself. I could get Revolutions by itself. RevDCM puts them together into a nice little package for ease of use.

can we get back on topic?
Merits of an all-encompassing editor vs. all-encompassing scripting and text-editing vs. system merging both. Discuss.

The following quote is taken from the thread Unprecedented Modding Tools (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=8941056#post8941056)

I agree with EF all the way here. While the whitespace still bothers me to this day in python; and I always forget the stupid colon at the end of if's, :lol: I still can see why it is so attractive. ;)

You mention having problems with syntax (forgetting the "stupid colon") and you want the rest of us to learn how to code in order to mod?

...

Come on guys. I did not say mod packaging was lesser. I said there was indeed a high skill level needed. And Afforess, it IS a package mod. Why?

1. Revolution is a separate mod.
2. DCM is a separate mod.
3. Better AI is a separate mod.
4. Influence driven war is a separate mod.
5. and so on
6. and so on

There's no point me continuing the list, you would get the point by now. RevDCM is a package of a number of separate mods. The innovation is the separate mods themselves. Revolutions is innovative. DCM is innovative. Better AI is innovative.

Say what you will, RevDCM is a package mod. Technically DCM is a package mod too as I developed most of the components of DCM as separate innovations. :)

Oh really?

The Mod Packager takes bits of other people's modding, combines them all together to form a new experience. I'm not being negative, some of these mods are really good.

First off, you begged the question. If some of them are really good, then some of them are really bad; yes? Secondly, you used the qualifier "I'm not being negative", which is just the equivalent of saying "No Offense" right before you tell someone they suck. Now, this last part takes the cake:


Whereas most of MY modding was producing new concepts for Civ. Combat Mod, Achievements, Ranged Bombardment, Air Missions, etc. There isn't many people who can do that.

So if there are only a few people that can do that, and this is a good thing, then all other modders must not be as good.

Dale, I really respect you, especially for all your work, but don't even try to pull this past me. I'm the master at being condescending. ;)

The following quote is taken from the thread Unprecedented Modding Tools (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=8941056#post8941056)



You mention having problems with syntax (forgetting the "stupid colon") and you want the rest of us to learn how to code in order to mod?

...
Yes, with python. I primarily code in C++. Am I your golden standard now? If I have trouble, then everyone else will? :lol:

I'm not sure how this is relevant, this thread has nothing to do with me; it's about modding tools. ;)

I have been known to use the Morrowind Construction Set to tweak a few things in my heavily modded game to my liking. I am certainly not a modder. For this I am grateful that Bethesda released such a powerful tool. A quick perusal of the literally hundreds of mods that get somehow posted on modding sites "created" by people with even less talent than me (and none of my stunning personality traits) would probably advise most other companies not to do the same, considering the sheer dross that buries many sites. There are some great works, a lot of average but decent works and endless rubbish. As Sturgeon said, 90% of everything is crap and, with proper modding tools, the 90% dross is now suddenly in the hands of those who don't even realise this.

Using an SDK or hand coding rather than an editor doesn't mean you spin gold. It can simply mean you have a highly polished turd.

There are countless examples of this across a multitude of games.

The reverse is also true.

Want an analogy. I can handwrite a dictionary. Does that mean I can craft a story ?

can we get back on topic?


That would be nice.

If people want to take the other discussion to another thread, that's fine by me. As long as they don't get so personal.

I agree with takhisis and Ainwood, we should get back On topic.

The stated reasons for not likely "user-friendly" mod tools is that often, that's where the modding ends, with the tools, and we are restricted by them; a la, Civ3.

The stated reasons for "user-friendly" mod tools would that it would lower the entry barrier to modding.

Seeing how Civ4 didn't have easy to use editors, and had wildly successful mods... I rest my case.

If some of them are really good, then some of them are really bad; yes?

I haven't tried all mods, so I am unqualified to state all of them are good. :rolleyes:

Secondly, you used the qualifier "I'm not being negative", which is just the equivalent of saying "No Offense" right before you tell someone they suck.

I was preceding anticipated flames due to misconstruing what I was saying. :rolleyes:

So if there are only a few people that can do that, and this is a good thing, then all other modders must not be as good.

Dale, I really respect you, especially for all your work, but don't even try to pull this past me. I'm the master at being condescending. ;)

You're putting words into my mouth. I did not say "this is a good thing". :rolleyes:

Sign of a desperate man to prove ANY point is to imply comments into your opponent's comments. Something you're doing. Please keep to the point, not vague implications which were never stated.

EDIT:
Sorry Ainwood, you posted after I started writing this post.

I'm glad to see that sanity is being restored.I agree with takhisis and Ainwood, we should get back On topic.

The stated reasons for not likely "user-friendly" mod tools is that often, that's where the modding ends, with the tools, and we are restricted by them; a la, Civ3.

The stated reasons for "user-friendly" mod tools would that it would lower the entry barrier to modding.

Seeing how Civ4 didn't have easy to use editors, and had wildly successful mods... I rest my case.
What about my third option: both. Have an editor for casual modder dummies (e.g. me) but still allow for manually editing the game with XML editors/notepad/whatever you prefer. I still think that a map maker would at least be useful.
For what it's worth, if you start checking in the civ3 utility programs section you'll find that terrain files can be edited manually using hex editors. So terrain types that you can't put together in the game editor, such as Sea tiles just alongside the coast, are feasible.

It's not just terrain types. With your proposal, what would you do if you wanted to add a new XML field? By having the editor, you would not be able to do it. Best case scenario is that you break the editor, therefore rendering it pointless (at least as far as your mod is concerned, and all the people that don't like Aforress's stance here will be just as angry at the mod maker for breaking the editor). Worst case is that you simply can't do it.

As far as I can tell, most of the people that really, really want an editor wouldn't care if we would be unable to make mods that couldn't be made with the civ3 editor, without cheesy workarounds (such as having two resources that are mostly identical, because you can't add a resource to a plot at a specific time).

With an XML editor the fields to edit can be loaded from the XML schema. Since the XML file must match the schema, there's nothing to say the editor thus can't use the schema to dynamically create the fields to edit.

With an XML editor the fields to edit can be loaded from the XML schema. Since the XML file must match the schema, there's nothing to say the editor thus can't use the schema to dynamically create the fields to edit.

What if I add an entirely new XML file? How will the editor cope then?

I want an editor for making maps, perhaps a separate basic XML editor would come in handy, but it'd be optional.

And even if that is not the case with the (theoretical) editors Dale.
The point of an SDK is to go beyond what the casual modder happy with editors is setting out to achieve, thus allowing those who wish to to retain their status as "master" modders. Simply because the casual modders will not be able to tweak a setting and call it their own.

I am a fine example of what I am describing. Usually I'm happy with using the vanilla rules. I am a graphics whore however (duh! 3d modeller,animator & skinner) so any official tools related to map/terrain-making and models would be fantastic.
Someone else may wish to alter the tech tree (it's a given, someone always calls out.."but, but....hair braiding is essential to Civ we must have it!").
Well wouldn't a tool facilitate rather than hinder this desire ?

Others, well they want to alter fundamental mechanics, for this you need to get your hands dirty.
Finally, I don't understand why anyone would get angry at someone for "breaking" a tool that wasn't designed to go beyond its limits. That makes no sense. After all you would be modding a mod,packaging, which requires knowledge..................

What if I add an entirely new XML file? How will the editor cope then?

Adding XML files is obviously outside the realm of the "casual gamer" who the editors would be targeted for since to do such a thing would also involve SDK modifications to load the file :rolleyes:. And if you're good enough to add in a new XML file to the SDK then you don't need an editor!

And even if that is not the case with the (theoretical) editors Dale.
The point of an SDK is to go beyond what the casual modder happy with editors is setting out to achieve, thus allowing those who wish to to retain their status as "master" modders. Simply because the casual modders will not be able to tweak a setting and call it their own.

I am a fine example of what I am describing. Usually I'm happy with using the vanilla rules. I am a graphics whore however (duh! 3d modeller,animator & skinner) so any official tools related to map/terrain-making and models would be fantastic.
Someone else may wish to alter the tech tree (it's a given, someone always calls out.."but, but....hair braiding is essential to Civ we must have it!").
Well wouldn't a tool facilitate rather than hinder this desire ?

Others, well they want to alter fundamental mechanics, for this you need to get your hands dirty.
Finally, I don't understand why anyone would get angry at someone for "breaking" a tool that wasn't designed to go beyond its limits. That makes no sense. After all you would be modding a mod,packaging, which requires knowledge..................

I think you meant to remark this to Afforess. I'm advocating editors. ;)

at first i laughed cause i thought the OP was trolling... but it appears hes serious.

@Afforess: just because you are an exceptional modder that doesn't need tools, that doesn't mean the rest of the modding community doesn't want (or need) them. for a lot of people modding is scary business, with such tools it will expand the modding community hugely (which is a good thing).

i actually find it kind of offensive that you would include me (and the rest of CFC) in your rant. as the second poster said: There is no We in your argument. i think very small minority of people would support this.

that all said, im not denying you your opinion, just giving you mine.

carry on then. as you were.

@Afforess: just because you are an exceptional modder that doesn't need tools, that doesn't mean the rest of the modding community doesn't want (or need) them. for a lot of people modding is scary business, with such tools it will expand the modding community hugely (which is a good thing).

Apparently, you didn't really read the OP. That isn't a real concern;

my real concern is that if they give us some fancy, easy to use modding tools, a la Civ3 or Spore, they will cripple us from making advanced mods with the SDK. Correct me if I am wrong, but I can not think of a single instance, in gaming history, where a company gives users a simple editing tool AND the advanced source code too. It's always one or the other. And if we have to decide, I want the advanced code. It's as simple as that.

No one has yet adequately addressed this concern, so my argument is still valid.

Apparently, you didn't really read the OP. That isn't a real concern;

my real concern is that if they give us some fancy, easy to use modding tools, a la Civ3 or Spore, they will cripple us from making advanced mods with the SDK. Correct me if I am wrong, but I can not think of a single instance, in gaming history, where a company gives users a simple editing tool AND the advanced source code too. It's always one or the other. And if we have to decide, I want the advanced code. It's as simple as that.

No one has yet adequately addressed this concern, so my argument is still valid.
First of all, I don't think that anything you or we can say will change what Firaxis does. Your argument is still as valid as it ever was.
Second, you might want to read this again:

I also wonder whether the game engine Civ V uses comes with gaming tools they can redistribute. Tools for skinning characters or previewing 3d models for instance. If Firaxis could deliver these, it would cost them nothing but could help modders a lot.
If they include tools given by the engine, which make art-bundling/editing easier, then it doesn't clash with text files modding, as text files allow you to assemble art resources while tools may help make them.
There's no reason why they wouldn't provide an xml editor and the xml files if they wanted to. I know my firm sells a product where we provide both an xml editor and the xml files. Nothing prevents anyone from editing the xml files by hand if they like.

Without an SDK, the mods we will see will be on par with current Civ3 mods. Civ3 mods pale in comparison to Civ4 mods. I would go as far to say that there aren't really any Civ3 mods so much as there are Civ3 game tweaks.

Have you actually played top-notch Civ3 mods recently? Sure, there are limitations such as not being able to mod the AI, and not being able to seed events, and these are problems (although the no event scripting one may not be insurmountable). But to call them all merely "tweaks" - not only is it disrespectful to the modders, but if you'd actually some of the really good ones, you'd realize they're a whole lot more than merely "tweaks".

Maybe limitations when using the editors, but if there is still access to the raw files then it would be win-win if they release a user-friendly editor.

Agreed. And it seems Takhisis does as well (see below).

You don't grasp the concept of logic then ;)
You say anyone can learn, I said I know someone who couldn't, so there's at least one person who can't, so your anyone is wrong, but you dismiss it nonetheless. I may of course not grasp the difference between anyone and everyone, not being a native English speaker but I think you're just ignoring arguments that prove you wrong.

LDiCesare does use logic correctly. He's logically disproven Afforess here.

I'm glad to see that sanity is being restored.
What about my third option: both. Have an editor for casual modder dummies (e.g. me) but still allow for manually editing the game with XML editors/notepad/whatever you prefer. I still think that a map maker would at least be useful.
For what it's worth, if you start checking in the civ3 utility programs section you'll find that terrain files can be edited manually using hex editors. So terrain types that you can't put together in the game editor, such as Sea tiles just alongside the coast, are feasible.

I think this would be an excellent option. There's a lot to be said for a "simple" editor for "basic" modders who just want a "tweak" of the game, and don't want to learn programming. And there's also a lot to be said for a lack of limits for those who do have the "15" minutes to learn programming.

at first i laughed cause i thought the OP was trolling... but it appears hes serious.

@Afforess: just because you are an exceptional modder that doesn't need tools, that doesn't mean the rest of the modding community doesn't want (or need) them. for a lot of people modding is scary business, with such tools it will expand the modding community hugely (which is a good thing).

i actually find it kind of offensive that you would include me (and the rest of CFC) in your rant. as the second poster said: There is no We in your argument. i think very small minority of people would support this.

that all said, im not denying you your opinion, just giving you mine.

carry on then. as you were.

I agree. It was arrogant to use "we" in the opening post, having not first established even a plurality by legitimate means. I'd suspect more people would support decent modding tools than be opposed to them in general. But rather than do research to discover if this is the case or not, you supposed that "we" all agreed with your position.

I, despite being a student nearing a computing degree, find the modding tools in Civ3 quite useful. Sure, I know how to program, but not in every language (I've never used XML or Python, for instance), and it takes more than 15 minutes to learn a language for all but supergeniuses like yourself, and even then I'm sure some knowledge of similar languages helps. And sometimes, when all you do want to do is really a tweak, a nice handy editor is really convenient. Yeah, I can program in C or Prolog, and can program without a GUI. But that doesn't mean such tools aren't convenient.

Does it take time to develop these tools? Yeah, of course. But it's nowhere near as complex as developing the entire game. And, as someone said in this thread, the tools can then be used by Firaxis themselves to speed up scenario creation (if you really want to edit maps manually in files, that's pretty ridiculous. I've done it before, and much prefer the Civ3 editor or the Civ4 WorldBuilder). They'll also introduce many people to modding who may well have not gone into modding had such tools not existed, and increase the value of the game. Some of those who start with the editor will graduate to programming, increasing the number of "programmer" modders. And the editor will provide a relatively "safe" harbor for new modders, increasing the stability of their "tweaks" - from what I've played of Total War mods, the lack of an easy-to-use editor can result in much less stability than would be desired.

It's certainly in part your tone that's irked me, but in the end I'd trust Firaxis on this. They've set the precedent high for modding, and I don't think they want to pull a Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 on modding for Civ5, so significant limitations are unlikely. And if it really took that much time to develop an editor, I doubt they'd do so. And having played around a good amount in Civ editor creation myself, I'm sure a full-time team at Firaxis that knows the program better than the back of their hands could make a decent one without delaying the game by more than two or three months :D.

Just release the editors source code and don't hardcode and we should get by... :whew:

I can not think of a single instance, in gaming history, where a company gives users a simple editing tool AND the advanced source code too. It's always one or the other.

Crysis. There is the Crytek Sandbox, which is a user-friendly easy to use GUI based editor, and there is the Crysis Mod SDK which contains source code, access to the full assets and the ability to manipulate anything (except the core Crytek engine).

There's one which blows your statement out of the water. I suggest you don't resort to generalities to try and make statements. There's always an exception.

I'm sure there's others, but I've wasted enough time disproving pretty much everything you've said. I can't be bothered wasting more time. Enjoy your fears and like I've said twice in this thread, the only fear you should worry about is if Firaxis do give us an editor for the masses that you mod isn't lost in the "noise", as you lovingly refer to it. ;)

Correct me if I am wrong, but I can not think of a single instance, in gaming history, where a company gives users a simple editing tool AND the advanced source code too. It's always one or the other.

To expand on what Dale said, how about Heroes of Might and Magic (I believe it was...) 4. That had an editor with it, along with a scripting portion that allowed deeper modding. Let's see, well, there was this game called Neverwinter Nights and its sequel, Neverwinter Nights 2. Both had robust editors along that while relatively complex compared to a strategy game editor, was still easy enough for anybody to create simple scenarios, etc. That, of course, had the more advanced scripting source for advanced modding. And let's not forget Morrowind from Bethesda...

Heck, look at RPG Maker XP and RPG Maker VX. They allowed for creation of some very intricate works with the editor portion alone... Throw in the Ruby Script (I think it is called) that was included, and people have made games far beyond the intent of the programs.

Sorry, but I would love to have a simple level / unit editor. I don't have programming skills and all my mods tends to be on the small scale / balancing side. I don't think that to develope such tools would be too much of a hassle for Firaxis.

Just trolling here: In the case of Civ4, Visual Studio and Notepad/Wordpad are modding tools, aren't they?


I am a fine example of what I am describing. Usually I'm happy with using the vanilla rules. I am a graphics whore however (duh! 3d modeller,animator & skinner) so any official tools related to map/terrain-making and models would be fantastic.


You're a 3d modeller and can't handle Blender?

I wouldn't mind seeing some simple little tools for some of the people that modding would otherwise be to intimidating. At least some worldbuilder-esq tool. Someone already mentioned somewhere about modding unit graphics/models easy such as how you create a creature in Spore, except it would be preferably in an external editor this time. Something like that would be nice, but I would want to have other options as well. Maybe some kind of XML editor for the noobs, but honestly, I'd never use something like that. If you can read English, you can write XML. Its stupid simple and anyone requiring one won't be making much of a mod anyways.

I agree with Afforess to a degree, generalized modding tools are not the way to go if you want to see good mods... its too complicated for that. I'd basically like to see it just like civ4 but with an improved world builder and an easier way to swap weapons, skins and body parts between units. Maybe some other little additions, but seriously leave the coding to the coders.

Just trolling here: In the case of Civ4, Visual Studio and Notepad/Wordpad are modding tools, aren't they?

Neither are specific to modding.

This entire thread is nothing more than chest-beating by the OP.

Have a nice life, Afforess. I'm out.

With an XML editor the fields to edit can be loaded from the XML schema. Since the XML file must match the schema, there's nothing to say the editor thus can't use the schema to dynamically create the fields to edit.

A pipe dream of mine is to have an editor that does just that, though I don't think many of the people that really want them would like to deal with stuff like iCombat, so there would need to be a way to display known tags nicer.

Another idea I just have is to interface the editor with the SDK, so the values the editor needs can be added directly. For example, instead of using gc.getInfoTypeForString("CIVILIZATION_ROME"), you would use gc.getEntryType("Civilization").getEntry("Rome") in the code. That would allow new types of entries and fields to be added without breaking the editor.

And I think I speak for all of us when I say that even advanced modders will use the editors if they are good enough and would be really happy if we could have both editors and modding that is at least as powerful as civ4.

A pipe dream of mine is to have an editor that does just that, though I don't think many of the people that really want them would like to deal with stuff like iCombat, so there would need to be a way to display known tags nicer.

Another idea I just have is to interface the editor with the SDK, so the values the editor needs can be added directly. For example, instead of using gc.getInfoTypeForString("CIVILIZATION_ROME"), you would use gc.getEntryType("Civilization").getEntry("Rome") in the code. That would allow new types of entries and fields to be added without breaking the editor.

And I think I speak for all of us when I say that even advanced modders will use the editors if they are good enough and would be really happy if we could have both editors and modding that is at least as powerful as civ4.

With MS Access, you can create forms that use multiple tabs and create tabs within that. I am certain that you could do that with a self built editor as well. Then you can arrange the fields into groups that you can put on each tab, with the more prominent ones being within the first couple of tabs and the more background stuff in the later ones.

You do know that developers often use the tools they give to us themselves to work on the game?

Bethesda RPGs are well-known for the fact that the editor they give with their games is more or less the same one they used to build the game for example.

You're a 3d modeller and can't handle Blender?

So how did you draw that conclusion from my post ?

On second thoughts never mind. I don't really care.

You do know that developers often use the tools they give to us themselves to work on the game?

Bethesda RPGs are well-known for the fact that the editor they give with their games is more or less the same one they used to build the game for example.

I doubt the civ3 developers made everything in the game with the editor. Though they might have for the stuff that the editor can be used for (maps and most of the stuff that can be done with XML now).

this discussion is a variation of the old "give us programming language so simple, that that we can program without knowing how to program"

who stated that modding should be a simple task?

if you have only 15 minutes of spare time and expect to make a mod. i will disappoint you: the best you can do is make one of "my first unit" crap mod, that no one will give a crap about.

simple tasks, such as tweaking some unit type's attack value can and should be done by hand. i do realize that tracking dependencies in quite a few XML files can be a pain, but i do not think, that the devs should create editors just for that.

of course there should be some map/scenario editor. i can't image making scenarios else wise.

i think that a map/scenario editor + SDK + some source code is the best way to go.

as to all other possible editors: the devs should not waste their precious time writing them. be prepared to spend some time learning (XML, python, etc.) and if you are not up to it, then you should not be granted the right to mod. i prefer quality over quantity any day.

Afforess, you were and still are 100% right. Regardless of what people who just want to "add one unit or graphic" and have no intention of major modding or programming ability. I of course hope we could get both but I still fully agree that I'd rather have the SDK/source.

(coming from someone who right now really doesn't effectively use such, but I'd rather the potential was out there.)

But why couldn't we have both, Earthling? Why should this be posed as a matter of choosing between them? They're not mutually exclusive.

this discussion is a variation of the old "give us programming language so simple, that that we can program without knowing how to program"

who stated that modding should be a simple task?

Who stated it shouldn't ?

if you have only 15 minutes of spare time and expect to make a mod. i will disappoint you: the best you can do is make one of "my first unit" crap mod, that no one will give a crap about.
Ahh! recognition the goal of all modders, or not. There are some that would like to mod their own games for themselves, who require neither "fame" or praise.


simple tasks, such as tweaking some unit type's attack value can and should be done by hand. i do realize that tracking dependencies in quite a few XML files can be a pain, but i do not think, that the devs should create editors just for that.

of course there should be some map/scenario editor. i can't image making scenarios else wise.

Modifying maps can be achieved by tweaking files as can creating scenarios. Everything is data after all.


i think that a map/scenario editor + SDK + some source code is the best way to go.

But your not the developer so............

as to all other possible editors: the devs should not waste their precious time writing them. be prepared to spend some time learning (XML, python, etc.) and if you are not up to it, then you should not be granted the right to mod. i prefer quality over quantity any day.

Granted the right ? :lol: Who died and made you :king:

Your aware that simply because something can be downloaded your NOT actually obligated to do so, right ?

So how did you draw that conclusion from my post ?

On second thoughts never mind. I don't really care.

Um, yes i did draw that conclusion.
you as "pro" should be able to handle the professional tools without big problems, and it should be easier and more satisfying for you than using an included editor.

Um, yes i did draw that conclusion.
you as "pro" should be able to handle the professional tools without big problems, and it should be easier and more satisfying for you than using an included editor.

If you followed the thread earlier you'll see I started with Lightwave(Amiga) and 3ds Max Dos.
I currently use Max, Maya and ZBrush. Blender is a good enough open-source tool, but not the flavor I crave.

'nuff said ?

Oh! and developer tools are very useful with regards to modelling and animation. Without them you end up (usually) writing your own import/export maxscripts (though I'm figuring import scripts will have to written anyways) or recreating their skeletons,hierarchy,naming conventions, guessing at scale...blah, blah,blah........

Who stated it shouldn't ?

You are going to be very disappointed. Even with an all encompassing GUI modding tool, modding will still be very time consuming.


Ahh! recognition the goal of all modders, or not. There are some that would like to mod their own games for themselves, who require neither "fame" or praise.

Because the stated goal of every modder is fame... :lol:

Um, yes i did draw that conclusion.
you as "pro" should be able to handle the professional tools without big problems, and it should be easier and more satisfying for you than using an included editor.Just a note - I'm using Blender only... but a couple of years ago, I was using 3Dstudio MAX (not for modding though)... and the UI is very different. And from what I gathered, Blender has a somewhat idiosyncratic interface - for me, not a lot of my skills I acquired on 3Dstudio MAX transferred over, I basically relearned everything (of course, the AutoCAD + 3Dstudio MAX setup my father used was for architecture, so they deviate from the "generic" workspaces a bit) - and that's my view as amateur 3D modeller, I'd almost bet that professionals have a much, much stronger preference (for example, the Fortran <-> C++ rift at our physics department is... erh, sometimes very unpleasant!).

On included editors: that's a mixed bag. Editors specifically made for modding usually suck, but they're very accessible. Editors used by the developers themselves are usually very helpful and convenient (though they often have a steeeeeeeep learning curve... I remember the time I used the NWN2 toolset).

Cheers, LT.

You are going to be very disappointed. Even with an all encompassing GUI modding tool, modding will still be very time consuming.

Because the stated goal of every modder is fame... :lol:

Me ? I won't be disappointed, if I mod anything it will be for my own satisfaction so the time I spend will be my own. Please remember I started modifying games, scenario creating, modelling, texturing etc etc..before you were born. I do have a rough idea what it entails ;)

Stated goal...hmm, I have donated many models over the years without even asking for a mention in the credits..so I guess it is not (was not ?) always the case.

But good luck with your endeavours, I hope you gain the "fame" you crave.

Afforess, you were and still are 100% right. Regardless of what people who just want to "add one unit or graphic" and have no intention of major modding or programming ability. I of course hope we could get both but I still fully agree that I'd rather have the SDK/source.

(coming from someone who right now really doesn't effectively use such, but I'd rather the potential was out there.)

It makes me glad to see sanity in this forum.

I hope you gain the "fame" you crave.

While I appreciate backhanded jabs as much as the next guy, remember, talking about individual users is against the rules.;)

You know I would sig that except I know it's not really about me personally, just the opinion I expressed. (ie. if that was in like an OT politics thread that would be sigged in an instant) Though yes, I do think your stance is reasonable and I think a lot of others are missing the point. You (and I) are not against, say, an easy map editer/worldbuilder - but I know that really doesn't do very much for serious modding. I certainly know I couldn't do what I wanted like add new victory conditions, change the AI, etc... just by adding in new units or maps or graphics. Though I haven't done such because I'm not a great modder - but I'd rather the potential was there for those who want it.

And Takhisis - it's not that we couldn't have both. It's that I mostly agree there probably won't be both. I also don't know of any games that marketed both the "customizable interface stuff" and had SDK-like resources available. Judging from other games, stuff like Spore etc... I see exactly what the problem with civ V going this route is and think it's reasonable modders would be concerned.

This thread is starting to become more hassle than its worth.

Can I strongly suggest that people start discussing the ISSUES, and not each other? Otherwise, I close the thread, and deal with the people.

While I appreciate backhanded jabs as much as the next guy, remember, talking about individual users is against the rules.;)

Afforess, for what it is worth, that was a genuine comment.
I'm too long in the tooth to be snide to someone the same age as my youngest of 3 children.

I'll reiterate my viewpoint one last time. Editors if planned into the development cycle will never detract from the modding possibilities, especially when being touted as a marketing point.
Modern games when touted as moddable are coded to be exactly that. Civ was late to the party with IV. I'm expecting V to be as open, but more streamlined in its processes.
Time and the game release will be the only things that can truely answer the questions though.

You may have more noise as you call it, but if your mod is good, it will stand on its merits no matter what.

Now I really must get back to SOTS, I have some Hivers needing to be squashed underfoot.
Be well :)

Take the personal comments off, pleeease... if you want a mosh pit, post in YouTube comments or join forumwarz... but not here.

Wow, it takes only 15 minutes to learn it? That is pretty amazing...

if all you want to do is tweak a few numbers that is all it takes

Most stuff will take an hour or two to figure out though - and some like the citystyles are even more involved

OK, sarcasm aside, XML is not so plain. Yes, it is readable, and I can understand and find a good amount of it for basic editing. Of course, there are many "functions" that I am clueless as to what they do (throughout all of the files) and when it comes to Schema, I am lost. Regardless of it's "ease" to learn, it is a pain to work through. All of the lines and cross referencing to make sure that file is edited so this will work and such. Give me a simple, user friendly editor any day of the week.

I am with Afforess on that one, get a decent xml editor and just spend a little time learning the xml formats

Anyway, my point is that yes, I can read the XML, but it is the hassle of editing it that is the problem. It is very time consuming and, quite frankly, tiring... especially for someone that is not a programmer. I am more of a designer! That is my passion and getting bogged down in code (be it C++, Python, or even XML) just takes me away from my passion and makes it a chore.

Learning nifskope and blender seriously takes a lot more effort than editing xml (Python and C++ may be another issue). So if that is what you did manage to learn, xml should be relatively easy (though potentially not as 'fun')

So wht you and Afforess are saying is that people that don't know how to program should not be allowed to contribute?

XML editing is not programming.

Even if you do not do that, you can obviously still contribute. There are people like Bakuel or Ekmek who only create content (units, leaders) for others to use. Since you feel artistic that is the direction you could take, or you could colaborate on a mod where someone else does the 'coding'.

You do raise a good point. But there are still the people who just want to add a civ, change unit stat, make a simple scenario. Why do these people have to go to the trouble of learning a programming language just to make one or two little tweaks?

You do not need to learn a programming language to do so.

Yes, but it can look quite overwhelming, with all these short-form tags, "i" at the beginning of some tags, "b" at the beginning of others. More complicated than simply opening a window and changing a text box from "15" to "16" or using a scroll menu to change a prerequisite from bronze working to iron working.

Once you have done it a few times (2 or 3) it comes natural, I agree the learnign curve is steeper, but it also offers more flexibility.

If you never did it because it felt too complicated, you never realized how easy it is.

mamba, since you apparently know XML, is it the same as Blender? Hard to learn but easy to do once learned? Beginning in Blender was a nightmare but I got there eventually. If it's the same with XML, it might be worthwhile.

Edit: @Takhisis: XML is easy to learn ;).
Just the mass of files and where to look at will make it difficult at the beginning. It just needs time at this point, but it's technical not difficult.

If you followed the thread earlier you'll see I started with Lightwave(Amiga) and 3ds Max Dos.
I currently use Max, Maya and ZBrush. Blender is a good enough open-source tool, but not the flavor I crave.

'nuff said ?


Sorry, must have forgotten it :blush:.


Oh! and developer tools are very useful with regards to modelling and animation. Without them you end up (usually) writing your own import/export maxscripts (though I'm figuring import scripts will have to written anyways) or recreating their skeletons,hierarchy,naming conventions, guessing at scale...blah, blah,blah........

I guess, the firaxis artists didn't use more specialized things than the "normal" 3D modeling programs...but i'm not an artist, so i'm probably wrong here.

Just a note - I'm using Blender only... but a couple of years ago, I was using 3Dstudio MAX (not for modding though)... and the UI is very different. And from what I gathered, Blender has a somewhat idiosyncratic interface - for me, not a lot of my skills I acquired on 3Dstudio MAX transferred over, I basically relearned everything (of course, the AutoCAD + 3Dstudio MAX setup my father used was for architecture, so they deviate from the "generic" workspaces a bit) - and that's my view as amateur 3D modeller, I'd almost bet that professionals have a much, much stronger preference (for example, the Fortran <-> C++ rift at our physics department is... erh, sometimes very unpleasant!).


Fortran o_O.
on topic: The point is, that if you've learned one of the programms, then you have the abilities to do, what you want.
That you might have to learn some/many things new, is sure right, but you can do it. That you might have preferences, sure, but that normaly comes because you're just used to some of the things, that you don't know, how to do these things in the new program, etc, etc. That changes over the time.

I know thats like saying oh I learned how to program using codeblocks so I can't use VS 2008. You can, you just didn't try hard enough.

mamba, since you apparently know XML, is it the same as Blender? Hard to learn but easy to do once learned? Beginning in Blender was a nightmare but I got there eventually. If it's the same with XML, it might be worthwhile.

Well, I do not know blender, always shied away from it ;) I wold expect blender to be more complex however.

In xml it took me about 2 hours to have all the stuff figured out I initially wanted (adding civ specific units). It probably would have been faster if I had not searched for and read a few tutorials on this site about how to add units as they all were pre-BtS. I spent more time reading them than it would have taken to just look at examples, which I then ended up doing on top of that anyway. In the end I did it differently from what the pre-BtS tutorials described (granted, pre-BtS you could not do it that way, so BtS made it easier) ;)

Everything (with one exception, city styles) I wanted to do in xml since was easy, it followed the same logic established by the unit xml. The files and tags changed but it wasn't new any more, just a variation on the same theme.

Now if you were to ask me what each tag in the xml does, I doubt anyone knows exactly, but for most of what you do you can ignore most of them and for the rest you simply go by comparison (like LH behaviour).

XML is easy to learn? Might give it a try... but i don't ahev Civ 4 here with me to try its real effects. :(

Where I really think tool support could help were easier unit and leaderhead creation.

If you could simply add / remove items like swords and rifles or hats and coats in an editor that would be nice. The animation would then follow what weapon you equipped or something like that. Texturing obviously is done in some graphics program, so no need to provide anything for that.

Even something simpler like having the ability to put any unit on a horse, a chariot or an elephant plus the ability to swap heads or animations + weapons and you have 95% of the units out there (minus the texturing) ;) No need to swap coats etc.

For leaderheads something similar could be possible. In many rpgs you can change the face by adjusting mouth, nose, eyevbows, hairstyle, beard, face overall (thin, thick) and obviously the color of all of this. Have this and again the ability to put on coats, crowns, hats and you are all set for a host of new leaders and units ;)

I doubt they provide any of this though, but if there is something I really want over what came with Civ4, that is it.

A agree with what has been said, except the python, I can't write python worth anything, although maybe thats because it was the first real programing language I tried.

Known: C++, Visual Basic
Learning: Unreal Script
Tried: Python, C

Python is very similar to C++. It looks the same to me really, just have to be careful with the whitespace, but failing to compile because of semicolons is pretty similar. Also the capital-lowercase conventions seem to be different, at least in civ, but it's not like that matters.

Anti-Aforess

Sorry for not having the time to read all 180+ posts here. If my points were already told, I am sorry to repeat them and not only second them.

Int the very first moment I thought: Aforess, are you the fat swag of madness (like there is here a proverb in Germany)? Indeed Civ is LIVING on the editor and the other modding tools. Anything else would be out, soon. Indeed it is a matter of fact, that many good scenario creators like Rocoteh and El Justo did not come to civ IV but remained at civ 3. It has the better modding tools than civ 4. Better means, better to to use for people without knowledge on programming. Only then we have most people able to mod.

Modding tools means living of Civ. Full stop. Without them it would die slowly.

Again, these tools must be simple. No BS of text editors or ingame editors. They are way too complicated. But an external tool, you can design maps, rules and everything. Additionally it would be fine for a graphic editor, too, where you can make your own units and buildings and so on. Then we all have the fun we had with Civ III.

Adler

Flaming - warned.

Anti-Aforess

You might want to remain at least remotely polite. I mean, there are rules, and a little bit of respect can't hurt. And I can't say I agree with Aforess, but you're pushing things a bit far.
It has the better modding tools than civ 4. Better means, better to to use for people without knowledge on programming. Only then we have most people able to mod.
That's just totally false. Civ 4 has better tools in the sense they are more powerful. Fall from Heaven 2 couldn't exist in Civ 3. The mods one can do in Civ IV are far superior to those which can be done in civ III. If Civ V has less modding power than Civ IV, then it'll be a failure for me. Providing tools, external or not, is good, but providing access to data files and a scripting language is a must.

I agree with Afforess. Other programs, could destroy Civ 5. Maybe an XML editor, or a Civ 5 Model editor could be fine. :mischief:

Indeed Civ is LIVING on the editor and the other modding tools.

No it's not. Civ4 has NO modding tools. There are TONS of mods. There are more mods for Civ4 than there is for Civ3, which does have modding tools.

Better means, better to to use for people without knowledge on programming.

It's already been discussed to death here, but there is no real way to get around the programming requirement of modding. There's no such thing as a tool that will let you code C++ without actually knowing C++ before hand.

Again, these tools must be simple. No BS of text editors or ingame editors. They are way too complicated. But an external tool, you can design maps, rules and everything. Additionally it would be fine for a graphic editor, too, where you can make your own units and buildings and so on. Then we all have the fun we had with Civ III.


Civ3 mods all pale in comparison with Civ4 mods.

Civ4 has NO modding tools.

WorldBuilder is a modding tool. I would advise you to stop using generalities. They seem to be your defeat every time. ;)

WorldBuilder is a modding tool. I would advise you to stop using generalities. They seem to be your defeat every time. ;)

I'm sure everyone here will agree the WorldBuilder is more of a testing platform than an actual modding tool. ;)

I'm sure everyone here will agree the WorldBuilder is more of a testing platform than an actual modding tool. ;)

No, it is a modding tool. Not a very good one, but a modding tool, nonetheless!

I don't think so. Can you add new civs with it? Can you add new civics, and new graphics with it? No.

Firstly who is this "we" ?

Secondly modding tools and editors have never stopped any dedicated modder from ignoring/working around them in any game.

Lastly, modding tools are quite convenient for some who would wish to make straightforward mods but actually have an ongoing life outside of the game.

:goodjob: I totally agree

I'm sure everyone here will agree the WorldBuilder is more of a testing platform than an actual modding tool. ;)
No. It's a modding tool. If you want to create a scenario, it's very convenient as it allows you to see the layout of the lands. You can later write your scripts to react to units entering tile x, but without the WorldBuilder, it would be a real pain to make your scenario.
I don't think so. Can you add new civs with it? Can you add new civics, and new graphics with it? No.
Can you add new maps with it? Yes. Can you add new scenarios? Yes. A tool isn't supposed to do everything. This one does only 2 things: Map making (and it could be better at it) andd scenario creation. Saying these aren't modding is pretty ridiculous.

No, these aren't modding. These are a very few things, and I don't suppose this is modding Civ4.

No, these aren't modding. These are a very few things, and I don't suppose this is modding Civ4.

No, it is modding. Modding by definition is adding new content to something. A scenario is new content. Maybe it's not a new civ, new unit, or new graphic, but it is new content.

That's like saying NifSkope and Paint.NET aren't modding tools because they can only make new graphics, not new units or civilizations. Or Notepad++ isn't a modding tool because it can't make new graphics or compile new DLLs.

By that rationale just basic, every day save games are modding tools, as they allow you to upload new content for the game. And that's just preposterous.

WB is more of a pseudo modding tool, especially with how horribly it is implemented, it's about next to useless.

I find it particularly funny how everyone a few hours ago was dumping on the WorldBuilder as the worst tool imaginable, is now raising it on a pedestal as a great tool that can add new content to the game. :lol:

You may now commence backpedaling. ;)

I find it particularly funny how everyone a few hours ago was dumping on the WorldBuilder as the worst tool imaginable, is now raising it on a pedestal as a great tool that can add new content to the game. :lol:

You may now commence backpedaling. ;)

It is a terrible tool. However, it is still a modding tool.

I'm not arguing over how bad it is (it is pretty bad). No matter how bad it is it is still a modding tool released with the game by Firaxis.

I find it particularly funny how everyone a few hours ago was dumping on the WorldBuilder as the worst tool imaginable, is now raising it on a pedestal as a great tool that can add new content to the game. :lol:

You may now commence backpedaling. ;)

Actually if you care to read what's been said, it's more like "it's a crap modding tool, but still a modding tool nonetheless". Regardless of the quality of WB as a modding tool, it's still a modding tool.

You could also point to the Maya and Max nif exporters for Civ4 that Firaxis kindly supplied. They're artist's modding tools. So there's three modding tools that I know of. Did you want to retract your statement from post #194 and show people how real back-peddling works? ;)

Actually if you care to read what's been said, it's more like "it's a crap modding tool, but still a modding tool nonetheless". Regardless of the quality of WB as a modding tool, it's still a modding tool.

Apparently, Phungus and Nitram don't exist in your world; but I do. I feel honored.

Apparently, Phungus and Nitram don't exist in your world; but I do. I feel honored.

Regardless of what is said by either, there is no denying the fact that WB is a modding tool. Unless they are saying that every map maker, scenario maker etc who only use WB to create their files, is not a modder. Phungus's claim that a save file is a mod is just crazy talk. A save file does not introduce anything new to the game. It's a snap of the state of a game in progress at a certain time. The only thing that could possibly come close is the WB-save of the map before the first turn is played.

I'm also surprised you are now trying to align with me, since in post #194 you claim Civ4 has no modding tools. Are you now retracting that claim since I am firmly in the camp that modding tools do exist for Civ4? :mischief:

Really, what we have here is a disagreement of definition. We disagree on what, fundamentally, modding is. In my opinion, using the world builder is not modding; if it IS modding, then settling a city is modding, because you just added new content.

Regardless of WB's state as a modding tool, which is debatable, it doesn't help contradict Afforess's point that Civ4: Civ4 has a vibrant modding community and the game has a lack of easy to use modding tools. WB is a PoS, and can't even be used to create scenarios, and doesn't improve the modding potential of Civ4 one iota. None of the scenario makers even use it, they all use user made tools. So, sure you can be pedantic and make it look like you're refuting the point, when you aren't at all because you're sticking on the strict definition of None, but it in no way refutes the point Afforess was making.

Afforess's point was that Civ4 has no modding tools. That is the point which is being refuted. WB is in fact a modding tool. It IS possible to make a new scenario with the WB, something I have in fact done myself. The "mod" part comes in when you save out the WBS file to re-use. The WBS file is in fact a mod, so the WB has created a mod. Regardless of how crap the tool is, it is still a tool which can create a successful WBS file which can be used as a mod.

I do not see how settling a city in a game can be related to modding, it is not new content. What you've done is changed the state of a unit to convert it into a city using the existing game's rules. It is an action performed whilst playing the game. You must be confused. :)

Afforess's point was that Civ4 has no modding tools.


No it wasn't; it was a piece of evidence for my point.

The point I was making, if you scroll back one page, was that modding tools have a negative correlation with the general quality of a mod for a game. In layman's terms, the more modding tools we are presented with, the worse quality mods we have.

If it makes you happy, I'll revise my statement from NO to extremely limited and generally useless. But the correlation still stands, and you have not refuted me in any way. ;)

I honestly don't care if the WB is a modding tool or not.;)

I don't mod that much but I would have the SDK then an editer. Then you get to play the cool mods like Better AI, Rise and Fall, A New Dawn, FfH RevDCM ect.

No it wasn't; it was a piece of evidence for my point.

The point I was making, if you scroll back one page, was that modding tools have a negative correlation with the general quality of a mod for a game. In layman's terms, the more modding tools we are presented with, the worse quality mods we have.

You have no proof of this, and as yet have not presented proof of this claimed correlation. It is possible to have poor quality mods regardless of whether tools are available or not. It is also possible to have high quality mods regardless of whether tools are available or not as well. So there is no provable correlation between the presence of modding tools and poor quality mods.

There will be a lot more mods (or 'NOISE' as you called it many pages ago) and this is what a few people believe you are meaning. That with better user-friendly modding tools your mod will be lost in the 'NOISE' and you won't receive the player gratification that it appeared you wanted. Quite simply, if your mod is good it won't be lost in this 'NOISE'. I thought that was simple enough, but seems we're still going back and forth on this. :)

You have no proof of this, and as yet have not presented proof of this claimed correlation.

I have, but you have rejected it. Since you have rejected my evidence of Spore and Civ3, the burden for proof is now on you. ;)

I have, but you have rejected it. Since you have rejected my evidence of Spore and Civ3, the burden for proof is now on you. ;)

You're kidding right?

Here's a small selection of Mods made from games with modding tools: http://store.steampowered.com/freestuff/mods/

Seems modding tools doesn't limit the ability to make good mods. ;)

Oh look, there's even an entire website which highlights mods from games with modding tools. It only lists 6394 mods compared to your what........ 2? http://www.moddb.com/mods ;)

You're kidding right?

Here's a small selection of Mods made from games with modding tools: http://store.steampowered.com/freestuff/mods/

Seems modding tools doesn't limit the ability to make good mods. ;)

Oh look, there's even an entire website which highlights mods from games with modding tools. It only lists 6394 mods compared to your what........ 2? http://www.moddb.com/mods ;)

Are you smoking something? Showing all the HL 1/2 mods and a mod database (which in no way implies "games with modding tools" FYI) isn't an argument.

By that rationale just basic, every day save games are modding tools, as they allow you to upload new content for the game. And that's just preposterous.

WB is more of a pseudo modding tool, especially with how horribly it is implemented, it's about next to useless.

Umm, save games simply load a game state back into the engine. They in no way add to or modify the game.
Maps if altered (modified) or created from a blank canvas add something to the game that was not there before, a new map.
The argument for having no editors is becoming thinner all the time. The developers wasting their precious time point has been dismissed, the "crap" mods point was never valid to begin with. Which leaves us with :

"Oh no! I won't be revered if anyone can change variables/graphics/add a tech."

Because the truly innovative always have (and will again) find a way to achieve their ends. They tend not to worry about what others may do, but rather about what they will find a way to do.

I'd prefer having both: tools for the advanced modders, and tools for the layman.

My argument: Huge-scale mods like Fall From Heaven 2 and so many others have been brilliant. I would definitely want similar massive mods to play in Civ5. However, I also like to dabble in a bit of tinkering myself, but don't find enjoyment in having to learn programming languages to be able to do it.

Case in point: With Civ3 I used to make maps all the time, and enjoyed fiddling around with units/governments/etc in the limited but easy-to-use editor. With Civ4 I haven't done any of that because the WorldBuilder was too slow for making maps, and I never got comfortable with the 3rd party programs that tried to make it easier. And I could never get my head around editing units/civics/etc.

So from my perspective, a limited basic editor for the layman would certainly be appreciated. :)

Are you smoking something? Showing all the HL 1/2 mods and a mod database (which in no way implies "games with modding tools" FYI) isn't an argument.

You would pay to catch up to the discussion to understand what we're talking about and why a list of mods which Valve consider worthy to distribute via Steam (IE: HIGH QUALITY MODS) and a database of Mods whose purpose is to help users find high quality mods is pwnage on Afforess's argument. Of the high quality mods on those sites I can guarantee some of those games having modding tools. Which defeats the argument that there is a strong negative correlation on the ability to create high quality mods when modding tools are available.

Here's a good example of a high quality mod made for a game with modding tools: http://www.moddb.com/mods/third-age-total-war

Umm, save games simply load a game state back into the engine. They in no way add to or modify the game.
Maps if altered (modified) or created from a blank canvas add something to the game that was not there before, a new map.

A new map is not all that different from a new gamestate. I grant you that a savegame usually is a randomly generated map rather than one designed, but that is a relatively minor difference when it comes to modding.

The argument for having no editors is becoming thinner all the time. The developers wasting their precious time point has been dismissed, the "crap" mods point was never valid to begin with. Which leaves us with :

Actually they both are valid, I do not see where this is becoming thinner.

Afforess, your reasoning is, after all, a bit elitist. Anything that can be used by us laymen is 'noob' and not worthy of you uber-pro haxxor skillz. I still don't understand why n editor can't be good for the game, as long as they release the code as well (SDK, Python format, XMLs, whatever) for advanced users.
I'd prefer having both: tools for the advanced modders, and tools for the layman.

My argument: Huge-scale mods like Fall From Heaven 2 and so many others have been brilliant. I would definitely want similar massive mods to play in Civ5. However, I also like to dabble in a bit of tinkering myself, but don't find enjoyment in having to learn programming languages to be able to do it.

Case in point: With Civ3 I used to make maps all the time, and enjoyed fiddling around with units/governments/etc in the limited but easy-to-use editor. With Civ4 I haven't done any of that because the WorldBuilder was too slow for making maps, and I never got comfortable with the 3rd party programs that tried to make it easier. And I could never get my head around editing units/civics/etc.

So from my perspective, a limited basic editor for the layman would certainly be appreciated. :)
Same here.

Afforess, your reasoning is, after all, a bit elitist. Anything that can be used by us laymen is 'noob' and not worthy of you uber-pro haxxor skillz. I still don't understand why n editor can't be good for the game, as long as they release the code as well (SDK, Python format, XMLs, whatever) for advanced users.


Reality has a well documented elitist bias. ;)

With Anti-Aforess I wanted to make an analogy to Frederick the Great's Antimacchiavell. And that was not meant flaming. Unfortunately this analogy wasn't seen.
Anyway, my point is still valid: Civ IV has no modding tools to be used by people, who have not much knowing of programming. Civ IV is lacking to have these tools to be used by the ordinary player. Although I agree in so far, that the possibilities with civ iv are much more comparing to civ 3, this is in so far futile as it is not usable by everyone. And that's exactly the point. All shall have the possibilities to make scenarios and so on without the use of programming skills. Otherwise only the hardcore programmers are able to make mods. And that's not the sense. That's why there should be editor tools to mod the game.

Adler

Civ4 has been the most moddable game in history. It would be foolish to deviate from this formula. The only thing that may have been lacking is some documentation, as it did take the community a long time to get up to speed. The results have been spectacular though.

With Anti-Aforess I wanted to make an analogy to Frederick the Great's Antimacchiavell. And that was not meant flaming. Unfortunately this analogy wasn't seen.
Anyway, my point is still valid: Civ IV has no modding tools to be used by people, who have not much knowing of programming. Civ IV is lacking to have these tools to be used by the ordinary player. Although I agree in so far, that the possibilities with civ iv are much more comparing to civ 3, this is in so far futile as it is not usable by everyone. And that's exactly the point. All shall have the possibilities to make scenarios and so on without the use of programming skills. Otherwise only the hardcore programmers are able to make mods. And that's not the sense. That's why there should be editor tools to mod the game.

Adler

Have you managed to completely ignore the entire discussion?

What we have here is a dichotomy, either we get easy to use modding tools OR access to all of the advanced files that comprise Civ (SDK). Not both.

Civ3 chose option 1. Civ4 chose option 2. Guess which has better mods?

What we have here is a dichotomy, either we get easy to use modding tools OR access to all of the advanced files that comprise Civ (SDK). Not both.


This is sure not true.
Like already said, there's no real reason, why there can't be both.
It could maybe take a bit longer to develop a game with full accessible core files and a good editor, but also this not sure.

Note that we can have easier to use moding tools than Civ4s.

And yes, with enough effort, you can even have quite easy to use modding tools for Civ4.

And if they can make the business case for it (or some programmer at Firaxis does it off the books), it is even possible that they could ship easy to use modding tools.

Note that easy to use modding tools for Civ4 would mean they could more cheaply put out interesting mod packs -- but, the point where "developer investment in making them easy to use" crosses "designer investment in using hard to use modding tools" is far, far, far, far, far away from the point where people who want "easy to use modding tools" expect the tools to work at.

What people are used to in polished consumer UI takes a lot of QA and a lot of iterations and a lot of polish on the part of developers. That makes sense, because thousands or millions of consumers are losing time if it isn't polished, while one developer has to spend time fixing it.

Hence the fact that internal tools don't need polish to anywhere near the level of external tools. Internal tools that crash and burn when you do something weird to them is acceptable.

You can see this in the XML used by Civ4 -- it is clearly an internal toolset exposed for non-internal people to use. When it fails, you get load-time errors in Civ4. This isn't a hard problem for someone who isn't afraid of two-phase development, but to someone used to highly polished UI and consumer level interfaces and has no history of using tool chains to solve problems... it panics them and makes them think that it is actually hard to make simple changes in Civ4.

Polished UI generally either (A) requires that the data it is representing be limited, as the informational bandwidth of something like a Civ4 XML file is ridiculously higher than any polished UI would ever allow a user to see, or (B) only works on a limited set of data.

Ie: polish is a waste of time on the scale of "making mods professionally at Firaxis". Polish is less of a waste of time when you want to expose the stuff to users to make mods.

This is sure not true.
Like already said, there's no real reason, why there can't be both.
It could maybe take a bit longer to develop a game with full accessible core files and a good editor, but also this not sure.

Time = Money. And Civ5 won't make much (if any) extra sales because of "modding tools". Fact is, 99.9% of consumers don't care. You are the .1%.

Oh, and This->

Note that we can have easier to use moding tools than Civ4s.

And yes, with enough effort, you can even have quite easy to use modding tools for Civ4.

And if they can make the business case for it (or some programmer at Firaxis does it off the books), it is even possible that they could ship easy to use modding tools.

Note that easy to use modding tools for Civ4 would mean they could more cheaply put out interesting mod packs -- but, the point where "developer investment in making them easy to use" crosses "designer investment in using hard to use modding tools" is far, far, far, far, far away from the point where people who want "easy to use modding tools" expect the tools to work at.

What people are used to in polished consumer UI takes a lot of QA and a lot of iterations and a lot of polish on the part of developers. That makes sense, because thousands or millions of consumers are losing time if it isn't polished, while one developer has to spend time fixing it.

Hence the fact that internal tools don't need polish to anywhere near the level of external tools. Internal tools that crash and burn when you do something weird to them is acceptable.

You can see this in the XML used by Civ4 -- it is clearly an internal toolset exposed for non-internal people to use. When it fails, you get load-time errors in Civ4. This isn't a hard problem for someone who isn't afraid of two-phase development, but to someone used to highly polished UI and consumer level interfaces and has no history of using tool chains to solve problems... it panics them and makes them think that it is actually hard to make simple changes in Civ4.

Polished UI generally either (A) requires that the data it is representing be limited, as the informational bandwidth of something like a Civ4 XML file is ridiculously higher than any polished UI would ever allow a user to see, or (B) only works on a limited set of data.

Ie: polish is a waste of time on the scale of "making mods professionally at Firaxis". Polish is less of a waste of time when you want to expose the stuff to users to make mods.

Good Summary Yakk. :D

Have you managed to completely ignore the entire discussion?

What we have here is a dichotomy, either we get easy to use modding tools OR access to all of the advanced files that comprise Civ (SDK). Not both.

Civ3 chose option 1. Civ4 chose option 2. Guess which has better mods?

Civ 3! As it has the tools available to use for everyone.

Adler

Civ 3! As it has the tools available to use for everyone.

Adler

You are willing to sacrifice Fall From Heaven 2, Rhye's and Fall of Civ, Dale's Mods, Revolutions, etc... on the alter of Civ3? :eek:

On a purely unrelated note, the Pitchforks of America corp stocks doubled. :rolleyes:

I hope to get both. There's many many MANY games that have great modding tools and source code accessibility. It has almost become the norm in some genres.

And the "time == money" argument is bogus. If they wanted to have modding tools it would've been budgeted for at the start of the project, meaning the time AND money were allocated before the production schedule began. You don't just suddenly say, 12-18 months and $3 million into production say "Oh let's see if we squeeze in some modding tools". That's when producers get angry at you. :rolleyes:

Civ 3! As it has the tools available to use for everyone.

Adler

As someone who has played both Civ 3 and Civ 4 and mods for both, I must say Civ 4, in my opinion, has better mods.

I'm not saying that all mods for Civ 3 are bad and all mods for Civ 4 are good (neither are true), but Civ 4, overall, has better mods in my opinion.

"Modding is easier, therefore individual mods will be better", does not logically follow.

I'd like to point out again that I disagree with those who think a WB isn't a modding tool. It is. A carefully created map, and even, more so a map with cities and units placed that couldn't have been built in the first place, are mods.

Although I agree in so far, that the possibilities with civ iv are much more comparing to civ 3, this is in so far futile as it is not usable by everyone. And that's exactly the point. All shall have the possibilities to make scenarios and so on without the use of programming skills. Otherwise only the hardcore programmers are able to make mods. And that's not the sense. That's why there should be editor tools to mod the game.
It is not futile because everyone can't use it.
It's all a question of what you try to achieve. Adding a new map or civ should be straightforward and available to as many people as possible.
Creating a new combat system, devising new algorithms for terrain generation or setting up a spell system in a game which lacks one, all require programming skills. These aren't futile.
What Dale and others, myself included, keep saying, is that there's no dichotomy between having access to tools and having access to powerful modding tools (data files, scripts, api). Even if the tools are only externalised internal tools.

You are willing to sacrifice Fall From Heaven 2, Rhye's and Fall of Civ, Dale's Mods, Revolutions, etc... on the alter of Civ3? :eek:

On a purely unrelated note, the Pitchforks of America corp stocks doubled. :rolleyes:

Did it ever occur to you that upon seeing the success of the mod scene for 4 the developers decided to show it more love with 5 ?
It does not have to be an all or nothing scenario, sometimes the glass is simply ready to be refilled..

Did it ever occur to you that upon seeing the success of the mod scene for 4 the developers decided to show it more love with 5 ?


You're implying that modders were not a consideration with Civ4; which is a pretty big insult to Soren Johnson and the other dev's.

I would be more inclined to believe they've seen Civ4's success and duplicated the modding abilities; after all, why fix what isn't broken? ;)

Polished UI generally either (A) requires that the data it is representing be limited, as the informational bandwidth of something like a Civ4 XML file is ridiculously higher than any polished UI would ever allow a user to see, or (B) only works on a limited set of data.

Ie: polish is a waste of time on the scale of "making mods professionally at Firaxis". Polish is less of a waste of time when you want to expose the stuff to users to make mods.

Oh my GOD this is so far from the truth it's not even in the same galaxy! A polished UI has NOTHING to do with limiting the data set. Utter BULLOCKS!

99% of people who would use the tool would not be adding new fields in the files. That's advanced modding. So it will be a static set of fields in the DB tables. It couldn't be more EASIER to make a polished UI for that.

You're implying that modders were not a consideration with Civ4; which is a pretty big insult to Soren Johnson and the other dev's.

Very true. They took a very hard long look at Call to Power 2's modding successes and expanded on it. Soren wanted to ensure that all data was exposed in flat files, and easily adjusted. I think me and Locutus gave him an initial set of 250 python triggers we wanted exposed. The final number was not near that, but most were not necessary (as we could get to the SDK). :)

I would be more inclined to believe they've seen Civ4's success and duplicated the modding abilities; after all, why fix what isn't broken? ;)

Maybe they expanded it. Why is it so hard to accept that it's possible for both GUI and source modding? ;)

Maybe they expanded it. Why is it so hard to accept that it's possible for both GUI and source modding? ;)

GUI modding tools would be great, except we live in an imperfect world, where Companies care about their bottom lines, games have time constraints, and unicorns don't exist.

GUI modding tools would be great, except we live in an imperfect world, where Companies care about their bottom lines, games have time constraints, and unicorns don't exist.

Then how do you explain the increasing number of games and companies offering both GUI tools AND source access over the last 5 years? ;)

and unicorns don't exist.

I'd like to see you prove that last point. :)

I'd like to see you prove that last point. :)

The burden of proof is on you, since you are the one claiming it does exist. :lol:

You're implying that modders were not a consideration with Civ4; which is a pretty big insult to Soren Johnson and the other dev's.

I would be more inclined to believe they've seen Civ4's success and duplicated the modding abilities; after all, why fix what isn't broken? ;)

Please do not put words in my mouth that were never there. The ability to mod a game does not automatically make it a successful ability.
4 was/is (as someone stated) wildly successful from a modding perspective.

Ergo, the development team for 5 would like to not only replicate, but build on that success by supporting the community even more.

If you'd stop thinking in terms of one upmanship and start discussing the issue, some progress could be made. At the very least a modicum of enlightment.

Civ 3! As it has the tools available to use for everyone.

Adler

Ah, so having tools makes the better mods ? I would have said the quality of the mod is what makes for better mods and there I am with Afforess, mods you can do for 4 could not have been done for 3.

Oh my GOD this is so far from the truth it's not even in the same galaxy! A polished UI has NOTHING to do with limiting the data set. Utter BULLOCKS!
You using firefox?

Type in about:config in your address bar.

That is not a polished UI. That is a UI that is equivalent to editing raw XML in Civ4. That has a huge number of options. If any UI designer wanted to make a polished UI to edit all of the fields (documented and undocumented) in about:config, I'd laugh at the UI designer. Doing so would be dumb, as keeping up with new about:config settings (and changes thereof) would be utterly ridiculous (either we slow down developers who toss settings into about:config, or we break regularly), and the raw size of the interface makes it...

Bah, nevermind. This isn't worth it.

I suppose if I had to vote between easy to use modding tools or much more powerful ones I'd choose the latter instead of the former. I'd prefer to see a few very high quality mods rather than thousands of crappy ones.

That being said, hopefully CiV will offer both but it is not guaranteed. I guess we really won't know though until Firaxis releases more information.

You using firefox?

Type in about:config in your address bar.

That is not a polished UI. That is a UI that is equivalent to editing raw XML in Civ4. That has a huge number of options. If any UI designer wanted to make a polished UI to edit all of the fields (documented and undocumented) in about:config, I'd laugh at the UI designer. Doing so would be dumb, as keeping up with new about:config settings (and changes thereof) would be utterly ridiculous (either we slow down developers who toss settings into about:config, or we break regularly), and the raw size of the interface makes it...

Bah, nevermind. This isn't worth it.

What? That's all I can say, what?

The about:config is extremely easy to use. Find the value to change, double-click on it. It even tells you if the value you're trying to enter is valid. It's even in alphabetical order. The UI is polished. The tag names could be clearer, but that's got NOTHING to do with the UI.

You're right, it's not worth it because you're wrong.

What? That's all I can say, what?

The about:config is extremely easy to use. Find the value to change, double-click on it. It even tells you if the value you're trying to enter is valid. It's even in alphabetical order. The UI is polished. The tag names could be clearer, but that's got NOTHING to do with the UI.

You're right, it's not worth it because you're wrong.

I disagree dale, it might be polished for the likes of you or me, but to the average user, it's mumbo-jumbo. For kicks, start a poll in OT, see what the average person thinks about the "about:config:.

You might be surprised to learn you are alone. ;)

The UI is polished as everything is displayed cleanly, and it's user-friendly to use. The problem with about:config is NOT UI but the tags aren't clear. That's got NOTHING to do with the UI. I bet if the tags were labelled "Width of screen", "Height of screen" and other simple English terms, every person in the world could use it. THATS a polished UI!

Go back to losing arguments about modding tools. :p

The UI is polished as everything is displayed cleanly, and it's user-friendly to use. The problem with about:config is NOT UI but the tags aren't clear. That's got NOTHING to do with the UI.


That may be your definition, but the rest of the world will disagree with you.

Basically, you are saying "My Spanish to English Translator has a great interface, provided you can read spanish". The point is that people who know zero spanish should be able to use it.

Replace Spanish with Programming, and you'll get the picture.