Wouldn't affect me buying the game, and I would consider getting the DLC too. But I'd still rather just wait and have everything in an expansion pack. They feel like a good value, while in general, DLC doesn't feel like it is at all (with rare exceptions).
Civilization 5 and DLC
- Thread starter ori
- Start date
tom2050
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 5,516
These are reasons why discussion prior to game release is important (although many are sick of seeing it). We need to hope that if implemented this way (forced update), 2K/Firaxis/Steam can perhaps undo this atrocity before release.
If forced update is not in the mix, then all is good. At least give a pop-up asking.
Rusty Edge
Deity
Very true.
I enjoy long involved games, and may be playing more than one mod or game type at a time.
The line between free DLC and an official patch which includes a couple of new random events is a little fuzzy.
Here's to some clarity at E3
My turn.
TBH, most of my post was a worst case scenario, but let me address a couple of your points:
Positive perspective Lemon really hopes that she's completely wrong about all of this, and she would really like to be proven wrong. Unfortunately, that won't happen until the game is released. Negative Lemon has worked in the E.R., and a psych hospital for far too long, and she has seen the absolute worst of human nature far too often to believe that what you are promised turns out to be true. It does in children's books, but not very often in the real world. My Grandad used to say "Beware a smilin' dog. He still has sharp teeth." Smart man.
Oh, and btw, the word "moot" applies to every thread in this entire sub-forum. The game hasn't been released yet.
TBH, most of my post was a worst case scenario, but let me address a couple of your points:
Far fetched? I'll put nothing past the Marketing boys and girls in their nice blue suits, and their quest for gold. First of all, I didn't say that the game required DLC to make the game moddable. The game is being touted as moddable, and I'm sure that it is, right out of the "box". My speculation is that if you want the really spiffy, powerful modding tools, they will be available as paid for DLC. I'll address mods and DLC compatibility below.
From what little information I have been able to see, it looks like Steam will distribute mod content, along with other goodies. You don't think that those mods won't be vetted and cleared by lawyers for any possible copyright infringement? Or any possible content that might offend anyone? This is a corporation you're talking about. They will do nothing which could get them sued. Therefore, only a few "privileged" mods which meet the criteria will be allowed to be distributed. It's a possibility, don't you think?
I'm talking about an administrative levy by Steam for the free mods that I'm expecting it will provide for download. Server space and bandwidth cost money, and they will try to attempt to recoup those "losses" in the form of a small service charge. Yes, 2K has confirmed that mods can be downloaded off of any site, but I'll bet that you won't be able to download the ones that Steam offers.
No. It stems from a complete distrust of the digital distribution system. Their objective is much like a cell phone company. Keep you coming back for more and more, in little tiny pieces, all while you don't own the game that you've purchased.
It's hardly moot. Here's a hypothetical for you. You and I both have Civ5, and you buy DLC package A. I whip up some version of the BAT Mod for Civ5 and distribute it on SourceForge, like always. You download it and try to use it. Problem. It doesn't work because you have DLC A, and I didn't develop with it. So there are two solutions. You can unload DLC A and not use content that you've possibly paid for, or I am forced to buy DLC A so that my mod will work for those who have it. Gee, that's a win-win for Steam. If I want to keep up, I have to buy DLC A, and B, yadda, yadda, yadda. And if you want to use Civ5 BAT, then you need to buy it too. Money makes the world go round.
Nobody will play a mod that won't work with their game, bug free or not. No piece of software that I've ever purchased has ever been bug free. It didn't stop me from buying it. And we're not talking about bugs here, we're talking about compatibility between user's versions of the game. We don't know yet if mods that are not built with any added extras will be able to be played without unloading the (theoretical) extra content. What I'm saying is what if a "standard" mod, that wasn't built with the extra goodies, won't work for a (theoretically) enhanced game, but a mod downloaded from Steam will? Where does that leave the modding community here at CFC, or Apolyton? Maybe, our mods didn't pass the litmus test, so they can't be distributed by Steam, and therefore don't work. Would you spend the time to d/l a mod that you couldn't play? "Jeez, I'm not going to use that crummy mod. It doesn't work!" You might hear that even if the mod is bug free, and completely outstanding.
I think Civ is lucky to have the modding system, too, but the thing is, to this point the mods have mostly been "home brewed" by a grass roots modding community. Ever thought that some smart guy at Steam hasn't thought of a way to make money off of mods? It may not have happened yet, but Civ is one of the most modded games out there. Just look at how many mods, graphics packs, and modcomps there are just for Civ4 alone. You don't think that someone is trying to find a way to capitalize on that?
Positive perspective Lemon really hopes that she's completely wrong about all of this, and she would really like to be proven wrong. Unfortunately, that won't happen until the game is released. Negative Lemon has worked in the E.R., and a psych hospital for far too long, and she has seen the absolute worst of human nature far too often to believe that what you are promised turns out to be true. It does in children's books, but not very often in the real world. My Grandad used to say "Beware a smilin' dog. He still has sharp teeth." Smart man.
Oh, and btw, the word "moot" applies to every thread in this entire sub-forum. The game hasn't been released yet.
Thyrwyn
Guardian at the Gate
The only DLC that we have any information about is a) The Mesopotamian MapPack and b) The Babylonian Civilization.
The only way either of these would absolutely have to cause problems for mod functionality would be if the mod was built in such a way as to require the presence of one or the other. There is nothing in C++ that says that the presence or absence of either piece of DLC would affect the workings of any other mod.
Could they build the game such that they would cause problems? Sure, but they could easily build the game in such a way that it wouldn't.
Even if they build the game right, could you build a mod that would crash if the DLC was or wasn't there? Yes, but only if the modder required either the presence or absence of the DLC.
Until we know how they have built the game, there is now way to state conclusively that either piece of DLC that we have seen will prove problematic for mods or mod designers.
Disclaimer: No, I do not have any modding experience - but I am familiar with coding Windows applications using C++
deanej
Deity
The XML is very affected by DLC, though. And the XML is where the majority of mods are made.
eireksten
Protective/Organized
That's simply not true. Adding more data (through DLC) does not need to affect the rest of the data at all. Nor does it need to affect what data is being used for a certain setup. Not unless you design the system to do so.
I just can't imagine a situation where you own too much DLC to be running a mod. That's just plain stupid. The other way around, possibly. But not necessarily, and we simply have no clue how they are designing this part of the system.
Remember that this is not a Civ4 remake...
Lemon Merchant's post (5 above) is smart, appropriately tough given industry trends, and sagacious. I am struggling to understand people's interest in paying more for "cool stuff" like an actual full game, or why they embrace paid DLC. There is way too much $$ incentive to carve content out of games and sell it as DLC when those games move to integrated platforms like steamworks. She has every reason to be concerned about modding as well.
Rusty Edge
Deity
While I have already proclaimed the decline and fall of Civilization, others who are already acustomed to Steam and appreciative of it's services can see potential merit and greater value in an A la carte approach. That way they only pay for what they want and don't have to pay a bundle to buy a bundle.
My Dad died when I was a kid, and I've been a pessimist ever since. Whenever I get something I've always wanted ( like Civ on hexes ) , I start looking over my shoulder for potential problems. I figure if we needed to "make some noise" to get civ V, then we need to make some noise to avoid some slippery slopes and pitfalls before it goes gold.
Things are probably a lot more benign than I envision. Where I see multiple corporate entities and whiffs of bonuses and stock options for a quick buck, or marketing working independently of product development or IT or customer service, there may only be the intention of solving a DRM problem( and releasing progamer hours to make a better game ) in exchange for broadening steam's audience to advertise steam's other games, and giving us something better than gamespy or xfire in the bargain, a win-win-win. Maybe Babylon was a candidate that didn't make the cut, and by offering it they could appease the artist behind it, and figure they were doing fans a favor because there is so much work involved in creating leader figures in V.
Thyrwyn has faith. I hope he is right.
White Elk
99 > 1
Beyond simply being communal discussion, threads like this serve the additional purpose of demonstrating fan reaction. 2k and Firaxis glean info from these boards. And it wouldn't surprise me if the folks at steam have come to see for themselves what the fuss is all about. Its been weeks now and this resistance towards steam, DRM and DLC has been increasing not lessening. I'm certain that the powers that be have taken notice by now. It is great to see veteran civers and active modders taking a part in these discussions. Civ IS the modding community. Without the modders Civ does not continue to enjoy the cult status it has achieved.
deanej
Deity
I don't see how. For example, let's say we have a DLC that adds a wonder. You need the new entry in buildingclassinfos, the new entry in buildinginfos, the new art define, the new text entry, and before BtS, modify the L system files for it. Since babarians are banned from building wonders, you must also modify their entry in civilizationinfos. Oh, and you need to modify the audio and movie files too.
It's been confirmed that civ5 will use XML. I can't imagine how you would have a completely different system, especially since civ4 has the best system ever devised. You can't even claim modular loading will help; even if they do make the audio files modular, the modifications needed to entries that reference stuff will make it a tangled mess very quickly.
Discussion is great, but some of the "negative" what ifs are no more than devils advocate. You don't need to bring those worst case scenarios into the discussion in a way that convinces people that this game and its modding scene are doomed. You might be a modder yourself and see it in a different light, but it doesn't really help people make better decisions on whether they should be getting this game and what to expect out of it. DLC will happen if companies think it will make them more money. Before DLC it was rolled into game edition packages, this is nothing new.
Again, you can use all the examples of this mod and that mod conflicting with X DLC and Y Expansion. Bottom line is that modding games generally will conflict with any kind of patching and update released for any game. This is normal, and arguing that DLC and other expansions or editions will absolutely or theoretically conflict with modding is going to destroy the "scene", is the wrong way to go about it. Judging by Lemon's inclusion of Steam and using it to make money off mods, is plausible but has no part of this discussion. Steam is a distribution platform. Companies with money pay to put their stuff on Steam, like the Apple Store. Free content doesn't belong there and will never part of this equation. Let me ask you this question, are modders in this community trying to find a way to make money off of it? If not, Steam doesn't care. Nobody is going to pay for modded content in a system like that, and therefore nobody smart at Valve is seriously looking at your concept of DLC.
2K does stress that they hired a modder straight out of the community as one of their core programmers. We'll only know the truth of how well this game is designed when they either:
1. Release more information prior to release (like at E3)
2. Buy the game and see for ourselves.
Again, you can use all the examples of this mod and that mod conflicting with X DLC and Y Expansion. Bottom line is that modding games generally will conflict with any kind of patching and update released for any game. This is normal, and arguing that DLC and other expansions or editions will absolutely or theoretically conflict with modding is going to destroy the "scene", is the wrong way to go about it. Judging by Lemon's inclusion of Steam and using it to make money off mods, is plausible but has no part of this discussion. Steam is a distribution platform. Companies with money pay to put their stuff on Steam, like the Apple Store. Free content doesn't belong there and will never part of this equation. Let me ask you this question, are modders in this community trying to find a way to make money off of it? If not, Steam doesn't care. Nobody is going to pay for modded content in a system like that, and therefore nobody smart at Valve is seriously looking at your concept of DLC.
2K does stress that they hired a modder straight out of the community as one of their core programmers. We'll only know the truth of how well this game is designed when they either:
1. Release more information prior to release (like at E3)
2. Buy the game and see for ourselves.
deanej
Deity
I am sick and tired of people claiming that patches and expansions are the same as DLC! THEY ARE NOT THE SAME!!! With and expansion/patch, the community just moves on to the later version. Nobody develops for vanilla and Warlords anymore, and you'd be the laughing stock of the forum to develop a mod on the 3.13 patch instead of 3.19.
Have you seen people complaining about automatic patching using Steam? Apparently not everyone patches whenever there is a patch out. Also not everyone plays BTS, and some people still run vanilla.
They might not be exactly the same, but they can do the exact same thing to ANY mod out there: breaking them by updating the game files. And apparently that's what people are afraid of here, DLC breaking game files. Some people will argue that its less likely for a DLC to break a mod than a patch or expansion. This is true, as the latter can contain huge core updates to the engine and other code. Yet here we are, talking specifically about DLCs, when they all belong to the same category which every moddable PC game has dealt with for years and DLC was called something along the lines of "collectors editions" with extra maps and in game bonuses.
On DLC and greed: DLC up to now has always been "optional". That means you had to download it (even if its free), and install it manually. I wish companies would listen to their customers more, but to tell you the truth, people in Sales and Marketing generally are less inclined to see it our way when they come up with something win-win like DLC. Its optional so people don't have to buy it. The choice option vastly reduces the argument that it prevents sales of the profitable game. The fact that people who opt-in, make it that much more attractive because there are few costs to develop the content, and high returns. If the DLC doesn't make sense to customers, they shouldn't buy it and it will send a message. But as you can see, DLC is here to stay until they push it to the limit. Then again, DLC has changed over the last few years (used to be free on PC for all games), and will change again at that point.
Just for the record I am very accustomed to Steam; but I can't fathom how the a la carte approach of DLC would truly benefit CIV players. I venture that when it's all said and done the customizing through selective DLC purchases will cost players more than $ spent on CIV IV expansions in real terms. Plus it will create different classes and complicate mods more.
Maybe this new CIV will be so incredibly different than IV to make this a silly question, but what was included in Warlords or BtS that you wouldn't have wanted to have access to? Assume you would have preferred to avoid some of the content. It's a whole other leap to get where because you skipped some stuff the a la carte menu is actually going to save you money overall or generate more valuable content for the game overall.
It's not gonna happen. We should try to stop this $ DLC perfidy before it takes wing and gets off the ground.
deanej
Deity
There's a short time, while people wait for the mods to catch up, that you don't want to update (so you can continue playing a mod that hasn't yet caught up). It's been my experience that within a month the mods are caught up and everybody is running the new patch.
I honestly don't see why anyone would want to play vanilla anymore, except to play one of the vanilla scenarios or a mod that hasn't been updated in years.
I can't believe you're not concerned over the fracturing of the community that could result with DLC. Completists are hurt by DLC, as suddenly the full experience costs a lot more.
And please don't use "that's the way it is" as a justification. IMO, anyone that does is part of the problem.
Ahriman
Tyrant
Partly we're not concerned about fracturing the community from DLC because... there is NO FRAKKIN EVIDENCE that they're going to have repeated/multiple micro-DLC offers.
You can say "For example, let's say we have a DLC that adds a wonder" all you like, but there is no evidence that they would do such a thing.
If they were doing large numbers of micro-DLC like that, then yes, I'd have a problem with it. But guess what: they're probably not going to.
You seem to assume that Firaxis/2K are idiots, and that they're just too stupid to think about compatibility issues at all.
deanej
Deity
The deluxe edition will be enough to fracture the mods, at least partly. I don't see how you go from "there is no evidence for this" to "they probably won't do this". That is a leap that I am not prepared to make.
I don't believe they are idiots, but I do believe that they don't care.
I don't believe they are idiots, but I do believe that they don't care.
Similar threads
