Zero day DLC = disrespecting the customer

[Thyrwyn]

I realize that I have little experience with modding (hoping to change that with Civ V), so I will bow to your experience and expertise. Still, it seems to me that the easiest things to make "easily moddable" would be units & civs. We will have to wait and see how they structure Civ V.

 

[The_J]

Has anyone else seen what 2K has done to Mafia II?
It's sold by 5 different retailers, and each retailer has another extra bonus.
That's scary.
I don't expect anything good for Civ5.

 

[phungus420]

I realize that I have little experience with modding (hoping to change that with Civ V), so I will bow to your experience and expertise. Still, it seems to me that the easiest things to make "easily moddable" would be units & civs. We will have to wait and see how they structure Civ V.

It's certainly true that it could be coded to work properly for modular loading and DLC. But keep in mind there is the wider concept of forbidding fan made content that competes with the marketed DLC. This is one of the main concerns I have, it's also unprecedented; usually developers look at modding as an asset, as it increases name recognition and content and demand of the product. By putting themselves in direct competition with fans they are harming the long term viability of Civ5.

 

[Shurdus]

It's certainly true that it could be coded to work properly for modular loading and DLC. But keep in mind there is the wider concept of forbidding fan made content that competes with the marketed DLC. This is one of the main concerns I have, it's also unprecedented; usually developers look at modding as an asset, as it increases name recognition and content and demand of the product. By putting themselves in direct competition with fans they are harming the long term viability of Civ5.

Hold your horses here. They added a bonus civ for the people willing to buy some special edition of the game. This is not exactly the same as saying that they will add endless streams of DLC and that they will make countermeasures to ensure that you cannot mod the content that they added as bonus content. You think five steps ahead of what may happen - which is not bad at all - but then you jump to conslusions that are five steps ahead too. Let us see what will happen before we worry about it too much.

 

[phungus420]

With all due respect sir, my concern is 1 step ahead, and it is a reasonable and valid one; prefectly in line with the direction the franchise is moving. How is Firaxis/2K going to adress the differences in versions for modding, multiplayer, GOTM, etc?

Basically what you're saying is "Don't worry, just trust everything will work out allright." I am more inclined to believe Murphy when it comes to predicting the future then PolleyAnna, because Murphy is usually right, and PolleyAnna seldom is.

 

[deanej]

Perhaps we should look at the example of Cities XL. The developer (and publisher), Monte Cristo, decided that, instead of giving the community what it wanted (a good solo game with a powerful system for modding), to limit modding so much that even simple texture changes were impossible and instead release DLC for those that paid monthly to be a part of the MMO Planet Offer. To make a long story short, Monte Cristo is no longer in business.

 

[Yakk]

A new civ runs tendrils throughout the game mechanics; new UUs, UBs, artstyles, leader, etc, etc. Modularlizing this, while possible (and is done by many civ4 mods), will create compatibility and development nightmares, no matter how it's implemented. Perhaps Shafer was misinformed when he made his statements about exposing the dll, but I don't see how one is going to be able to package majore overhaul mods like RevDCM for the new modding download hub, that will be able to take into account the shattered codebase that will result from a DLC aproach to adding content. Just look at Civ4 mods as an example, you can't just pick and choose modules; some mods claim that they can be added this way, but in practice it simply does not work.

Sure, there are problems with art assets in Civ4. But other than that, Civ4 has perfect modular addition of things like UUs.

The modular art asset problem is just a screwup in the Civ4 engine.

There is nothing fundamentally difficult here.

 

[Oishi]

Perhaps we should look at the example of Cities XL. The developer (and publisher), Monte Cristo, decided that, instead of giving the community what it wanted (a good solo game with a powerful system for modding), to limit modding so much that even simple texture changes were impossible and instead release DLC for those that paid monthly to be a part of the MMO Planet Offer. To make a long story short, Monte Cristo is no longer in business.

Not to mention that CitiesXL is very buggy and a mosh pit of unfinished codes. I can't even get past the loading screen and the menu seems pretty alien in language. It could have been a great game, but alas, out of all choices they made the most stupid one. I'd really hate to see this happening in Civ5.

 

[phungus420]

Sure, there are problems with art assets in Civ4. But other than that, Civ4 has perfect modular addition of things like UUs.

The modular art asset problem is just a screwup in the Civ4 engine.

There is nothing fundamentally difficult here.

Bull.

Everytime you add a new class object for most of the existing classes you throw off the array size for multiple arrays that check buildings and leaders etc. Are you telling me Civ5 isn't going to define the number of building and leader types at runtime? What will these be hardcoded at compile time? Without specifically defining the list sizes for certain objects we will run into all sorts of problems.

Look if you sit down and think about it, it's theoretically possible to code. That does not mean it is practical to code, or that it is a good use of time.

 

[Yakk]

Bull.

Everytime you add a new class object for most of the existing classes you throw off the array size for multiple arrays that check buildings and leaders etc. Are you telling me Civ5 isn't going to define the number of building and leader types at runtime? What will these be hardcoded at compile time? Without specifically defining the list sizes for certain objects we will run into all sorts of problems.

Look if you sit down and think about it, it's theoretically possible to code. That does not mean it is practical to code, or that it is a good use of time.

Huh?

No really. Huh?

What game are you talking about? I'm seriously confused what in the world you are going on about. And I'm a computer programmer who has hacked at the Civ4 DLL and made changes to how it works.

I'll repeat. What are you going on about? It doesn't seem to make any sense to me.

Are you saying that at some point, Civ5 loads the XML data about things into arrays? I don't see how this has to do with the problem: at worst, you won't be able to play a game with someone else who isn't playing with the same settings as you (but that isn't new).

Adding a new civ/etc is a simple drop in. Nobody should ever use the offsets into wherever the civ is stored at anything other than an in-game generated dynamic value. So adding a new civ might make the game save-game incompatible, but otherwise not pose a problem. (And even that can be fixed by using some kind of unique ID, and not serializing array offsets but instead serializing those uids).

I'm seriously confused what problem you are talking about. It isn't as if the XML data files refer to "entry number 5 in the list of civilizations" anywhere. And the problem with modular things like civilisations is all about that problem.

Graphics wise, there is a bunch of "entry number 5" problems, but that is because the civ4 graphics modular engine is crap, as I mentioned in the previous post. Fixing this is not fundamentally difficult: it was fixed for non-graphics entries, and nothing about the graphics entries is very different.

 

[Roman Emperor]

I've bought Civ III and Civ IV special editions, and will be buying Civ V special edition. I've been a big fan of Civ since Civ III and will continue playing, for a long time. Now I might not agree with some of the things they do but that's going to be with any company. As for this incarnation of Civilization the only thing I am going to be worry about is the internet connection, to register the game to be able to play, as I do not have one at the moment.

 

[Rusty Edge]

I've bought Civ III and Civ IV special editions, and will be buying Civ V special edition. I've been a big fan of Civ since Civ III and will continue playing, for a long time. Now I might not agree with some of the things they do but that's going to be with any company. As for this incarnation of Civilization the only thing I am going to be worry about is the internet connection, to register the game to be able to play, as I do not have one at the moment.

Since you are in America perhaps you could get an AOL free trial and open a dial-up account long enough to register and get the first patch?

 

[deanej]

If the patches are the same size as the ones for BtS, you won't be able to get them on a dial up connection.

 

[Rusty Edge]

If the patches are the same size as the ones for BtS, you won't be able to get them on a dial up connection.

That's unfortunate. I recall my days of inadequate internet not too fondly. Hopefully the packaging will say "Requires HIGH SPEED internet connection "

 

[civ_king]

wait, how long does a 100 Megabyte file take to download?
100•1024=102400•8=819,200kbs÷40kbs=20,480 seconds÷341.3 minutes÷60=5.68 hours, ouch... sounds like all night

 

[Sterf]

wait, how long does a 100 Megabyte file take to download?
100•1024=102400•8=819,200kbs÷40kbs=20,480 seconds÷341.3 minutes÷60=5.68 hours, ouch... sounds like all night

On my 34mbs connection (which isn't the hottest or newest or anything) it takes 23 seconds. Don't assume everyone has a connection comparable with those of the early nineties. Do you need minutes just to refresh a thread?

 

[tom2050]

Still, it seems to me that the easiest things to make "easily moddable" would be units & civs.

Dev's already stated adding a leaderhead will be worse than going to hell for a month. So, if we believe the dev's statement, adding a leaderhead for a new civ's won't be 'easy' at all.

 

[Tylerryan79]

Dev's already stated adding a leaderhead will be worse than going to hell for a month. So, if we believe the dev's statement, adding a leaderhead for a new civ's won't be 'easy' at all.

So why are they saying it will be "unprecedented modding"? I loved dl all the different civs everyone made, and was looking forward to all the different ones everyone would make. That statement they made origanally made me think, "hey, even i can give it a shot". Now im just hoping ill have good mods to download.

 

[tom2050]

So why are they saying it will be "unprecedented modding"? I loved dl all the different civs everyone made, and was looking forward to all the different ones everyone would make. That statement they made origanally made me think, "hey, even i can give it a shot". Now im just hoping ill have good mods to download.

Sure, it will be unprecendented, but it won't be easy (for leaderheads, according to them). Their words were 'difficult and complex' IIRC. And that is from a programmer's perspective. Average joe wouldn't have a clue what to do.

 

[Insanity_X]

I'm going to assume that some clever dick will work out a way to put up leaderheads that aren't moving, talking or otherwise damn near impossible to code, and share his findings with the community leading to worse leaderheads that are possible to code for the average Joe.

ANd as for the DRM, I don't care if it's tyranical or the start of a slippery slope for the franchise. If you don't like the idea it then dont buy it and register your disaproval with your cash. Personally, I'm going to shell out the extra money and not feel ripped off. I want to have the bonus features, regardless of whether or not they matter to the core game.