Civilization 5 Modding Dead.

[Thorburne]

(Note: Before you flame me, I had the highest hopes for Civ5.)

I can attest to that! If I remember correctly, you were one of my strongest opponents back before Civ V was I said that I wanted a GUI editor for the database. In another thread, I have a post about a scenario I am trying to create that does little more than add a few city-states (specific to the scenario). It took me forever to get it and I needed assistance from others on these boards. Finally got it working, but it was more trouble that it should have been. A GUI would have made it much easier, quicker and been way more efficient for something as simple as that. Given the fact that XML is really pointless with Civ V since the XML files don't even effect the game and all editing them does is change the database, something that a basic GUI could do.

Anyway, I don't want to stir up that old argument again. In regards to Civ V modding being dead, I would say that the comparison of the Civ IV forums and the Civ V forums is kind of moot since most people get the mods for Civ V from the in game browser, whereas with Civ IV, the forums are the only place for people to get the mods.

 

[Oohforf]

It certainly is not dead. It's only the beginning. Once the dll is released, Civ 5 modding will sky rocket with huge projects being here and there.

 

[Afforess]

Anyway, I don't want to stir up that old argument again. In regards to Civ V modding being dead, I would say that the comparison of the Civ IV forums and the Civ V forums is kind of moot since most people get the mods for Civ V from the in game browser, whereas with Civ IV, the forums are the only place for people to get the mods.

Then compare downloads per day. Back in the beggining of Civ5 (when there were 30k players online at any time, I was getting ~50 downloads a day according to GameSpy. That's compared to ~110/day I get from RAND at this very moment.

It certainly is not dead. It's only the beginning. Once the dll is released, Civ 5 modding will sky rocket with huge projects being here and there.

Excellent rebuttal. Have you considered politics as a career?

 

[Zyxpsilon]

I was getting ~50 downloads a day according to GameSpy. That's compared to ~110/day I get from RAND at this very moment.

Ah com'on, afforess... you simply can't match RoM with TechDiffusion and you know *exactly* why.
Not all apples in the bucket rotten over time, but dump a bunch of fresh fruits into it (or a new one!) and you get edible food for awhile.
Civ4 & Civ5 were both released on my yearly calendars.
Popularity of the UN_modded game might also be a factor.

 

[Afforess]

Ah com'on, afforess... you simply can't match RoM with TechDiffusion and you know *exactly* why.
Not all apples in the bucket rotten over time, but dump a bunch of fresh fruits into it (or a new one!) and you get edible food for awhile.
Civ4 & Civ5 were both released on my yearly calendars.
Popularity of the UN_modded game might also be a factor.

I wasn't. The 50 came from Active Cities, Tech Diffusion, and the Open Puppet City View mod I had (before Firaxis patched it in themselves).

 

[primordial stew]

B.S.

What's primitive on CFC is that *SOME* people would stop at nothing to rant about every civilization iterations even if they don't have the slightest idea what this gameplay represents in both quality or personal preferences for the ruleset as offered.

Modding it has never been *this* easy for anyone knowledgeable enough.

<snip>

The only primitive factor here is that ranters' interpretation is no match for truth.
Designed to perform.

I'm pretty sure you missed my main point, so for clarity let me try again. My claim is that all 3 of civIII, IV, and V are very limited compared with the 2nd expansion pack (Conquests for civIII, BtS for civIV). Not much of a claim, I know, but the point is patience, since if they follow the same schedule we will have to wait for the 2 expansions before we get a fully featured game, after which we'll get some really great mods like AND(we can hope)!

If this is what you are calling BS, and need proof, we'll then I'll ask you how many people still play the original after the expansion comes out? I can setup a poll if you want to find some numbers. For sure, civIV modding dropped like a stone when Warlords came out, and the same happened to Warlords when BtS came out. When someone posts a question in a civIV modding forum these days, it goes without saying that they are inquiring about BtS.


As much as I'd love to put out the civV version of RFRE, civV simply does not provide the modding functionality it needs yet. Another project, the "Eastern Front" mod, is only in need of some Lua functions. Perhaps if someone was knowledgeable enough, and willing to help, we could get this puppy out! But as is, I'm just waiting till certain things become possible, and others easier. Easier as in functions are both listed, and documented enough that I can successfully use them. Examples are much appreciated

So for me, it's not dead, but it is dormant.

 

[Sephi]

Civilization 5 Modding is dead. In fact, it was stillborn - never alive to begin with, only a facsimile of life.

Why It's Dead:

1. No Multiplayer Mods.
2. No Support for modders from Civ5 Dev Team (Each Patch has crippled modding more)
3. No DLL Access (Civ4 had the DLL source code at this stage already. It's APRIL folks!)
4. Extremely Limited LUA
   • No I/O (read/writing files) Access
     • I can not how emphasize how huge this is, without I/O mods can not use custom config files. I/O is like programming 101.
     • A couple modders suggested No I/O access was a good thing, for safety. If you can't trust modders, who can you trust?
   • No modifying SQL databases in game
   • Barely any useful events
   • No way to save data (It took 2 months before modders hacked together a solution)
   • Poor Lua support in Modbuddy
5. Confusing XML littered with dead XML fields
6. Hardcoded Leaders, Resources, Techs
7. Impossible to make building graphics
8. No Artwork support
9. No Access to critical features, Like AI

Anecdotal Evidence:

• Despite Modbuddy giving my mods much more exposure for Civilization 5, and a massive install-base, my Civ4 RAND downloads/day far outpaces Civ5 mod downloads. I'm still getting 100 downloads a day.
  
• The Civ4 C&C forums have 2-3x users browsing than the Civ5 C&C forums.

But don't take my word for it, look at how bare the forums here are. In another 6 months, they are going to be pretty much empty. Civ4 modding, on the other hand, is still going strong.


(Note: Before you flame me, I had the highest hopes for Civ5.)

good analysis

however if CIV5 had been as popular as CIV4 on release, we would see a lot more activity here, despite any limitations on modding.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

I wasn't. The 50 came from Active Cities, Tech Diffusion, and the Open Puppet City View mod I had (before Firaxis patched it in themselves).

Gotcha... so your Death conclusions are mostly based on the fact that *current* Mods conflict with continual patching of the core game by devs?

Let's assume the ruleset will soon get sealed (which i have been asking for since November while holding on a few other "projects", btw) and that Total-Conversions attempts will basically enhance or expand upon - for examples - four or more Re_Balancing MODS under continual development; Thalassicus' Balances, Spatzimaus' AC, MarkusBeutel's NiGHTS & Decimatus' CTP.

I've seen plenty of resilient Modders over the years and there's no challenge tough enough for even more unknown people than you might still claim.

I don't count *ANY* numbers of D/L for anything or anyone - i prefer quality & well implemented ideas which would happen anyway.

Firaxis might seem to be plagiarizing or interfering with some of our stuff - i simply don't care since it all proves *we* are certainly right into demanding a (somehow) stable gameplay for *our* independent design purposes.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

So for me, it's not dead, but it is dormant.

The confusion come straight from the principle that our expansions are now being sold on Steam in a sequence of regular DLCs.
This model of distribution *prevents* consistent (or static, if you prefer) Modding.
Once their patching is done (as i've stated bazillions of times already), keep watching.
They gave (rather sold, btw) an SDK, they asked for competition.
MODS are DLC.

 

[SamBC]

I don't think that the DLCs are interfering with mod compatibility, nor are they duplicative of mods that I'm aware of. Rather, the patches appear to take ideas from mods (which ought to be flattering) and interfere with their compatibility.

 

[cool3a2]

I think you guys all make a basic mistake in your thoughts. You are all thinking about large mods like ROM was for civ4. Mods that use powerful modding features. The point is though, that even basic modding is not really possible as we are simply unable to add user made art. I mean, unlike with civ4 in the early days, we would be able to set up the granny files - the artwork in other words - we are just unable to tell the game to use them / show them up. This makes it impossible to provide even simply things like adding new civilizations in adequate quality. Take a look at the new civilizations section and you'll see that there isn't much going on. And what's the reason for this? Firaxis simply doesn't let us add unique art (at least, that's what it seems to be to me) and I guess this is due to their DLC policy. Of course, that's their right, but it's still a mistake and it is at least misleading if they propagate the cool modding community on the games package. They really shouldn't wonder if people feel robbed now. To come back to my initial point, I think people could wait for those strong modding features you are dreaming of if we could concentrate on the basic things meanwhile like adding new civs. If we could do that, interest in civ5 and modding would increase. If we can't, nobody will be here anymore if they (and only if they) finally provide strong modding features. At the moment, it doesn't even seem that they'll ever allow us to add unique art... That's why I stopped with civ5 for now. Besides of that basic issues in civ5 like the AI is contacting me with a diplomatic suggestion without telling me what it actually suggests - there are just possible answers given to an unknown question...

So in short, we should concentrate on small things for now, then grow. But even those small things are impossible to do now. And please don't tell me this is because of patches. There were patches for civ4 as well and we still managed to get our mods updated.

 

[Valkrionn]

The art issue is due to the tools not working as intended, and yes, Firaxis needs to fix that.

 

[Psyringe]

The art issue is due to the tools not working as intended

Do you honestly believe that?

 

[Valkrionn]

Do you honestly believe that?

Given that I know the guy who made the tools, yes, I quite honestly believe that.

 

[SamBC]

Do you honestly believe that?

If they wanted to stop us pulling in 3D art, they could just have not given us the tools. Giving us broken tools just doesn't actually make sense.

 

[Ryan F. Mercer]

Giving us broken tools just doesn't actually make sense.

I couldn't agree more.

It's all a spiteful tease, I'm sure. From the lead-up, to the roll-out, and then into hibernation, the broken tools serve to keep us challenged and busy while they string us along.

 

[Psyringe]

Given that I know the guy who made the tools, yes, I quite honestly believe that.

Well. I find that hard to do. Somehow, ever since DLC entered the stage, modding tools are becoming much harder to produce, as well as more error-prone ... here's a good example since it stretches across three games done by the same company:

- Morrowind, released 2002, no DLC. A Construction Set (actually the same tool which the devs used to create the game) was shipped with the game. Bethesda even dedicated a whole CD solely to the construction set and lots of resources. They also released hands-on videos which showed plyaers how to use the CS. The CS also had an extensive documentation of the game's scripting language, complete with cross-references and examples.

- Oblivion, released 2006, small DLCs. The Construction Set was released at the same date, but only as a separate download, and crippled in some regards. No videos were created, and there was a lot less documentation.

- Fallout 3, released 2008, larger DLCs. The CS was released 2 months after the game, as a separate download. (I don't know whether it was crippled since by this time I had decided that the game probably wasn't worth getting too involved with it.)

There's a clear correlation: The more important DLC becomes, the worse support for modders is getting.

Of course, there are always official reasons why the tools are buggy, or can't be delivered with the game, and somehow these never have to do with the fact that mods might compete with the DLC. Officially.

Currently, it seems to me that Firaxis' support for modders is developing just like Bethesda's, the signs are there. Unfortunately.

 

[Valkrionn]

Like I said: I know the guy who made the tools. I have zero doubt that it is simply a time concern (Fix modding, or fix the game... Second one has to have priority), rather than some insidious plot.

 

[Psyringe]

Like I said: I know the guy who made the tools. I have zero doubt that it is simply a time concern (Fix modding, or fix the game... Second one has to have priority), rather than some insidious plot.

I wouldn't call it an insidious plot ... I actually tend to defend devs when they say things like "we prioritize getting the game working on release over having perfect modding tools on release"; it's an honest statement and as much as modders would appreciate the devs totally focusing on the modders' wants and needs, it simply isn't a reasonable approach for a business. However, I'd prefer the devs to be a bit more candid about all of the factors of the equation. The correlation I mentioned (the more DLC, the less support for modders) already holds true for other companies, so I see a possibility that Firaxis might succumb to this approach as well.

I don't have any inside information though, so if you have, I understand that you disregard my concerns. Though I'd add that _if_ there was a policy to not fix the graphics tools as long as the DLC is fresh, your contact definitely wouldn't be allowed to talk about it (due to the usual NDA regulations). But yeah, I also see a possibility that I'm too pessimistic n that regard. Time will tell, I suppose.

 

[Valkrionn]

Let's put it this way: If there was, I would not have anything to do with civ5, whether that be testing it or otherwise.

So if there is, I have zero knowledge of it. About the best I can say, ultimately.