Dennis Shirk confirms DLL is on its way

[Gedemon]

I understand your feeling, as I also hadn't reach so many limits with what could be done with Lua alone in my mods, and fixing the other part of the sdk seems almost as important, but having the c++ sdk will really help for the gameevents and documentation part of your post.

not counting all those that absolutly need the sdk for their mods, I mean that every modder here have his own priorities for the available tools...

 

[Skajaquada]

What is the DLL anyway? I was thinking about those problems loading XML-files. For example we can load the civ5artdefines_units.xml and add new units however we can't do the same with the civ5artdefines_effects.xml (while both are equally editable in the Civ 5-asset folder). If we get all the source-files and can re-compile the entire game we could fix those (I'm imagining there's a long list of files to replace and they've commented out everything but the civ5artdefines_units.xml ).

 

[Spatzimaus]

but having the c++ sdk will really help for the gameevents and documentation part of your post.

But that's only true if WE do the work. And that brings up a whole other question: how cross-compatible will these be? That is, if you make a mod component that adds a true start-of-combat GameEvent with the DLL SDK, how easy would it be for me to use that event in my own mod, especially if I also have my own DLL alterations? Is it plug-and-play, sort of like the XML modding, is it cut-and-paste like Lua modding, or is it far, far worse?

And again, there's the issue of familiarity. We might be able to code up a GameEvent like this, but chances are it'll take a modder FAR longer to find and debug the code necessary for this sort of change than it would if one of the Firaxis devs just spent a week adding every GameEvent we'd ever asked for. Same goes for most of the other things I listed; it's not that we can't do these things with the DLL, just that it's a colossal waste of time for us to do this when it could be done once and for all in an official way in far less time and with far fewer problems.

 

[Valkrionn]

I wonder if any of the modders here are going to Beta test the DLL. That would be interesting.

I would imagine that the "beta" he mentioned implied the Frankenstein test group would get access to the DLL.

That's probably the other big modding issue at the moment. Hopefully this'll be addressed soon enough.


Err, what? There's Thal, markusbeutel, Spatz, Gazebo, Valkrionn, and others who have just been waiting for the DLL.



I'm pretty sure you'd enjoy this then.

Always awesome to see your name pop-up.

 

[Gedemon]

But that's only true if WE do the work. And that brings up a whole other question: how cross-compatible will these be? That is, if you make a mod component that adds a true start-of-combat GameEvent with the DLL SDK, how easy would it be for me to use that event in my own mod, especially if I also have my own DLL alterations? Is it plug-and-play, sort of like the XML modding, is it cut-and-paste like Lua modding, or is it far, far worse?

And again, there's the issue of familiarity. We might be able to code up a GameEvent like this, but chances are it'll take a modder FAR longer to find and debug the code necessary for this sort of change than it would if one of the Firaxis devs just spent a week adding every GameEvent we'd ever asked for. Same goes for most of the other things I listed; it's not that we can't do these things with the DLL, just that it's a colossal waste of time for us to do this when it could be done once and for all in an official way in far less time and with far fewer problems.

It's far worse for compatibility, but hopefully at some point they'll be a dll modpack compiling most user added events. One common DLL for multiple mods.

and in fact, I'm afraid that most of the other things you've listed won't be in the range of the sdk like graphics and sound, so that still leave works to Firaxis, don't worry !

 

[SamBC]

and in fact, I'm afraid that most of the other things you've listed won't be in the range of the sdk like graphics and sound, so that still leave works to Firaxis, don't worry !

I wonder if it being left to Firaxis might be why he's worried... it's understandable to be concerned that they'll say "well, you've got the DLL" and not fix anything else modding-related.

 

[Spatzimaus]

I wonder if it being left to Firaxis might be why he's worried... it's understandable to be concerned that they'll say "well, you've got the DLL" and not fix anything else modding-related.

Basically, this.

Several parts of the existing modding package, like many of the importers in Nexus, either don't work correctly or just don't work at all. The Lua events we've been given are inadequate and are horribly documented. Many XML stubs still don't work at all. It's ridiculous that we can't add custom sounds at all. And so on.
To me, these are far more important than anything the DLL gives us; yes, you need the DLL to do total conversions like FfH, which are important in the long term to the game's desirability, but Civ5 is running out of "near term" to trade for that. The number of people posting here and downloading mods seems to be half what it was only a month or two ago, and that concerns me, because what's the point in modding if no one's left to actually play it?

My worry, then, is that if they've been spending all of their time on the DLL instead of fixing those many other problems, that maybe they're under the impression that it's what we modders really wanted all along. That'd mean that all of those other problems might not even be on their radar... and if these are all things we CAN'T fix with the DLL, then we have to wait even longer for Firaxis to get around to them.

 

[SamBC]

I think casual mod players just look for mods in the mod browser in game; I've pointed to hear as a place to find more mods to people who've just used the in-game one. The issues with uploads should be sorted after the upcoming SDK update fixing ModBuddy issues... so I'd suggest people should actually upload there and point people to threads here as the place to talk about it. Of course, if the ingame mod-hub actually displayed the mod homepage field...

But generally, in terms of the concerns, I agree with Spatzimaus. We need the sound and graphics issues fixed, we need the fonticons fixed, we need mod associations fixed... and I don't think most of those can be fixed with the DLL source

 

[Zyxpsilon]

I'm actually not as excited about this as I thought I'd be. I realized a few days ago that there wasn't actually a huge number of things that I want to do that explicitly need the DLL, while there ARE a huge number of things that I want them to fix in the existing SDK.

I hear you... i also *WANT* plenty of control over some SDK specifics (gr2 models format ) -- but we have also proven that our community could and still can muster a bunch of workaround "features".

DLL might finally be the trigger of numerous functional components created independently as needed.

Revival of interests in some projects which were once thought to be "impossible" to code through current LUA operands & calls - minimum, i say.

Someone, please get a hold on Sneaks! I can hear him scream about such potential(s) from here.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

What is the DLL anyway?

Documented Hooks to the core routine functions. Is all.

 

[Seven05]

Well, gratis anyway... no information linked there about license terms.

Nothing special about the license for VC Express, they retain the rights to their software and libraries and you get the rights to yours. Well for Civ 5 DLL modding you won't technically have the rights to your software becuase you'll be working with Firaxis' code, not your own.

The big thing to remember with software is that it uses copyright laws so they can't claim ownership of something you create using visual studio any more than they can claim ownership of an email you create using Outlook. But you still have to respect the rights of the original author when creating derivitive works. In fact it's in their best intrest to stay very far away from any such claims or else we'd all be suing them everytime we suspected a virus author used Visual Studio to create their virus

 

[Thalassicus]

I'm curious as to what a DLL is?

The source.

To be accurate, it's portions of the c++ code. We already have the lua source code and database.

I'm actually not as excited about this as I thought I'd be. I realized a few days ago that there wasn't actually a huge number of things that I want to do that explicitly need the DLL, while there ARE a huge number of things that I want them to fix in the existing SDK.

I agree with you here on the whole. The main advantages to having the c++ for me will be:

• See how firaxis did things without reverse-engineering it conceptually.
• Fix bugs in firaxis' code directly, instead of replacing it with working lua code.
• Access to a few events that aren't properly exposed to lua, like combat ended/policies acquired/buildings constructed.

 

[Seven05]

To be accurate, it's the c++ part of the code. We already have the lua source code and database.

To be more accurate it's the game core source so no direct access to the game engine source. So no changing the way things are rendered or bypassing Steam as the multiplayer layer.

I agree with you here on the whole. The main advantages to having the c++ for me will be:

• See how firaxis did things without reverse-engineering it conceptually.
• Fix bugs in firaxis' code directly, instead of replacing it with working lua code.
• Access to a few events that aren't properly exposed to lua, like combat ended/policies acquired/buildings constructed.

And I would add

• Implimenting some changes in C++ so I don't have to learn LUA beyond the basics

 

[pintocat]

Sorry for the dumb question, but what does this mean in terms of multiplayer scenarios or mods?

 

[Valkrionn]

Nothing whatsoever, given that that would require modifications on Firaxis's part.

 

[Afforess]

Civ5 Lead Producer Dennis Shirk has just posted on the forums to confirm that the Civ5 DLL is on its way to being released.

I've copied the post below, and the original can be seen here.

Discuss.

I would like to point out that this means nothing.

It's akin to saying "You are dying". Yes, I am. Slowly. Every day.

The DLL may be on it's way to being released. But that doesn't mean anything significant.

 

[KungCheops]

I would like to point out that this means nothing.

It's akin to saying "You are dying". Yes, I am. Slowly. Every day.

The DLL may be on it's way to being released. But that doesn't mean anything significant.

At least the game, which seemed long lost, is starting to twitch a little...

 

[Uncle Anton]

Quick question Afforess (given how at the moment, RoM-AND is the Civ4 mod I'd most like to see ported to CiV)....

Do you think it's too late for the kind of Source take-up that you and other modders like Avain, Ripple, Glider, Phungus, Wolfhanzem Kael etc helped propel (ie that the point where modders have thrown their hands up in frustration and moved on)? Have they made the modding community wait too long for the source? If that critical tipping point hasn't yet been reached, how much longer would you be prepared to wait for the Source to be released before you decide that even when it does come out, you won't be interested?

For me, the question behind this whole "Is Modding CiV dead" question is less about "Was/is CiV moddable as it stands" and more about "Will anyone be interested in Modding CiV by the time the source is released"....

What's your opinion in that context?

 

[Valkrionn]

Counter question: What does it matter?

Realistically, an expansion or some large content-pack DLC would revive enough interest in the game to propel fresh modders into the scene. Many civ4 modders have moved on, or remained with civ4... But that does not, in any way, mean that civ5 modding is dead. Rather, it simply means it is left for fresh blood. For better or worse.

 

[killmeplease]

hooray