DLC vs. Modding

[GigaNerd]

In that recent article everyone's been talking about, it says that DLC's gonna be a feature in Civ5. Here's my question: Why bother buying DLC when modders can make nearly identical content?

BTW, would it be legal to buy the Deluxe Edition and distribute the Babylonian Civilization over CFC for free? Or is that illegal? (I'd like to have Babylonia, but I'm a bit cautious about buying the Deluxe Edition)



Last question: Everyone says DRM is bad. I'm a n00b, so would anybody care to explain the evils of DRM to me?

 

[Dale]

Last question: Everyone says DRM is bad. I'm a n00b, so would anybody care to explain the evils of DRM to me?

It just means those people can't pirate the game.

 

[mechaerik]

What recent article? I haven't seen anything confirming DLC in Civ5.

Also, @Dale:
I don't like DRM either (well, some kinds anyways), but that doesn't mean I plan to pirate the game.

 

[GigaNerd]

What recent article? I haven't seen anything confirming DLC in Civ5.

Also, @Dale:
I don't like DRM either (well, some kinds anyways), but that doesn't mean I plan to pirate the game.

It's on the front page! How can you miss it?

"Sid Meier's Civilization V players will enjoy the benefits of the Steamworks' features included in all PC versions such as auto-updating, Steam Achievements, downloadable content, multiplayer matchmaking and more."



Wait... so there are more evils to DRM than just anti-piracy?

 

[Dale]

What recent article? I haven't seen anything confirming DLC in Civ5.

Also, @Dale:
I don't like DRM either (well, some kinds anyways), but that doesn't mean I plan to pirate the game.

Did you note the winky?

 

[Toni1]

In that recent article everyone's been talking about, it says that DLC's gonna be a feature in Civ5. Here's my question: Why bother buying DLC when modders can make nearly identical content?

We'll have to wait and see what kind of modding tools are included with game, what they are capable of and wether or not there's any restrictions in their use.

BTW, would it be legal to buy the Deluxe Edition and distribute the Babylonian Civilization over CFC for free? Or is that illegal? (I'd like to have Babylonia, but I'm a bit cautious about buying the Deluxe Edition)

Yes, it's illegal to distribute any part of original game content without permission from Firaxis/2k.

Last question: Everyone says DRM is bad. I'm a n00b, so would anybody care to explain the evils of DRM to me?

DRM, Digital Rights Management is a way for publishers to retrict how users use their digital products. The wary from disk checks/copy protection/cd-keys to limited activations and requiring constant internet connection. There are also medhods to prevent resale of retail games (only applies to retail games bought from stores, you can't sell games bought from digital distribution services like steam) or restrict their resale value (this usally involves one time use only registration keys to specific services like DLC, Forums etc.). While there are reports of DRM causing various hardware and software problems it seems problems are very hardware specific (my only experience is downgrading of my DVD drive speed. This was starforge from years ago) so you are not very likely to encounter them unless you use old games as some of old DRM may not be compatible with latest OS's or hardware. Most of the software issues are probably mostly related to incompatibility with newer programs and drivers but they may intentionally interfere with the operations of specific programs (The most serious I've experienced is starforge included in Space Rangers II (same as above) refusing to allow running of game while there were image mounting programs present (Alcohol 120%/Daemon Tools)). I may have been lucky or it's due to fact that I crack the games I buy or maybe problems are excacerated, hard to tell. Limited activations may also cause problems if you install often as depending of the publisher, the activations may not be renewable and once spend you may have to actually rebuy the game to reinstall.

 

[MrHan]

What really ticked me off about that last article was that I had to buy the SE just to get babylon.

Like.. seriously? Civ =/= Pokemon. If there was a SE version of say... Pokemon Diamond that gave me 20 additional pokemons, I would probably buy that. But Civ is not that kind of a game. The sale of SE to milk bucks from players who want the entire game is cheap, cheap, CHEAP!!! I'm not gonna buy SE just to get babylon, and in the unlikely event that I do, I won't be happy doing it. I'm starting to hate 2k for bringing Civ down to the level of Pokemons.

What's worse, I don't think Pokemon's even done that cheap bullshiii, and yet Civ is going right at it.

Screw you 2k.

 

[attackfighter]

I prefer user made content because they have more freedom with their work. Like, amateurs can make mods with Hitler in it and no one cares, but the professionals can't because it would be 'bad for the company image' or some bs lol.

User made content is also free (although sometimes DLC is too) and it's usually more complex, as opposed to DLC which is usually dumbed down for marketability.

 

[ori]

BTW, would it be legal to buy the Deluxe Edition and distribute the Babylonian Civilization over CFC for free? Or is that illegal? (I'd like to have Babylonia, but I'm a bit cautious about buying the Deluxe Edition)

As already pointed out it would not be legal, just to point out: it would also be against forum rules and users doing something like this would not be looked kindly on...

 

[Magma]

Personally I am not going to buy any DLC for a game I already paid for.

 

[AbsintheRed]

As already pointed out it would not be legal, just to point out: it would also be against forum rules and users doing something like this would not be looked kindly on...

Blablabla, right now you are not looked kindly on
The whole modding system will be ruined :S
CFC and other forums will be useless, as you will need to have all your files through steam

Rather reopen the poll

 

[eireksten]

The whole modding system will be ruined :S
CFC and other forums will be useless, as you will need to have all your files through steam

Steam doesn't hinder modding. I have a Steambased version of Civ4, and I can mod everything just as anyone else.

 

[Ahriman]

As already pointed out it would not be legal, just to point out: it would also be against forum rules and users doing something like this would not be looked kindly on...

So, how different does something have to be until it is user-created content?

Are we banning *any* maps of the Fertile Crescent region? What if someone takes their map and tweaks it slightly? What if they use the base map but add their own scneario on top?

Can they use the Leader images of the Bablyonian leader and reskin them or change them? How large does that change have to be? There's a minefield here.

 

[Commander Bello]

Steam doesn't hinder modding. I have a Steambased version of Civ4, and I can mod everything just as anyone else.

Technically it may not hinder modding, from the legal point of view it will easily do so.

DLC for which you have paid for sure won't be distributable.
Consequently, this means that any modifications of such DLC like re-skinning and whatnotever at least will be very questionable.
Let there be just one animation not being available in the standard package, and voilá: copyright!

In turn this means that forums like this here would have to be very restrictive in allowing to upload user-made graphics, scenarios, mods and so on.
That much to the advertised "moddability".

Furthermore, you cannot compare Civ4 with Civ5. To the best of my knowledge, for Civ4 all versions, in whichever way they may have been distributed, have been identical in terms of gameplay, units, graphics and so on.

With Civ5 it will be different - see "creator's edition" and DLC...

And finally, I see patches coming as DLC. For just $ 5,00 - only this week. ....

 

[eireksten]

So you're saying that the fact that Steam supports DLC hinders modding?

DLC for Civ5 isn't Steam's fault. That's the choice of the developers/distributors. Steam in itself does not hinder modding.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Steam doesn't hinder modding. I have a Steambased version of Civ4, and I can mod everything just as anyone else.

No, not steam. The DLC system

3. The most worrying thing about the improved modding community, the steam requirement and the extra content, is the implication this seems to have on the modability of the game. Will Firaxis/2kGames control what mods are available depending on their content? Right now, I could write a "Civ4 Full Nudity XxX P0rN MOD!!!11eleven!1!" and anyone could download and install it. It won't be pretty, but I've got the liberty to create and distribute it and everyone's got the liberty to play or ignore it.
But now you bring "exclusive Babylon civilization" as $10 extra... What if someone decides to just mod in Nebuchanezzar or Hammurabi (or even 20 extra civs, 100 extra units and techs ala RoM) with the same (or almost the same but slightly different) unique buildings/units which people could just download for free instead of paying extra? Will you -thanks to the system you seem to be setting up- be able to just ban this extra content? Is the free modding community no longer free?

 

[eireksten]

The whole modding system will be ruined :S
CFC and other forums will be useless, as you will need to have all your files through steam

No, not steam. The DLC system

I just read what you wrote the first time, and responded to that. It seemed like you were one of those wanting to attribute all problems to Steam.

About the announcement of DLC, I don't know what to think. I'm sure Jon Shafer wants Civ5 to be as moddable as possible. Since we don't really know yet how the DLC relates to modding, I'll just wait for some more intel on this before making up my mind.

 

[phungus420]

Can they use the Leader images of the Bablyonian leader and reskin them or change them? How large does that change have to be? There's a minefield here.

Minefield is an accurate description. If the original reports were true, and we are getting near full exposure of source and XML (ala civ4), it will be impossible to clearly define what is and what isn't allowed. Firaxis are setting themselves up to be in direct competition with the modding community and at the same time are tempting fate and creating a de facto incentive to copy DLC works. This isn't smart from a business perspective. I can understand the decision to use Steam, I don't personally like it, but it makes good business sense. The decision to create zero day DLC, and presumably alot more DLC later, while at the same time releasing high power mod tools is, ironically, only going to lead toward alot of bad blood between the modding community and Firaxis.

 

[Ahriman]

If the original reports were true, and we are getting near full exposure of source and XML (ala civ4), it will be impossible to clearly define what is and what isn't allowed. Firaxis are setting themselves up to be in direct competition with the modding community and at the same time are tempting fate and creating a de facto incentive to copy DLC works.

Right. This is what seems weird to me.
Paid DLC and supporting a mod community (and Civ arguably has a stronger mod community than any other game series in history) seem to conflict.

But I'm guessing that DLC is aimed at the silent-majority "casual" gamers who don't go to fansites like Civfanatics and aren't really interested in installing 3rd party mods. Pure speculation, but I bet that at least 80% of Civ4 purchasers never installed any mod ever or edited any game file, they just played the game as-is, and maybe installed the official patches and maybe bought some official expansions.
So perhaps they intend to sell DLC to these silent types, and use no enforcement mechanism other than inertia to stop modders from doing whatever they like with the content.

So the question is; what is Civfanatics policy on this? There should be a clear policy on what is and is not allowed as hosted content. Anything that is not 100% identical to official DLC is fair-game (as long as it doesn't try to say "free version of official DLC" or similar in its description)?

 

[Chalks]

That's interesting - especially since the animated leaders are not going to be easily modable it seems. I would assume that reusing existing ones would be common.

Perhaps you simply wouldn't be able to redistribute the unmodified aspects of the file (like the models if you reskinned it)?