Is the HOF mod allowed?
- Thread starter Methos
- Start date
DaviddesJ
Deity
Methos said:
From what I've seen, you can install whatever you want in your CustomAssets folder, and it will simply be ignored for GOTM purposes. But it will apply to other games you create.
Warning: this may make it more painful to play GOTM when you have to do without all of the useful mods! It's so much better to play Civ4 with improved advisors, event notifiers, etc., that I find myself less and less interested in opening the GOTM instead of one of my other games.
DaviddesJ said:
Before replying to my post you need to check out the link. If you do you'll see your entire statement just showed you didn't bother to check it.
The mod I linked was made by the HOF Staff and works with the 'No Cheating' box checked.
Again, check the link before replying.
DaviddesJ
Deity
Methos said:
As it happens, that's not true. But if you don't find my posting useful, feel free to ignore it.
DaviddesJ said:
Your post above deals with the CustomAssetts folder, whereas the mod in question does not. It is based out of the Assetts folder and I believe is a .INI file.
Edit: Just checked, and it is indeed an .INI file.
Edit #2: A statement was removed as it was 'flaming'. My apologies.
Even with some of the stuff I regularily play with included in the HOF mod, there are others where this isn't the case. So David's point is valid, moreso because he was discussing GOTM not HOF. You are running naked playing GOTM right now.
A deeper issue is that security is completely mishandled currently. The articles that matter should be secured while all else should be freely modifiable by the player. Point is that I do NOT want an approved mod for each event I choose to play. Its bogus and harmful to the mod community.
A deeper issue is that security is completely mishandled currently. The articles that matter should be secured while all else should be freely modifiable by the player. Point is that I do NOT want an approved mod for each event I choose to play. Its bogus and harmful to the mod community.
DaviddesJ
Deity
Smirk said:
It would be nice, but I think it's unrealistic to expect Firaxis to implement a security model at the Python level that lets one distinguish mods that have access to "information that should be secured" from information that doesn't. That is a lot of work.
They have done a tremendous job of making the game modifiable. I don't think this additional level of functionality is really reasonable to expect, and it's unfair to attack them for "mishandling" the matter.
Just to be clear, installing the HOF mod following our instructions will not modify the custom assets or the normal game assets. Installing to the mod directory only affects you when the mod is loaded, either by loading a game file that uses the mod, or by loading the mod via Advanced->Load A Mod. Installing the HOF mod won't affect GOTM games as the GOTM start file was created as a standard game.
DaviddesJ said:
Hardly, Firaxis is a business like any other. Are you suggesting that they made it modable for some altruistic philosophy? Its more likely because its what their customers want or expect.
But to address this in a more general sense, modable games are not done for the users benefit, thats just a bonus, this is done because the benefits during the development process make this added level of abstraction beneficial. The programmers aren't defacto designers and the designers don't have to pester the programmers about bugs in their tools, when they can just go right into the data and modify it themselves (without specialized tools, as was done in the past).
As an analogy, a car has an easily accessible hood to get into the engine compartment, despite the vast majority of users never once needing to get in there. This is not an altruistic thought for the many car entusiasts, its done for simple potential utility.
But anyway, I disagree with your basic thought. Its one thing to ignore security its another thing altogether to inappropriately apply it. For one the current option is "No Cheats" which disallows the builtin editor but also ignores all user assests, the "cheats" apparently. One such popular "cheat" is a clock and turn timer, another are textures based on beautiful natural imagery. Those are horrible and vile cheats. And should be disallowed with a "No Cheats" option.
I also disagree with your sentiment because I know they are more committed, than you would suggest, to the integrity of their game. They have to be if they wish the multiplayer aspects to be taken seriously. And in addition to other things like the better handling of ingame knowledge (fog of war, resources visiblity, etc) I'm convinced it will turn out better. But I have to prod in any event cause thats my right as a customer.
DaviddesJ
Deity
Smirk said:
I think this is an absurd claim. Obviously we have no hope of agreement or even common ground for discussion.
Smirk said:
The option would more accurately be called "No Mods" instead of "No Cheats", but the choice of the name seems a trivial thing to get upset about. In practice, they want a way to disable things that would give players a relative advantage in the game, and the only way they have to do this is to to disable all mods, and this is very unlikely to change.
I don't know of any game that does anything like what you want. If it's really so easy to do, where are the examples?
PaperBeetle
Emperor
Smirk said:
I think this is a very rational claim. Compiling a large complex, program is A Big Thing, and the developer doesn't want to go through that process every couple of minutes when balancing the game mechanics. For this reason, games have long been written to read external files, to get the kind of variable data that we know as 'moddable'. The fact that these days such files are written in an open format, allowing users to edit them, simply reflects a change in PC game culture, not a great change in the way the games are written.
Of course, there will be additional overhead for the developer in ensuring that the game (and/or editor) is robust enough to handle end users' tinkering, but this overhead obviously isn't so large as to put developers off.
except that Civ IV was written entirely in C++, XML, and Python...specifically to help with easier and much more extensive modding than was possible in any previous Civ game(and possibly in any other game period)
I am not so pessimistic as Smirk to believe that Developers do nothing if it does not improve their bottom line. I think that modding is an important part of the civ fan experience, and Firaxis was smart in making it such a big part of their programming plans.
They could have made Civ IV much less moddable than they did and still been able to do all the mechanics balancing and whatnot that they have to do.
I am not so pessimistic as Smirk to believe that Developers do nothing if it does not improve their bottom line. I think that modding is an important part of the civ fan experience, and Firaxis was smart in making it such a big part of their programming plans.
They could have made Civ IV much less moddable than they did and still been able to do all the mechanics balancing and whatnot that they have to do.
Similar threads
