Sorry for coming late, had a party and am not entirely sober atm.
Too much for me to reply individually, I'll try to touch on the main points and claims by my opponents. Some were stated by several people.
A GUI based editor would degrade mod making abilities for more advanced modders!
This is simply not true. It will not stop "advanced" modders from doing it there way.
.....If you consider those who can modify
XML to be advanced modders, than frankly, you have no reason to be discussing the modding capabilities of civ5.
It is incredibly simple. And what you don't understand, people on the forums are GLAD to help. Really, we are. My own mod has... 16 third party mods available atm, with more in development all the time. Many of those modmodders are doing what they are simply because they asked questions, and learned.
If you are unwilling to approach something, and
learn, then you have no business modding. It cannot be stated simpler.
It would tie up developer resources and is not worth it.
With proper planning, this would NOT be the case. Besides, with that argument then I would say that they could have spent less time "reinventing" the leaders which look all nice and flashy, but do not add any real elements of gameplay as far as I can see. As far as I am concerned, they just did that to appease the reviewers who only care about graphics and flash.
Also, as I have stated over and over, many other companies have released GUI based editors. Many times, along side the advanced scripting/programming languages and tools.
Few things wrong with this.
First off... In what world do you live in that proper planning can allow a person to do two separate, mutually exclusive tasks at the same time? I'd really love to know.
Any new mechanic, feature, app, whatever, has an opportunity cost. It's quite a simple concept. A programmer can only do one thing at a time... If he works on one feature, he is NOT working on another. A GUI editor that is, again, unnecessary, means the programmers are NOT working on something better. Say, AI.
Second, what in the hell does it matter if other companies have done it? Have other companies had a GUI editor that would have to be as advanced as one for civ5? One that is easily extensible, that will not hiccup on adding new tags? No, because other games do not allow the full extent of access that Civilization does. It is flat out not the same.
It was removed after CIV III, so why would they bring it back.
I was still miffed when they didn't include one with CIV IV. It was so limiting and left the power to do even simple mods with the advanced modders. Yes, XML may be among the easiest codes to figure out (some of the fields are easy... others are not very clearly defined), and I have done it to an extent where I could do the simple changes, it is just very tedious and overwhelming. Which leads me to...
.........Again, xml is not advanced. It is english text. Ooooooooooh, it's in brackets! It's instantly unreadable, undecipherable machine-speak that only a chosen few can interpret!
The only valid point I have seen you make is this: "some of the fields are easy... others are not very clearly defined". That can be solved via proper documentation, a wiki, simply asking on the forums. That's it. Given explanations, xml is every bit as simple as a GUI. And without those explanations, a GUI would be every bit as obtuse to you as XML is. So your entire argument boils down to this:
"Tell me what the tags are for. Make it understandable." And
that, my friend, I can agree with. That is why the forums are important, that is why the community is important; You can ask questions, and have them answered within a fairly short timeframe.
It is much easier to mod with XML than an editor/ XML is simple!
When I hear this argument, all I picture is Sheldon, from The Big Bang Theory saying something along the line of "All you have to do is multiply the molecular mass by the speed of the photon atoms, then divide it by the light variable, subtract the distance, then add the level of gravitational pull... it is so simple really, I don't understand how anybody can't figure that out!"
Seriously, as has been stated before, for you guys, it may be easy... but for those of us who just want to do some basic stuff, it is like translating Ancient Greek with a French to English dictionary.
That is not a fair comparison. Example of xml:
Code:
<iWithdrawalProb>25</iWithdrawalProb>
Hmm. What does that mean? Well, it specifically says 'WithdrawalProb', so I'd suppose it would be the chance for a unit to withdraw from combat. Oh, and it says 25? So a 25% chance to withdraw! Done.
Now for an example that (for some) qualifies for your comparison:
Code:
public class Multiplier
{
public static void main(String[] args)
{
Scanner input = new Scanner(System.in);
int value1, value2;
System.out.print("Enter first value: ");
value1 = input.nextInt();
System.out.print("Enter second value: ");
value2 = input.nextInt();
if (value1 % value2 > 0)
{
System.out.printf("%d is not a multiple of %d", value1, value2);
}
else
{
System.out.printf("%d is a multiple of %d", value1, value2);
}
}
}
That is actual code. It's extremely simple code (I hate having to take basic classes on
I already know... So very much. Especially when you can only use techniques already covered in the class.
), but it is still code, and many would have no idea what it says.
And now, a couple of direct quotes...
This is text:
Code:
What you are reading right here is text! Plain and simple.
This is code:
Code:
int main()
{
unsigned int n;
cout << fixed << setprecision(0);
cout << setw(10) << "n" << setw(30) << "Factorial of n"
<< " (Iterative solution)\n" << endl;
for( n = 0; n <= LENGTH; ++n)
cout << setw(10) << n << setw(30) << iterativeFunction(n)
<< endl;
cout << "Go on with <return>";
cin.get();
cout << setw(10) << "n" << setw(30) << "Factorial of n"
<< " (Recursive solution)\n" << endl;
for( n = 0; n <= LENGTH; ++n)
cout << setw(10) << n << setw(30) << recursiveFunction(n)
<< endl;
cout << endl;
return 0;
This is also code:
Code:
<CivicInfos>
<CivicInfo>
<CivicOptionType>CIVICOPTION_GOVERNMENT</CivicOptionType>
<Type>CIVIC_DESPOTISM</Type>
<Description>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_DESPOTISM</Description>
<Civilopedia>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_DESPOTISM_PEDIA</Civilopedia>
<Strategy>TXT_KEY_CIVIC_DESPOTISM_STRATEGY</Strategy>
<Button>,Art/Interface/Buttons/Civics/Despotism.dds,Art/Interface/Buttons/Civics_Civilizations_Religions_Atlas.dds,5,1</Button>
<TechPrereq>NONE</TechPrereq>
<iAnarchyLength>1</iAnarchyLength>
<Upkeep>UPKEEP_LOW</Upkeep>
<iAIWeight>0</iAIWeight>
Get the picture? If not, which two of the three above samples look the closest to each other.
Yeah... if that 5 year old was Ender Wiggins!
....While you earn points for the Ender reference, no. I do not care if the general structure is similar (which is entirely for readability; You can have the entire xml file on a single line, just won't be able to read
.
), xml is still text. It is not code.
It is data, stored in an easily readable text format. That is all. If you cannot be bothered to learn how to modify
XML, which consists of finding the appropriate tag and modifying simple values (0 to 1, to turn on Blitz, for example), then why are you here?
I suppose I just can't get past that point. XML is purely text. It is nothing more. It may appear daunting in the first 10 second glance, but after devoting that
ten seconds to reading it, it is clicks: This is just text! This is simple. If you are unwilling to devote that ten seconds.... What worthwhile modifications will you make?
Absolutely!
I have never seen a company charge extra money for a GUI editor... It may be possible, but I've never seen it. To be honest, you could run all of the polls you wanted, but I would guarantee that there would be people who voted yes. Not saying I would be one of them... not saying I wouldn't be.
Skipping most of this post. What Afforess meant about charging more is this: For them to have the same level of work on all other features, but also include an editor, this means they have to spend more man-hours on the project. So they should be paid more for those man-hours. So the game would cost more.
Actually, XML contains data (it is a database), yet the XML language is in code.
..........No. Dear god no.
XML contains data, yes. But it is in no way a database. That is an enormously different beast.
And XML is not in code. Code is machine executable script. XML contains no executable script; It simply contains data that both machines and humans can read. It is not code. It is not code. It is not code. Oh yeah, it is not code.
Thorburne, you can argue with the programmers all you want, and I see some of the points you're making as valid.. programmers just won't give it, though
However, you're missing the main point, and that's why I quote you above: the market. The shiny leaders are
NOT for the reviewers; they're for the CivRev kind of gamer.
There are two main powerful types of customers 2k wants to please: 'normal' gamers (i.e. non-fanatic, as we are too little compared to the broader strategy market) and serious modders. The first are where the profits are, and the second create cool new 'games' for the first to play even more. That's what they're getting at with the in-game browser. A mod like FfH inside such a tool has the power to make casual gamers draw their friends into buying Civ for playing such mods, down the line, extending their sales beyond their concentrated efforts.
Shiny leaders cater to the former, unprecedented modding tools catter to the latter. It has been noted more than once that modding Civ5 will take more technical skills than modding Civ4. Sorry, but making modding more casual is not as much in their plans as making modding
consumption more casual. That's what unprecedented are all about. Good mods will always come from just a few dozen individuals, and those will always be there no matter how hard it is to mod. If that pays off with being able to create deeper mods, all the better.
Casual modders are not at all an interesting market for them. They end up more often than not being the only ones playing their mods.
I understand yours and others' drive to to call attention to the needs of the kind of customer that you are, but Firaxis/2k is after profit behind every decision they make, such is the way the carousel spins.
For the most part, I agree with you here.
Games must make money. Without that profit, they will not be made (rather, not at the same level of quality! Some would still be out there). In order to make that money, you want to target the broadest audience you can.
Graphics help draw in casual gamers. They see a picture on a box, like what they see, decide to give it a try. This is always the biggest source of income for a company.
Modders, on the other hand, extend a game's life. Civ4 has lasted a LONG time, and likely will continue to make money! This is in no small part due to the excellent mods available... To use myself as an example, I would not have bought BtS without Fall from Heaven. I do not think I have
ever completed a game of BtS. I know many people who got their friends to purchase civ, specifically to play FfH! Small mods may outnumber large ones hundreds to one... but those large mods are able to draw in consumers, and actually make money for the parent game.
Casual modders? They make no money for the company. They already have the game, and there is noone who is going to buy a game so they can try out that
toooootally sweet new robot unit random modder A added. There just is no money there; A casual modder is a transient target.
Either their interest dies out (in which case, why spend resources on them) or they move up into the ranks of the more advanced modders (which is EASY to do. I'd point to myself as an example there, again.
), and use the advanced tools, no longer requiring subpar tools which slow the pace of development.
So you only benefit if you are a "normal gamer" or a "Serious modder"?!? I don't think that it is good business and very counter productive to disregard the middle group! After all, those people that make mods that only they will play could potentially be the next great designer... but if they are not allowed to realize that potential, then the world is at a loss. I am not saying that about me in particular, though I would like to.
You argue about profits, but the small amount of relative resources and assets are nothing, especially when you consider that the game has been under development for several years.
You know what... I think that this argument is wearing out! Neither of us are obviously going to budge... call it a draw! As has been mentioned, there are no confirmations either way whether an editor will exist. From what I am seeing, it appears to me that it won't. If they don't include one, I will be very disappointed. I feel that it is a slap in the face to me... one who has loved Civilization for a while and loves being creative but is denied that for whatever excuses/reasons the developers may offer!
In short,
yes. And it is, indeed, good business. The middle group is transient. The middle group does not drive profits. The middle group is smaller than either other group.
As has been said... There is
nothing stopping
anyone at all from making the next great mod! You simply must be willing to
learn. Without that willingness, no amount of handholding, no tools, nothing Firaxis can do, will make you capable of creating a mod. Not even a half-decent one, let alone the next big thing.
There is nothing holding you back from learning, other than your own unwillingness to attempt it. Rise above that unwillingness, or don't, the choice is yours; However, without rising above it, you will never realize any potential you may have.
The only roadblock to becoming a modder is yourself.
It is no slap in the face if there is no GUI editor. It is simply Firaxis saying (IMO correctly!) that it is an unnecessary waste of time. Your creativity is denied outlet by yourself, not Firaxis.
I've said numerous times in this thread that a text-based editor, with good tools, would be a welcome addition. We'll have to wait and see if we get it. A GUI editor, however... Would be utter
. I personally would be sorely disappointed if they DID have one.
Again, I am not trying to force anything... I just want everyone to have a chance. As said time and time again, an editor will not hinder the advanced modders.
Everyone
does have a chance. XML is simple to learn. You just have to allow yourself the opportunity.
I guarantee you that anyone on this forum would be willing to assist you in it.
Who was it that said we serious modders don't want the casual modder to be able to make any old crap through a editor as it would drown out our awesome mods with lots of useless noise mods?
I can't remember who said it, but it's just popped back into my mind.
I dunno. I know I personally don't feel that way.
Hell, I list every thirdparty module for Rise from Erebus in our download thread! I welcome casual modders, I encourage them to continue modding, I hope they develop into more serious modders. It's how I got started in this, and now I'm going to school so I can get a job in game design! I'd never want to deny others that opportunity.
This is where XMLSpy comes in handy. Point it at the schema that defines the valid tags and values and it will validate your XML file and point out where you've gone wrong. It won't, however, show errors where one XML file references a value from another as I pointed out above.
Okay, I give you points for this one.
Regarding "XML is [not] code", the main problem with the whole argument above is that both sides are using the same terms to mean different things.
Computer scientists use code mostly to mean source code--executable computer instructions--whereas most laymen consider code anything that isn't prose.
There can be no agreement if we don't agree on the definitions. By the CS definition, XML is not code. It is data
encoded in a plain-text file format in the same sense that you would encode music into the MP3 format. It doesn't describe computer instructions, but to the laymen it is hardly simple prose even though it is a
human-readable file format.
But a GUI editor by itself wouldn't make editing the XML easier for laymen. You'd need comprehensive documentation of what each attribute does and how they relate to each other. With that documentation, XML would be nearly as easy. The problem is that such documentation
does not exist for Civ4.
Sticking all those attributes into a GUI would be just as mysterious as they are in XML. When Civ4 modders tweak the XML, they also go through the same painful process of figuring out which attribute does what. Many times you make a change, fire up the game, and see no difference. A GUI wouldn't change that without having every attribute detailed.
Yes, I think there is a fundamental difference in our definitions.
However, that used by myself, Afforess, Dale, yourself.. Is the correct one. As per any easily available source. Dictionary, wikipedia, whatever.
And I completely agree about the documentation; I really feel that that is the crux of the argument, here. You can become intimidated looking at the xml simply because you don't know what any particular tag means... but a GUI would have the same issue, unless documented! And with that documentation, xml becomes easier than the GUI. So ultimately... It's all about documentation.
Laugh if you want, but I did make that argument. Look at Spore. The barrier to entry is basically none. It's extremely hard to find good creatures if they aren't on the top featured list, which only holds 10 creatures.
Hmm. I don't really see it working that way for Civ, assuming there are ways to filter mods in the browser. Anything at all along the lines of what's possible in the CivFanatics DB would allow you to check for total conversions easily, for example.
On the PolyCast I think Jon Shafer mentioned that the in-game mod marketplace would be moderated in some way, but I don't remember entirely. It may be that like Apple's AppStore all mods are vetted before made available.
Whether modders would be allowed to charge for their mods is up to the publisher. Firaxis wants to do it but is not in control. That's another thing not mentioned in this discussion: the developers and designers at Firaxis don't sign the checks. They are given direction and requirements by their bosses and ultimately by the publisher, and the publisher's only interest is in making profit. That's just how it goes under capitalism.
Too bad Firaxis isn't running Communism as all the developers would gain a 10% bonus to production and be able to build that awesome GUI for you!
I would rather assume so, at least to make sure it's not malicious. If it is available from within game, then Firaxis and 2K could conceivably be held liable in court.
I do not, however, think modders should ever charge for their creations. It is repugnant to me.
How many mods become incorporated by others? How many merge concepts from others? Art? Rereleases for new patches? Who makes the money? How do you distribute said money?
It would fracture the modding community. You would have arguments about who made what and who deserves the money; Notices not to use X mod in any other mod; Claims that A's post in forum 1 inspired mod B's new mechanic, and thus A deserves a cut of the money.
It is a whole can of worms that should never be opened.
I wouldn't charge for my mods - I expect copyrights with mods could get tricky very fast....
I agree. I'd refuse to charge. I'd also refuse to purchase any. Or associate with those modders who seek to charge. It is morally repugnant to me. It is against the very concept of modding, IMO.
If you want to charge for something, make an indie game, an app, etc. A mod should be free.
