No Modding Tools, Please!

[Afforess]

I'd like to see you prove that last point.

The burden of proof is on you, since you are the one claiming it does exist.

 

[EdCase]

You're implying that modders were not a consideration with Civ4; which is a pretty big insult to Soren Johnson and the other dev's.

I would be more inclined to believe they've seen Civ4's success and duplicated the modding abilities; after all, why fix what isn't broken?

Please do not put words in my mouth that were never there. The ability to mod a game does not automatically make it a successful ability.
4 was/is (as someone stated) wildly successful from a modding perspective.

Ergo, the development team for 5 would like to not only replicate, but build on that success by supporting the community even more.

If you'd stop thinking in terms of one upmanship and start discussing the issue, some progress could be made. At the very least a modicum of enlightment.

 

[mamba]

Civ 3! As it has the tools available to use for everyone.

Adler

Ah, so having tools makes the better mods ? I would have said the quality of the mod is what makes for better mods and there I am with Afforess, mods you can do for 4 could not have been done for 3.

 

[Yakk]

Oh my GOD this is so far from the truth it's not even in the same galaxy! A polished UI has NOTHING to do with limiting the data set. Utter BULLOCKS!

You using firefox?

Type in about:config in your address bar.

That is not a polished UI. That is a UI that is equivalent to editing raw XML in Civ4. That has a huge number of options. If any UI designer wanted to make a polished UI to edit all of the fields (documented and undocumented) in about:config, I'd laugh at the UI designer. Doing so would be dumb, as keeping up with new about:config settings (and changes thereof) would be utterly ridiculous (either we slow down developers who toss settings into about:config, or we break regularly), and the raw size of the interface makes it...

Bah, nevermind. This isn't worth it.

 

[Thormodr]

I suppose if I had to vote between easy to use modding tools or much more powerful ones I'd choose the latter instead of the former. I'd prefer to see a few very high quality mods rather than thousands of crappy ones.

That being said, hopefully CiV will offer both but it is not guaranteed. I guess we really won't know though until Firaxis releases more information.

 

[Dale]

You using firefox?

Type in about:config in your address bar.

That is not a polished UI. That is a UI that is equivalent to editing raw XML in Civ4. That has a huge number of options. If any UI designer wanted to make a polished UI to edit all of the fields (documented and undocumented) in about:config, I'd laugh at the UI designer. Doing so would be dumb, as keeping up with new about:config settings (and changes thereof) would be utterly ridiculous (either we slow down developers who toss settings into about:config, or we break regularly), and the raw size of the interface makes it...

Bah, nevermind. This isn't worth it.

What? That's all I can say, what?

The about:config is extremely easy to use. Find the value to change, double-click on it. It even tells you if the value you're trying to enter is valid. It's even in alphabetical order. The UI is polished. The tag names could be clearer, but that's got NOTHING to do with the UI.

You're right, it's not worth it because you're wrong.

 

[Afforess]

What? That's all I can say, what?

The about:config is extremely easy to use. Find the value to change, double-click on it. It even tells you if the value you're trying to enter is valid. It's even in alphabetical order. The UI is polished. The tag names could be clearer, but that's got NOTHING to do with the UI.

You're right, it's not worth it because you're wrong.

I disagree dale, it might be polished for the likes of you or me, but to the average user, it's mumbo-jumbo. For kicks, start a poll in OT, see what the average person thinks about the "about:config:.

You might be surprised to learn you are alone.

 

[Dale]

The UI is polished as everything is displayed cleanly, and it's user-friendly to use. The problem with about:config is NOT UI but the tags aren't clear. That's got NOTHING to do with the UI. I bet if the tags were labelled "Width of screen", "Height of screen" and other simple English terms, every person in the world could use it. THATS a polished UI!

Go back to losing arguments about modding tools.

 

[Afforess]

The UI is polished as everything is displayed cleanly, and it's user-friendly to use. The problem with about:config is NOT UI but the tags aren't clear. That's got NOTHING to do with the UI.

That may be your definition, but the rest of the world will disagree with you.

Basically, you are saying "My Spanish to English Translator has a great interface, provided you can read spanish". The point is that people who know zero spanish should be able to use it.

Replace Spanish with Programming, and you'll get the picture.

 

[PieceOfMind]

Off topic:
I just tried about:config for the first time ever. After cautiously proceeding past the warning that where I had to click "Ok, I'll be careful!" or something to that effect, I was immediately scared to change anything on the following screen.
It was mumbo jumbo to me and I pass as an amateur civ4 modder. If a civ4 "modding tool" looked like that, I'd prefer editing XML, Python and C++ code directly using another editor.

 

[Dale]

That may be your definition, but the rest of the world will disagree with you.

Basically, you are saying "My Spanish to English Translator has a great interface, provided you can read spanish". The point is that people who know zero spanish should be able to use it.

Replace Spanish with Programming, and you'll get the picture.

What's this post got to do with anything in this thread? We're talking about modding tools in this thread, not language translators. There is no sense in what your posting now, it appears you're just posting gibberish.

Spanish to English translators? WTH?

To put this thread back on topic, I re-iterate that I hope Firaxis can provide both simple to use modding tools and access to the sources. It is my opinion that the OP is incorrect in his claims that modding tools will dumb-down the modding process and result in no complex mods such as we've seen in Civ4. There are literally thousands of complex high-quality mods created for games which have modding tools.

The OP's claim that modding tools stop the ability of complex mods to be made is a complete fabrication based on the thousands of mods available for the many games with modding tools (for examples see http://www.moddb.com/mods). In a further post when challenged the OP claimed that Spore and Civ3 were conclusive evidence that modding tools destroyed any ability to make complex mods, and when presented with the facts the OP diverted the conversation. ModDB has over 6000 complex high-quality mods made from games with modding tools. I feel this is adequate counter to his 2.

The OP also claimed that developers don't waste the time or money on developing modding tools. This was countered with facts ranging from the many games coming out with modding tools (which is becoming a "norm" for some genres) and tried to brush aside other facts such as modding tools are developed by companies to help them fill the game so it's a tiny time and money investment to extend them to the public. There were other facts presented that the OP didn't respond to.

It is my belief that the OP's actual concern is that with exposure to modding for everyone that mod's will become lost in the general "noise" (to use the OP's term). I believe the OP fears their mods not gaining them the adoration, recognition and 'pat on the back' that some modders crave. Well, if your mod is good enough, it will always be known.

I honestly don't think there is anything left to say in this thread. No matter what either side says, the proof will be on release. There is no way this thread can end happily whilst full details of what will be included, and actual hands on exposure, are not available. I suggest we postpone the continuation of this discussion till we know what we're dealing with.

 

[Bandobras Took]

The burden of proof is on you, since you are the one claiming it does exist.

I made no claims whatsoever; I merely expressed a desire to see the proof for yours.

 

[Adler17]

I don't think you played many Civ 3 scenarios, did you? You then would say something different. Yes, you have more possibilities with Civ 4. Yes, there are good mods for both. Agreed. My point was and is, that with the limited abilities of people in programming many outstanding scenario creators were forced to leave Civ IV aside. That's why they couldn't come to civ IV. Therefore they couldn't make their scenarios here. And that lessens the quality in general for all the mods of civ IV.
Ergo: There must be easy to use modding tools, even if it lasts a few months more to publish it. Or as a compromise: Release them with a patch, although then I doubt they will come.

Adler

 

[Afforess]

What's this post got to do with anything in this thread? We're talking about modding tools in this thread, not language translators. There is no sense in what your posting now, it appears you're just posting gibberish.

Spanish to English translators? WTH?

There is this thing called an analogy. I believe it's used widely in the literary world.

The OP's claim that modding tools stop the ability of complex mods to be made is a complete fabrication based on the thousands of mods available for the many games with modding tools (for examples see http://www.moddb.com/mods). In a further post when challenged the OP claimed that Spore and Civ3 were conclusive evidence that modding tools destroyed any ability to make complex mods, and when presented with the facts the OP diverted the conversation. ModDB has over 6000 complex high-quality mods made from games with modding tools. I feel this is adequate counter to his 2.

Uh, my mod is in Moddb, and I used no modding tools (unless you want to debate the notepad++ is a tool, in which case, you are grasping at straws). So you can't claim that all the mods there were made with tools.

The OP also claimed that developers don't waste the time or money on developing modding tools. This was countered with facts ranging from the many games coming out with modding tools (which is becoming a "norm" for some genres) and tried to brush aside other facts such as modding tools are developed by companies to help them fill the game so it's a tiny time and money investment to extend them to the public. There were other facts presented that the OP didn't respond to.

Remember Yakk's Response to this, about how long it takes, and how much QA there is for such tools? The difference between dev's tool and the tools the people on this forum want to see are huge. Dev's tools are often buggy, incomplete, and use programming language terms; it would be incomprehensible to most people here.

It is my belief that the OP's actual concern is that with exposure to modding for everyone that mod's will become lost in the general "noise" (to use the OP's term). I believe the OP fears their mods not gaining them the adoration, recognition and 'pat on the back' that some modders crave. Well, if your mod is good enough, it will always be known.

So I'm a narcissist? Is that all you've got, ad hominem attacks?

I honestly don't think there is anything left to say in this thread.

I've got something to say: You are wrong.

 

[Yakk]

Gah, you think you are done, and they pull you back in.

If what you mean by "polished modding tools" is "about:config" (and I mean about:config, not "about config with a bunch of new magic toys attached, like help text saying what each option does, validation that your changes won't break the browser, etc), then yes, a bog-stupid XML editor is a "polished modding tool".

Modding civ4 with a bog-standard stupid XML editor is not much easier than doing it with notepad. The hard parts (validation) has to be done in the separate "compilation" step (well, run civ4 on the mod), you have to manually deal with the XML files (and put them in the right spot), you have to manually link technologies and units and civilisations and the like. You have to know what the tags do.

About the only thing about:config does is prevent you from breaking the config option file format.

And we have actual individuals who have modded civ4 who, when presented with about:config, recoil in horror.

But if that is your standard of "modding tool", then sure, they should ship civ4 with a schema-reading bog-standard XML editor. And maybe a "create new mod" that does the equivalent of copying the assets directory into a new mod directory (well, hopefully they are going to embrace modular loading of mods, which would mean that the bog-standard XML editor would have to be enhanced by knowing how to follow the modular mod "fallback loading" and creation. Ie, it would do diffs on what you want the units.xml file to look like with the standard units.xml, then output the modular_units.xml with only the changes in it).

Would that really be "oh my, all of a sudden I can mod"? Would that be "oh my, an amazingly polished interface"?

Because when I talk about a polished interface, I'm not talking about that.

A polished interface would let you create units, stuff them into libraries, pick and choose them, edit their stats, look at them as they would appear in game, let you work on them on a 'conceptual' level and not on a 'obscure XML tags' level.

Civopedia, for example, is a marginally polished UI interface to the rules of Civ4. If you had a civopedia where you could edit unit stats, or create units (and techs, etc) with drag-and-drop, and no matter what you did the result was a legal mod of civ, that would be a polished method of making a Civ4 mod.

But all you are talking about is "ship an XML editor with civ4?"

 

[LDiCesare]

I don't think you played many Civ 3 scenarios, did you? You then would say something different. Yes, you have more possibilities with Civ 4. Yes, there are good mods for both. Agreed. My point was and is, that with the limited abilities of people in programming many outstanding scenario creators were forced to leave Civ IV aside. That's why they couldn't come to civ IV. Therefore they couldn't make their scenarios here. And that lessens the quality in general for all the mods of civ IV.
Ergo: There must be easy to use modding tools, even if it lasts a few months more to publish it. Or as a compromise: Release them with a patch, although then I doubt they will come.

Adler

I didn't played civ3 very much because I think the game is bad. Much worse than civ2 in fact. Civ 2 had about 0 modding tools and had great mods though. I understand and can agree with the statement you make in the above quoted post. I just disagree with the "futile' statement (or wording) in your earlier post.
As for their being "forced" aside, I'd disagree. People who want can learn. If they're clever enough to make good mods, they're clever enough to mod xml or change basic python functions. They just didn't care enough for it.

 

[Dale]

So I'm a narcissist? Is that all you've got, ad hominem attacks?

Ad hominem circumstantial to be exact. Your argument is biased due to your fear of losing mod recognition.

 

[Afforess]

Ad hominem circumstantial to be exact. Your argument is biased due to your fear of losing mod recognition.

Then you will realize that ad hominem attacks are completely false:

1. Afforess claims Modding tools will ruin Civ5 modding
2. Dale points out Afforess is narcissistic
3. Therefore modding tools won't ruin Civ5 Modding

Logically, your claim does not follow.

And I'm not even denying the narcissistic jab.

 

[Dale]

You obviously don't understand ad hominem then.

1. Afforess claims modding tools will ruin Civ5 modding.
2. Dale points out that Afforess's claim is based on Afforess's fear of losing modding recognition.

My point is based on circumstantial evidence that you are narcissistic and that has caused the belief in your claim. But since you now admit to being narcissistic, that means my point is no longer ad hominem, but rather FACT.

You sir, have been proven to be fighting against the average person being able to submit mods, so that your own perceived glory can be furthered. That is an extremely selfish and disgusting position.

I will no longer participate in your arguments.

 

[deanej]

If the choice is between the average person modding and better, higher quality mods, I'll take the latter. While I would like to have both, I don't think it's really possible; one side will win and the other will lose, even if only by a little. Even if we have the editor and the power, what if by using the power you have to break the editor? IMO that's very unprofessional and unpolished.