Reasons for not pre-ordering

[ezzlar]

Umm... if mods are needed for the game to turn out great, it's unfinished as well, so I don't see why you're singling out Civ VI here?

Well. If a game is great or not is of course matter of opinion. What was good about 4/5 that it was possible for modders to create a lot of custom variety, satisfying different gamers. Civ 6 offers a lot of modding but the most important parts in terms of modding arent really available for customisation.

 

[pokiehl]

Civ 6 offers a lot of modding but the most important parts in terms of modding arent really available for customisation.

I’m a modder for Civ 6 so that’s news to me. What’s missing for Civ 6? The DLL? Not a huge deal at all.

 

[GeneralZIft]

I don't want to compare the games based on their mods. Civ5 and particularly Civ4 have had MANY years to garner highly tuned mods. Civ6 is still fairly new. Moreover, it's not just Civ but every title around the world is losing modability (so I don't blame Civ in this case).

But I mean, more than that, they should stand on their own.

 

[InsidiousMage]

Umm... if mods are needed for the game to turn out great, it's unfinished as well, so I don't see why you're singling out Civ VI here?

But I mean, more than that, they should stand on their own.

As a, mostly, console peasant find the attitude around mods incredibly baffling. While there are some good and cool mods, if you need mods to make a game playable, then you shouldn't be playing that game because it isn't good! A good game should be able to stand on its own without DLC or mods. Those should enhance the experience of playing the game, not making it playable in the first place.

 

[Leyrann]

Well. If a game is great or not is of course matter of opinion. What was good about 4/5 that it was possible for modders to create a lot of custom variety, satisfying different gamers. Civ 6 offers a lot of modding but the most important parts in terms of modding arent really available for customisation.

That's a mistake in your perception, albeit an understandable one.

For Civ IV and V, you could only load a single mod at the time, so content would be consolidated in modpacks. For Civ VI on the other hand, you can load multiple mods at once, so content is far more scattered to allow people to take what they like.

You'll need to download ten or twenty mods instead of just one, but you can overhaul your game just as much as in earlier versions.

 

[Xur]

As a, mostly, console peasant find the attitude around mods incredibly baffling. While there are some good and cool mods, if you need mods to make a game playable, then you shouldn't be playing that game because it isn't good! A good game should be able to stand on its own without DLC or mods. Those should enhance the experience of playing the game, not making it playable in the first place.

Sorry, but that is an incredibly naive statement. Without mods for Warcraft 3, we would never have had DOTA and an entirely new genre called MOBA. DOTA itself spawns new games using it's engine and Valve released a game based on one of those mods. Counterstrike also started as a mod to Half-Life. This is possible because there was good mod support and everyone wins if a game has good mod support. Half-Life and Warcraft 3 were good games even without modding, but modding certainly made them better. Those games that will be remembered forever. What is civ6 going to be remembered for?

I get that it can be hard to understand on a console, because that environment does not add anything of value to the modding community. We (on PC) are always held back by the limitations of consoles. Modders that say that civ6 has great support are probably surface level modders. Sorry for being a bit blunt. Changing textures, models and some values in xml does not change the game in any fun and relevant way - it's just more of the same. You couldn't make a new experience or new gameplay in civ6. Civ6 has poor mod support, but ok surface level mod support.

If a game has great mod support it can keep the game going for decades and introduce new gameplay. It has nothing to do with fixing a game or "standing on its own". Good mod support CAN fix a game, but that was never the intent with modding. Mod support is a feature like any other feature. Modding support is a feature that can be bad or good, and if it's bad like civ6, then I honestly don't care if it's there or not.

I personally find the multiplayer feature of civ games irrelevant and a waste of time. Does that mean I find it baffling that people want multiplayer? Well... no. Some people might even require multiplayer in order to enjoy the game.

Sorry for the rant...

 

[reddishrecue]

When I go online, I use the mods which is where I usually play civilization in and when I do I use the community mods. Many of the mods are already made so there's a few of us that just find the mods as good use depending on what the community improves. Multiplayer is about popular mods and having the most up to dated one also.

 

[UWHabs]

Mods can salvage a game and give it a second life. Like I got back into the Civ 4 Colonization recently partly because it has a few post-lifetime mods that clean up some big parts of it, and have even taken those as a base and tweaked some values myself to get it more like a game I want it to be.

But given that I would expect even the most popular mod is only downloaded by a small fraction of the community, I'd hesitate to call one game better than another because some mod picked up the game and gave it that second life.

For me, my stats are clear - I have 700 hours in civ 5, last played 2016. I have 2500 hours in civ 6. Are there a few pieces of 6 that they could clean up to help it? Sure, always are. But I don't see any bugs that simply make the game unplayable or unfinished. If anyone else has a different opinion, that's fair. I'm sure there's a million things that I hate that others are more than happy with.

 

[ezzlar]

@Leyrann @pokiehl I had some difficulty in taking your posts seriously given all the topics in the civ 6 forum about how the game works. And not works. But I think @xyr summed it up quite well "Modders that say that civ6 has great support are probably surface level modders. Sorry for being a bit blunt. Changing textures, models and some values in xml does not change the game in any fun and relevant way - it's just more of the same. You couldn't make a new experience or new gameplay in civ6. Civ6 has poor mod support, but ok surface level mod support."

 

[pokiehl]

@Leyrann @pokiehl I had some difficulty in taking your posts seriously given all the topics in the civ 6 forum about how the game works.

I'm likewise having difficulty taking your posts about Civ 6 modding seriously, considering you have no experience and don't know what you're talking about.

But I think @xyr summed it up quite well "Modders that say that civ6 has great support are probably surface level modders. Sorry for being a bit blunt.

it's quite rude to denigrate the hard work of Civ 6 modders as "surface level." That's just a viewpoint coming from pure ignorance. There are many, many extremely impressive and popular Civ 6 mods out there. Many people have absolutely "made a new experience or new gameplay" (whatever that means).

Changing textures, models and some values in xml does not change the game in any fun and relevant way - it's just more of the same. You couldn't make a new experience or new gameplay in civ6. Civ6 has poor mod support, but ok surface level mod support."

Again: neither of you have any experience modding the game. How is it that you're speaking so confidently about something that you literally know nothing about?

 

[ezzlar]

So what we have:

Either Civ 6 is very moddable as Pokiehl claims "What’s missing for Civ 6?"
Or Civ 6 is just for surface level modding

Another search for truth on the Internet. Any suggestions on methodological way of proving one or the other?

 

[pokiehl]

So what we have:

Either Civ 6 is very moddable as Pokiehl claims "What’s missing for Civ 6?"
Or Civ 6 is just for surface level modding

Another search for truth on the Internet. Any suggestions on methodological way of proving one or the other?

Feel free to join a Civ 6 modding community and see for yourself. We're a friendly and helpful bunch.

If you'd still prefer a second-hand answer...I know everyone is an expert on the internet, but my suggestion is to not give equal credence to the person with 7 years of experience in the topic vs the person with literally 0 experience who can't answer any specific questions and is only repeating misinformed "common knowledge".

 

[Arcaian]

So what we have:

Either Civ 6 is very moddable as Pokiehl claims "What’s missing for Civ 6?"
Or Civ 6 is just for surface level modding

Another search for truth on the Internet. Any suggestions on methodological way of proving one or the other?

Realistically, there are a handful of modders who are comfortable making .dll mods for the civ series, but .dll access allows them to add new functionality in a way that you cannot if you don't have it. This does mean civ 5 has some areas where you can mod it effectively in a way civ 6 cannot be modded - AI is one which comes to mind; Real Strategy is great, but the small amount of civ 5 mods that were able to use the .dll level modifications were able to re-write the AI; Vox Populi basically re-wrote whole chunks of the AI again, is my understanding. Real Strategy can still use Lua to have more intelligent AI - that allows for additional logic to be added and some existing logic to be changed, but with limitations. In that way, civ 5 is more moddable than civ 6 - however, there are literally a handful of mods that have done this level of .dll work in civ 5's history, at least to my understanding. It took a very long time for most of them to be completed to the standard they're at today, and in general it adds limitations. Limitations in terms of what mods get made using them - they tend to be larger collaborative efforts to share the load of the C++ work - in terms of what level of flexibility the user has - you cannot have two .dll mods active at the same time - and in terms of who can use them - as soon as it's a .dll mod, MacOS and Linux users can't use them (without emulating Windows at least, which is a big barrier for many people). Civ 6 also has a much wider amount of customisation available within the Lua/xml framework than Civ 5 had - at the most obvious level, multiplayer mods work which never used to be the case. I can remember having to manually hex-edit the Civ5 executable and send it to my friends so we could get a few mods working in multiplayer, and that difference is pretty tremendous in Civ 5. In general, fewer things are hard-coded and need the .dll access to change, which is absolutely a change in the right direction for modability. Once can dismiss those modders who aren't making C++ mods with .dll access as "surface level modders", but that's pretty clearly the overwhelming majority of modders, so making the game more accessible at that level is meaningfully an increase in moddability too. Civ 6 is more broadly moddable than Civ 5, but is less deeply moddable than Civ 5; depending on your preferences, one may seem better than the other, but I think it's unfair to say that one is more moddable than the other.

 

[pokiehl]

Realistically, there are a handful of modders who are comfortable making .dll mods for the civ series, but .dll access allows them to add new functionality in a way that you cannot if you don't have it. This does mean civ 5 has some areas where you can mod it effectively in a way civ 6 cannot be modded - AI is one which comes to mind; Real Strategy is great, but the small amount of civ 5 mods that were able to use the .dll level modifications were able to re-write the AI; Vox Populi basically re-wrote whole chunks of the AI again, is my understanding. Real Strategy can still use Lua to have more intelligent AI - that allows for additional logic to be added and some existing logic to be changed, but with limitations. In that way, civ 5 is more moddable than civ 6 - however, there are literally a handful of mods that have done this level of .dll work in civ 5's history, at least to my understanding. It took a very long time for most of them to be completed to the standard they're at today, and in general it adds limitations. Limitations in terms of what mods get made using them - they tend to be larger collaborative efforts to share the load of the C++ work - in terms of what level of flexibility the user has - you cannot have two .dll mods active at the same time - and in terms of who can use them - as soon as it's a .dll mod, MacOS and Linux users can't use them (without emulating Windows at least, which is a big barrier for many people). Civ 6 also has a much wider amount of customisation available within the Lua/xml framework than Civ 5 had - at the most obvious level, multiplayer mods work which never used to be the case. I can remember having to manually hex-edit the Civ5 executable and send it to my friends so we could get a few mods working in multiplayer, and that difference is pretty tremendous in Civ 5. In general, fewer things are hard-coded and need the .dll access to change, which is absolutely a change in the right direction for modability. Once can dismiss those modders who aren't making C++ mods with .dll access as "surface level modders", but that's pretty clearly the overwhelming majority of modders, so making the game more accessible at that level is meaningfully an increase in moddability too. Civ 6 is more broadly moddable than Civ 5, but is less deeply moddable than Civ 5; depending on your preferences, one may seem better than the other, but I think it's unfair to say that one is more moddable than the other.

I think this is a really good summary.

I just want to add on to your point that Civ 6 added so much flexibility in "unhardcoding" way more of the database than Civ 5. As a result, Civ 6 lets modders lean a lot less on Lua, which is great for overall stability, compatibility, and multiplayer functioning as well.

Another thing is that modding art and graphics is in many ways far easier than in Civ 5. Civ 6 provided the asset pantry for nearly all of the DLC, and gives modders a tool to view and manipulate these assets. As a result, we have a ton high-quality natural wonder mods, for instance, like the ones by Sukritact. In Civ 5, I believe it's impossible to add natural wonder graphics.

People are free to have their opinions, but I was compelled to respond to this discussion because of the up-thread denigration of Civ 6 creations as "surface level" and uncreative mods that just "change textures, models and some values in xml."

A lot of really talented modders have put out so much great modded Civ 6 content. Sukritact, Leugi, @Zegangani, Albro, @JNR13, @SeelingCat, and many many others. It's just not cool to wave a hand and dismiss their creativity and hard work without even understanding how Civ 6 modding works. Modders are still pushing the envelope today too and making more discoveries.

 

[Leyrann]

@Leyrann @pokiehl I had some difficulty in taking your posts seriously given all the topics in the civ 6 forum about how the game works. And not works. But I think @xyr summed it up quite well "Modders that say that civ6 has great support are probably surface level modders. Sorry for being a bit blunt. Changing textures, models and some values in xml does not change the game in any fun and relevant way - it's just more of the same. You couldn't make a new experience or new gameplay in civ6. Civ6 has poor mod support, but ok surface level mod support."

Then we can shake hands, because I have a hard time taking your posts seriously, devoid of actual arguments as they are. You can repeat the statement "Civ 6 is only surface level moddable" however much you want, but without arguments backing it up (not to mention disproving the arguments other people, most notably pokiehl, are giving in response to your claims) it doesn't mean anything.

 

[ezzlar]

"Civ 6 is more broadly moddable than Civ 5, but is less deeply moddable than Civ 5; depending on your preferences, one may seem better than the other, but I think it's unfair to say that one is more moddable than the other."

To me, that is my point in the argument.

@pokiehl Your unanswered question? Is that the general "whats missing for Civ 6?" For real? A lot. A lot. If you missed that I am unsure if telling you actually would make a difference. But if so, please tell me. And in that case I could sum up several issues that are unchangable modwise, as far as I know. But then I expect you to point to modwise solutions to these issues. Which I am certain that you wont since experienced modders like Infixo and Gedemon couldnt solve them. Which brings me back to the base case, your statements dont hold.

@Leyrann Pretty much a copy of pokiehl. I give you the same option, would you like me to sum up issues that modders havent been able to solve which you then can point to solutions, please tell me in this thread.

 

[BackseatTyrant]

I don't want to compare the games based on their mods. Civ5 and particularly Civ4 have had MANY years to garner highly tuned mods. Civ6 is still fairly new. Moreover, it's not just Civ but every title around the world is losing modability (so I don't blame Civ in this case).

But I mean, more than that, they should stand on their own.

I would be disappointed, but honestly not surprised if Civ7 outright doesn't have any modding functionality whatsoever, simply because it would come in conflict with online play and/or cross-platform support

 

[pokiehl]

I would be disappointed, but honestly not surprised if Civ7 outright doesn't have any modding functionality whatsoever, simply because it would come in conflict with online play and/or cross-platform support

I get why you wouldn't be surprised, but I sincerely doubt that will be the case. Modding is relatively niche, yes, but Firaxis knows that modding is one of the foundations of the entire genre.

Online multiplayer with mods will be no problem. One of the biggest upgrades to the Civ 6 modding framework is that mods are compatible with online play and extremely easy to set up. You can simply join a friend's lobby and autodownload all their mods. You can also do modded multiplayer across platforms no problem (Windows, Mac, Linux). This wasn't the case with Civ 5 at all.

The console and mobile platforms don't have modding support, but that's to be expected and is pretty standard for games that release on both PC and console.

 

[Leyrann]

@Leyrann Pretty much a copy of pokiehl. I give you the same option, would you like me to sum up issues that modders havent been able to solve which you then can point to solutions, please tell me in this thread.

Yes, please do. It'd be nice to be able to have an actual discussion rather than throwing around empty claims.

 

[Tiberiu]

Sorry, but that is an incredibly naive statement. Without mods for Warcraft 3, we would never have had DOTA and an entirely new genre called MOBA.

A very good point, as a former Warcraft 3 player I'd like to point out that the editor has also produced incredibly popular games and genres, such as Castle Fight, Custom Hero Footies, and many others. Warcraft 3 editor in itself was a fantastic tool, especially considering its time.

Last but not least I think Skibi Tower Defense (which was so amazing that Blizzard bought it to be able to say it was made by them), is certainly one of the best Tower Defense games in existence.