Jump to content
BeerHunter

Won't modding turn Squad into an ArmA3 nightmare?

Recommended Posts

To say Mods to Squad will become a nightmare is blasphemy....LOL just remember where squad came from project reality, which was BF2 mod, sure there will be a lot of bad mods, but you only choose what you find good to play,

and without doubt there will be some very talented people out there, that will bring some fantastic mods to squad! cant wait to see what they conjure up, happy days¬¬!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it will. The only thing that's holding me back from buying this game are mods. I don't want to spend my money on it, and when I click on the server browser (on final release) see nothing but a few un-modded servers. Also, I don't want to see e.g. 10.000 people playing this game and only 1.000 or 2.000 playing without mods. That would be a disaster for this game's core, pure gameplay. Without mods; everyone will play the game as it is meant to be and have a lot of fun. With mods; everyone will have to download 60GBs of mods to join 1 server and if that server's full repeat the whole process to join another one, plus the community will be divided and we will lose the vanilla experience. Finally, I don't understand the point of clothes, sounds, weapon mods. Wouldn't the devs do a great job with those things when release date comes?

Thank god someone understands  ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Ureal being free for developers and only paying them a percentage of sales over a certain number, mods should not be nescessary in every case because a mod team should or could just make their plans or game using the engine alone without need to mod another game. Unless the engine doesnt have everything a modder would need to implement their game add ons or stand alone game features.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Ureal being free for developers and only paying them a percentage of sales over a certain number, mods should not be nescessary in every case because a mod team should or could just make their plans or game using the engine alone without need to mod another game. Unless the engine doesnt have everything a modder would need to implement their game add ons or stand alone game features.

 

I personally find it much more fun and appealing to mod for a game I truly enjoy than attempting to make my own. I don't think people are going to say "lets make our own game" just because UE4 is free. I'm sure you know that it's not that simple or easy! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm reading it wrong , but one of the most frustrating things about playing ArmA3 online are all the various mods required to join different  servers.

 

If players are allowed to create mods for Squad , won't it make it difficult to find a server to play on without having to download and install all the various mods required to join that server?

Could not agree more. I know I won't change anybody's mind but the most successful mods we see today, and which are used as an argument for modding support, are counter-strike, team-fortress, project reality etc.

 

These are mods that spawned in a different era of gaming. Back then not everyone had access to modding tools, not every kid with 6 hours of spare time started to design their own character skins etc. Hacking, like computer technology, was not so wide-spread and common as it is today--it's nothing uncommon to see ~10 year olds cheating in online games nowaday. Tell me, in 2004 how common was that? How many relatively cheap programs in tutorials for modding were there on Steam back then? These are all mods that have since adopted the standard development process of a team being behind it and providing official content that EVERYONE can enjoy on the same level.

 

Also Project Reality was a mod. It modified a base game to fill a niche in gaming. It's what it did best and it did it successfully. That is why we have Squad today. What need is there to enable modding in Squad further?

ArmA 3, as OP pointed out, is a mess when it comes to modding. One needs to install third party programs and use them, fix a myriad of issues that arise, download many different mods with questionable quality and more. And for what? So that each person gets to feel like a special snowflake with his special little hat that requires others to download the textures? 

 

Whatever happened to demanding from the developer to make a game most, if not everybody, could enjoy? It's quite paradoxical if you ask me: people whine about developers letting down and at the same time they demand modding so that developers actually don't really need to keep up a standard. 

 

Furthermore, what happens to cheating when modding is enabled? This I am not sure, but doesn't modding, having client-side stuff, increase the chances of people cheating? See above.

 

Single player games? Sure, mod them. Mod Multiplayer support in them if you can. Multiplayer games? It needs to be a level playing field.

 

And the whole Fair-fight and VAC vs. VAC only poll? As I understand even though Fair-fight has been dropped having the first option would greatly increase hacking security for VANILLA servers, and modders get to have VAC anyway. People still voted for VAC only accross the board? How incredibly narrow-sighted is that?! Go mod your own game for christ's sake, you're concerned about YOUR OWN enjoyment after all.

 

I am against modding in MP games. I hope modding support for this game comes last and that by that time I will have exhausted my fun with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do not have to download mods if you don't want to mate, it's not forced, I do think however Squad should make the difference compared to Arma 3 and physically separate the server browsers for modded servers and original servers, and this should be done from the menu, not by a filter.

 

If Squad does the same as Arma 3 and has workshop based mod's this will help further the system.

 

One of the biggest factors which helps Arma as a series stay on top is the modding factor, people can diverge to their own idea of what Squad should be, sure this doesn't help if they bring out a sequel but it does substantially increase its life.

Yeah, "nobody is forcing you to".

 

But then I could use the same argument someone above made FOR the mods: after a year I will be left with empty servers for the actual game that I purchased and I'll have about a hundred different versions of Squad Life servers to choose from. What if I like the current assets, that I bought to use, and I don't want to play on a server with somebody's local favorite special ops group texture pack and map. I think you're all forgetting that with that one great mod there's about a million shit mods, and they ALL segregate the community. What about people with slow internet connections? And the ones who are not well versed in computers and can't set up their mods?

 

As if free will or something is an argument for anything here, like you could say "you don't HAVE to have fancy clothes for the ball everyone else is going to. So you can't afford them; nobody is FORCING you to go there so you could stay at home". Try saying that to your daughter come graduation. It's not as simple.

 

The base game needs to deliver. If you're into "to each his own" that much, then why don't you let the free market provide instead. Right? "Oh but the price isn't too high because the developers must feed their families too!" Exactly! Make people make games that you will want to pay for to play and in turn they will make quality games that they want you to PAY FOR to play.

 

@ghostfool pointed out on the first page that ArmA 3 is succesful because of the mods ("I know its a long way to go, but hopefully you do really seperate the servers that use Mods. Arma may be on top, but only because the most people like to play non arma games with the arma engine like altis life or whatever. "), as did you, but what about the homogenity of the community? I mean hell, how many people play roleplay servers there? Altis life, Stratis life, zombie mods, tactical mods, hunger games adaptations, wasteland... the list goes on. And in the end I cannot even find a populated vanilla asset server. I like the damn vanilla game; it's what I purchased! If anything can be said about ArmA it is that it has always been a template for the player base from Skyrim and Garry's Mod etc to mess about in. It's literally a sandbox if you ask me. But is that what you want in a game like PR? PR is what it is BECAUSE it's not like ArmA. Exactly because it is a structured environment that is easier to get into.

 

Question: does PR have a modding community or is there a team that is developing PR and releases official patches, and then most of the people play that? If that's the case it begs the question, what good will modding in Squad do or rather, why are people insisting in pointing out that "PR was also a mod" when they bought this game to play PR and we have the same structure right now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, "nobody is forcing you to".

But then I could use the same argument someone above made FOR the mods: after a year I will be left with empty servers for the actual game that I purchased and I'll have about a hundred different versions of Squad Life servers to choose from. What if I like the current assets, that I bought to use, and I don't want to play on a server with somebody's local favorite special ops group texture pack and map. I think you're all forgetting that with that one great mod there's about a million shit mods, and they ALL segregate the community. What about people with slow internet connections? And the ones who are not well versed in computers and can't set up their mods?

As if free will or something is an argument for anything here, like you could say "you don't HAVE to have fancy clothes for the ball everyone else is going to. So you can't afford them; nobody is FORCING you to go there so you could stay at home". Try saying that to your daughter come graduation. It's not as simple.

The base game needs to deliver. If you're into "to each his own" that much, then why don't you let the free market provide instead. Right? "Oh but the price isn't too high because the developers must feed their families too!" Exactly! Make people make games that you will want to pay for to play and in turn they will make quality games that they want you to PAY FOR to play.

@ghostfool pointed out on the first page that ArmA 3 is succesful because of the mods ("I know its a long way to go, but hopefully you do really seperate the servers that use Mods. Arma may be on top, but only because the most people like to play non arma games with the arma engine like altis life or whatever. "), as did you, but what about the homogenity of the community? I mean hell, how many people play roleplay servers there? Altis life, Stratis life, zombie mods, tactical mods, hunger games adaptations, wasteland... the list goes on. And in the end I cannot even find a populated vanilla asset server. I like the damn vanilla game; it's what I purchased! If anything can be said about ArmA it is that it has always been a template for the player base from Skyrim and Garry's Mod etc to mess about in. It's literally a sandbox if you ask me. But is that what you want in a game like PR? PR is what it is BECAUSE it's not like ArmA. Exactly because it is a structured environment that is easier to get into.

Question: does PR have a modding community or is there a team that is developing PR and releases official patches, and then most of the people play that? If that's the case it begs the question, what good will modding in Squad do or rather, why are people insisting in pointing out that "PR was also a mod" when they bought this game to play PR and we have the same structure right now?

Your biggest fault with your argument is that arma 3 does not develop a multiplayer game or game modes, they rely on their community to develop the game further beyond their own aspirations of coop and a single player campaign.

Also i know for a fact that King of the hill as a mission is still prevalent in arma 3, so I don't know how you aren't finding servers with base game assets? Unless your being semantic about things.

And comparing mods to your daughters ball or graduation makes no sense, for a start if you purchased the game you have access to everything it has to offer, so mods are free as far as I am concerned.

The ability to install mods and having slow internet connections is not a factor anyone can control, if the masses are okay the one or two people who can't do it will have to find help.

Also you can clearly see that Squad is not a blank slate, otherwise it would not have multiple maps and factions, and it would have some form of implementation of mods.

This means the developers want to develop their game to a certain standard before they allow mods to be implemented, unlike arma 3 or skyrim which had mods within the first few days.

My final point is more of an observation, if the game in a years time is full of life servers rather than the base game then that is the natural progression of a game with mods that is no longer being developed and the base game is no longer interesting to the masses, you need to realise that mods extend the life of a game beyond the life cycle of the devs.

At no cost to the devs (In fact they get more money), the only devs who now don't do mods are those that have games on a conveyor belt churning them yearly, if mods help me to keep my interest while OWI develops squad 2 or w/e else, then to me that is a good compromise on OWI's behalf because they keep me as a customer when development has ceased and allow others to further their own artistic capabilities without any need for a career in game development.

It's a good trade in my opinion.

Oh and to answer your question yes people do mod for PR but because it's free nobody talks money, really easy, involve money and it becomes hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imo the main thing that keeps a game exciting, fun & me wanting to continue to play it is new maps. You can only play a map so many hundred times before you just cant bear to play it again no matter how good of a map it is. The Squad devs have already created awesome weapons & vehicles & a handful of great maps but maps take a long time to create, debug & test to be ready for final release so even if mods aren't implemented, letting the community create & submit new maps too seems like a great way to A: allow the devs to concentrate on all the things they're trying to deal with besides creating new maps B: get a lot of pro-bono work done on the game c: vastly increase the games content/playability/enjoyment. There are some very talented mappers out there who are willing & able to do some of the most tedious work involved in creating new maps free of charge or just a token mention on the forums at least. Obviously there would be a submission for dev approval process before being added to the game but new maps being added more often would increase playability & reduce that "oh god not Muttrah again" feeling. (Obviously using PR as an example here) There are those who will argue that there are already a lot of maps in PR & that's true but only a handful of them are actually rotated on the consistently populated servers because there just aren't that many people who want to play the others. with newer potentially better community created maps coming in for consideration on a regular basis some of the older less popular maps could be "retired" to keep the size of the base game download from becoming like 50 gigs or something ridiculous. Idk how many ppl are actually involved in the visualization, creation & final approval/denial of suggested maps for the game but just imagine the variety & possibilities of the devs having many times that many complete or near completed maps coming in for their approval or improvement & approval (or rejection) on a regular basis. Seems like a win win to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems a lot of people drank the EA koolaid and are convinced that allowing the community to make what they want out of a game is a bad thing. It makes me sad to see people claiming they won't buy the game because mods will be supported. In 4-5 years when Squad isn't shiny and new mods will be a breath of life, many games are still being played years after developer support dropped off thanks to fantastic modding communities. Yes, quality will vary depending on the teams behind the mod, but sorting and joining modded/none modded servers is a valid concern. I'm sure the devs will figure out a nice clean system of organizing vanilla from modded servers, as with all things this early in development patience is key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your biggest fault with your argument is that arma 3 does not develop a multiplayer game or game modes, they rely on their community to develop the game further beyond their own aspirations of coop and a single player campaign.

Also i know for a fact that King of the hill as a mission is still prevalent in arma 3, so I don't know how you aren't finding servers with base game assets? Unless your being semantic about things.

And comparing mods to your daughters ball or graduation makes no sense, for a start if you purchased the game you have access to everything it has to offer, so mods are free as far as I am concerned.

The ability to install mods and having slow internet connections is not a factor anyone can control, if the masses are okay the one or two people who can't do it will have to find help.

Also you can clearly see that Squad is not a blank slate, otherwise it would not have multiple maps and factions, and it would have some form of implementation of mods.

This means the developers want to develop their game to a certain standard before they allow mods to be implemented, unlike arma 3 or skyrim which had mods within the first few days.

My final point is more of an observation, if the game in a years time is full of life servers rather than the base game then that is the natural progression of a game with mods that is no longer being developed and the base game is no longer interesting to the masses, you need to realise that mods extend the life of a game beyond the life cycle of the devs.

At no cost to the devs (In fact they get more money), the only devs who now don't do mods are those that have games on a conveyor belt churning them yearly, if mods help me to keep my interest while OWI develops squad 2 or w/e else, then to me that is a good compromise on OWI's behalf because they keep me as a customer when development has ceased and allow others to further their own artistic capabilities without any need for a career in game development.

It's a good trade in my opinion.

Oh and to answer your question yes people do mod for PR but because it's free nobody talks money, really easy, involve money and it becomes hard.

I can CC about BI saying such a thing. I saw a video from BI stating that they endorse all modding to arma 3. They also turned to Dayz and said Modding time with SA. So its not all that bad off to allow modding. Ark being the biggest one in such a short time. Some quality stuff coming out of it. UE4 engine, i too am learning up on it asap. I just am not totally convinced UE4 is stable with ARK assets.

 

Even if i don't get to add something into a mod for Squad, i will be happy to know the UE4 engine. Better understanding of it. I do like modding err scripting arma 3, and will script dayz when the time comes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should also mention, that UE4 and steam downloaded content can get so frigging stupid with the server updates. Like SteamCMD, but you have to load the assets err mod into client side, activate it then transfer the Mod folder, and the .mod file into the mods directory. When we try to load it, sometimes the assets don't load correctly into the database and cause database damage. I want to show you the fun we can have with ARK just playing around.

Alpha updates can break mods. So i hope that when the time comes we will not be getting daily updates like ARK does. Its fustrating they opened up the Modding too early.

 

Its not FPS but its just something we thought we would try.

 

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/355024907214776551/FDA9590CF3C31D5740D0BB01FEE05264FDB10B38/

 

One of our clan guys, put guards into the castle we built. Here is another cool image.

http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198011423171/screenshots/

 

here is mine of it.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=612162643

 

So you see i know its off topic but let me give you guys some insider, that UE4 is some sweet engine to put mods into. You can design anything you want, enhance your server with SQUAD military assets, and design your own.

Modding a server doesn't mean changing the base damage of weapons so you kill the other team, or super duper scopes.

 

You do not have to white-list that server.

 

What UE4 engine means to me with the combination of the SQUAD assets, is the ability to make brand new content, or more content and the ability to make brand new maps. If you really want to make a WW1, WW2 mod for it. It also means the guys at SQUAD can make new DLC content for us. Which means $$$ to the project.

 

It doesn't always mean it will be stupid content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To say Mods to Squad will become a nightmare is blasphemy....LOL just remember where squad came from project reality, which was BF2 mod, sure there will be a lot of bad mods, but you only choose what you find good to play,

and without doubt there will be some very talented people out there, that will bring some fantastic mods to squad! cant wait to see what they conjure up, happy days¬¬!!

but wont that split the community? some ppl want to play with a gore mod, some want to play with an isis mod, some want to play with suicide vest mod etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really, it depends how much content the vanilla comes with first. Mods will enhance those other servers too.

 

It really depends on the community and what they want. But modding also brings with it new clients, and the more clients we have the more servers we have.

If you want star wars mod and its popular, then it opens up a whole new community. You play it or you don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well if Squad wont support mods than it will just show that the Devs forgot where they came from.

You all just crying "Arm3" and i bet non of you still play because i can still find a shit tons of PvP/PvE server that only needs the base games without ZERO issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who mods a game that's in Alpha? Doesn't seem like this should be a concern yet.  Nobody even knows what the game is going to be like 2 months from now. Much less what it will be like at release. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who mods a game that's in Alpha? Doesn't seem like this should be a concern yet.  Nobody even knows what the game is going to be like 2 months from now. Much less what it will be like at release.

I mean. Arma 3 had mods in alpha. But that's a completely different story. It kind of relies on mods. My mod list is gigantic now, but it was still sizable not long after launch. Interesting to see how A3 has changed its mechanics and stability from then to now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a few years when Squad is fully built and has many vehicles, maps, factions and all that, what is to stop mainstream gamers from 'taking it over'?

 

We like to mention BF2 as a shining example of how modding is great. But, what if the same thing happens to Squad, but in reverse? Instead of taking the casual BF2 game and making PR out of it, what if people take Squad and make BF out of it? I have a feeling it's going to happen at some point.

 

Just look at the training mode for Project Reality, it was so popular that it had to be removed from the mod because too many people started playing it like it was THE game. People liked the instant gratification of dying and spawning 0sec later, or being able to grab 5 attack helicopters and fly in formation, or base raping the crap out of the enemies, or simply having never ending firefights in a little village. It was everything that was great about PR with virtually none of the hassle.

 

My point, is that when you open things up to the majority, you're going to end up with a very casual game. With a free for all modding environment, how long before the players who want a hardcore teamwork focused game, become outnumbered by mainstream casual gamers? Make a mod that adds in casual FPS stuff like 3rd person, instant respawning, mini-map, enemy markers, kill confirmations, health regen, crosshairs, and all that other jazz, and I bet you people would flock to Squad.

 

I'm not expecting the developers to instantly cater to these casuals, but look at what happened to Arma2 and DayZ. Do you think the Arma2 developers expected they would be working on Zombie related stuff? But, money is a big motivator. Their hardcore military simulator took a backseat when DayZ blew up, will the same eventually happen with Squad? I hope not.

 

Also, how productive do you think the forums would be if more people start playing mods than playing the actual vanilla version of Squad? How exactly do we tell them apart if they aren't honest about it?

 

This stuff alone wouldn't really bother me, but the way in which the developers have responded to some issues already has me worried. If they dismiss stuff like blood/gore, suicide vehicles, and unarmed collaborators based on not excluding people, are they going to stick to their guns when it comes to the majority of Squad players demanding more casual features be added? I don't honestly know anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for time periods and such i could personally go afew years without, just look at what squad is and has done so far. With more factions / maps the game will continue to fill new without the need of different time zones such as Vietnam and WW2. If they were to happen i would like to see much much later after the full release of the game but as mandatory updates, not something that someone has to decide to get or not.

 

Agreed. I'm not even all that torn up on new factions. Just make the balance (optics) a little more even. Give me some new maps every few months and I'm probably good to go. I mean as it stands, we already have 3 different game modes (AAS/Skirmish, Insurgency, territory control). I could see something that's the opposite of insurgency, where the US/RUS side needed to defend a location(s) from a terrorist attack or whatnot... but with some updates, tweeking and some new content from time to time, I do not see this getting old soon.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

everyone does know the difference between "Mods" and "AddOns" . . . ?  only reading through here, it seems many are getting confused between the two, which appears to be causing some misinterpretation of peeps ideas/arguments . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's to bad that the mods couldn't just be server side. Kinda like how Cod4 did with its maps. I was a diehard arma 3 player until more and more servers populated with between 2-25 mods. I've played in servers with up to 22 mods, it was neat. But also a buzz kill, wishing the game naturally had these mods. Your friends are like " hey, what server are you in? ". And you respond, it's the 102-11nd Airborne Tactical Crouch milsim serious Hardcore. You just have to download these 17 mods. Their response, " can we just play the game?!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×