Would a Mods On Choice Benefit BoS

[6./ZG26_5tuka 1863]

I know it's a dead horse but anything that messes with FMs is not a mod but a hack and (technicly) possible even without mod support.

 

DCS stands as a good example of online mod compatebility.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[Mikey 28]

Mods can sometimes make or break a game. CLOD for example I wouldnt play without Team Fusion mod. Arma series, Subsims all of them I play with mods...this game really needs mods on mode

[Trooper117 2580]

RoF wasn't ruined because of the 'mods on' mode... in fact it made the game far more enjoyable.

There is no reason that BoS/BoM would be any different.

[GunnyHighway 32]

My experience of 20 something years of gaming, is that in relation to Multiplayers; when mods come in , cheating and hacks come in unfortunately!  

[TG-55Panthercules 551]

My experience of 20 something years of gaming, is that in relation to Multiplayers; when mods come in , cheating and hacks come in unfortunately!  

 

Has that been your experience with RoF?  RoF has had its Mods On/Off modes for a few years now, and I haven't really seen any evidence (personally or from monitoring the forums) of a cheating/hacking problem in MP for RoF.  (Of course, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, so I certainly can't say for sure that it's not happening in RoF, but if it is it's certainly happening very quietly).

[SharpeXB 1067]

Yes RoF has a Mods On and Off mode. But almost nobody uses the Mods online. Either that's because if the belief that Mods on the server would lead to cheating or more likely that it's just too difficult to get players all using the same mods.

[Pavulon 2]

My experience of 20 something years of gaming, is that in relation to Multiplayers; when mods come in , cheating and hacks come in unfortunately!  

But many of us- flight-simmers grow up and now we play for fun, not for stupid frags or other shitty things.  Look at Arma 3 where community make some mods for better gameplay, graphics, etc.

 

+1 for MODS

Edited December 12, 2015 by [16VTFS]Pavulon

[GunnyHighway 32]

Did not know my experience would be so controversial.

 

I love mods, it doubled the life time of Silent hunter III (i played that game for at least 800 hours with and without mods), Steel Fury Karkhov 1942, Operation Flashpoint which is the father of Arma.

 

But in the vast majority of my experience, as soon as a game is MP some moders investing time in breaking down the codes to bring improvement to the game, will find shortcuts. Some to make money, some others to show off  their superior skills to other moders and/or  wanting to appear friendly to a fan base of lazy gamers who love to play sims in Arcade mods, they will deliver and/or sale cheats. It is a Narcissistic traits.

 

What can I say, it is only my experience, some other people might have a different experience, we don't all look for the same things in gaming sims. 

 

My view is that all the mods must be made by 1C, copyrighted by 1C, and will be sold by 1C.

 

Hence, they will be compatible, well maintained and certainly well done.

 

And won't be made by some individual with a personal agenda.

Edited December 13, 2015 by GunnyHighway

[Ace_Pilto 393]

I would say it adds nothing but another obstacle. Just use checksums and let the server and the client be compatible like in every other game.

[6./ZG26_5tuka 1863]

I would say it adds nothing but another obstacle. Just use checksums and let the server and the client be compatible like in every other game.

Mods can be a great addition to a game if handled right. BoS is crying for mods due to limited (or not 100% appreciated) content. We already have custom missions and skins, which is nice, but sill not quite enought to be worth called a "mod support".

 

Just take a look at DCS for that matter. They've a real bnch of mods that are fully MP compatible and I've yet to see sby abusing mods. I'm talking about sound mods, graphic mods, new terrains, flyable Ai aircraft and other cool stuffs like interactive aircraft carriers. I've probably spend more time modding DCS than actually flying because it's great fun.

 

Think I don't even need to point at the Arma series, which is a great example since Bohemia in contrast to 777 actively supports mod content.

Edited December 13, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[GunnyHighway 32]

 

 

Think I don't even need to point at the Arma series, which is a great example since Bohemia in contrast to 777 actively supports mod content.

Arma support mods because it has been a showcase and a marketing tool to sell VBS 1,2 and 3 to different countries. Different countries = different mods; different uniforms, different weapons, different vehicles etc...new markets and more profits.  Besides, you can't make all the mods you want in Arma 3. If I wanted to make a mod for a midget submarine to pass drugs or terrorists between 2 countries with a common sea with accurate coast line depiction, accurate border police patrol schedule, coast guard patrol schedule, etc... and accurate underwater maps, i would find myself in hot, hot water.

 

Now they don't care when you make a mod with Zombies for X-Box kiddies, or race motorbike or go-carts!

 

Moreover, I don't think that 1C wants to sale its sim to modern armies to train their troops on WWII technologies.

 

Let's compare what is comparable.  

[6./ZG26_5tuka 1863]

That has very little to do with what I wrote. Mods have no connection to external foundings by military at all, infct in both cases (ED + Bohemia) they're even seperate products.

 

To not go too far off topic it's perfectly well able to manage mods in a MP game and still keep an even and fair playground. Again if not dozens of graphic, sound and map mods had been developed for DCS 1.2 it probably had only carried half it's popularity on to 1.5.

 

While not expecting an as open approach as ED regarding mods a bit moer transparency would be nice. Who wouldn't like the possibility to customize his cockpit or to have nice sound mods enhencing the imersion? They're no gamebrakers at all.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[Ace_Pilto 393]

Sorry, I took this topic to mean "Would a mods on mode like in RoF benefit the game?" and not "Are mods good".

 

For the former, no it's cumbersome and pointless. For the latter, yes mods can be a great way of getting things done but they have a lot of drawbacks to. I don't see that Il-2 really need mods except for some AI tweaking and an alternative campaign built into the UI instead of in a third party app.

 

What have mods added in the past?

 

Better graphics? We have great graphics

Better sounds? We have great sounds.

FM tweaks? Ok but this creates a huge division in opinion.

More flyables and maps? That's going to be impossible given the business model.

User made missions and campaigns that rely upon user made flyables and maps? Again, impossible.

A few cosmetic improvements like cows in fields of unique buildings or a different loading screen? Very nice when done well but, so what?

 

We're better off trying to convince the people in charge that they ought to build a quality game into their lovely flight sim engine rather than taking the DiY route here. New Il-2 isn't set up for mods like old Il-2 was.

[6./ZG26_5tuka 1863]

What have mods added in the past?

 

Better graphics? We have great graphics

Better sounds? We have great sounds.

FM tweaks? Ok but this creates a huge division in opinion.

More flyables and maps? That's going to be impossible given the business model.

User made missions and campaigns that rely upon user made flyables and maps? Again, impossible.

A few cosmetic improvements like cows in fields of unique buildings or a different loading screen? Very nice when done well but, so what?

1. Your opinion. Look at SweetFX and how many people appreciate it (note SweetFX is no mod)

2. Again your opinion.

3. Not possibel, even with mods, since FMs are hardcoded. If you hack your game and change the FM you prossibly won't get into any online session since the server syncronising everything won't even read your "modded" files but crash your game.

4. Impossible? We have a Ju 52 ai only with great external model and a working FM. That would be a very interesting flyable mod plane for future.

5. Depends. Mission designers and movie makers might think very different than you.

 

So what do we conclude from that? Mods are not suited for everybody. You know what's great about mods? They're 100% optional, they don't harm anybody (unless illegal) and they can enhence the game without occupying valuable dev time.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[DD_Arthur 2747]

 

So what do we conclude from that? Mods are not suited for everybody. You know what's great about mods? They're 100% optional, they don't harm anybody (unless illegal) and they can enhence the game without occupying valuable dev time.

 

Agree completely.  The mods off/mods on system that RoF has works very well indeed.

 

For peoples info;  original IL2 1946 was never "set up" for mods.  They came about due to a sound hack that opened up the whole game to abuse and split the flight sim community at the time.

 

In the end 1946 survived the experience but along the way "mods" gave us some truly horrible franken planes and a choice of around four different non-compatible versions of the game too.  

[VA_SOLIDKREATE 2226]

I would like to see an official community MOD's pack just like how DCS does. A user submits the team verifies that it is of the same quality and no hacks exist.

[[Pb]Cybermat47 1515]

In the end 1946 survived the experience but along the way "mods" gave us some truly horrible franken planes and a choice of around four different non-compatible versions of the game too.

 

But you can have multiple installs of 1946 on one PC, making the compatibility issue null and void.

[TP_Jacko 83]

I have not experienced the ROF mods but voted no based on my experiences from 1946. The problem for me is it will fragment the MP servers into the haves and have nots. If its a good feature it shoukd be built into the game for all.

[Dakpilot 2182]

A number of mods for RoF were incorporated into the game, much like Velkie Luki Map for BoS

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Feathered_IV 6967]

I don't think I've ever seen a community poll being so close to unanimous.  I hope the developers will eventually see the benefits of having an RoF style mods-on mode.

[1./JG54_Uwe 343]

I think the unlocks poll was close lol!

[FuriousMeow 1079]

I don't think I've ever seen a community poll being so close to unanimous.  I hope the developers will eventually see the benefits of having an RoF style mods-on mode.

 

Sure, but it's also only 1% of the people who bought BoS/BoM so if anything that shows how very little it is wanted.

Edited March 24, 2016 by FuriousMeow

[GunnyHighway 32]

Mods take away business from the creators of the game. And that is the reason why mods are authorized most of the times for games which are considered dead in the water by the creators; this one is not dead in the water. Yet you are openly saying that the game you purchased is not that good and needs to be improved, then that the creator of the game are not good enough to improve it and to let you improve it as you know better. You add insult to injury.

 

[Edited]

Edited March 29, 2016 by Bearcat

[216th_LuseKofte 3701]

Mods in IL 2 is the only surviving community in that game. It is mods that keep it alive and it is people mod haters loved to hate ref: TD that patches the game. Same for COD . If it weren't for modders there would be no combat flight sim community for 777 to serve. There are ways to prevent cheaters into a server. 

I am all for a free modder community in this game, I think they would positively surprise many

[SCG_Space_Ghost 1965]

Sure, but it's also only 1% of the people who bought BoS/BoM so if anything that shows how very little it is wanted.

 

That's a pretty dim way to look at it considering that the majority of the consumer base doesn't participate on the forums and you're assuming that that 95% of the consumer base doesn't want something when the participating forum members who think mods are a good idea are a pretty large majority.

 

I can't help but feel that if this untapped playerbase were to join these forums we'd see 90% of them voting for mods-on as well.

Mods take away business from the creators of the game. And that is the reason why mods are authorized most of the times for games which are considered dead in the water by the creators; this one is not dead in the water. Yet you are openly saying that the game you purchased is not that good and needs to be improved, then that the creator of the game are not good enough to improve it and to let you improve it as you know better. You add insult to injury.

 

Create your own game and stop whining, no one will blame you for it. 

 

Yeah, I can hardly imagine how badly the ROF poppy field mod bit in to their bottom line.

 

Not.

 

Accept the fact that millage may vary - stop whining, I won't complain about it.

[FuriousMeow 1079]

That's a pretty dim way to look at it considering that the majority of the consumer base doesn't participate on the forums and you're assuming that that 95% of the consumer base doesn't want something when the participating forum members who think mods are a good idea are a pretty large majority.

 

I can't help but feel that if this untapped playerbase were to join these forums we'd see 90% of them voting for mods-on as well.

 

How are these "95% of the consumer base" going to find these mods? Not through multi-player, that's still not a very large percentage. It has to be through the forums, so if they aren't here to say "I want mods!" then the only evidence is this thread as to who and how many want mods - and that evidence is very clear, they aren't here to even find out about mods or seek it out so they don't care about them.

 

Mods are actually a niche, despite the vocal players that swear by them. Many use vanilla games, they may get a fully package mod when everything is put together into something (like the HSFX of the old Il-2 series, or Extreme Graphics mod for STALKER CoP) when the game is finished being developed and they want to expand on what is there. The majority of mods have always come out when the development of the game has ceased to exist. There weren't mods during the entire Il-2 series - the joint dev and approved modellers to create 3D models was not modding as it was official - the mods only showed up when development stopped. While development is continuing, mods are not something most care about. It's only when there is no more development that some may begin to look into additional content.

 

The devs already did mods with RoF, and it wasn't that highly used.

 

Plus, not only do mods actually hurt the development of the current game while it is still being developed - by interfering with planned development of items - but it also slows development because the developers now have to look at these externally built models and see how they work in game. It isn't just looking at the object and going "okay, it works - approved!" They actually have to check the entire model out and ensure there aren't any problems with it that aren't apparent in 5 seconds of launching the game, there's more work for the developers to do in order to ensure full compatibility and that the model won't cause a huge slowdown when viewed from a certain angle with two or three of them in close proximity. So this digs into development of further official content, which most would actually rather have than 3rd party modellers gaining experience with the process and adding in some ground objects.

 

The majority of users don't even touch mods until the developers are no longer developing the title, or it is a single player game like Fallout and has been played through already so some want fresh content. The development hasn't stopped, and that's when mods actually matter. The entire Il-2 series did not get mods until the sound hack. Older flight sims had mods made for them when development ceased. Development is still ongoing with BoS/BoM.

 

But beyond that, unless at least half of the player base is on the forum asking for mods then there isn't any indication from the very few in this poll that anyone cares for them - because they actually have to get on these forums to even find out about the mods available. So, if 1% is asking then that is only 1% and nothing more.

Edited March 25, 2016 by FuriousMeow

[216th_LuseKofte 3701]

IL2 Mods had little to none effect until 408 patch. Hy days was 4.09, 8 - 9 years after first release of the game. So you are correct. I haven't missed mods yet in this game for the very same reasons you mention . 

But I would not lock that coffin, it might be a mod that finally make the JU 52 a cockpit . It free a lot of work from the developers. But you will also get a paranoia about cheating. We have seen that pop up in this forum already.

However, there is not a need to start a war about this, we will not see mods yet in this game if ever

[SCG_Space_Ghost 1965]

How are these "95% of the consumer base" going to find these mods? Not through multi-player, that's still not a very large percentage. It has to be through the forums, so if they aren't here to say "I want mods!" then the only evidence is this thread as to who and how many want mods - and that evidence is very clear, they aren't here to even find out about mods or seek it out so they don't care about them.

 

Mods are actually a niche, despite the vocal players that swear by them. Many use vanilla games, they may get a fully package mod when everything is put together into something (like the HSFX of the old Il-2 series, or Extreme Graphics mod for STALKER CoP) when the game is finished being developed and they want to expand on what is there. The majority of mods have always come out when the development of the game has ceased to exist. There weren't mods during the entire Il-2 series - the joint dev and approved modellers to create 3D models was not modding as it was official - the mods only showed up when development stopped. While development is continuing, mods are not something most care about. It's only when there is no more development that some may begin to look into additional content.

 

The devs already did mods with RoF, and it wasn't that highly used.

 

Plus, not only do mods actually hurt the development of the current game while it is still being developed - by interfering with planned development of items - but it also slows development because the developers now have to look at these externally built models and see how they work in game. It isn't just looking at the object and going "okay, it works - approved!" They actually have to check the entire model out and ensure there aren't any problems with it that aren't apparent in 5 seconds of launching the game, there's more work for the developers to do in order to ensure full compatibility and that the model won't cause a huge slowdown when viewed from a certain angle with two or three of them in close proximity. So this digs into development of further official content, which most would actually rather have than 3rd party modellers gaining experience with the process and adding in some ground objects.

 

The majority of users don't even touch mods until the developers are no longer developing the title, or it is a single player game like Fallout and has been played through already so some want fresh content. The development hasn't stopped, and that's when mods actually matter. The entire Il-2 series did not get mods until the sound hack. Older flight sims had mods made for them when development ceased. Development is still ongoing with BoS/BoM.

 

But beyond that, unless at least half of the player base is on the forum asking for mods then there isn't any indication from the very few in this poll that anyone cares for them - because they actually have to get on these forums to even find out about the mods available. So, if 1% is asking then that is only 1% and nothing more.

 

Sure and ten times the number of people evidently disagree with your sentiment. 

[Mysticpuma 1231]

Options are always better.

Completely agree

[DD_Arthur 2747]

 

 

The devs already did mods with RoF, and it wasn't that highly used.

 

Plus, not only do mods actually hurt the development of the current game while it is still being developed - by interfering with planned development of items - but it also slows development because the developers now have to look at these externally built models and see how they work in game. It isn't just looking at the object and going "okay, it works - approved!" They actually have to check the entire model out and ensure there aren't any problems with it that aren't apparent in 5 seconds of launching the game, there's more work for the developers to do in order to ensure full compatibility and that the model won't cause a huge slowdown when viewed from a certain angle with two or three of them in close proximity. So this digs into development of further official content, which most would actually rather have than 3rd party modellers gaining experience with the process and adding in some ground objects.

 

I'm not too sure how you can have any idea of how much use mods are put to in RoF and the rest of the paragraph I'm quoting is frankly irrelevant to the mods on/mods off mode that the Digital Nature engine is capable of. 

[6./ZG26_5tuka 1863]

Not to mention the Ilya Morumets, which also was a mod and "interferred" so much with 777s "development of items" that hey actualy payed for the model and integrated it into the game as an expansion bringing in moer money for the company.

 

Yea, modding can be so bad.

[Feathered_IV 6967]

Modding helps personalise the game and cure all those little niggles that pop up in the Dev's question and answer thread and get the response " Sorry, no time."

 

I'd put my efforts into improving the campaign briefings, replace the Action Point label, improve the 109's cockpit floor texture, change the prompting for the repetitive radio calls and maybe put in some nicer default skins while I'm at it.

 

Nothing earth shattering or of a threat to the company, but it would dramatically improve my singleplayer experience.

[GunnyHighway 32]

It seems that so many are afraid to be "WRONG" in public.

[SCG_Space_Ghost 1965]

It seems that so many are afraid to be "WRONG" in public.

 

Yeah, there are a couple of you in the thread who can't take the 10:1 ratio above in stride.

[Feathered_IV 6967]

It seems that so many are afraid to be "WRONG" in public.

 

You could probably change that to, "It seems that so many are not afraid to be "WRONG" in public." for better dramatic effect.  That's a bit of modding for you. 

[SharpeXB 1067]

I have no problem accepting the evident: 274 vs 29 is a pretty resounding majority.

 

There are 78,939 members on this forum and only 303 of them have bothered to respond to this poll. That doesn't look like any sort of resounding majority.

Forum polls have irrelevantly small sample sizes and aren't true random surveys. So the results are unfortunately meaningless.

Edited March 29, 2016 by SharpeXB

[unreasonable 3161]

There are 78,939 members on this forum and only 303 of them have bothered to respond to this poll. That doesn't look like any sort of resounding majority.

Forum polls have irrelevantly small sample sizes and aren't true random surveys. So the results are unfortunately meaningless.

 

They are no more meaningless as representations of the opinion of the player base than any other statements made in the forum, for exactly the same reasons. And yet, the developers asked the community to give feedback and have themselves said that this is valuable.

 

Forum polls are not supposed to be random - they are obviously a method of testing the opinion of that self-selected minority of game players who are motivated enthusiasts. The question for the developers is whether giving that segment of the player base what they want is beneficial overall. Given that such motivated enthusiasts tend to have a disproportionately large effect on the public perception of games I would have thought that the answer is generally yes, if the resources required are not too great.

 

In this case, we are simply asking for what was already available in RoF, which has never led to the sky falling with an epidemic of cheating and revenue stealing add-ons, as some scare-mongers predict here.

[Dakpilot 2182]

Only just over double the amount of people voted in the 'Unlocks' poll, which was a much more significant issue to members in general

 

Polls can only ever show a trend

 

Perhaps the Poll should have been "Would a RoF style Mods on mode harm BoS"

 

I don't believe there is really any evidence to say it did any harm to RoF,  (from a player perspective) it certainly did add to the community and many of the Mods after widespread user acceptance "quality control?" were integrated into the base game and benefitted everyone

 

The ONLY possible downside (again player perspective)  is fragmenting servers, which did not really happen in RoF, but there is evidence of that  historically in old IL-2...easy compromise MODS ON only in SP, or private servers

 

Only the dev's know how much time/manpower was required to manage/implement this feature and if/how much it would impact workflow on BoM etc, also the amount of updates in BoS has been much greater and would impact mods in much the way patches effect mods in old IL-2, this is a big difference between BoS and RoF

 

Many people are frustrated by the seeming/perceived  inflexibility of the Dev's, but they seem to work to a very strict plan, that has so far seen updates and new expansion added at a rate unrivaled by anything I have seen in CFS genre for many years, there appear to be more benefits to this management approach than downsides

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[SharpeXB 1067]

Having mods available would increase the number of support tickets for 1CGS. Yes they aren't obliged to provide help for 3rd party mods and programs but they'll still get the tickets. They probably get enough of these already.

They are no more meaningless as representations of the opinion of the player base than any other statements made in the forum, for exactly the same reasons. And yet, the developers asked the community to give feedback and have themselves said that this is valuable.

 

Sure. The Forum is really the only way for the developer to get feedback. But you have to take the participation statistics into account when reading the posts. Of the 78,939 members, only about 4,500 have even made a single post. So what you see on a forum are from a minuscule fraction of the players.

 

The players who frequent the forum and vote on these polls are enthusiasts and probably aren't representative of the typical player. There's another poll here indicating 37% of players have muliple screen setups. How valid do you think that statistic is?

Edited March 29, 2016 by SharpeXB

[SCG_Space_Ghost 1965]

There are 78,939 members on this forum and only 303 of them have bothered to respond to this poll. That doesn't look like any sort of resounding majority.

Forum polls have irrelevantly small sample sizes and aren't true random surveys. So the results are unfortunately meaningless.

 

Considering that that 303 is the observable demographic, yes, 274 vs 29 is a resounding majority based on the participatory sample.