Would Those Who Oppose Paid Modding Have an Issue With it Being Limited to Consoles?

[tartarsauce2]

looks like rusty and I are about on the same *kind of* opinion so I'm happy about that :D

okay, so, ingame style explanation - what if all the vault experiments were to create such different conditions not as a whackjob attempt at mad science but because the people in charge knew they didn't know enough to predict the outcomes, so they changed how vaults worked in different ways so that the diversity of the vault populations would mean that somewhere, at least, some people would survive... like spray and pray, but with different strategies instead of bullets
-----------
one of the things about the paid modding things that I didn't communicate clearly is that I think that all sorts of systems eventually grow too big and then kind of fall apart(just how much or what exactly happens is very different), complex civilizations tend to do this a lot, what I'm worried about is an unmanaged situation where bethesda stretches itself too thin, it gets too rote practiced, too "efficient" but not "dynamic" - it gets old
a LOT of art nowadays, and I consider all forms of fiction to be art basically, are technically well done, but they lack "soul" now I don't think fallout itself does but when I saw the pipboy apps, and vault thing and just how much it was being played up at E3 I started to panic

there's a reason why I was pretty vitriolic at the paid mods thing when it was presented, as it was presented, because at that time, only a solid NO would work, now that it's less of a danger for bad implementation I think it's very important to think about how to make it actually work because I think we're going to get to that point where bethesda ends up like the halo and CoD series (boring same old stuff) and a lot of different quirky things will suffer and fall victim to a milk-toast corporate culture, which usually infests companies that grow big, and bethesda is growing big by buying other companies, not by the "good old days" style of making better games (not that I think fallout 4 isn't better than other games it really really is but it's like, about how much better it is in certain ways that I noticed)
like when you look at games long enough you can start to tell where a company or developer was like "not enough time to make it good just finish it at this and move on" but you can also tell why they did it kind of

and I want to find ways to avert that because I'm tired of having to jump different games just to find that "spark of quality" and that's why I want to see to it that bethesda gets this right, because I think it IS probably going to be the future to an extent, but I want it to be controlled and limited in a way that doesn't destroy what exists now, but adds to it, and some of the stuff that doesn't make sense right away, makes sense when the whole situation is considered, and we talk about it

same friend I talked with on phone last time described (not bethesda's stuff) but the general situation in gaming as it stands as "prettied up bloatware" where everything is the same, everything needs crafting, everything uses the same graphics and physics engine etc etc (or at least close to it and it's obvious)

There is the moral of all human tales;

'Tis but the same rehearsal of the past.

First freedom and then Glory – when that fails,

Wealth, vice, corruption – barbarism at last.

And History, with all her volumes vast,

Hath but one page...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Course_of_Empire

The third painting, The Consummation of Empire, shifts the viewpoint to the opposite shore, approximately the site of the clearing in the first painting. It is noontide of a glorious summer day. Both sides of the river valley are now covered in colonnaded marble structures, whose steps run down into the water. The megalithic temple seems to have been transformed into a huge domed structure dominating the river-bank. The mouth of the river is guarded by two pharoses, and ships with lateen sails go out to the sea beyond. A joyous crowd throngs the balconies and terraces as a scarlet-robed king or victorious general crosses a bridge connecting the two sides of the river in a triumphal procession. In the foreground an elaborate fountain gushes. The overall look suggests the height of ancient Rome. The decadence seen in every detail of this cityscape foreshadows the inevitable fall of this mighty civilization.



The fourth painting, Destruction, has almost the same perspective as the third, though the artist has stepped back a bit to allow a wider scene of the action, and moved almost to the center of the river. The action is the sack and destruction of the city, in the course of a tempest seen in the distance. It seems that a fleet of enemy warriors has overthrown the city's defenses, sailed up the river, and is busily firing the city and killing and raping its inhabitants. The bridge across which the triumphal procession had crossed is broken; a makeshift crossing strains under the weight of soldiers and refugees. Columns are broken, fire breaks from the upper floors of a palace on the river bank. In the foreground a statue of some venerable hero (posed like the Borghese Warrior) stands headless, still striding forward into the uncertain future. [a] In the waning light of late afternoon, the dead lie where they fell, in fountains and atop the monuments built to celebrate the affluence of the now fallen civilization. The scene is perhaps suggested by the Vandal sack of Rome in 455. On the other hand, a detail in the lower right of "The Consummation of Empire" shows two children fighting, one clad in red and the other in green—the colors of banners of the two contending forces in "Destruction," which thus might depict a foreshadowed civil war.

The fifth painting, Desolation, shows the results, years later. We view the remains of the city in the livid light of a dying day. The landscape has begun to return to wilderness, and no human beings are to be seen; but the remnants of their architecture emerge from beneath a mantle of trees, ivy, and other overgrowth. The broken stumps of the pharoses loom in the background. The arches of the shattered bridge, and the columns of the temple are still visible; a single column looms in the foreground, now a nesting place for birds. The sunrise of the first painting is mirrored here by a moonrise, a pale light reflecting in the ruin-choked river while the standing pillar reflects the last rays of sunset. This gloomy picture symbolizes what all empires could be after their fall. It is a harsh possible future in which humanity has been destroyed by its own hands.

Edited April 29, 2016 by tartarsauce2

[Chessboard]

I voted no.

I support the modding community 110%. their work is beyond amazing but if there is to be any financial support it should come from Bethesda, they are the ones who have profited massively over the years. Afaiac... without modders being all over FO4 from release and the promise of more, bigger and better quality mods once the tools were released, it would have died within a fortnight. Bethesda know this and have raked in possibly millions in extra sales from FO4 and their older games directly because of mods but have given nothing back that I know of. In fact they still don't 'officially' recognise the modding community, it's still a case of 'we don't support the use of mods....' but they damn well support the cash rolling into their wallets because of them.

Also making consolers pay for something we get for free is just not right... but... how much extra work will it be for the modders to have their mods work on consoles? About that, I have no idea....

"without modders being all over FO4 from release and the promise of more, bigger and better quality mods once the tools were released, it would have died within a fortnight".

 

That is a statement from a bubble...you live surround by a crowd of people who love modding games as much as playing the games with mods (your interest in mods is even evident in the fact you spend money to get a premium account on a site devoted to modding) so you think that is representative of the gaming community as a whole and the driver for FO4. There's a wider non-mod centric community of gamers out there. FO4 sold 12 mil copies on day 1 and much of that to the console crowd and a goodly percentage of people who will never install a mod on their PC. It was still selling heavy for weeks after. This alone shows that, despite its anticipated flaws due to Bethesda's past history with other games, people were buying it based on its own merits.

 

You would have to be an idiot to spend fifty dollars or more on any game in the hope that the hobbyist modders might fix it.

 

Some mods are great and are sometimes equal to or exceed what the publisher put out. There are modders who show mad program skillz in the work they do. Mods can extend the play life of a game for individual players but its not the priority for the gaming crowd. At the end of the day mods are a bonus. At the computer company I was working at when Skyrim came out, they were all over it. When they talked about the game it was mainly the vanilla elements they mostly talked about. Not because they did not use mods but because it was the common experience that everyone shared with the game. Everyone had different mods they preferred but all had played the same core game.

 

Bethesda knows that over the years modding/using mods has become regular past time for many for so it makes business sense to use it as a selling point. But if the game is s*** to start with it will be died before any modder gets a chance to even release a single re-textured skin mod. No one will give a s*** about the mods if the game is s*** to start with. No reviewer ever gave a new game 10 out of 10 because they knew that mods would fix that game that was only a 6 of 10 to start with.

 

 

"if there is to be any financial support it should come from Bethesda".

 

..it did...they did not charge for the CK. I don't know of to many other hobbies were you get the tools for free. My grandmother paints as a hobby (and sometime even manages to sell her work on occasion) but she has to buy the paints and canvas unlike us who got the tools for free from both Nexus and Bethesda.

 

Players who want it all to be free or Modders who want to get the tools to do it for free and a place to sell it without a booth charge...(shrugs shoulders) looks like neither wants to invest money.

Edited April 29, 2016 by Chessboard

[iXenite]

 

Paid mods will only lead to more trouble as time goes on.

That's your opinion, and that's fine with me. What's not fine with me is stating it as a fact without anything to back that up.

 

 

Everyone in this thread touts their opinion as fact. You are, I am, all of us are. Don't try to act like you're some privileged saint that is free of bias. You're not. No one is. This is a deeply speculative and subjective topic.

 

But here is one fact:

Companies, all of them, are greedy. If there is any chance at capitalizing on their consumer base they will if given the chance. If we let companies step all over the modding community it will be killed by corporate greed.

 

Anyway, that's all I am going to say on this topic. I will not be discussing it further.