Fallout 3 is overrated

[Crni Vuk]

Which "dev" support you are talking about ? There is no real support by Bethesda to their mod community.

I think this is fairly clear. Beth’s mod community grew substantially when they started to release mod tools.

If you call the release of a programm that probably was not even al to much changed before its release anyway then you probably have a pretty broad definition of support from devs to a modding community.

The deliver of mod tools isnt something that I would really call a support by the developers. To listen to the complaints (Fallout 3 has still the same issues around modding like already Oblivion ... how comes that if the "moders" get so much support I ask ?), trying to encourage the moders with eventualy including the high quality content of them to the game, setting up a contest with high quality prices for the best mods. That are things I see as "good" developer support. You can take a look to Epic and their Unreal games and the make something Unreal contests and endless release of maps and new textures and other content if you want to see what a good support is. Even VALVE, if you want so which even hired some of the best modders in to their team. Such things have become today more or less fairly common.

Bethesda has no agenda against the moding community of course. But I would not really say they get any support either. The mod tools are probably just usual dev tools anyway that maybe have been adjusted by some dev in 30 min. and then released to the public.

To me it just looks like the moders are seen by Bethesda as another way to "fix" the game, nothing more nothing less. Till today the only patch for the German version of Oblivion which fixed many of those really terrible errors in the translation was provided, which surprise? By the German Oblivion mod community. Its a sad thing that Bethesda games are one of those that get by the moders quite a lot of "fixes" and "patches" ...

 

[lewis]

its a bit late to say the game its over rated, dont you think? but at least somebody did it

 

[Dionysus]

The total ineptness of B.soft telling the story and making the "moments" of the game into idiotic, umplausable (sp?) and totally holywood ripoffs killed the game.

I actually like FO3. I just can't agree that the plot is original and interesting, or even innocuous.

The deliver of mod tools isnt something that I would really call a support by the developers.

That's only because you don't know what the word "support" means. But that is a personal issue that isn't germane to this discussion.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

The deliver of mod tools isnt something that I would really call a support by the developers.

That's only because you don't know what the word "support" means. But that is a personal issue that isn't germane to this discussion.

They don't support their mod community, they simply enable it by providing mod tools. To my knowledge they don't patch or update their mod tools, they don't try to find out what the mod community wants and enable such possibilities in the future, and they don't even recognize or promote good mods (though they do say they play their games with some, never naming mods). It's a semantics argument and while support can mean simply enabling, it can also (usually?) mean that there is ongoing interactions, so I'm in favor of using a less ambiguous term for their actions.

EDIT: spelling

 

[Crni Vuk]

exactly what Garlic said. Its more or less a discussion about "sematics".

Its not about to not give Bethesda credit where it deserves. But its also as well not apposite to give them more prestige then deserved. No doubts that mod tools make it much easier to change details of the game. But to say it that way, without the intention to "lower" the meaning of mods. But I am not sure if those pink powerarmors and another random xy armor with different colour sheme are full mods. Quite a few talented moders could even without Bethesdas "mod tools" which are only slightly changed (if even) dev tools release very formidable content. I think to just acknowledge a Mod community and to really interchange with them and support it, are 2 really different things. I mean how comes that with Morrowind the tools have been released with the game directly, and with Oblivion alwmost shortly after the game releasd and with Fallout 3 now it took them how much 2 - 3 months? Cause of "issues" with consoles? You could see almost every day another "where are the tools" thread in the official forum. Thast not the kind of support or interchange between moders and devs that I would call "ideal".

If it makes you feel better. Yes, ok Bethesda indeed does support their mod community. But like with many things, they do it poorly.

 

[Dionysus]

exactly what Garlic said. Its more or less a discussion about "sematics".

Yes, it's a semantic discussion in which you and UG are at odds with the dictionary. There really is no argument here. You fellas can make up your own little patois, and I'll just note the points at which it deviates from actual English.

 

[Per]

It is a well-known property of words that their meaning does not depend on context. All instances of the word "support" mean the same thing.

:v

 

[Radwaster]

Per wrote:

It is a well-known property of words that their meaning does not depend on context. All instances of the word "support" mean the same thing.

A Field of Rape is not necessarily the same as Rape in a Field.

Sorry but context changes meaning.

 

[Morbus]

Also, sarcasm goes undetected.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

exactly what Garlic said. Its more or less a discussion about "sematics".

Yes, it's a semantic discussion in which you and UG are at odds with the dictionary. There really is no argument here. You fellas can make up your own little patois, and I'll just note the points at which it deviates from actual English.

Maybe YOU should check a dictionary sometime. And maybe think before posting something you're blatantly wrong about.

Also, /agree to Garlic and Per.

 

[Dionysus]

Maybe YOU should check a dictionary sometime. And maybe think before posting something you're blatantly wrong about.

LMAO. This is just bizarre. I'm genuinely curious. Do you not know what the word means, or do you disagree with the premise (that Beth's mod community would be much smaller if Beth didn't release mod tools)? Because we can argue the latter point. But if you accept that point, then there's no question that they support the mod community.

 

[cronicler]

Dionysus:
Yes B. released the design tools for Morrowind free of charge. Then came Oblivion and B. loyalists started ramming the gates for the mod tools so they got em in about a week. Then came FO3 and B. waited as long as it could to get their dlc well into the pipeline.

A supported mod community is something like the blizzard, Id or Valve communities where some professionals use some of their personal time to give some heads up, some tutorials, some explanations... Some feedback.

There are a lot of games that are given mod tools/sdks after release. Just look at ground control 2. Fantastic possibilities. one of the worst documented and inefficient editor. Zero dev feedback, support, explanations. DEAD game.

The FO3 Tools are the same tools as Oblivion tools. the filesystem just has an extra passcode/random line in the headers and every 3rd divider or so. so you can't directly open it with Oblivion tools.
Fuck, you can just Copy/Paste the commands from oblivion mods to make it work.

Beth has tried to appear supporting the mods / delaying for making the tools user friendly while they release basically the same tools late.

Sure throwing the dog a bone to shut it up might be considered kindness but it was a bone that was given and taken away before.

 

[Crni Vuk]

that they made such a fuss around the release to the mod tools this time most of the time even in a unlogical relation and comment with issues around "consoles" shows at least to me that they dont even have a real ideas regarding the mod community. What kind of effect should a release of mod tools on the "PC" have to consoles? Well except that maybe a lot of console players might become unhappy (understandably enough). But this definetly shows which audience is really important to Bethesda though, and some people still talk here about a support to the mod community? Bethesda is sure not a devil or antichrist in the gaming buisness. But if you look on their marketing and listen to certain comments you can get the impression that they love to have some kind of control over their audience and the content. Obviously. manipulation in work with the gaming media is what sells their games, not the real value as RPG or anything.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Yes, it's a semantic discussion in which you and UG are at odds with the dictionary. There really is no argument here. You fellas can make up your own little patois, and I'll just note the points at which it deviates from actual English.

sup⋅port
   /səˈpɔrt, -ˈpoʊrt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [suh-pawrt, -pohrt]
–verb (used with object)
1. to bear or hold up (a load, mass, structure, part, etc.); serve as a foundation for.
2. to sustain or withstand (weight, pressure, strain, etc.) without giving way; serve as a prop for.
3. to undergo or endure, esp. with patience or submission; tolerate.
4. to sustain (a person, the mind, spirits, courage, etc.) under trial or affliction: They supported him throughout his ordeal.
5. to maintain (a person, family, establishment, institution, etc.) by supplying with things necessary to existence; provide for: to support a family.
6. to uphold (a person, cause, policy, etc.) by aid, countenance, one's vote, etc.; back; second.
7. to maintain or advocate (a theory, principle, etc.).
8. to corroborate (a statement, opinion, etc.): Leading doctors supported his testimony.
9. to act with or second (a lead performer); assist in performance: The star was supported by a talented newcomer.
–noun
10. the act or an instance of supporting.
11. the state of being supported.
12. something that serves as a foundation, prop, brace, or stay.
13. maintenance, as of a person or family, with necessaries, means, or funds: to pay for support of an orphan.
14. a person or thing that supports, as financially: The pension was his only support.
15. a person or thing that gives aid or assistance.
16. an actor, actress, or group performing with a lead performer.
17. the material, as canvas or wood, on which a picture is painted.
18. Stock Exchange. support level.

Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/support
You might be going by the first definition of support (though that's structural and suggests ongoing interaction as well...) while the fifth definition is most fitting to how the term is used in this context. That said, the most similar definition to how you're using it is a definition for the term as a noun, number 17, which has no equivalent definition for using the term as a verb. Again, enable is a much more accurate descriptor for Beth's relationship with the mod community.

en⋅a⋅ble
   /ɛnˈeɪbəl/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [en-ey-buhl]
–verb (used with object), -bled, -bling.
1. to make able; give power, means, competence, or ability to; authorize: This document will enable him to pass through the enemy lines unmolested.
2. to make possible or easy: Aeronautics enables us to overcome great distances.
3. to make ready; equip (often used in combination): Web-enabled cell phones.

Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/enable

 

[Per]

I made some kind of comic to get some kind of point across.

It is possible to think enabling equals support. It is also possible to think that enabling and little else is poor support. Whether this is an accurate description of the circumstances, I don't know.

 

[Atomic Cowboy]

The first thing you have to do in any debate is define your terms. The dictionary definition of a word is never going to be adequate, and if you're arguing in a formal manner, it's considered amateurish starting off with "The Oxford English Dictionary defines X as..."

Both parties have to acknowledge this, or they'll be speaking crosswise, attacking strawmen and phantoms that are distinctly removed from their opponent actual position.

I'm inclined to suspect that both sides on the "Support" debate agree with the naked statements the other made; given the other's definition of support. The real debate (which isn't yet happening) is about what types of Support ought to be expected, and whether the current level deserves the title of Support, or if doing so undermines the meaning of the term.

Similarly, debating whether the 'Plot' in F3 was adequate or if the 'Scenario' was adequate seems to be missing the point. It's one thing to ask "When you say 'plot' do you mean X or do you mean X+Y? Because while I agree with you on X, Y is not very good."

All I'm saying is that nit-picking the terminology of another person's argument tends to prevent the real conversation from occurring. If there's a possibility that two people are just using terminology in slightly different ways, it's far more productive to approach the definitions in a friendly manner. After all, if we can't communicate rationally, we devolve to nothing but a pair of dogs barking louder and louder.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

^ Exactly. That's why I agree on the first point Garlic made, that it'll come down to a semantics agrument (and those, as you pointed out, usually lead nowhere). The only reason it ever appeared in this thread is because someone is too lazy to check a dictionary before posting.

Dictionary definitions are the closest there is to a formal definition of the word. True enough, it's not absolute, and meanings do change with concext, but that's why there are multiple definitions listed. Failure to acknowledge this simple fact is far worse than bringing dictionaries into discussion.

 

[Dionysus]

You might be going by the first definition of support (though that's structural and suggests ongoing interaction as well...) while the fifth definition is most fitting to how the term is used in this context.

Obviously, 3, 5, and 7 are all applicable here. They tolerate the mod community. They provide for the mod community. They even advocate for the mod community. I think you see now that it's simply incorrect to say that they don't support the mod community. Enable can work too.

I made some kind of comic to get some kind of point across.

I'd say that's an outrageously inaccurate portrayal of this situation. The mod tools that they have released are not useless or broken in a catastrophic way.

 

[Holocausto]

Eh, I'm under the impression that beth used the SDK (or whatever the hell you want to call it) to build and construct the game themselves did they not? So if that's the case isn't that kinda like a car mechanic handing over his tools to you so you can fix the car yourself if need be? In that scenario I wouldn't consider that impressive "support" if the tools already exist due to initial necessity. But all this is pointless IMO. beth are going to make the game(s) they want to make and modders will have to take things unto themselves to achieve what they want.

You have to know when it's pointless to keep pleading with a game co. F3 is a lost cause to me personally. Unless some modders want to professionally record a ton of new voice overs and rewrite much of the story/quests I have no further use for this game. I'll finally finish Bioshock & Thief deadly shadows (yes I know they are console-tainted as well but despite that they manage to hold up a respectable level of challenge and intrigue unlike F3 IMO).

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Obviously, 3, 5, and 7 are all applicable here. They tolerate the mod community. They provide for the mod community. They even advocate for the mod community. I think you see now that it's simply incorrect to say that they don't support the mod community. Enable can work too.

They provide tools when they get around to it, though it's becoming increasingly less of a priority. To my knowledge, the innitial release of the tools is all that they provide to the mod community (correct me if I'm wrong). They do not provide patches/updates for the tools, walkthroughs, hosting, promotion, contests, etc. They also do no advocate for the mod community (again, correct me if I'm wrong) though when they come up, they say generally good things (they deny that there are any professional level mods out there). Hell, they were even refusing to say whether or not they were going to release mod tools for Fallout 3 and it took them what, 3 months to release the tools? That's hardly advocating for the modding community, though I wouldn't say that it's completely ignoring them either (I'm guessing that they didn't get to work on tweaking the tools for public release until they were convinced that it would be profitable for them to do so, hence the delay).

Again, please point out where they have provided support for the mod community beyond releasing the mod tools, I'd be happy if they did.