Mods/GECK will fix it. Nope.

I still prefer a well made game even if it meant little to no modding capabilities. Not even user content can keep me invested in such a lazy ass game, why would I care about things like naked women mods, texture mods and all those other mods if it's just going to result in just uninstalling the game after the initial "Hey a new mod" feeling wears off(which doesn't take very long for me).
 
ZigzagPX4 said:
The painful thing is that the intense mod culture is sort of unique to Bethesda's games, which means moving to one of Zenimax's other subsidiaries' game engines could reduce the freedom of modding capabilities.

While I know everyone here is willing to sacrifice modding for a stable, well-performing game with balanced mechanics, I don't think the majority of Bethesda fans will. It's a large part of what makes Bethesda games still popular.

And I have to admit, I'm not too happy sacrificing player content for a slightly less crashy game either. But we'll see how it goes.

And before you say "why not both", the Gamebryo variants Bethesda uses are some of the best engines for modding. It would be difficult to find another engine that balances both performance, quality, current-gen tech and full modding capabilities.
Click to expand...
Oh well, I don't know, people made mods and lots of them, already for games like Quake and later Half Life 1. Maybe the golden age of mods. It was the time when Counter Strike, Day of Defeat, Insurgency, Tactical Ops, Red Orchestra, Fire Arms and many more mods saw the light.

I think jumping to a more stable engine and a more modern framework isn't the issue here. What you need are decent tools and a developer that actually supports modding. That's a lot more important. Obviously some engines are easier to work with than others, but at the end of the day, it depends how dedicated the community is.
 
Crni Vuk said:
Oh well, I don't know, people made mods and lots of them, already for games like Quake and later Half Life 1. Maybe the golden age of mods. It was the time when Counter Strike, Day of Defeat, Insurgency, Tactical Ops, Red Orchestra, Fire Arms and many more mods saw the light.

I think jumping to a more stable engine and a more modern framework isn't the issue here. What you need are decent tools and a developer that actually supports modding. That's a lot more important. Obviously some engines are easier to work with than others, but at the end of the day, it depends how dedicated the community is.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of stable engines with lots of freedom for modding, sure. But barely any of them can also sustain an open-world environment too without sacrificing performance. I suppose with an AAA budget, you could eventually develop a new engine or modify an existing one to the necessary requirements, but that would take a lot of time and investment.

It depends on whether Bethesda is a cheapskate company or not, whether they're willing to risk a bit of resources to make a good engine, and how smartly they're going to spend what Fallout 4 earned then, I think.

Of course, this is all oversimplification - a lot of stuff behind game engines and a lot of stuff behind developer money management is way out of my field. But in terms of concept, it depends as much on the engine as a developer's willingness.

Besides, Bethesda number one priority is their modding community. I'm confident that no matter what DLC plans or microtransactions or whatever they introduce, they won't want to risk failing this community. Unlike other AAA games, Bethesda's IPs rely outright on mods for long-term sales. So they're going to put that above all - even above making an RPG, making an FPS, appealing to general audiences.
 
ZigzagPX4 said:
Besides, Bethesda number one priority is their modding community. I'm confident that no matter what DLC plans or microtransactions or whatever they introduce, they won't want to risk failing this community. Unlike other AAA games, Bethesda's IPs rely outright on mods for long-term sales. So they're going to put that above all - even above making an RPG, making an FPS, appealing to general audiences.
Click to expand...

Bethesda is not really that concerned for mod users though... They showed it when they decided to implement paid mods.

If the backlash from the community wasn't as big as it was (where even Bethesda Fanboys had bad things to say about it) I bet we would have paid mods right now and that is not what I call not want to risk failing this community.

I have the feeling that Bethesda is starting to prioritise their profits before and at the launch day for their games (pre-purchases, season passes,etc) and probably on merchandise (I am pretty sure we will start seeing official Fallout merchandise a lot more than in the past) instead of counting on sales after they release the CKs for their games, those sales after that are nothing but crumbs. Remember Bethesda is owned by Zenimax which has in it's board many Hollywood and TV bigshots, and Hollywood these days prioritise the profits on movie launch and merchandise (they even make popular movies be like giant expensive merchandise ads by cramming it with vehicles and robots and weapons that can be used to make stuff to sell, look at the #4 on this article for example.).

Another thing is that console players will only be able to get mods through Bethesda network, which it is a way to regulate mod usage and probably a way to in the future trying to make mods being paid again.

I do hope I am totally wrong, but Bethesda doesn't seem to care about their modding communities as they used to anymore.
 
Risewild said:
Bethesda is not really that concerned for mod users though... They showed it when they decided to implement paid mods.

If the backlash from the community wasn't as big as it was (where even Bethesda Fanboys had bad things to say about it) I bet we would have paid mods right now and that is not what I call not want to risk failing this community.

I have the feeling that Bethesda is starting to prioritise their profits before and at the launch day for their games (pre-purchases, season passes,etc) and probably on merchandise (I am pretty sure we will start seeing official Fallout merchandise a lot more than in the past) instead of counting on sales after they release the CKs for their games, those sales after that are nothing but crumbs. Remember Bethesda is owned by Zenimax which has in it's board many Hollywood and TV bigshots, and Hollywood these days prioritise the profits on movie launch and merchandise (they even make popular movies be like giant expensive merchandise ads by cramming it with vehicles and robots and weapons that can be used to make stuff to sell, look at the #4 on this article for example.).

Another thing is that console players will only be able to get mods through Bethesda network, which it is a way to regulate mod usage and probably a way to in the future trying to make mods being paid again.

I do hope I am totally wrong, but Bethesda doesn't seem to care about their modding communities as they used to anymore.
Click to expand...

Whether they care about the people who uses mods is another matter. But paid mods is going to bring modding to a even higher pedestal, which shows that they definitely put a high degree of attention to the modding community.

Modding is definitely up there with all the charts and predictions within the business boards of Bethesda Softworks and Zenimax. It's a significant factor in their games, and a unique one. It's definitely something in their main consideration which can and will affect sales to a large degree.

In short, it doesn't matter what it looks like they're doing, modding is definitely a priority of theirs. It's not about them being supportive of the modding community, it's that it's literally one of the biggest parts of their predicted profits.
 
Very doubtfull in my opinion. But, since no one of us knows really what their the priorities are, we can only guess at best what their goals are anyway.

But Fallout 4 seems to be the least mod friendly of their games so far.

ZigzagPX4 said:
There are plenty of stable engines with lots of freedom for modding, sure. But barely any of them can also sustain an open-world environment too without sacrificing performance. I suppose with an AAA budget, you could eventually develop a new engine or modify an existing one to the necessary requirements, but that would take a lot of time and investment.
Click to expand...
Yeah! Imagine that, a developer with AAA budged, years or experience, teams of developers, would have actually to go out and develope something of quality for it's fans. Imagine that! They would have to make ... actuall games using any resoruce they have at their disposal, pushing the boundaries of what is possible and *le grasp* taking risks maybe to be truly innovative :O! Just as how some video game companies used to do in the past!

Don't get me wrong, my itention is not to attack you. But I am just a bit tired of that argument, as all I expect from Bethesda, really, is just to be an actuall game developer. I am not saying there are not some challanges or that it would be easy. But for the last 15 years all they have done is to recycle the same old schlock over and over again. It it really starts to show I think.

Modding has become worse over the years, more and more unfinished assets in their games, pretty much all of the quality has decreased. Particularly when you directly compare Fallout 3 to Fallout 4. With all of their design decisions I just can't see Fallout 4 with as many mods like Skyrim - the fact that your protagonist has a voice alone limits the amount of mods. And it seems to work with the Skill system they implemented is also a real pain in the ass to work with.

Is it really to much to ask from such a company to set more of a focus on innovation after such a long time?
 
Last edited:
ZigzagPX4 said:
It's not about them being supportive of the modding community, it's that it's literally one of the biggest parts of their predicted profits.
Click to expand...
That's a bit contradictory wouldn't you say? I won't claim to be a business expert, but from what they have brought to the table in FO4 it doesn't look like they give a rats ass about modders,and the modding community it the only thing keeping them from being forced to put out a game yearly. Skyrim is a prime example, game is still printing money because a lot of console players are buying a PC just to be able to get mods. This longevity isn't going to happen for FO4 because of the voiced character and the absolute trash linear story line.
 
Wouldn't they release the GECK much faster if modding was one of their top priorities? :confused: Some other AAA games already come with editors and construction kits since day one :???:.

Again in my opinion Bethesda seems to be going in the direction of making a game, get tons of profit before and at launch, move on and repeat... The rest of the sales are bonus crumbs of profit :wiggle:.
 
Why is everyone confusing "sees the potential in mods" with "supportive of modders"? :roll: It is not the same thing. They are two vastly different things.



Risewild said:
Wouldn't they release the GECK much faster if modding was one of their top priorities? :confused: Some other AAA games already come with editors and construction kits since day one :???:.

Again in my opinion Bethesda seems to be going in the direction of making a game, get tons of profit before and at launch, move on and repeat... The rest of the sales are bonus crumbs of profit :wiggle:.
Click to expand...

Bethesda sees the potential in modders. I am not saying they are trying to support the modding community. I am saying they are trying to take advantage of modders. They are not releasing it yet because they know it will boost sales to delay it from release, letting the hype falter for a bit before giving it the jump again, presumably with a Steam sale for it too once the GECK is released. It is for profit, that's why modding is one of their top priorities.

And while people are smart, they are also accepting. The modern DLC and microtransactions culture has been naturally accepted more than you think. Bethesda has a very high chance of getting away with a paid mod system all the while taking advantage of modding potential. And at no point is modding simply "crumbs" of profit. I would venture to say that without modding, Bethesda's games would fall drastically in user reviews, lose more than a quarter of the profits, and generally become less popular. They are an unofficial feature of the game.

Crni Vuk said:
But Fallout 4 seems to be the least mod friendly of their games so far.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. That's the fuss over the new file format that people were up in arms about. Overreactions. It is every bit as mod friendly as Skyrim, it is in technical terms Skyrim with guns. It's so blatantly the same engine there's even Dragon Souls and Magicka counters from Skyrim still left over as values in the game.

Considering how moddable it is without the modding tools, imagine how moddable it will be with the GECK. That's just it. They can - and actually are doing right now - release the game, have hype drive sales up for a while, have it drop from the peak, then release the GECK and drive it up again. Then they monetise it quietly, get blasted for a bit, some of their community abandons the series but not enough to impact sales in any meaningful way, and go on with their lives. I would say this is simply a pessimistic prediction, but considering literally how Overkill and Konami have gotten away from controversies with their profits intact, something as tame as paid mods is definitely going to get by pretty easily.

Spacemunkey said:
That's a bit contradictory wouldn't you say? I won't claim to be a business expert, but from what they have brought to the table in FO4 it doesn't look like they give a rats ass about modders,and the modding community it the only thing keeping them from being forced to put out a game yearly. Skyrim is a prime example, game is still printing money because a lot of console players are buying a PC just to be able to get mods. This longevity isn't going to happen for FO4 because of the voiced character and the absolute trash linear story line.
Click to expand...

They are doing the exact same thing they are doing with Skyrim, that's my point. That is putting mods as a focus. And it's not contradictory at all. Longevity is definitely going to happen with Fallout 4, regardless of its poor writing. Skyrim is a perfect example of what they're doing with Fallout 4. I'm not going to further into this point because it's pretty clear that Skyrim's modding community says everything that needs to be said.
 
ZigzagPX4 said:
They are doing the exact same thing they are doing with Skyrim, that's my point. That is putting mods as a focus. And it's not contradictory at all. Longevity is definitely going to happen with Fallout 4, regardless of its poor writing. Skyrim is a perfect example of what they're doing with Fallout 4. I'm not going to further into this point because it's pretty clear that Skyrim's modding community says everything that needs to be said.
Click to expand...
If I have a guilty pleasure game it's skyrim and that is for the simple fact that it has massive amounts of freedom that is nowhere to be found in FO4. I can fire up Skyrim create a warrior and through mods and vanilla content play that warrior 20-50 hrs and never even see a dragon. FO4 is all about the MQ to the point where making an outside the box decision isn't even registered; an example of that is killing Father, the game acts like you refused his offer and tells you to leave the institute, except you can't without using console commands. That lack of freedom coupled with Shyamalan level plot twists(The Happening not Sixth Sense) leaves the longevity of FO4 in question to everyone except diehard BGS fans.
 
ZigzagPX4 said:
Absolutely not. That's the fuss over the new file format that people were up in arms about. Overreactions. It is every bit as mod friendly as Skyrim, it is in technical terms Skyrim with guns. It's so blatantly the same engine there's even Dragon Souls and Magicka counters from Skyrim still left over as values in the game.
Click to expand...
I have no clue. It's just what a modder said when he took a look at Fallout 4s skill system for example. It's a mess. And changing anything on it will be a nightmare. His words. Not mine.

The same issue when you think about quest mods. It will be difficult to get those in the game, due to shitty dialog wheel and voiced protagonist.

Those two alone, means that it is more of a hassle for modders. And we have not talked about the engine yet. That's what I mean, when I say least mod friendly game.

Considering how moddable it is without the modding tools, imagine how moddable it will be with the GECK.
Click to expand...
A couple of texture changes and weapon replacers so far. Nothing super fancy so far. The really "big" stuff, will require script extenders, new UIs and well mod tools, either provided by the community or Bethesda.
 
MercenarySnake said:
When they finally think of a way to implement paid mods. When they feel like it.
Click to expand...



MercenarySnake has voted to hold the plebiscite on the proposed G.E.C.K. 4 release date on April 12, with advance predictions on April 2 and 9.

After some debate, NMA also agreed on the question answering:

"Do you support the G.E.C.K. 4 predictions of the Joint Review Panel of NMA Aurthority and the hardcore Fallout fanbase, that the G.E.C.K. 4 be approved subject to 209 conditions set out in Volume 2 of the NMA's Final Report?"

The question refers to the 425-page second part of a report issued by the DirtyOldShoe AKA "some kind of lucky" last December.

Despite widespread opposition in the Bethesda fanboy lowgrade teir, the panel recommended a controversial post by MercenarySnake, which spearheaded the release to sometime never.

Several Bethesda Nutchins reportedly opposed the question, arguing that it was too long and bound to cause confusion. Councillor Crni Vukhoe told the Bethesda Nutchins that DirtyOldShoe's predictions shouldn't have been part of the question and that Crni Vukhoe "Wants to share some love".

"Not everybody out there is going to read the NMA report," said ZigzagPX4. "They have their opinions, whether they're for or against it... they're not going to read that report. I think it's just too lengthy of a question to try to ask and too confusing possibly."

People will get to respond "Fallout 4 sucks" "Fallout 4 won't get better with mods" or "I'm a stubid Bethesda Nutchin" to the question.

Council tabled the discussion after approving the first question, but additional questions to the plebiscite may come forward at the January 20 meeting.

Other potential questions are expected to be related to the issue of potential delays and whether nutchin concerns are related to living a sad and pathetic life.

When it will provide the most profit
 
Skyrim had the same release schedule with it's tool kit, game released in November followed by the creation Kit in February.
 
Fallout: New Vegas is still getting a constant influx of detailed real-life weapons and intricate quest mods, while Fallout 4 keeps getting sexy female clothing mods and settlement system fixes. I know the GECK isn't out yet, but it's very telling of the contrast in both the tone and audience of both games.

If the GECK comes out and the influx doesn't change, it's pretty much confirmed what kind of game Fallout 4 is.
 
For me, there are two categories of Bethesda RPG games (though Fallout 4 barely qualifies as an RPG): the ones you play for the experience and the ones you play to screw around in. The former category includes titles such as Morrowind, Oblivion, and New Vegas (since it's technically owned by Bethesda, I suppose the isometric Fallouts would be included here as well). The latter includes Skyrim and Fallout 4.

You can modify the game all you want, but it's still just a modification. And ultimately, a shoddy application of duct tape and 2x4's won't save a house from collapsing in on itself with the next breeze.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top