PC1 Modding in pCARS (Want opinions)

[XN-Sigma]

Hi.

I've been following the pCARS development since February on the WMD forums, when I decided to get into it I thought "hey, since there is no publisher BS, I guess this project will be more open to modding than other games".

Now, since then I've seen several threads and discussions on WMD about the subject, they always ended up in flame-wars of people pro modding and people against it, and none of them seemed too serious about it. Until now, recently some user made a thread in the general forum to discuss what kind of plan could be taken to allow or not modding.

As of now, the thread has been overwhelmed by people against modding, which shocked me greatly since my experience with mods has taught me A LOT of people likes them.

So since I found out this forum is a more "neutral land" and people don't need to fear the *ahem* political correctness of the WMD forums, I'd like to ask your opinions on the subject, do you think mods are good for games and should be allowed? Or not?



PS. Most of the people against modding in this recent thread at WMD seemed to be higher ups. ($$$$)

 

[Chronus]

We fully intend to allow modding in many areas.

At NG, redi (quite sensibly and intelligently) said the following about "modding":

I largely agree with you if it's modding in the sense of "adding or modifying content that the devs don't, can't or won't".

And this:

[...]I still vote for unmoddable core content of the game

That is a partial quote, but the sentence is independent and stands on its own.

Also, on several occasions a "very vocal" investor of yours said he was against modding. One can expect other investors think similarly.

In spite of all this, you come forward and say there will be modding - which I salute. What type of modding? As redi put it ["modding in the sense of "adding or modifying content that the devs don't, can't or won't"]?

What we won't want is hacking.

No game developer wants hacking.

Modding and hacking, however, have nothing to do with one another.

Modding is, as most of us have stated throughout the years:"legal modification to content files". These "content files" have been, for most of us modders, physics files, graphics files, sound files, AI configuration files. Serious, reputable modders never advocated hacking of executable codes or hacking of netcode. And I for one never advocated ripping content from other sims into this or that sim.

Please don't mix modding (and you know what I am talking about) and hacking.

 

[Mapu]

contradictions over contradictions; even internal contradictions? lol

 

[Kazumi]

Indeed, I've been getting more and more interested in Assetto Corsa, knowing that it will be completely open to modding makes me drool. However I must admit something, I use a Dual Shock 3 to play racing games, I have no wheel, and judging by the netKar-Pro demo, I'm kinda worried that the game may be too difficult for my controller, though I read somewhere that FVA fairs better with controllers so I dunno what exactly to expect from AC...

I do think it will work out quite well, but of course I can imagine it isn't their highest priority at the moment. The demo open wheeler car is also quite twitchy with wheel.

 

[Andy_J]

We fully intend to allow modding in many areas. What we won't want is hacking. Thus, we're working on robust tools for this area.

You fully intend to allow modding now? Well that is a turn up for the books. Your American Pit Bull (Micas) has told us that the final game will not allow modding as per your weighted community vote system. What has changed the goal? Pressure from the haters?

 

[Kazumi]

Well, I quoted Ian Bell somewhere in those threads on that matter and got flak for that (he was positive about modding before the project started). The problem arose when those 3 or 4 members / investors were suddenly vocal against modding per se. I don't know if we all mean the same with "modding" though. A modding-friendly environment does allow creating mods without altering many or even any of the existing files. As has been said in other threads that's still referred to as "modding" even if it's more about content creation and so on

 

[David Ignjatovic]

Is there a way to allow mods for everything but cars, then allow SMS to sell cars at the same standard as the original game?.....Cars will sell more DLC than tracks, and modders can fix/improve the game if necessary.

 

[Ian Bell]

At NG, redi (quite sensibly and intelligently) said the following about "modding":



And this:




That is a partial quote, but the sentence is independent and stands on its own.

Also, on several occasions a "very vocal" investor of yours said he was against modding. One can expect other investors think similarly.

In spite of all this, you come forward and say there will be modding - which I salute. What type of modding? As redi put it ["modding in the sense of "adding or modifying content that the devs don't, can't or won't"]?



No game developer wants hacking.

Modding and hacking, however, have nothing to do with one another.

Modding is, as most of us have stated throughout the years:"legal modification to content files". These "content files" have been, for most of us modders, physics files, graphics files, sound files, AI configuration files. Serious, reputable modders never advocated hacking of executable codes or hacking of netcode. And I for one never advocated ripping content from other sims into this or that sim.

Please don't mix modding (and you know what I am talking about) and hacking.

Thanks for the advice

We'll put modding to the members in a poll as we do with every important decision. They do decide these things, we don't. I want it and I'm paying the money to see the tools are developed for it, but I won't veto the majority, that would go against everything we stand for.

 

[Ian Bell]

You fully intend to allow modding now? Well that is a turn up for the books. Your American Pit Bull (Micas) has told us that the final game will not allow modding as per your weighted community vote system. What has changed the goal? Pressure from the haters?

contradictions over contradictions; even internal contradictions? lol

There are many senior members on the team and I suspect that many won't go with Micas' vote, I could be wrong though. As it stands my personal view is to allow modding but crucially, with proper tools that we code. This makes it easier for us, easier for modders and eliminates the need to go hacking.

We started as modders 11 years ago and it's in our blood, mine particularly. In short I'll be lobbying hard for it.

 

[Ian Bell]

I should give a bit of background here.

The issue that some have against modding is that it might reduce the income we can receive from selling DLC packs as many of the cars/tracks/physics/other cool things would be out there for free from modders. My opinion is that we have a big enough and talented enough team to be confident in our abilities to make things that people feel are worthy of shelling out some money for.

The other classic argument for modding is that it extends the lifetime/cycle of a game. It does indeed, but the developer doesn't get any revenue from this and that's something that those positing said argument don't consider fully. Again, I see no reason why paid work and free work can't coexist.

 

[Ian Bell]

Nearly forgot. Keeping the online racing fair is another big issue with modding.

 

[Chronus]

I want it and I'm paying the money to see the tools are developed for it,

If I may, this I find important. Thank you for being candid about it.

but I won't veto the majority, that would go against everything we stand for.

While I understand that is how companies work (decisions arrived at after a vote), I am under the impression that only a minority accepts modding. I hope this impression is wrong, though - visually, pCARS is already delightful, and if the physics engine lives up to expectations created, then modding (privately or for community use) would be a dream.

I hope the final decision is then one that will allow the modding community to become engaged by pCARS.

On my part, that is all. Good luck, hope everything turns out very much OK.

 

[Ian Bell]

If I may, this I find important. Thank you for being candid about it.



While I understand that is how companies work (decisions arrived at after a vote), I am under the impression that only a minority accepts modding. I hope this impression is wrong, though - visually, pCARS is already delightful, and if the physics engine lives up to expectations created, then modding (privately or for community use) would be a dream.

I hope the final decision is then one that will allow the modding community to become engaged by pCARS.

On my part, that is all. Good luck, hope everything turns out very much OK.

Thanks Chronus. I hope so too. In fact it will be very interesting to find out what the consensus really is regarding modding.

 

[Chronus]

My opinion is that we have a big enough and talented enough team to be confident in our abilities to make things that people feel are worthy of shelling out some money for.

That is exactly what I have been saying. Given the express will you have of producing high quality content, people will always purchase what you offer them - provided, I think, it is not too expensive. And even then, I know people who will gladly pull out of their wallets a 100 Euros or more for a DLC or a addon if the quality really is that amazing.

The other classic argument for modding is that it extends the lifetime/cycle of a game. It does indeed, but the developer doesn't get any revenue from this and that's something that those positing said argument don't consider fully. Again, I see no reason why paid work and free work can't coexist.

No, the developer does get revenue from extending the lifetime of the product. That is what has been keeping SIMBIN working with Race07 - people mod for it, people race online, people buy addons as along as these are not too expensive. As they did.

Like you, I see absolutely no reason believe paid work and free work to coexist.

Nearly forgot. Keeping the online racing fair is another big issue with modding.

Not a big issue, I disagree. How did your former company and dev team manage with GTR2 and GTL? "BOOTED FOR POSSIBLE CHEAT". I think the same concept (more or less) was followed by Stefano for NKP.

If the content (physics files, that is) of the client does not match that of the server, the racer will not be able to race.

 

[Peter]

I should give a bit of background here.

The issue that some have against modding is that it might reduce the income we can receive from selling DLC packs as many of the cars/tracks/physics/other cool things would be out there for free from modders. My opinion is that we have a big enough and talented enough team to be confident in our abilities to make things that people feel are worthy of shelling out some money for.

The other classic argument for modding is that it extends the lifetime/cycle of a game. It does indeed, but the developer doesn't get any revenue from this and that's something that those positing said argument don't consider fully. Again, I see no reason why paid work and free work can't coexist.

Race07 has a lot DLC packs (I have them all) and there are many mods and tracks going hand in hand. I think there's no problem.

 

[Ian Bell]

That is exactly what I have been saying. Given the express will you have of producing high quality content, people will always purchase what you offer them - provided, I think, it is not too expensive. And even then, I know people who will gladly pull out a 100 Euros or more for a DLC or a addon if the quality really is that amazing.



No, the developer does get revenue from extending the lifetime of the product. That is what has been keeping SIMBIN working with Race07 - people mod for it, people race online, people buy addons as along as these are not too expensive. As they did.

Like you, I see absolutely no reason believe paid work and free work to coexist.



Not a big issue, I disagree. How did your former company and dev team manage with GTR2 and GTL? "BOOTED FOR POSSIBLE CHEAT".

If the content (physics files, that is) of the client does not match that of the server, the racer will not be able to race.

How does people buying addons flow from others modding it previously though as per your Race07 point?

This really is a crucial point that many don't get. Developers don't want the lifecycle of a game to be extended by modding, they want the most people to buy it in the least possible time. If they release an addon pack that then encourages others to buy the original game that's a win for developers, but it doesn't flow from the modding argument.

On your final point re. online racing, yes we can of course control the mechanics of it to an extent although 'open' modding does greatly increase the complexity of anti cheat coding. The problem is that giving people the 'Booted' message isn't a very positive thing.

 

[Ian Bell]

Race07 has a lot DLC packs (I have them all) and there are many mods and tracks going hand in hand. I think there's no problem.

How many online racers are there on each track commonly? The bigger issue is fragmentation of the online community. The aim it to get the most possible racers in the same lobby fed to the same set of tracks using the same exe. This makes for a better online community. Modding runs directly counter to that.

Again, I'm for modding, I'm just pointing out the reasons why others aren't.

 

[Chronus]

How does people buying addons flow from others modding it previously though as per your Race07 point?

We both agree that modding contributes to extending the lifetime of a racing sim (or any game - Half Life comes to mind).

If people (a community, that is) are still active around a particular racing sim, it is fairly certain (as SIMBIN proved and proves) that a publisher/developer can introduce a DLC or addon at any time and get revenue from it. What really matters is keeping the interest in the sim alive, in my opinion. As long as that happens, the developer will get something out of it.

This really is a crucial point that many don't get. Developers don't want the lifecycle of a game to be extended by modding, they want the most people to buy it in the least possible time.

True.

But a new product, a serious and new product, takes at least 2 years of development/production time. In the meantime, keeping the interest alive in the "old" product will also extend revenue past the original units sold.

On your final point re. online racing, yes we can of course control the mechanics of it to an extent although 'open' modding does greatly increase the complexity of anti cheat coding. The problem is that giving people the 'Booted' message isn't a very positive thing.

That is a price everyone must be willing to pay, Ian. I have iRacing - if my antivirus truncates part of a file because it "thinks" there are virus footprints in there, I can no longer connect - re-downloading is necessary.

That is a price to pay to keep it all legal, right and just.

 

[Chronus]

The bigger issue is fragmentation of the online community. The aim it to get the most possible racers in the same lobby fed to the same set of tracks using the same exe. This makes for a better online community. Modding runs directly counter to that.

I won't even touch the exe. As I said, a good, reputable modder does not touch exes.

As for modding and fragmentation...

I do see your point. However...it all depends on your vision. YOUR vision, not that of other investors (though you have to consider their input, I know).

If your vision is one that promotes a long term relationship with the community, one that will keep people "loyal" or emotionally attached to this sim or sim series, then you may contemplate the idea of promoting SMS owned servers for the online play - with all the social networking attributes needed to keep people "glued" to it. With SMS owned servers brewing with intense activity, people will probably only want...SMS servers.

And who controls whatever resides in SMS servers? You.

 

[Micas_WMD]

The issue is a bit more complex than just a black and white pro-modding, or anti-modding view. I'm generally against modding for some of the reasons Ian referenced, but it hasn't come to the point yet where anyone has defined exactly what the proposition is. If SMS is creating tools, then it's very likely that I'll support the release and use of those tools. If modding means that someone can create a 3000hp Audi that functions in MP (as in Shift 2), then no - I'm not supporting that.

I'm not going to apologize for wanting to protect the content and integrity of the game as well as protecting my investment. Unless SMS makes a really good argument why cars and tracks should be able to be added to the game through modding, my view now is that I'm not in favor of that. As I've said before (which always gets misconstrued), if I feel some aspect of the proposed modding does not benefit the game, does not increase it's value, and detracts from revenue streams, then I'll be opposed to it.

I will make an argument to the other WMD members, including the investors as well, why I think the proposal doesn't serve our interests. I expect there will be others that make the argument in the converse, and attempt to convince members that their view makes more sense. That's how WMD was designed from the beginning. It was understood before WMD opened that there would be community votes on certain features, and that they would be weighted by investment levels. That's not controversial, it's just how it is.

At WMD, I've said time and again that we can probably come to some consensus about modding so it doesn't even need to go to a vote. We'd need more information about the tools Ian references before any substantive discussion can take place.

Ultimately, this could be much ado about nothing.

 

[XN-Sigma]

You know, I must say, I really like pCARS, I enjoy the game, but the over sensitiveness of some investors about modding in the WMD forum really makes me go nuts. Though I like to see that you (Ian) are not totally against modding. But anyway, I think modding itself isn't a problem for sales of the game, as I said before, some games such as ArmA II even became more succesfull because of modding. However, I do understand the concern about legal issues such as mods made with stolen content, licencing and cheating. And sure it's difficult to find a middle ground between DLCs and free modding, but I'm sure with some hard brainstorming a solution can be found.