Tweet
Idea: Collective, Collaborative Mods
Hi all
Firstly, I'll just say I only got the game recently, know relatively little about modding, and generally stand in awe of some of the great Mods I see floating about. Thanks!
One problem with modding - and it seems exacerbated by the nature of Civ3 - is that it is very difficult for individuals to take full advantage of the hard work of the Modders. When I say 'take full advantage', I generally mean using more than one mod at a time. There are a few reasons:
1. It is very hard (or tedious) for a gamer to use multiple mods. It involves multiple downloads and the dreaded intergration. There are so many issues that can be fixed or improved - civilizations, balance, units, graphics, governments, wonders, improvements but any one mod author doesn't have the time to address them all.
2. Many mods are continually being developed as bugs are found and game balance problems are corrected. This means that a gamer needs to keep an eye on the threads of all the mods he is using.
3. Mods that are each worthwhile in their own right might contradict each other. This is especially apparent in terms of graphics mods not dealing with expansions in gameplay mods. eg. Icons showing unit details in the city screen are great but what if another mod changes those details? Or what if a new civilization's UU is not scaled for a certain balance mod?
4. The use of the one gameplay file (blc) and independent mods means there is a tendency in Modders to throw in extra tweaks. eg Israel civ comes with a corruption fix. a goverment mod redos a lot of gameplay and unit balance fixes, etc.
Obviously these factors affect mod designers too, since their mods effectively compete with other mods that were designed to tackle completely different things. How many threads, for how many mods, for how many topics has the same or similiar feedback been sought and given? How compatible are saved games and user designed scenarios to certain mods? By developing the mods diseparately the cost the community as a whole is huge.
The solution, in my mind, is to start collaborating more. We need standards - well known and accepted mods - to evolve so that new mods don't reinvent the wheel. The Apolyton Pack for CTP comes to mind as an example of what I propose for Civ3.
What I propose, or suggest, specifically is a set of intergrated mods released as a whole and tested together. It would be a run as a collaborative project that develops or maintains this collection.
Other components:
1. the project would have a manager - a well known and respected individual. The project manager would be responsible for maintaining the collection in a high quality, coherent and easy to install fashion and could delegate work to trusted volunteers as necessary.
2. there would be a centralised site or thread from which all project files are available both at a 'stable' release and beta release.
3. Individual mods that comprise the project would have a clear jurisdiction over those files or settings within the project. The authors of those mod coordinate new ideas and development with the community, project manager and other related mods and their authors.
3a. Sharing on a development level of works in progress, graphical templates and motifs.
3b. Mod authors are free to maintain working versions of their mods for independent use at their own discretion.
4. Regular community feedback and consultation and outsourcing. eg for civilopeadia entries.
5. Clear and thorough documentation
These are a suggestion only, of course.
People differ in what they like and do not like. At this early stage there are a lot of people who prefer not to change game mechanics but like graphics mods. People would disagree over what civilisations are worth adding and which ones aren't. But in my opinion there are many things we can agree on. Perhaps we could disallow controversial changes? For the player or modder that doesn't think the changes go far enough, they still have a base product that is that much closer to the ideal.
Think what kind of gaming experience we could build!
Such a solution would probably evolve over time anyway. But why not get a head start?
Sorry for my inability to use specific examples in this post. Perhaps I'm coming from way out of left field with this. Perhaps not. Regardless, I would like to thank all the Modders out there who work tireless and ingeniously to improve this game experience.
:egypt:
Firstly, I'll just say I only got the game recently, know relatively little about modding, and generally stand in awe of some of the great Mods I see floating about. Thanks!
One problem with modding - and it seems exacerbated by the nature of Civ3 - is that it is very difficult for individuals to take full advantage of the hard work of the Modders. When I say 'take full advantage', I generally mean using more than one mod at a time. There are a few reasons:
1. It is very hard (or tedious) for a gamer to use multiple mods. It involves multiple downloads and the dreaded intergration. There are so many issues that can be fixed or improved - civilizations, balance, units, graphics, governments, wonders, improvements but any one mod author doesn't have the time to address them all.
2. Many mods are continually being developed as bugs are found and game balance problems are corrected. This means that a gamer needs to keep an eye on the threads of all the mods he is using.
3. Mods that are each worthwhile in their own right might contradict each other. This is especially apparent in terms of graphics mods not dealing with expansions in gameplay mods. eg. Icons showing unit details in the city screen are great but what if another mod changes those details? Or what if a new civilization's UU is not scaled for a certain balance mod?
4. The use of the one gameplay file (blc) and independent mods means there is a tendency in Modders to throw in extra tweaks. eg Israel civ comes with a corruption fix. a goverment mod redos a lot of gameplay and unit balance fixes, etc.
Obviously these factors affect mod designers too, since their mods effectively compete with other mods that were designed to tackle completely different things. How many threads, for how many mods, for how many topics has the same or similiar feedback been sought and given? How compatible are saved games and user designed scenarios to certain mods? By developing the mods diseparately the cost the community as a whole is huge.
The solution, in my mind, is to start collaborating more. We need standards - well known and accepted mods - to evolve so that new mods don't reinvent the wheel. The Apolyton Pack for CTP comes to mind as an example of what I propose for Civ3.
What I propose, or suggest, specifically is a set of intergrated mods released as a whole and tested together. It would be a run as a collaborative project that develops or maintains this collection.
Other components:
1. the project would have a manager - a well known and respected individual. The project manager would be responsible for maintaining the collection in a high quality, coherent and easy to install fashion and could delegate work to trusted volunteers as necessary.
2. there would be a centralised site or thread from which all project files are available both at a 'stable' release and beta release.
3. Individual mods that comprise the project would have a clear jurisdiction over those files or settings within the project. The authors of those mod coordinate new ideas and development with the community, project manager and other related mods and their authors.
3a. Sharing on a development level of works in progress, graphical templates and motifs.
3b. Mod authors are free to maintain working versions of their mods for independent use at their own discretion.
4. Regular community feedback and consultation and outsourcing. eg for civilopeadia entries.
5. Clear and thorough documentation
These are a suggestion only, of course.
People differ in what they like and do not like. At this early stage there are a lot of people who prefer not to change game mechanics but like graphics mods. People would disagree over what civilisations are worth adding and which ones aren't. But in my opinion there are many things we can agree on. Perhaps we could disallow controversial changes? For the player or modder that doesn't think the changes go far enough, they still have a base product that is that much closer to the ideal.
Think what kind of gaming experience we could build!
Such a solution would probably evolve over time anyway. But why not get a head start?
Sorry for my inability to use specific examples in this post. Perhaps I'm coming from way out of left field with this. Perhaps not. Regardless, I would like to thank all the Modders out there who work tireless and ingeniously to improve this game experience.
:egypt:
Please volunteer! ) 
Comment