View Full Version : Is Modding Disabled?
Created a couple of addons for Iron Front (using Eliteness and just renaming .ifa -> .pbo and back) and upon attempting to load them get "Wrong signature for <addon>" as if its checking all addons to see if they are signed by the Iron Front devs, so is modding effectively disabled in the engine right now until the devs release their version of the modding tools? after reviewing the code of most of IF, there shouldn't be any problems using the tools already available, but that's just conjecture. Anyone else had any luck loading their .ifa's? or do the developers have any comments, or are we still just waiting for IF-Specific tools?
Mr Burns
May 28 2012, 14:15
Small excerpt from the community Q&A we held with Deepsilver / AWAR the last saturday.
(quick translation from german)
Q: How about community mods, can the devs say something about it?
A: Not yet, but we´ll be glad to include good mods into IF.
Q: So atm it´s not possible to load mods in IF?
A: It is possible, but not without our help, as they need to be signed with our key.
Steffen told me they´d post an official statement about modding that same evening, but i couldn´t find it yet.
Seems we need to wait some longer.
Thanks for the quick reply, I must have missed that interview over the weekend. I figured it'd be something like that. Such a shame, I had just finished replacing the awful K98/Mosin sounds just to realize I cant load them yet :(.
A thought on the "we'll be glad to include good mods into IF", the reluctance of using stock bi mod tools, IF sig checking any addon attempting to load, and their anti-cheat "plans" kind of has me worried they want to setup some kind of restricted modding environment to minimize the chance of people hacking (which wouldn't work at all), but I hope they are just taking their time to develop their own set of tools or something, I guess we will see in the announcement.
I think I wasted hours today trying various ways to get the game to load up a sound mod I've been working on as well, I thought I was doing something wrong but I guess not. They better sort this out soon.
I think I wasted hours today trying various ways to get the game to load up a sound mod I've been working on as well, I thought I was doing something wrong but I guess not. They better sort this out soon.
Glad to see I'm not the only one that was kind of confused at first, I really just hope they aren't going to try and change how the actual modding works in any way, Like only signing/loading certain "trusted" mods to keep multiplayer more consistent.
What a fantastic idea ,
I hope this helps with anti cheat and speeding up stability of vanilla , I think Bis should seriously consider this method for A3.
What a fantastic idea ,
I hope this helps with anti cheat and speeding up stability of vanilla , I think Bis should seriously consider this method for A3.
i hope your trolling
Gishank
May 28 2012, 17:09
The devs "approving" mods is a very bad way to go about things and could very easily discourage people from modding.
ProfTournesol
May 28 2012, 17:10
The devs "approving" mods is a very bad way to go about things and could very easily discourage people from modding.
Exactly. That's the worst idea ever.
I think in ofp and arma 1 , I would completely agree but since then , the numbers and variety are so few , I can't see major mods like ACE and Other major players disagreeing with consistency enforced by devs .
My two cents ,I crave mp stability and anything that allows for tighter anti cheat gets my vote .
Of course this method would have to prove stability and I have no real idea for IF devs intentions .
I think in ofp and arma 1 , I would completely agree but since then , the numbers and variety are so few , I can't see major mods like ACE and Other major players disagreeing with consistency enforced by devs .
My two cents ,I crave mp stability and anything that allows for tighter anti cheat gets my vote .
Of course this method would have to prove stability and I have no real idea for IF devs intentions .
The problem is it wouldn't increase stability at all, and it would do absolutely nothing to help stop cheating.
But it can as you have already seen, you tried to make a mod to the game and didn't succeed
ProfTournesol
May 28 2012, 17:24
I think in ofp and arma 1 , I would completely agree but since then , the numbers and variety are so few , I can't see major mods like ACE and Other major players disagreeing with consistency enforced by devs .
My two cents ,I crave mp stability and anything that allows for tighter anti cheat gets my vote .
Of course this method would have to prove stability and I have no real idea for IF devs intentions .
Modding becomes more and more difficult (technically speaking), adding some more constraint will make it completely disappear. Then, the MP crowd will be happy.
But it can as you have already seen, you tried to make a mod to the game and didn't succeed
Those nice guys who try to ruin RV engine MP games don't use addons for it anymore... just saying...
Xeno
Mr Burns
May 28 2012, 17:27
Despite all anti cheat and stability thoughts, i think having to have ArmA2 in order to make mods would limit chances of greatness evolving drastically.
And even if you already own ArmA2, the tedious "config, bin, start, close, fix config, bin again, start all over .. etc." addonmaking process really doesn´t need more constraints.
Yes but equally those other nice guys who are not so known , can disguise a simple sound mod that raises the sound of footsteps on there or other mundane little sneaky thing :)
Obviously it's all very subjective ,but I see everyone's point modding makes Bis games and all that , however ,there are some that are happy you can start vanilla and enjoy it and not being able to mod without restriction is a nice to have feature .
Yes but equally those other nice guys who are not so known , can disguise a simple sound mod that raises the sound of footsteps on there or other mundane little sneaky thing :)
Check what signature checking is all about... you don't want soundmod x or addon y beeing used on your server ? Enable signature checking on your server and don't add the server keys for those addons on your server... As simple as that.
The IF solution is not doing anything against "cheating" but hinders modders to even make mods for singleplayer.
Xeno
Yes but equally those other nice guys who are not so known , can disguise a simple sound mod that raises the sound of footsteps on there or other mundane little sneaky thing :)
Obviously it's all very subjective ,but I see everyone's point modding makes Bis games and all that , however ,there are some that are happy you can start vanilla and enjoy it and not being able to mod without restriction is a nice to have feature .
You clearly do not understand how the RV engine's addon signing system works, or even seem to be aware of its existence. Servers can choose to check addon signatures and only allow certain addons to be used. If someone changes the files within an addon, it causes a mismatch in the signature and the player will not be allowed to join the server.
The problem you are describing has already been solved by BIS long ago.
It's even more simpler now tho :)
And you are trying to say in an ideal world where everyone uses the full range of checks . You think every server owner knows how to in pho an addon and check config for cheats etc ? Hmm I needed to be in your head ,seems very idealistic and nice .
Also my other point is , right now this small team know, all bugs are there's ,not some small insignificant addon that someone forgot to tell them they had loaded , I think for getting a stable foundation it is genius .
After thinking about it again, I have to say you are right, Thromp. And let's hope BIS will implement this great solution in A3 too. Who needs mods and addons these days to keep a game alive...
Xeno
NoRailgunner
May 28 2012, 17:51
Thromp you are very special now please go and have fun with a console shooter.... :rolleyes:
After thinking about it again, I have to say you are right, Thromp. And let's hope BIS will implement this great solution in A3 too. Who needs mods and addons these days to keep a game alive...
Xeno
Totally agree with you. Then we would not have had the awful situation where DayZ shoots Arma to the top of the best sellers list, bringing in more funds for BI to use on A3, increasing the player base and boosting potential future sales of all BI games. Its disgusting.
Well the longer they let us wait the longer its going to take for all the good addons and mods to arrive. I don't think I'm wrong in saying that very few people would still be playing if they were stuck with the stock version of ArmA 2.
I've personally had to stop work on my sound mod now, as I can't even test out the sound samples that I'm making.
But it can as you have already seen, you tried to make a mod to the game and didn't succeed
Yes but equally those other nice guys who are not so known , can disguise a simple sound mod that raises the sound of footsteps on there or other mundane little sneaky thing :)
Obviously it's all very subjective ,but I see everyone's point modding makes Bis games and all that , however ,there are some that are happy you can start vanilla and enjoy it and not being able to mod without restriction is a nice to have feature .
You probably shouldn't speak about something you know little about. This wouldn't stop hacking at all, this would just hinder legit mod creation. As someone pointed out earlier, the hackers have moved on from creating addons a long, long time ago - they don't even use the system anymore, they just inject their code directly into the game bypassing anything devs throw at them. This thread isn't about terrible ideas for anti-cheat improvement either, its about the state of modding in Iron Front.
KBourne
May 28 2012, 18:12
Don't worry, the ability to mod will be there. I am almost sure the the IF devs are aware of the fact that modding is crucial for their tittles existence.
Not only that but I believe that a few of the devs where modders for ArmA2?
Anyway just wait it off, the game is just out for a couple of days ...
Kind regards
DMarkwick
May 28 2012, 18:33
I wondered why there were no Nazi zombies yet :)
But, on a serious note, how can any mod achieve the accolade of "quality" sufficient to earn a key, when no-one can make any kind of mod at all?
BTW, I should like to port JTD Fire & Smoke to IFL44 at some point :)
Yeah - I would like to get my skills slider over too - which requires CBA anyway so I might be waiting a while for that to get ported!
In some respects I do see why they might hold of for a couple of weeks - they are going to have a shed load of issues to deal with to start with and don't want any wild goose chases I guess. So in a way I am agreeing with Thromp's stability idea - but only in the short term. In reality I think they would be crazy to disallow or vet mods (the former just plain bad for sales and product lifetime, the latter just too much work for them).
I still think you might be slightly drunk though Thromp ;-)
I feel very humbled to have been quoted and dispelled by the great and the good ,
Hope one day people read the read me of addons better than they enter a forum thread , my point is and was that this is a fantastic way for stability of vanilla to be achieved and in my opinion A3 should follow suit , at no point have I said modding should not be allowed ever , I merely state my case that this is a very good way to debug without clutter and as for anti cheat , you can create cheat through pbo regardless of how a certain team do it now , it is my opinion a sanctioned method can only strengthen anti cheat.
For all anybody knows it may simply take a simple request to register your addons like tag at ofpec , but I presume all the dispellers know it's different so ,I leave you the great and the good and those who seem to know what I know about it all , to continue the debate in monotone
It was nice but not so productive I guess
I bow out of the convo here and test my addons in TOH and AO for now until debs give clarification
I wondered why there were no Nazi zombies yet :)
There are... Zombie sandbox....
I too think thatits okay if some mods were "endorsed" by the IF devs, but to only have "good" mods?
To me "Dayz" isnt a "good" mod, but lots of people love it and its helped sales a little.
Keep modding open IMHO is key to the longevity of the game.
I cant play vanilla Arma any more i need some mods to tailor it to my individual playstyle.
Whats good for you may not be right for me and Vica Versa.
Rgds
LoK
PS I am happy, however, to let them postpone the modding if it hinders the present bug tracking/fixing.
UPDATE: Re: DAYZ mod, I don't think it's "bad" (good and bad are subjective, which was kind of my point) just not quite my cup of tea.
therussiandong
May 29 2012, 00:37
I hope they just take modding out completely.
People need to stop feeling so entitled to things. The dev team worked their asses off to make a great game for you guys and all you want to do is change, change, change.
If you really want to mod you need to just go make your own game and don't ruin one's that are already made.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*sarcasm*
Nicholas
May 29 2012, 00:45
People need to stop feeling so entitled to things.
This part is completely true.
KBourne
May 29 2012, 05:12
Im going to dismantle this post in the nicest way possible,
I hope they just take modding out completely.
This will kill the game instantly, people will get tired of playing the same thing over and over again, devs should definitely not listen to this kind of advice if they want to bring this game to a higher level then it already is.
People need to stop feeling so entitled to things.
True, people are to demanding and I completely agree with the fact that some members are rude towards those that worked hard on the game but not everyone is like that, putting everyone on the same level isn't the way to go ..
The dev team worked their asses off to make a great game for you guys and all you want to do is change, change, change.
Yes they worked hard and they brought us a nice game, however Modding is not only about changing, it is a hobby like paintball or socker people like to get involved and taking that away from them because of a few rotten apples wouldn't be fair for those that mean well and get enjoyment out of it ...
If you really want to mod you need to just go make your own game and don't ruin one's that are already made.
Modding is not ruining mate, some of the modders are delivering state of the art products for free! I do not see any harm in to that, at release it is for the end user to decide to use those mods or not, the point you make that one needs to make their own game, well tbh thats kinda dull, some modders only do it for the fun of it they don't want to make money and in other cases not everyone has capital as leverage to make their own game ...
btw, I don't do sarcasm :P
kind regards ..
Hello all
Entitlement... hmm
I think with OFP->ArmaOA we have just been so spoiled with great mods and missions, fx and sounds etc that we (the community) forget/dont realise the amount of work that goes into these projects.
A sig i saw around here says "Dev's make ALL the things" and in its sarcasm/observations it's quite close to the bone.
In general we are quite a headonistic breed, a step back now and again is what's needed.
Now, why hasn't any made me a Tiger I mod??!
rgds
LoK
therussiandong
May 29 2012, 18:52
My sarcastic comment is now being taken seriously, so I feel as if I must respond.
While I do deeply value the developers time and effort put in the games they make, I do feel like ArmA and modding go perfectly hand in hand.
They compliment each other and find bugs and improve features for each other, saving time and money.
For example, most of us seem to be unhappy with the vanilla sounds. So instead of the dev team going out to record more sounds, JSRS or RWS could make their own sound packs.
Or take DayZ for example, they found a bug with the direct comms that has gone unattended for a very long time and is only now being corrected.
To sum it up, devs we love your work and nothing is stopping us from playing right now. But we want to put our own little twists in as well if its okay with you. :D
KBourne
May 29 2012, 19:02
My sarcastic comment is now being taken seriously
No thats the way I respond to sarcasm, by being serious :) like I said I went for the dismantling sarcasm :P
GossamerSolid
May 29 2012, 20:32
I hope modding becomes open soon because this game isn't going to last too long without modding.
The population is already small enough as it is.
-=Borz=-
May 29 2012, 21:59
I believe people should stop being so demanding and have some patience.
There are thousands of people, like myself, who are waiting to know all the possibilities the game can provide before deciding if buying it or not.
I can imagine some spoiled kiddies, with a chilli inside their asre waiting in the queue to buy this game on release to be the first to post videos on youtube, like they did with Modern Warfare X
Developers want to sell games. The sooner they release all top secret info, the sooner they get what they want. Our money (if deserved). They are new developers, they will learn soon ;)
Regards
Borzi
Reading these threads has me very concerned for the very heart of this game ,which is for the game to grow and be a success with its most loyal of gamers the ( OA /O flashpoint gamers) .
Now we all know that the richness of these games are not the campaigns not the single or even the multilayer but the editor and modding community and to try to stifle this is really the end of this game and if BI try to do this with A3 well its over for them .
Iron front itself has been taken up by members of the modding community and we have seen really more advancement and better game play in free mods like ACE and even Dayz so if they don't get there modding tools out to the community we will see this as a glorified mod and nothing else which will do more harm than good to the community itself.
NikoTeen
May 30 2012, 09:18
After testing out IF for a while, and especially after OA has become so mature and smooth thanks to the 30 addons I use on daily basis, I identified 3 major points that could be enhanced via modding :
1) Performance : smoothness is not even close to OA's even if its supposed to be the same build. I believe mods such as DVD (auto viewdistance) and clutter tweaking could do some justice here.
2) Sounds : sounds are just like vanilla OA, not at the level expected from such a game. JSRS would make a difference, especially with non impressive actual explosions ans non existent bullet cracks.
3) AI : I can't stand the vanilla AI, it's just bad. I use for OA an custom mix of SLX/ZEUS/ASR that makes the AI behave almost like humans would do.
That's the majors things I see right now, but I can imagine further enhancements such as recoil and rest tweaks, more weapons and vehicles... all the things :)
Hullo there
I loathe to play arma without the following mods
JSRS (Sound)
Blastcore (FX)
CoSLX (AI) with a sprinkling of other AI stuff
ST Hud (squad location/ situation enhancement)
ST Movement (movement enhancer)
These are the basics and even though movement in buildings is a little enhanced in IFL its not quite there. If only the equivalent of these mods were ported over (a BIG ask, I know) then I'd be a happy camper.
I am assuming and hoping the
A: Not yet, but we´ll be glad to include good mods into IF. was:
a. Incorrect
b. lost in translation
c. taken out of context
I do hope they get the game to a stable condition soon and start letting the modders begin to tweak.
rgds
LoK
Defunkt
May 30 2012, 23:09
Was about to purchase from BI Store then, just as I was going to enter my card details, I decided it'd be prudent to hold off until the modding question is actually resolved.
[APS]Gnat
May 31 2012, 14:57
Yeh, if this isn't mod'able ...... can't be bothered purchasing.
GossamerSolid
May 31 2012, 15:54
Yeah guys, hold off on your purchase until we have detail about modding.
I've spent $30 on the game and I haven't really played it too much because I have no interest in the included MP missions, the population is too splintered becuase the steam guys are stuck on the shitty 1.01 version, while the rest of us have the semi-decent 1.01a version.
We need a solid 1.02 to come out and modding to be enabled.
Not even considering buying it until I hear the line on this -it seems a new level of silly to effectively bite the hand that fed one's own success
Max Power
May 31 2012, 19:41
You realize this game isn't made by BI, correct?
[ASA]ODEN
May 31 2012, 19:53
You realize this game isn't made by BI, correct?
Yes, why do you ask?
You realize this game isn't made by BI, correct?
Yes -If Libmod hadn't enjoyed modding support in OFP they never would've gotten to the point where they are now; they surely know how important modding is to the long term success of a game of this genre
If they do not allow modding (suicidal long term policy), i will never purchase the game....
Max Power
Jun 1 2012, 11:20
Yes -If Libmod hadn't enjoyed modding support in OFP they never would've gotten to the point where they are now; they surely know how important modding is to the long term success of a game of this genre
So what you're saying is that because people liked their mod, they are "feeding" the IF developers somehow, as if the community is responsible for their creation of a good mod... and not only that, but the IF developers now owe the community a moddable game, and failure to come up with that moddable game is an assault on the community. Am I reading your statement correctly?
[APS]Gnat
Jun 1 2012, 11:51
.. IF developers now owe the community a moddable game, and failure to come up with that moddable game is an assault on the community.
No, to me its simply acknowledging that a very large percentage of BI gamers/the target community are here, buying and staying around because the game engine is very mod'able/able to have extra addons.
Deliberately so.
Thats either the types of gamers that are either "mod'ers" themselves or those who like a game that has regular mods/addons.
So ignoring that part of the community can this sort of ..... "feedback".
GossamerSolid
Jun 1 2012, 11:53
So what you're saying is that because people liked their mod, they are "feeding" the IF developers somehow, as if the community is responsible for their creation of a good mod... and not only that, but the IF developers now owe the community a moddable game, and failure to come up with that moddable game is an assault on the community. Am I reading your statement correctly?
Max, I'm just feeling that it's weird coming from a group of former modders that they would disable modding themselves...
It just kind of seems wrong.
Max Power
Jun 1 2012, 12:23
Wrong? Like ethically wrong?
Wrong? Like ethically wrong?
No.
Its up to the developers to decide if their game is moddable or not, but a not moddable game have a shorter life span.
Max Power
Jun 1 2012, 13:12
Well that's a little more of a balanced view than all of this talk of biting, insult, and hypocrisy.
ProfTournesol
Jun 1 2012, 13:40
Anyway, i understood that modding isn't supported yet, but that it's in their plan to support it in the near future, and eventually to integrate some of the modders' creations, if suitable, in their game/next release.
I think the assumption made by most people is that, as the game was built on the RV engine, modding would be supported. I think it's a fair assumption to make even though no-one explicitly said that it would be supported.
If they had said in the beginning;
"This game will not support user based mods or addons" or "This game will support user based mods or addons approved by the development team"
Then I suspect that less people would have jumped in and bought it straight away.
Are they waiting to get the platform more stable before opening it up to mods? Are the publishers worried about future DLC sales? Are they just trying to protect the style and the era of the game? Who knows!
In the end of course, it is up to them (or more likely the publisher) I guess, but surely they must be aware of the expectation even if they did not make any promises?
Either way it would be good to get a clear statement of intent from them!
In the end of course, it is up to them (or more likely the publisher) I guess, but surely they must be aware of the expectation even if they did not make any promises?
Either way it would be good to get a clear statement of intent from them!
Jedra has a point here! I would be lying if I said that I don't care about the modding possibilities in this game because I do. however it is on them to decide to open it or not, and if they don't well :( not that I am going to turn my back or something but it would be a shame because I like to try out stuff made by other community members, especially if it contributes to my video editing purposes and mission editing plans.
I hope indeed that they will clarify this sooner then later, to be honest you can say that the community can't demand anything for modding but on the other side if you have a healthy thought about this, it will determine the survivability for the game in the future whether they like it or not ...
kind regards
colonel stagler
Jun 1 2012, 15:17
After some laddish banter with Mlacix on their forum. I sent a formal request for the lib bisign along with the files for my SS retexture of the German Scouts. I got this swift, polite and informative message in reply.
Hey Stagler
Good to hear this, good job. We plan an announcement about this situation, and about how the modding will work in IF at the weekend. There you will get answer for all of your question, and after it we will open the addon making forum sections. Please after this announcement send me a message again about what you think with this system and in the future plans.
Best wishes, Mlacix.
After some laddish banter with Mlacix on their forum. I sent a formal request for the lib bisign along with the files for my SS retexture of the German Scouts. I got this swift, polite and informative message in reply.
Nice to hear your planning to texture SS German scouts, also nice to hear they are not shutting the door down.. so it seems :)
GossamerSolid
Jun 1 2012, 15:44
Looking forward to the announcement this weekend.
therussiandong
Jun 1 2012, 19:52
That's awesome! I have high hopes for this dev team, so I didn't think they would let us down.
It just wouldn't make sense for them to not allow modding. Eager to hear what they have to say, and maybe they will explain why they disabled it for now.
ProfTournesol
Jun 1 2012, 20:28
The announcement about modding is out :
http://forum.iron-front.com/showthread.php?358-Iron-Front-Liberation-1944-Modding-possibilities-Announcement
The announcement about modding is out :
http://forum.iron-front.com/showthread.php?358-Iron-Front-Liberation-1944-Modding-possibilities-Announcement
Like I thought and said previously, it is all about the license agreement which is not more then normal ... taken in account that the engine belongs to Bohemia interactive IF development needs to assure them that the content is legit .. however this might tighten modding down a bit, the door is not closed for those that are willing.
People need to adapt a little to the rules where IF development agreed upon with BIS, this might frighten some modders a bit but all in all I think this isn't a bad thing, like I see it the Devs of Iron fornt are willing to offer help the only thing needed are some licenses to get it don...
License it everyone happy
kind regards
This basicly makes modding impossible, at least for me.
I use O2 to make my addons, and as this is not allowed then i am out of this.
But if they told us this directley i would not had wasted my money on this.
Max Power
Jun 1 2012, 21:20
This basicly makes modding impossible, at least for me.
I use O2 to make my addons, and as this is not allowed then i am out of this.
But if they told us this directley i would not had wasted my money on this.
You need to read the post more carefully before you go catastrophizing.
The post suggests that you develop the addon using OA and its tools.
ProfTournesol
Jun 1 2012, 21:25
You need to read the post more carefully before you go catastrophizing.
The post suggests that you develop the addon using OA and its tools.
With an express and personal agreement from BIS...
You need to read the post more carefully before you go catastrophizing.
The post suggests that you develop the addon using OA and its tools.
Spot on, people need to read grrrr O-o :p Repro you can still use O2 but at this point they still looking what is possible and how they need to manage it,
What is not possible:
1: To use the BI tools suite or Arma sample models to create assets for Iron Front (unless the modder gets a personal license from Bohemia Interactive itself).
You only need a license of bis for free use of O2 to release Free addons for iron front you don't need nothing more. common can you guys read a bit before hustling in to conclusions? they are not shutting the door flat to your face, the only thing you need to do is contact bis and ask for a personal license. point....
Or something in that line :)
With an express and personal agreement from BIS...
Right and I don't see anything wrong with it, as it is a tool licensed under the bis AULA, there is no restriction as long if the modder keeps to the personal agreement He or She gets with bis ... its like with the video editing license we still can make video's yes? well then :)
See it from the POV from Iron front development versus Bohemia interactive and vica verca ...
Its the same for ArmA games,, modders do have an agreement with bis that they can release free user made addons for community purposes, read the Aula guys, the difference is Iron front Is second hand agreement while when modding directly for Arma is a first hand agreement with the engine developer. Heck they even give modders the opportunity to earn a few bucks extra if they can get in to agreement with Iron front development for who is willing to take a step further, maybe even a job offer who knows ....
kind regards
Yes maybe so...
But as it is now i have to get a licence from bis to even start at it.
And then even i have to get a key from If to even test it in the game, and then as most of addons maker to bis games know.
To have in game is only the start of it, you have to change it a lot of times to get all of the bugs out of it.
And if you need a key for every change then it would be an enourmus task to get it finished.
As it is for now you need a key signed by the If developers to even get it in game.
And if it stay like this the workload for any addon maker would be really big.
Yes maybe so...
But as it is now i have to get a licence from bis to even start at it.
yeah and what do you think you have now with bis for modding with ArmA? also a license, Bis agreed upon you to mod for Arma but not for Iron front because bis has a sales agreement for the use of their engine with deep silver AWAR not with you :) you only need to take A step extra to be able to mod in Iron front, send a mail and your don it cost NOTHING! nothing, ''except of a little time of your end' and a hell of a lot more time for bis to reply on all those mails they will get for such a license,
wait for the license and start modding plain and simple how hard can it be ??
as for the key you only need to send the content to them so they can test it and if it is legit they will sign the addon for release. You can use OA to test your addons or at least thats the general id and what I make out of it. Maybe they will come up with something different in the near future as they said in the post that they are looking in to it for what is possible maybe they can agree upon making tools like bis for modding and a key for testing who knows, technology doesn't stop with one program or tool ....
kind regards
Have you made for ex a tank into Arma2?
To make a tank into the Arma games there is really a lot of work to do.
At first the first lod wich take with texturing at least (for me) 2-3 weeks to do, then resolution lods another day.
Shadow lods and other ones to do another 1-3 days, cfg model.cfg and config.cpp + one day.
On top of this all the changes for the If models, and this is not a little work for what i have seen.
And then you got it in game, for to discover all the bugs you have to solve!!
On top of all of that you now have fo get a key for every change you make, as i think the developers will not have the time to make this for you.
On top of all of that you now have fo get a key for every change you make, as i think the developers will not have the time to make this for you.
I never said modding is easy, I said that it isn't that hard to get the license, what the key concerns it might be a bit tricky but not impossible to get some sort of an understanding with the developers give it some time, they are not entirely sure whats possible if it comes to testing the addons..
The thing is I understand the disappointment at some point but on the other hand I hope you can see where they are coming from, such things need some time they are aware that there are quit a few members that like to mod and that it might be harder to meet everyones expectations. They are really trying to solve this issue and as I see it the door is still open they didn't say no so far ...
therussiandong
Jun 1 2012, 22:36
Great.. so now we have to jump through hoops to make a simple addon.
Thanks a lot.
Great.. so now we have to jump through hoops to make a simple addon.
Thanks a lot.
We should not lose all hope.
If the developers makes it a little bit eaysier for moders like myself. maybe a private license to test addons ingame without the key part.
Then i see a future in this.
Max Power
Jun 1 2012, 22:56
I believe the article was stating that you can already prototype Addons in OA. You would only need such a license for adding features specific to IF.
We should not lose all hope.
If the developers makes it a little bit eaysier for moders like myself. maybe a private license to test addons ingame without the key part.
Then i see a future in this.
Well don't lose hope but don't over eager it aether just wait it off a bit, they had a miss understanding with bis about the agreement and modding and using the bis tool suits. Then taken in account they are new on the field they try to bring something to the public and they already had a rough weak in a whole ...
I don't think it is easy for them aether, and you can't put this on bis because they have an agreement with IF development. Thats business, that on the side its not said that IF development cant come up with some sort of a solution, but you also need to be aware that it might be as it is and that you need to accept it.
kind regards
---------- Post added at 01:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:01 AM ----------
I believe the article was stating that you can already prototype Addons in OA. You would only need such a license for adding features specific to IF.
true but take in account that not everyone owns that game :) they might have new comers on the plate that want to mod also .. The only way for them to mod in IF then is trough purchasing ArmA2 OA, not that it is tremendously expensive but still, it would be nice if they can release some sort of a test key for developers, which need to ask for it of course with a license agreement where they abide to only use it for testing purposes or something in that line.
kind regards
Max Power
Jun 1 2012, 23:15
All I want- and certainly it is not against the forum rules to catastrophize- is for people to stop jumping to the most catastrophic interpretation of that article. It seems to me that it would be a simple matter of writing an email describing your intent, awaiting a reply, then starting work using the OA tools. Then, when you're satisfied, you can begin working together with the devs to get it ported over and released officially. It's an extra step, and someone else is in control of whether or not you can do it. That kind of sucks compared to the free and open way we have been doing it for BI's games, I agree. But trust me, do you think the people at IF really want to pour over all these applications and yay or nay things based on either an email full of a boat load of smoke or an addon that soemone has already put months into but may or may not make the grade? I am quite sure that this agreement has everything to do with some protective restrictions that must be in place, and nothing to do with the IF devs being control freaks. Maybe I'm wrong, but I guess you either mod with the restrictions or you don't. Raging and ranting about how it should be a different way and could be if only you complain hard enough, I guarantee you, is not helping.
By all means, express your concerns about the arrangement, but be realistic, and put some thought into the situation before you just blurt out "Write an email? Too much work. Kthnxbye.". When you are talking about a hobby commitment that may take months of your spare time, complaining about writing an email and establishing a personal relationship with the devteam of a game you ostensibly love so much sounds patently ridiculous.
true but take in account that not everyone owns that game :) they might have new comers on the plate that want to mod also .. The only way for them to mod in IF then is trough purchasing ArmA2 OA, not that it is tremendously expensive but still, it would be nice if they can release some sort of a test key for developers, which need to ask for it of course with a license agreement where they abide to only use it for testing purposes or something in that line.
kind regards
That is true, and it is absolutely a legitimate and well thought out criticism.
Hellfire257
Jun 1 2012, 23:17
Not sure what to make of this. It sounds like it makes it a tremendous pain the arse to test anything at the moment. I'll wait for more information/clarification on it. The license stuff is fine with me, but the testing part is just...off. We'll see!
a legitimate and well thought out criticism.
It was not really meant as criticism :p I try to see it from both sides and like I see the statement now for those that own ArmA2OA will have less restriction then those that don't have it because they don't have the key for basic testing. However I do understand why IF development made that statement I hope people will read it more thorough then what Ive seen the past few hours and look deeper in to that article, at some point I see and understand a bit why some are disappointed, but like you said raging doesn't help. We don't get anywhere with that kind of attitude, like said building up a more personal relation with the devs from Iron front might bring up some new id's in a whole, stating that it is a hobby where an individual doesn't show commitment when they need to jump trough an extra hoop sounds idd a bit strange ...
but hey who am I to judge others :)
kind regards
Having read the statement I can see how they are bound to the licence agreement with BIS when it comes to using BIS tools to create addons - from that point of view it's kind of sensible.
I think though that it is concentrating on the 'big stuff'. There are loads of little addons in Arma that don't do very much but are very useful that people knock together in a short amount of time to fix an immediate problem. Then there are the little replacement configs that are built to change weapon loadouts and the like. I can't see these ever making it to IF under the current agreement. Firstly, the addon maker just isn't going to bother to go through an approval and QA process just for a small config replacement, secondly the IF dev team could very quickly get bogged down approving hundreds of tiny mods/addons!! Not to mention that a config replacement couldn't be tested by the addon maker with the current arrangement.
Also it's worth remembering that the guys who make the large addons, probably started by making small addons (maybe just for their clan) - it's going to be hard for the new guys to learn unless they do it in A2 or A3 (or ToH).
I would have like to have converted my own addons to IF, but mostly they use CBA which may or may not get ported - we'll have to wait and see.
Also, it seems that those who were looking forward getting some units with "authentic WWII German symbology" may be scuppered from the start...
"In addition X1Software/Awar will make sure the content contains no cheats or other abusive or non legal content (does not violate other people's rights, e.g. is original content based on original content and not for example ripped off content from Arma; contains no banned symbols and the like)."
Anyway, it will be interesting to see how this develops.
Nicholas
Jun 2 2012, 02:31
I said that it isn't that hard to get the license
How do you know this? Have you gotten a license?
Ultimately, this does make the modding process a lot harder, just read what Jedra had to say (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?134984-Is-Modding-Disabled&p=2161661&viewfull=1#post2161661) about it. I believe that because of this, the modding community will not be very large for Iron Front. I can understand that this is caused by an agreement with Bohemia Interactive. I really hope the developers have plans to release lots of DLC to compensate for this.
therussiandong
Jun 2 2012, 03:26
Part of me wishes I hadn't bought this game yet. Its so buggy already that I don't have the patience anymore now because of this whole modding situation.
So let me get this straight.. We can't use the BI Tools in X1's game because the tools belong to BI.. and even if you get the addon done you have to ask for a license?
But what the hell does that even mean? What could they possibly give you that makes it work?
It probably will make it harder for unexperienced modders, but I think the experienced ones who are interested in Iron Front will take up the opportunity. Its not all bad, take this as an example:
You make a new tank. You show it to X1 / AWAR. They think it'd fit perfectly in the game. You might not be very good with doing the configs or even textures but you're a great modeller. You work together with X1 / AWAR and provide them with an excellent new tank model and they help you out with the configs and texture work. The tank gets added in a patch. Everyone downloads the patch and gets to play with your new tank model. You get lots of recognition and praise for it. Everyone wins.
I don't think some people will be able to understand, but its just out of X1 / AWAR's hands as they don't own the engine and can't offer the same freedom Bohemia can. However I think this compromise will still lead to a game that will grow with the community's help over time for everyone.
therussiandong
Jun 2 2012, 08:32
But what makes you think they would take the time to do configs/texture for us?
Frankly, to me it seems like they don't care much about the mods or addons.
How do you know this? Have you gotten a license?
I am not much of a moddeler or a coder my self, but I am very sure if I mail bis with the right intentions that I can get such a license in no time, It would not make any sense when IF development writes it in their statement if Bohemia Interactive is going to turn down every sing sole that asks for one? This means both parties have been talking about it before what can be don and what not.
Ultimately, this does make the modding process a lot harder,
True but it doesn't make it impossible aether is it?
just read what Jedra had to say (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?134984-Is-Modding-Disabled&p=2161661&viewfull=1#post2161661) about it. I believe that because of this, the modding community will not be very large for Iron Front. I can understand that this is caused by an agreement with Bohemia Interactive. I really hope the developers have plans to release lots of DLC to compensate for this.
What Jedra is saying might be true, he nails it down a bit more trough the rules and points more onwards the bigger modders ...
however I still think that the more serious modders will get an opportunity here, it might be that the smaller modders like config replacement files and such will be left out this time, like said it is not ArmA2 and not Bohemia interactive and it is certainly not IF's engine, IF Development has an agreement with BIS which they need to follow, they also have to follow the law if it come towards releasing explicit content like symbols, the freedom in Iron Front might get tuned down by this but if we look a bit towards where they are coming from its pretty much understandable.
Kind regards
Hellfire257
Jun 2 2012, 10:46
Jedra is right on. I'm a smaller modder who mainly makes things for personal/clan use and this makes it very awkward to do such things.
If anyone is thinking I make personal things because I'm using dodgy content, I'd like to point out that when I mod, the end goal isn't to release anything - it is simply to learn. Most of it isn't of presentable quality! :D
Icewindo
Jun 2 2012, 13:22
...
You only need a license of bis for free use of O2 to release Free addons for iron front you don't need nothing more. common can you guys read a bit before hustling in to conclusions? they are not shutting the door flat to your face, the only thing you need to do is contact bis and ask for a personal license. point....
...
They are shutting the door flat my in our face, maybe even more...
If every adddon, let it be a new skin, a config change, a new weapon or a new fieldtoilet needs to be approved and signed by the IF devs for it to be able to be loaded by the game this will seriously cut down the number of mods for this game and many modders won't start at all because of the barriers put up.
And who's not to say an addon won't be signed by the devs because it doesn't fit their type. This is ridiculous and I'm just glad I don't have enough time to get back into addon creation anyway.
Jedra is right on. I'm a smaller modder who mainly makes things for personal/clan use and this makes it very awkward to do such things.
If anyone is thinking I make personal things because I'm using dodgy content, I'd like to point out that when I mod, the end goal isn't to release anything - it is simply to learn. Most of it isn't of presentable quality! :D
Full agree there.
They are shutting the door flat my in our face, maybe even more...
Nope they don't you are only feeling that way because they aren't that flexible as Bohemia interactive is, and you surely don't take in account that they have also rules to follow! You only see it from the modders side :) now I am going to say that the ones that react like this are very selfish, You do know they don't ow you nothing except of a working game yes?
If every adddon, let it be a new skin, a config change, a new weapon or a new fieldtoilet needs to be approved and signed by the IF devs for it to be able to be loaded by the game this will seriously cut down the number of mods for this game and many modders won't start at all because of the barriers put up.
Those that want to mod will step over that barrier, and I bet they will! Iron front is a good game aether with modding or without mods ..
And who's not to say an addon won't be signed by the devs because it doesn't fit their type. This is ridiculous and I'm just glad I don't have enough time to get back into addon creation anyway.
And they have the right to do so whether you like it or not, they have laws to follow and they have a strict agreement with bis and thats that, very sad for those that can not comply to this but thats how it is whining is not going to help ....
kind regards
Maybe this approach is a good thing, for a while the entire Iron Front community will be able to play with one n other, without the hassle of finding and then loading 3rd party content.
There are a lot of non ArmA players arriving on the scene that havent a clue about the hassles caused by addons.
and then when more information comes to light, it may very well be that some of the decent addons are incorporated into IF
Could be an excellent way for quality control.
No point in second guessing what the outcome will be, simply wait and see and enjoy the game.
Mr Burns
Jun 2 2012, 17:06
@<hidden>: You maintain a very tight defensive grid on this matter, does it shoot down ICBM's too? :o
Throwing in two quick examples of fun i couldn´t have because of restrictions:
-Paintball in WW2
-RO2 voices merged with DSAI (only for personal use)
Pzf-chicken ammo? Not gonna happen either, all the fun stuff...
Using an ArmA engine, is almost implying a friendly attitude towards modification.. (this is one factor that draws me towards a game purchase.) I'm not terribly worried about it at this point, however a couple of patches in and we'll see for sure.. :j:
Icewindo
Jun 2 2012, 18:39
Nope they don't you are only feeling that way because they aren't that flexible as Bohemia interactive is, and you surely don't take in account that they have also rules to follow! You only see it from the modders side :) now I am going to say that the ones that react like this are very selfish, You do know they don't ow you nothing except of a working game yes?
A working game... this I have yet to see with the mission stoppers and whatnot...
Those that want to mod will step over that barrier, and I bet they will! Iron front is a good game aether with modding or without mods ..
Imho there'll only be a marginal amount of modders left after this. Maybe they'll top the activity of the TOH modding forums but that's not hard to do.
And they have the right to do so whether you like it or not, they have laws to follow and they have a strict agreement with bis and thats that, very sad for those that can not comply to this but thats how it is whining is not going to help ....
kind regards
They could have told the community just maybe ABIT earlier than after release about their strict modding policy. Before the release there were only positive replies on possible modding. (quick, Iron Front devs, edit your past posts!)
You also missed my point here. Not accepting an addon because the devs don't like it's style has nothing to do with following laws and licenses.
...
Throwing in two quick examples of fun i couldn´t have because of restrictions:
-Paintball in WW2
-RO2 voices merged with DSAI (only for personal use)
Pzf-chicken ammo? Not gonna happen either, all the fun stuff...
My brother in mind :)
@<hidden>: You maintain a very tight defensive grid on this matter, does it shoot down ICBM's too? :o
No I maintain a very understanding and tight grid on this matter thats totally something different -> which don't needs any ICBM's :P is it because I don't align with the common critique? :rolleyes: I think I said already that I do understand the disappointment but that will not change the fact that they have a modding policy which we need to abide by willing or not willing :)
A working game... this I have yet to see with the mission stoppers and whatnot...
Do bear in mind that this matter does not concern every gamer and might only be inflicted upon some users of this game, which they are trying to fix :)
They could have told the community just maybe ABIT earlier than after release about their strict modding policy. Before the release there were only positive replies on possible modding. (quick, Iron Front devs, edit your past posts!)
Dear Iron Front Fans
We have to apologize for our incorrect statements about being able to provide exactly the same possibilities and process of community modding for Iron Front as Arma does. There has been a misunderstanding on our side until very recently about our agreement with Bohemia Interactive on the possibilities and limitations.
Iron Front will allow modding, but there are limits and certain things to keep in mind. This is to not violate both our agreement with Bohemia Interactive and the license a modder accepts when he is using the BI tools suite.
I understand from this quoting that they had a misunderstanding between them and Bohenia Interactive where they thought that the same possibilities for modding could be delivered like with ArmA2, sadly this isn't case. Where they also need to adapt.
Mistakes happen...
You also missed my point here. Not accepting an addon because the devs don't like it's style has nothing to do with following laws and licenses.
They have all the right to Implement such a rule, however they never stated that they will not accept addons which they personally don't like. Not that it not might happen but the main reason of the rule as such has been applied because they want to be able to screen the content for banned symbols and that it doesn't contain explicit forbidden content. You can't expect because you or others want to see it differently that they will comply ...
Kind regards
GossamerSolid
Jun 2 2012, 20:18
I understand from this quoting that they had a misunderstanding between them and Bohenia Interactive and the IF development team where they thought that the same possibilities for modding could be delivered like with ArmA2, sadly this isnt so and they need to adapt and so need the user.
Mistakes happen...
Not mistakes like this when I paid $29.99
They should offer refunds then because they led everybody to believe that it'd be open to modding like A2, then turned around and stuck a digital dick in our digital assholes.
Not mistakes like this when I paid $29.99
And now you are broke? If you really have gotten the game only for modding then I would assume that you would put some more effort in to your hobby then only complain about 29.99 dollars common, Is there not anyway that you would possible be able to mod in Iron front or are you just following the rest of the pack?
They should offer refunds then because they led everybody to believe that it'd be open to modding like A2,
Yeah right where in the enclosed selling license is there stated that it will be included ??? where !
Then turned around and stuck a digital dick in our digital assholes.
Yeah solid copy :rolleyes:
Max Power
Jun 2 2012, 20:30
Let us not forget that the license BI supplies the A2 Tool Suite clearly states that they may only be used to create content for BI's games. This may have something to do with the situation.
2. Limited Use of License: [...] The licensor also specifically prohibits the use of the Software for other purpose than designing, developing, testing, and producing non-commercial game content for computer games developed by the Licensor only.
3. End User's Obligations: [...] B.You are entitled to use the Program for your own use, but you are not entitled to: [...] (iv) Commercially exploit or allow a 3rd party commercially exploit game content you created using the Software, including but not limited to use by military organizations for computer aided training or commercially released game content;
So it looks like IF DLC doesn't fall under the scope of the BI Tools 2 license. So, if you give the addon or mod to them, and they adapt it, possibly it falls under the scope of their agreement with BI instead.
GossamerSolid
Jun 2 2012, 22:25
I don't care about BI Tools usage, I care about being able to run my own addons (such as config changes).
Max Power
Jun 2 2012, 22:42
You can't do that without the packing tools ;)
You can't do that without the packing tools ;)
I was thinking the same just now, not only that I wonder :rolleyes: ... oh never mind I am going to leave it at that :p
lol
RunForrest
Jun 2 2012, 22:53
... I care about being able to run my own addons ...
exactly
I run hundreds of small addons, mostly fixes (GDT,Proper;Truemods etc... i have kind of my very own Warmod running) without those i dont play ArmA. Some of those would also be great and NEEDED in IF. But i dont think they will make it into this game. I hope future proves me wrong.
On the other hand its great for PvP gameplay to have all servers on the same "addon-status", BUT im not very interested in PvP with the ArmA engine because the grafics are not very consistent among all clients (u cant force same grafic settings on all clients - which makes fair gameplay impossible) + the main big problem of grass clutter not being rendered at greater distances.
GossamerSolid
Jun 2 2012, 23:43
You can't do that without the packing tools ;)
CPBO/Eliteness/other dePBO programs aren't BITools
soooo...
Max Power
Jun 3 2012, 00:00
So what? So, develop it in ArmA 2 like they suggest and / or talk to the IF people and see if you can get the keys to do some testing.
CPBO/Eliteness/other dePBO programs aren't BITools
soooo...
You know that those tools are not associated with Bohemia Interactive in any way and no approval or warranty, implied use, nor permission has been given by them? And it probably will never happen either, It is only tolerated by them to a curtain degree and as long you don't get any permission from bis the same rule as the Bis tools suit may be applied on it ...
I don't think Iron Front Development actually gave anyone the permission to use those user made tools on their game nor the developers of those tools. You might want to ask first before you do so, before we just assume again that we can ...
Just you know that you need to be aware of this ...
GossamerSolid
Jun 3 2012, 05:36
I don't think Iron Front Development actually gave anyone the permission to use those user made tools on their game nor the developers of those tools. You might want to ask first before you do so, before we just assume again that we can ...
They don't have the authority to tell me what user made tools I cannot use.
Max Power
Jun 3 2012, 06:03
Well, it's true, but I guess they can accept or deny your addons based on whatever criteria.
They don't have the authority to tell me what user made tools I cannot use.
hmmm, coming to think of it you might be right on the using part but let me rephrase it a little bit more to this:
If aether the Development of Iron Front or Bohemia interactive would say that they will not approve the use of curtain user made tools for modding as it might brake or even threaten stability and playability of the game, single player wise or MP wise then I think they have the right to do so.
Modding is free entertainment which is not exactly a feature enclosed in the licenses of the game in a whole so they are in fact not bound to offer you assistance for it. But they do give you it, Bohemia interactive has more flexibility and Iron front a little lesser which not means that they don't allow it but they are certainly not bound to offer you anything to be able to mod.
The only thing I want to say is: Be happy with what you get, when you get it which is an extra e.g. a bonus and act accordingly towards it, don't be picky and say thank you.
Kind regards
ProfTournesol
Jun 3 2012, 10:48
The only thing is want to say is be happy with what you get, when you get it which is an extra e.g. a bonus and act accordingly towards it, don't be picky and say thank you.
Say thank you for being able to mod for free, to attract new buyers with new free content, to give one's free time and dedication to their game ?
Say thank you for being able to mod for free, to attract new buyers with new free content, to give one's free time and dedication to their game ?
Euhm Yes,
If you get a new Car or for example a model kit for a P51 which you will put together also for free, do you say thank you or F... You? To be honest get real, Do people actually get education around here or WHAT because I am starting to wonder? Saying thank you for something you get for free is the least you can do,...
Kind regards
ProfTournesol
Jun 3 2012, 11:00
Euhm Yes,
If you get a new Car or for example a model kid for a P51 which you will put together also for free, do you say thank you or F... You? To be honest get real, Do people actually get education around here or WHAT?
Saying thank you for something free is the least you can do ...
Kind regards
I perfectly understand IF team position towards modding, regarding their agreement with BIS. But involve yourself in modding and you'll understand that it's the modders who are giving something for free, my bad.
There are some very valid points raised in here ,
BUT i find it very sad that people seem to have a lack of understanding of the press release and respect for the team that made this game , its not BIS its a small team of what was modders and others who decided to make there own vision ,they asked BIS for Engine rights and made it a reality.
People have not even read the statement , you wouldnt think for a moment they have said , HI you can make mods but for now please use Arma2 /oa to test them and if we think they are viable , we hope we can not only allow them in our Game but also may even allow you tom earn some cash for your hobby.
Absolutely pathetic attitude ,I bought the game so i own the game and how it will be developed and played by all because i like it my way :( .
never seen such arrogance really in these forums for quite sometime ( well since Project reality / DAYZ mod was public lol).
But involve yourself in modding and you'll understand that it's the modders who are giving something for free, my bad.
You do understand that without the support of the developer modding will be a death end? You would not release one tiny thing if it wasn't for them! I need to reckon Bohemia Interactive did spoiled the community as such :S which makes the community assume they can take it for granted on a other game development .....
my bad, at a certain point it has no use to debate I guess :) ...
Kind regards
Hellfire257
Jun 3 2012, 11:09
Modding is hard enough as it is. Making modders (new and old) jump through even more hoops is very off-putting. If I am 100% honest, I wouldn't have bought IF if I had known what I know now. It is disappointing. I, as a customer am disappointed with the product I was sold. Question that if you will, but you will not be able to persuade me otherwise. I do however acknowledge that it is my fault for buying a product that I didn't know everything about. With hindsight, I will not be pulling the same mistake twice.
From a business perspective it makes perfect sense - BI doesn't want IF44 to become a separate, standalone World War II-specific platform with the same capabilities of Arma2, which would siphon off a large portion of the existing Arma2 modding community.
Disappointed about the news - I'm viewing IF44 as just an expensive DLC rather than a new game..
Hey Stagler
Good to hear this, good job. We plan an announcement about this situation, and about how the modding will work in IF at the weekend. There you will get answer for all of your question, and after it we will open the addon making forum sections. Please after this announcement send me a message again about what you think with this system and in the future plans.
Best wishes, Mlacix.
Since their announcement is out i was wondering if you have been granted access to a key to test it?
And if so do you have any screenshots?
Are people actually serious when they say Addon making is a negative effect on the game?
Have you all lost your mind?
A2 - Shitty explosions even more dull unrealistic gameplay, dull sounds. Not enough flight mechanics, not even a fully completed military game. I love A2 more than anything but the game have been partially built up by the community that want to mod.
Putting a strangle on this for multiplayer sessions when there's already a way to fix addons for servers/block addons?
You seem to forget the awesome addons such as ACE, WARFX, JSRS today I can't play without it.
Nonsense saying addons should be blocked, foolish I tell you!
True but a game can also be played without mods and addons, but arma 2 got a bit dull in long terms. I dont hope this but i fear that it's also gonna happen to IF over time.
unless of course there is going to be any interest for the modders
Modding will help in every way. There ain't a single thing that can be negative with this?
If there's something negative for singleplayer COOP purposes be my guest, type it all in here.
I wouldn't imagine a MILSIM group in arma 2 without ACE, JSRS and WarFX. The games effects and sounds ain't good enough, I'm not saying BIS don't know how to make effects and all, however they are creating a huge game, if then a addon group focuses on explosion effects only, that will ofc be a more quality explosion, eh?
GossamerSolid
Jun 3 2012, 14:46
Just looked on one of the cheating forums related to ArmA 2, they have their cheat mods in IF, yet us legit mod developers can't put ours in...
Great, just great...
I've never encountered a cheater in my 3 years of playing Arma 2. Never ever, feels wierd to hear about it.
I've never encountered a cheater in my 3 years of playing Arma 2. Never ever, feels wierd to hear about it.
Wow. You lucky bloke. :)
Whilst not a prevalent in Arma as they are in other games they do exist. I mainly encounter the greifing types who mass spawn stuff. very annoying indeed. with the recent popularity of DAYZ i've noticed an increase of script kiddies on pub servers. Not vast, but definitely there.
Shame the hacks are out for IF, but it's not surprising.
It is a shame that modding for IFL has to be done this way.
rgds
LoK
therussiandong
Jun 3 2012, 17:41
If they had said that the modding wouldn't be similar to ArmA before release, they wouldn't have received as many purchases.
I know I wouldn't have bought it.
Its just marketing strategies.
game cheating lol. yes I will not got this if you cann't mod it. I feel funny buying a mod. then you can not mod it. very sad.
this game not see cheating on server a big thing. kick i say
colonel stagler
Jun 4 2012, 01:28
Since their announcement is out i was wondering if you have been granted access to a key to test it?
And if so do you have any screenshots?
I have not been granted a key access yet no. Although I sent Mlacix my source files I had been working on for the IF guys to look at upon request. I have however made progress with my mod without them because after unpacking the files I discovered many textures are changeable via hiddenselection. I do intend to release as an addon however if IF are willing to cooperate.
Great news, We may need to check forum arma.at.ua. As most of the modder on IF use this site. the site in Russia.
jblackrupert
Jun 4 2012, 03:09
The forcing of Gemany's pathetic censorship laws on people is good enough for me to say. No sale.
The servers are all pretty much empty from what I've seen on checking it out on a couple of my friends system who bought it.
Max Power
Jun 4 2012, 03:22
IL2 was the same way. It was a great game.
jblackrupert
Jun 4 2012, 05:00
Great game or not, Developer treating customers like children who can't handle a few Swastikas on Uniforms won't be seeing my money.
Max Power
Jun 4 2012, 05:22
Great game or not, Developer treating customers like children who can't handle a few Swastikas on Uniforms won't be seeing my money.
That's not an accurate description of the situation, jblackrupert. Complying with German law is not treating your customers like children.
jblackrupert
Jun 4 2012, 05:41
That's not an accurate description of the situation, jblackrupert. Complying with German law is not treating your customers like children.
German law applies to the retail game. Not user made addons
Max Power
Jun 4 2012, 05:56
Right, but if they are releasing it themselves then the law might be applicable to them as a retail thing. You can't make a MLP game, get it rated, and then suddenly release the swastika fan pack that puts all kinds of swastikas and exploding heads into it.
If they are not giving their fanbase enough credit in some area, I don't think it has anything directly to do with swastikas.
jblackrupert
Jun 4 2012, 07:25
The rules state that modders cannot made addons or mod using banned symbols.
Anyhoo, the servers are virtually empty and what servers are populated are overrun with hackers
that with the heavy handed addon/mod rules and requirements........ I give the game 6 months before it tanks.
[APS]Gnat
Jun 4 2012, 07:27
.......... MP, are you a paid spokesperson or something?
Seems you have to defend against ANY view/every post that swings the other way.
The BIS success formula is WELL understood by this community. As modders/addon makers themselves, seems to me the IF team have little excuse for flying in its face.
Complying with German law
Pure smokescreen.
Max Power
Jun 4 2012, 07:40
I think you're misinterpretting what I'm saying, Gnat.
I'm against jbr saying that they are treating their customer base like children based on his criticism of the swastika situation for the following reasons:
IL2 was an international game made in europe and could contain no banned symbols either.
In my understanding, the devs have to encorperate mods into the game at least partially themselves, or at least green light them.
The situation of material generated by the dev team vs. material approved by the dev team seems to lack definition.
I am not countering every complaint. If you read the actual thread, you would see that. I'm against people freaking out and lighting their hair on fire, and running around yelling about how the devs are abusing the community, just like I would be against someone saying those things about YOU based on the same premises. The fact remains that modding is restricted. To me, as a mod maker, the 'hoops' you have to 'jump through' don't seem all that severe. But, to other people, maybe it's too much. Yelling and screaming about the problems without actually addressing the points raised in the address is emotionalism, it's rumour spreading, and I think that it would be unfortunate of other people forewent a game they would normally enjoy because someone was ranting and raving in a forum. jbr is the perfect posterboy for this, in this instance, with his little rant about the devs basically patronizing the community because they can't approve banned symbols, and mods must be approved. That conclusion is not supported by any of the information. If you don't like a game with nazis but without swastikas, that's fine. Post your opinion. Just don't make some frankly stupid rant based on some emotionalistic shortcut to thinking. I don't think that's fair, and I don't think that that deserves existing without being challenged.
therussiandong
Jun 4 2012, 07:41
Gnat;2163167'].......... MP, are you a paid spokesperson or something?
Seems you have to defend against ANY view/every post that swings the other way.
The BIS success formula is WELL understood by this community. As modders/addon makers themselves, seems to me the IF team have little excuse for flying in its face.
Pure smokescreen.
I'm starting the think the same about KBourne...
NoRailgunner
Jun 4 2012, 08:04
Maybe this is a agreement between IF:Lib44 devs and their publisher DeepSilver? Why should a publisher refuse to make profit with further addons/DLC'S? Btw German law is strictly against using swastikas and banned symbols especially if they can/will be used to glorify fascist movement, NS regime + crime and their military.
German law applies to the retail game. Not user made addons
I'm an American living here in Germany (non-military; civilian residency), so I'm forced to buy "censored" versions of any game over here. I'd love to ask a lawyer whether mods/addons are included with the censorship but I think it'd raise some eyebrows :j:
I'd be satisfied just being able to mod the game for my own private use. It's a shame we'll never see mods like ASR_AI, WarFX, etc.. ported over though.
jblackrupert
Jun 4 2012, 09:15
I'm an American living here in Germany (non-military; civilian residency), so I'm forced to buy "censored" versions of any game over here. I'd love to ask a lawyer whether mods/addons are included with the censorship but I think it'd raise some eyebrows :j: .
I'm pretty sure the German laws are like NoRailgunner described. The reason why you are including those symbols is the concern...... Glorifying the Reich.. Hitler....etc.
My issue is with with the developers telling addon/mod makers they are not allowed to put them in regardless of which country they live in.
The game was marketed heavily to the Arma and Red Orchestra crowd.
if they planned all along to censor and dictate which addons and mods can be made and who can make them they should have been up front about that in the beginning
the reason I suspect they didn't is they knew full well it would have effected sales.
As for MP calling me the poster boy for rants about it. I'm not the only one complaining. It was someone else who pointed out the banned symbols not being allowed.
Seems to me the IF team have their hands tied. If they must vet/sign/distribute the content (because of their agreement with BIS) then they're going to have to observe applicable statutes or not market that product in Germany.
If I was inclined to take issue it would be with the terms BIS have imposed. It is already the case that available tools *could* be used to perform unsanctioned ports (OA content to A2 for instance) but this is successfully policed by BIS and the community without resorting to enforced signature checks using only the developer's key.
[APS]Gnat
Jun 4 2012, 10:29
@<hidden> - fair enough
@<hidden> posters.
I believe the same rules apply to AWAR/IF team as applies to BIS.
If they only provide platform and THEIR content, and DON'T specifically approve user made content, they can't be held responsible for that content or its use.
Not controlling its content nor distribution allows such.
Same as a provider of a cell phone or the phones OS can't be held responsible if someone uses it for bad or offensive software/apps. (Or road-side bombs)!
Personally I think the IF team tripped up / out-smarted themselves by changing (away from the universal BIS tools) file extension references etc. They could potentially have their sticky fingers stuck if they later try to distance themself from "unarthorised" user made content (but again, how likely is that?! ).
Not that thats going to stop people making tools to "beat" whatever system they customised.
Hellfire257
Jun 4 2012, 10:59
You're right about the hoops thing, Max. For someone like me who maybe only wants to change a handful of config entries, the hoops are disproportional the to the outcome of the changes. To be short, it isn't worth my time. My time would be much better spent playing around with ARMA than IF.
Of course though, this is all speculation until we have further details.
Max Power
Jun 4 2012, 11:03
And that, I think, is a fair criticism, and I think it's an issue that needs addressing.
I hope that my point of view is clear now. I'm not against criticism. I'm against a forum drama shit show.
Now was not going to post here but I am amaze, this post is not close like mine was. what do German law against using swastikas and banned symbols, Have to do with the Tread IS MODDING DISABLED?
Max Power
Jun 4 2012, 11:53
I guess you'll have to read the thread to find out.
I did read thread thank you. still don't see what got to do with Modding Disabled, Loading and tool's.
Max Power
Jun 4 2012, 12:00
Well, I don't know what to tell you, then.
edit: Ok. The current thinking is this:
IF must approve all mods.
IF stated that mods must not have 'banned symbols'.
Mods with 'banned symbols' will not be approved.
Therefore, mods can not include banned symbols.
The forcing of Gemany's pathetic censorship laws on people is good enough for me to say. No sale.
The servers are all pretty much empty from what I've seen on checking it out on a couple of my friends system who bought it.
it all started at this post that came out of the sky. then the thread should be "mods can not include banned symbols" or German Law on mod some thing in that way.:j:
Max Power
Jun 4 2012, 12:17
No, this thread is about modding restrictions. This is one facet of those restrictions, which was mentioned in the IF team's document on mod making. Perhaps you should read that as well, since this thread is essentially about that document.
Nazi symbols is a pretty stupid argument. After all, you could add swastika and stuff into any game and would produce pretty much the same situation. Just because IF is a WW2 game, doesn't mean it is a special case.
NoRailgunner
Jun 4 2012, 12:43
Its simple - DeepSilver/Koch Media is a german label/publisher = they have to obey german laws. Now back to possible modding, config and other changes in IF:Lib1944 and what would be ok for both sides. Perhaps someone from X1 Software/AWAR can say something more about it? :)
well I read it The only place Germany is stated is in the Address of the software company, That is Koch Media. what address is base in Germany. Now we can say the software company is German, knowing that I say this game is cover under german law.
It has nothing to do with modding it where the game company making team is The Koch Media Team. So any one who not have the document knows. Also it state it may give certain individuals Epilepsy, That mean no Epilepsy fliter, That crash your game
Some thing when I live in Germany. Toy Airfix boxs had those marks blacken out' It a big thing in germany. I know kiss poster was Banned too.
sorry
noRailgunner you beat me to it. lol
---------- Post added at 12:52 ---------- Previous post was at 12:47 ----------
As I post before there no CBA for loading Mods. Till there is one out we may have to wait for modding.
Herbal Influence
Jun 4 2012, 13:34
In the US even Mark Twains "Huckleberry Finn" and "Tom Sawyer" were banned (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/778139/posts) in some public libraries.
They would badly guide i.e. mislead youngsters ....
So calm down, the German Holocaust is indeed a unique thing one should be able to respect. "Able", I call it. It's an ability to take other peoples feeling into account.
Max Power
Jun 4 2012, 19:58
well I read it The only place Germany is stated is in the Address of the software company, That is Koch Media. what address is base in Germany. Now we can say the software company is German, knowing that I say this game is cover under german law.
It has nothing to do with modding it where the game company making team is The Koch Media Team. So any one who not have the document knows. Also it state it may give certain individuals Epilepsy, That mean no Epilepsy fliter, That crash your game
Some thing when I live in Germany. Toy Airfix boxs had those marks blacken out' It a big thing in germany. I know kiss poster was Banned too.
sorry
noRailgunner you beat me to it. lol
---------- Post added at 12:52 ---------- Previous post was at 12:47 ----------
As I post before there no CBA for loading Mods. Till there is one out we may have to wait for modding.
I don't know where the disconnect is, or why you can't understand it, but I will explain it one last time, because I'm charitable with my time > : (
The problem with modding and banned symbols is that the devs have seemingly said that they must approve all user mods to guarantee certain levels of quality. In order to enforce this, they have created a system that locks out mods that haven't been packed with their tools. So, users must work with the dev team to make mods. The dev team have stated that they will not approve mods that contain cheats, that are based on someone esle's work, or have banned symbolism.
They can not approve banned symbolism it seems because of their publisher and German law. User made / packed / published mods are the user's liability. Content approved by the developing company is the developing company's liability.
So, you can see, if you wanted to make a ta-152 with all of its historical markings, including swastika on its tail, the dev team would reject it. They would reject it because they can't approve anything that's against German law. If they reject it, your mod is not a mod.
Therefore, mods with swastikas, cheats, stolen artwork, or anything else, is officially limited by the development filter that is the developer's approval.
I hope you can see how this discussion is relevent now. If you can't, I don't care. Leave the moderating to the moderators, kthnx.
Hellfire257
Jun 4 2012, 22:41
As I post before there no CBA for loading Mods. Till there is one out we may have to wait for modding.
You do not CBA to load mods. CBA is pretty much a tool set for mod/mission/script making. It isn't required in order to make/load mods, but it is useful.
Thank you about CBA, I was looking at as most mod need CBA to work. realy have not look in to it till now. Yes I like ACE mod and Icp_anims to load with Iron front, I be happy with that.
IFL forum Talk about modding why how come so on. I have play 8 hour of the game very good stuff, I say not wow, but good, yes they did lot good hard work. It has a lot of stuff put in it.
I happy I got it if not for any but supporting modding, lot modder do need support more then thank it free, Donate to them, small or big, In that way see more mods and happy modder.
where I am from it call Jai Dee (good haert).
Did have many problem with crashes think It has to do with IR tracking, Some other with same problem.
If the game had some support from the team on patching it from the problem it got will be great.
I play Dayz mod very fun. there no modding there either, the team patch problem very fast, 2 patch in 1 day. Most say wow me as some of the stuff rocket did with just stuff In arma 2. On line play smooth.
with IF the play not so smooth.
In a nut shell If Like ww2 arma, want to mod. I44 mod is open for modding there is no problem with Law and contract. I44 is base on BIs Arma2, I think that team would be happy with any help or with following the rules for modding here make sub mod base on I44 arma 2.
To get down to it Iron front not a BIS game or mod. So the support of modding is not there. If any thing yell at X1 software, what a small company, Has very few games, make it a unwanted child for modding.
I'm starting the think the same about KBourne...
You should read my posts better then, if you are smart then you might see a little deeper trough the context of the posts I made :) It is not because I understand the reasoning of the IF development that I am happy about it, I would like to see mods too and the restrictions they had to make might slow down or even minimize modding in this game but there is nothing that we can change about that.
It is unlikely that they can make any compromises about the law, neater about the Agreement they have with Bohemia interactive unless they can find an alternative for it, but as they only licensed the use of the engine for their game this might never happen. There are maybe other solutions we don't know about at this very moment but for now we can do 2 things, or we stay in a shitty mood and blame everyone that understands what is being said. Or, we start to reason by our selves and get used to the situation. But don't start to accuse me of being paid nor being a spokesperson for the Iron Front development because I have an open understanding mind towards it ...
I hope it might enlighten you a bit :)
kind regards
jblackrupert
Jun 5 2012, 06:50
The online servers are a virtual ghost town barely 2 weeks after release.
Loosening the rules might be a good idea.
So, some people wrote that it might be possible to make texture mods (additional textures for existing models) without needing keys? Is that possible? And if yes, how exactly? Additional textures for the existing vehicles could be a first step to a few released mods for now.
Mr Burns
Jun 5 2012, 15:21
So, some people wrote that it might be possible to make texture mods (additional textures for existing models) without needing keys? Is that possible? And if yes, how exactly? Additional textures for the existing vehicles could be a first step to a few released mods for now.
http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/setObjectTexture
^^ that´ll work for all units/vehicles that have hiddenselections (see IF configs if unclear).
Works from within a mission aswell as from config (speak addons).
Downside using with missions is the huge filesize you´ll eventually reach by having x'ammount of 2048x2048 textures coming with the mission itself.
.kju [PvPscene]
Jun 5 2012, 16:26
In my view Iron Front would have been better of as a DLC/addon to Arrowhead.
I'd assume it was built as standalone game due to the publisher/funding entity.
Hindsight is easier than foresight.
BI sets the rules and it is understandable that and the way they did.
The unfortunate thing is the IF team not having understood it until very late.
But that's life. People do faults. You are better accept that.
On the positive side the options BI granted them seem very favorable and
interesting to the modding community in my view.
Development might be doable more easy with unpacked data. Still have to look into that.
That may even work for SP addons. For official content the world isn't as simple as
hobby modder where you can do almost everything and no one cares.
In the commercial world people do care and it can be become very expensive quickly.
The low MP pop is certainly due to other issues. Lets hope they can get it resolved ASAP.
(Edit: The MP pop doesn't seem low to me after checking last night. A lot more PvP than Arma has.)
Sad but to be expected to see so much hate. Iron Front will certainly kill some people's dreams
about going commercial, everything being easy and getting rich..
At least it isn't you to learn it the hard way. Gaming business is no fun from what I can tell.
I was considering getting this because of the massive support ArmA II had with mods, but are you guys serious in that mod support is currently not allowed? Why? There's a lot of basic stuff that can easily enhance the experience beyond the vanilla stuff in these games..
Max Power
Jun 6 2012, 08:59
I was considering getting this because of the massive support ArmA II had with mods, but are you guys serious in that mod support is currently not allowed? Why? There's a lot of basic stuff that can easily enhance the experience beyond the vanilla stuff in these games..
Read the thread. They are not 'not allowed'. There are restrictions.
therussiandong
Jun 6 2012, 12:00
Restrictions that include having to work with the devs after getting their approval for anything..
Foffy just stick with ArmA 2 bro, and Invasion 1944. And wait for ArmA 3, theres supposed to be sick mod support including some kind of mod launcher/manager.
I would say register the company name in the Uk, no biggie to have swastikas over here
You could also then add SS and civilians so we can make a realistic simulation :-) and be rid of politically correct reasons for being anal
I would say register the company name in the Uk, no biggie to have swastikas over here
You could also then add SS and civilians so we can make a realistic simulation :-) and be rid of politically correct reasons for being anal
swaticas on nazis! that would be an outrage. i demand you put rainbows on the sleeves. and remove the weapons. ignoring history makes it go away didnt ya know that?
In my view Iron Front would have been better of as a DLC/addon to Arrowhead.
I'd assume it was built as standalone game due to the publisher/funding entity.
Hindsight is easier than foresight.
BI sets the rules and it is understandable that and the way they did.
The unfortunate thing is the IF team not having understood it until very late.
But that's life. People do faults. You are better accept that.
On the positive side the options BI granted them seem very favorable and
interesting to the modding community in my view.
Development might be doable more easy with unpacked data. Still have to look into that.
That may even work for SP addons. For official content the world isn't as simple as
hobby modder where you can do almost everything and no one cares.
In the commercial world people do care and it can be become very expensive quickly.
The low MP pop is certainly due to other issues. Lets hope they can get it resolved ASAP.
(Edit: The MP pop doesn't seem low to me after checking last night. A lot more PvP than Arma has.)
Sad but to be expected to see so much hate. Iron Front will certainly kill some people's dreams
about going commercial, everything being easy and getting rich..
At least it isn't you to learn it the hard way. Gaming business is no fun from what I can tell.
Agreed, especially the first paragraph, if IFL had been a DLC at the same price or more it would have benefited greatly from the existing support. But, time travel not being probable we'll have to keep our fingers crossed.
Rgds
LoK
jblackrupert
Jun 6 2012, 18:49
I would say register the company name in the Uk, no biggie to have swastikas over here
You could also then add SS and civilians so we can make a realistic simulation :-) and be rid of politically correct reasons for being anal
They don't have to, if addon and mod makers want to make purple tanks with Swastikas painted on the sides theres no legal reason to prevent them doing so
they just can't be released as official mods through X1Software and Deep Silvers sites.
I'm not asking Deep Silver and the developers to break German laws because i want authentic symbols, I'm just not into them forcing people who aren't living under those laws to have to do so.
The Project Reality team was up front from the beginning about additonal assets being made for that, the rules, the process of getting them into PR..etc.
some people bitched and told them to get lost but at the end of the day they didn't pay money for it under the impression that it would be open and free in regards to adding additional content.
I don't know where the disconnect is, or why you can't understand it, but I will explain it one last time, because I'm charitable with my time > : (
The problem with modding and banned symbols is that the devs have seemingly said that they must approve all user mods to guarantee certain levels of quality. In order to enforce this, they have created a system that locks out mods that haven't been packed with their tools. So, users must work with the dev team to make mods. The dev team have stated that they will not approve mods that contain cheats, that are based on someone esle's work, or have banned symbolism.
They can not approve banned symbolism it seems because of their publisher and German law. User made / packed / published mods are the user's liability. Content approved by the developing company is the developing company's liability.
So, you can see, if you wanted to make a ta-152 with all of its historical markings, including swastika on its tail, the dev team would reject it. They would reject it because they can't approve anything that's against German law. If they reject it, your mod is not a mod.
Therefore, mods with swastikas, cheats, stolen artwork, or anything else, is officially limited by the development filter that is the developer's approval.
I hope you can see how this discussion is relevent now. If you can't, I don't care. Leave the moderating to the moderators, kthnx.
Are you kidding me?
First of all: The IF devs are not responsible for third party addons that include swastikas or stolen material! There are mods that include swastikas for Arma2, Arma1 and OFP and i havent heard those devs having a problem with that.
Second: Cheating in multiplayer? give me break. Theres already a system that servers can have where each .pbo file is checked before the player can join.
Third: A certain level of quality? Again i must ask why on earth would the IF devs care of someone makes a shitty mod for their game?!?!? If the mod sucks NO ONE WILL USE IT.
I personally suspect that the IF devs just want to keep absolute control over this game. They dont want third party modders to make them look bad by fixing and improving their bug ridden game.
Are you kidding me?
First of all: The IF devs are not responsible for third party addons that include swastikas or stolen material!
You might be miss informed here, First off all: They have an agreement with bis which makes it so that they need to check the addon content before it is released to make sure that the addon it selves is legit. You can call it an excuse to have control over their game but as it is a part of the agreement they have, they will need to check up the content first. This brings me to the second part of it all: where they need to sign the addons, this part is in particular important for them! As it passes trough them before it is released they will fall under the law of Germany and as their liability is at stake here they can not allow to release any content with forbidden signs.
So yes they are responsible for what is released because when it is released it will be released trough an official patch ...
There are mods that include swastikas for Arma2, Arma1 and OFP and i havent heard those devs having a problem with that.
Third I think you are comparig Apples and oranges here, Bis is not checking up on the content which is released by the community, they don't need to because it is their engine. As part of this reason they will not have a direct liability problem, also they are not sited in Germany so they don't need to obay to the german law directly, the situation is very much different then it is with Iron Front development.
This means the addon maker Is responsible for what is released ...
I personally suspect that the IF devs just want to keep absolute control over this game. They dont want third party modders to make them look bad by fixing and improving their bug ridden game.
Oh common is this the only thing you can suspect? Really :rolleyes:
kind regards
.kju [PvPscene]
Jun 8 2012, 13:43
Official cheats or addons to break the game would be fun, right? Please take a bit of time to think before you write stuff Assayks.
It takes me approx 5 minutes to add swastikas and pink bears to most vehicles in the game and I don't even have to make an addon for that, as we learned on the last page about being able to switch textures via script. Granted, you'll have to add them to every mission and it probably will blow up the filesize, but it is not impossible and produces exactly the same situation. So this whole talk is totally non-productive to anything.
To "quality of released mods": This reminds me a lot of The Fall from x years ago. The developers didn't released good modding tools, because (as they said) they wanted to have only skilled people to get over this and therefore increase the quality of released mods. What happened? Till now, there are like 3 or 4 mods ever created, the game is forgotten and has no existing community.
Just to get some air out of these arguments.
It takes me approx 5 minutes to add swastikas and pink bears to most vehicles in the game and I don't even have to make an addon for that, as we learned on the last page about being able to switch textures via script. Granted, you'll have to add them to every mission and it probably will blow up the filesize, but it is not impossible and produces exactly the same situation.
Partly True, the textures are only a part of the addon it selves, but the textures of an addon don't come trough mission design is it? :rolleyes: my bad ....
Just to get some air out of these arguments.
lol, try harder :)
Kind regards
sharpe34
Jun 8 2012, 14:02
So you can basically mod to your hearts content, BUT, due to circumstances beyond our control you have to send your stuff to the devs who can say yes or no along with having to check the content of the mods match with certain national laws they have to deal with as well. Interesting complication.
So you can basically mod to your hearts content, BUT, due to circumstances beyond our control you have to send your stuff to the devs who can say yes or no along with having to check the content of the mods match with certain national laws they have to deal with as well. Interesting complication.
This is part of the reason why they needed to limit the freedom we are used to yes. but still they give some opportunities along with Bohemia interactive to be able to mod as long if the addon maker commits to those laws and agreements Iron front development is bounded upon ... I only hope they will find a work around in using the tool suits like bis, maybe releasing their own set of tools for the community, and if possible a solution for testing those addons more freely, this would also be more then welcome ...
part of that it is only a question of sending your addon content to IF development, let them check it and sign it and patch it as a game upgrade release to the public, at least thats the general id of it :)
kind regards
Partly True, the textures are only a part of the addon it selves, but the textures of an addon don't come trough mission design is it? :rolleyes: my bad ....
Maybe it's because english isn't my main language, but I am not sure what you are talking about.
Also I see no difference in creating a swastika-nazi-jew-extermination truck for a mission or... for a mission. The only difference with pure texture exchange is, that you need to deliver the textures with every mission + that you have a little bit more of script work to do (writing a additional line into the vehicle init). In any case, I could as well create a normal vehicle / dude mod, send it to the devs, let it get approved, then use special textures for it in my own missions, etc. etc. blah blah. Doesn't matter how you rotate it, if people want nazi stuff in their missions, there is nothing that prevents from that.
lol, try harder :)
Not really trying, to be honest. I just find this argument extremely silly, as is this talk about it. It just annoys me when people try to defend the limited modding capabilities with "they need to prevent swastika and ss-runes!" because this would be a fight which the devs simply cannot win. /Edit: Well, except if they remove the ability to exchange textures. But then they would limit the modding capabilities even more.
Hellfire257
Jun 8 2012, 15:16
You can pack textures into missions if you want, as long as the units support the setObjectTexture command. That's a way around it.
This is a German company operating under German laws, so you cant really expect anything else other than Vor Sprung Dorch Anal.
You can't really argue with that so why bother !
Who won the WW2, looks like the Germans did really. :yay:
Well, just to make it clear, I don't care about swastikas and I don't mind them not being in the game. It's just all the fuzz about it...
Also I see no difference in creating a swastika-nazi-jew-extermination truck for a mission or... for a mission.
You don't see the difference between mission editing and addon content releases but the law is, and thats just the point about it. It is not because you don't find it important that others might not get offended by it and as such the German law is clear about that ''they don't want it plain and simple.'' Not seeing the difference of mission design with or without those symbols doesn't change the fact that they have to obey those laws about actual addons and its content release.
Not really trying, to be honest. I just find this argument extremely silly, as is this talk about it.
The remark you made about just to get the air of the arguments is evenly silly and thats the reason why I posted that Quote. The whole thread goes just about modding and its restrictions, trying to push your thoughts trough by stating that you are going to get the pressure of those arguments is not going to cut it.
It just annoys me when people try to defend the limited modding capabilities with "they need to prevent swastika and ss-runes!"
It is not defending but trying to understand, Read the thread and the reasoning behind the restrictions and you might get just about there where you need to be ... Saying that it annoys you is not going to cut it eater is it?
This would be a fight which the devs simply cannot win.
Firstly its not a fight, try to see it trough some different glasses, the devs aren't here the fight a war neater are they here to win a fight they only implementing those rules because they need to implement them. And by now they will already know, whatever they will do about this situation it will never be enough for the community ....
Except if they remove the ability to exchange textures. But then they would limit the modding capabilities even more.
Here you have more freedom because it is not modding this is mission editing, they stated that we have complete freedom just like in ArmA when it comes to mission development, as said before this thread is about modding and texturing is only a part from modding and when a community member wants to release his mods they need to contain textures which needs to hold no forbidden symbols because of the mere fact that the addons will need to pas trough Iron Front Development first, as far as I am aware of it whats don trough mission editing has nothing to do with it.
Kind regards
MissionCreep
Jun 8 2012, 16:22
Does German law hold a company responsible for extensions/additions a third party makes to its software? I recall IL-2 Sturmovik had lot of mods and skins, included German and Finnish aircraft with swastikas. I believe a patch was available to remove the all swastikas from the mod packages, while retaining the aircraft skins. I don't think the makers suffered any consequences. I don't really care if swastikas or SS symbols are there or not, but it seems that this issue around it is limiting so many possibilities for this project. What if someone wanted to make a mission/campaign that takes place partly or completely in a concentration camp? Would that be deemed unacceptable/objectionable? It has been the setting for many a movie. Why not a role-playing video game? I recall EA had to defend itself after it allowed users to take on the role of the Taliban in MoH. Some people find the hammer and sickle symbol objectionable. Stalin was responsible for a lot of killing too.
Does German law hold a company responsible for extensions/additions a third party makes to its software?
It is not third party when it passes trough Iron Front Development and partly because of the agreement they have with bohemia interactive the content needs to pas trough them before it can be released in an official patch. This makes the situation a little twisted, true but it is like it is for all party's not ideal ...
German law might hold them responsible for what is released trough them if it violates the laws in Germany, I think the rules are implemented to prevent this from happening. They don't have the funds e.g. EA and other larger company's to fight back against certain lawsuits and might kill future releases if they do allow it to happen ...
kind regards
jblackrupert
Jun 8 2012, 16:36
Official cheats or addons to break the game would be fun, right? Please take a bit of time to think before you write stuff Assayks.
If they were concerned about cheats then why is there no anticheat packed in the game.. IE. Battleye?
They have an agreement with bis which makes it so that they need to check the addon content before it is released to make sure that the addon it selves is legit.
I'd like to hear from Bohemia regarding this issue, it seriously doesn't sound like something Bohemia would force someone licensing the engine to do considering how much of a negative effect it would have on the future of the game
given the targeted customer base.
The Arma 2 engine is reaching the end of it's shelf life and until DayZ dropped it was pretty much drying up, Bohemia is taking one more shot at the DLC game before Arma 3 drops.
I'm sure they wouldn't mind making a few bucks licencing the engine out to a few developers, but these rules X1/Awar claim are there look like something designed to scare everyone off
from even thinking about signing a deal with Bohemia.
I think there's a wee bit more going on then what their admitting to.
I'd like to hear from Bohemia regarding this issue, it seriously doesn't sound like something Bohemia would force someone licensing the engine to do considering how much of a negative effect it would have on the future of the game
given the targeted customer base.
You don't need to really, If you read the Aula regarding the bis tool suit and as they only licensed the use of the engine I think the restrictions are legit ..
The Arma 2 engine is reaching the end of it's shelf life and until DayZ dropped it was pretty much drying up,
Says you? I mean as far as I am aware the game is still being sold as of today and DLC's are still coming out so it is far from dyed out :/
Bohemia is taking one more shot at the DLC game before Arma 3 drops.
I'm sure they wouldn't mind making a few bucks licencing the engine out to a few developers,
This part is pure business and you cant blame them for doing so is it?
but these rules X1/Awar claim are there look like something designed to scare everyone off
from even thinking about signing a deal with Bohemia.
this makes no sense at all especially if you look upon it from Bohemia interactive position, not only that read your former statement where you say that they wouldn't mind making a few bucks licensing the engine out to a few other developers.
I think there's a wee bit more going on then what their admitting to.
Pretty strong words considered that you cant back it up.
kind regards
jblackrupert
Jun 8 2012, 17:28
his makes no sense at all especially if you look upon it from Bohemia interactive position, not only that read your former statement where you say that they wouldn't mind making a few bucks licensing the engine out to a few other developers.
What I said makes perfect sense.
I don't believe Bohemia is forcing them to make addon/mod makers jump through hoops to get their creations out to the community.
If Bohemia made addon/mod makers go through this process for every little addon/mod there would be hell to pay and they know it
so I seriously....seriously doupt they would put that kind of requirement on a developer with limited resources and money.
Unless you has some kind of inside knowledge, you really have no proof that I'm wrong any more then I have proof that I'm 100% right.
[GR]Operative
Jun 8 2012, 17:45
About the topic: it's plain and simple, don't know why people are so mad about it.
IF44 team:
- has an agreement with BI.
- needs to approve ANY mod to be released.
- must comply with German laws.
- cannot release material contaning Nazi symbols.
- so no mods with Nazi symbols are going to be approved.
It was a simply misunderstanding at the start, but the whole thing snowballed to this, hindering a lot of mods to come. That's it.
(applies to almost every message from this user in this very thread)
Man, you got the worst translator EVER!
I don't believe Bohemia is forcing them to make addon/mod makers jump through hoops to get their creations out to the community.
Are you even thinking this seriously trough?
Iron front development and Bohemia interactive has an agreement, as said by them selves in their statement, if the statement would be wrong BIS would of reacted by now. How the agreement sounds I do not exactly know but if you use common sense and reasoning I think we might come to a healthy conclusion that BIS wants to be sure that any content released whether it is community based or IF Development based doesn't contain any elements released by them. No where is stated by me that Bohemia interactive is forcing the Iron front development to restrict the community to release their creations. But they surely had a misunderstanding about this situation which they where bound to put up a set of rules to exclude such infractions.
you really have no proof that I'm wrong any more then I have proof that I'm 100% right.
Did i stated that you are wrong? I said that it doesn't make sense and that your words are pretty strong, considered that you cant back it up
and thats my honest opinion about it :)
kind regards
[GR]Operative
Jun 8 2012, 18:08
Does German law hold a company responsible for extensions/additions a third party makes to its software? I recall IL-2 Sturmovik had lot of mods and skins, included German and Finnish aircraft with swastikas. I believe a patch was available to remove the all swastikas from the mod packages, while retaining the aircraft skins. I don't think the makers suffered any consequences. I don't really care if swastikas or SS symbols are there or not, but it seems that this issue around it is limiting so many possibilities for this project. What if someone wanted to make a mission/campaign that takes place partly or completely in a concentration camp? Would that be deemed unacceptable/objectionable? It has been the setting for many a movie. Why not a role-playing video game? I recall EA had to defend itself after it allowed users to take on the role of the Taliban in MoH. Some people find the hammer and sickle symbol objectionable. Stalin was responsible for a lot of killing too.
You are missing the fact that the IF team needs to approve the content first dude. And they can't, as german law forbids it.
And so this is it. A debate about German laws here is/would be totally off-topic.
---------- Post added at 06:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:01 PM ----------
so I seriously....seriously doupt they would put that kind of requirement on a developer with limited resources and money.
I don't know if this is also a saying in english, but in portuguese I'm likely to say something like this: "Friends are friends, business is business".
Afterall, they have an agreement. It's done. No going back for free. IF devs should have properly read their papers BEFORE signing them.
belgerot
Jun 8 2012, 19:32
Well this is somewhat disappointing..
jblackrupert
Jun 9 2012, 03:57
Well this is somewhat disappointing..
It's a little more then that. No anti-cheat, Mod/Addon approval process, no fully working dedicated server on release, bugs that still cause CTD.... all the recipes for a game that will be dead very very soon.
.kju [PvPscene]
Jun 9 2012, 04:56
Signature system is in place that stops data modification.
Whats the big deal with approval process? If its too much effort to send a mail, to get it official and integrated in a patch, you better leave it.
Dedicated server available in 1.01 beta and fully with 1.02 one and half week after the release.
BI is working on making it more stable.
Mostly offtopic whine post anyway. There are other threads for that.
Nicholas
Jun 9 2012, 05:20
What happens if AWAR or X1 Software were to close their doors. What would we do about modding then?
Mostly offtopic whine post anyway. There are other threads for that.
Sadly lots off OT's here bitching about not being able to put in textures with SS symbols and swastikas and avoiding the modding rules by putting them in trough mission editing. Anyway I would like to see some comments by now about what can be don which will give a more reliant view on the situation for the real modders, not about what can not be don because we already know that.
What happens if AWAR or X1 Software were to close their doors. What would we do about modding then?
This right here, love to hear reasonable comments about this one :rolleyes: :p
Kind regards
ProfTournesol
Jun 9 2012, 09:11
The problem is the so called quality screening by the IF team. It's really far from our community spirit, and i don't get how BI is involved in this requirement.
The problem is the so called quality screening by the IF team. It's really far from our community spirit,
This part I do understand, we are not really used to it like you said right here.
and i don't get how BI is involved in this requirement.
I don't think bis is directly involved on the requirements, the only reason why bis is involved is the key and because of the mere fact that X1-Awar doesn't have approval to release the key to a third party in their license, which is the agreement they have with bis. IF development needs to sign the addons for us to give the ability to mod.
The involvement therefor for bis is more indirect and because of the agreement, when a developer signs the addons and releases it trough patches the developer is responsible for it, hence the law in Germany which makes it so that they can not allow addons to be released trough them with forbidden signs, stolen moddels or textures.
Its all about the circumstances and copyrights on the key sign and it turned out a little sour for the modding community, but not impossible to mod they don't forbid it ...
Kind regards
ProfTournesol
Jun 9 2012, 09:59
So mods can only be delivered through the patching process ?
So mods can only be delivered through the patching process ?
uhu, sadly yes ..
ProfTournesol
Jun 9 2012, 10:37
God, i really hope that this awkward situation is only related to licensing their proprietary engine to a third party, and that it isn't a live experiment of what future modding on future RV engine could look like. But after having watched E3 footage and heared so many times the "community" word, i'm confident BI won't shoot itself a bullet in the leg.
God, i really hope that this awkward situation is only related to licensing their proprietary engine to a third party, and that it isn't a live experiment of what future modding on future RV engine could look like. But after having watched E3 footage and heared so many times the "community" word, i'm confident BI won't shoot itself a bullet in the leg.
Nah, they already said multiple times they will keep supporting the modding community, Its like you said an awkward situation which is copyright related.
I am confident bis would never turn the dices on the modding community, I saw improved animations in the last vid of bis which looks like this here (http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=14012) or at least look similar to these anims so they know the community can come up with great ID's to implement them in future installments.
sadly this will be reduced in the IF tittle but at least they still try to give some possibilities, the only thing we need to do is making compromises, and thats just what they try to do I guess ...
kind regards
Herbal Influence
Jun 9 2012, 13:37
Well, it's all a bit unproportional, like in Arma2: Hundreds of people modding like hell, but few people playing .... I like mods, but I know modders who whine around because noones using their nice works.
ProfTournesol
Jun 9 2012, 13:54
Well, it's all a bit unproportional, like in Arma2: Hundreds of people modding like hell, but few people playing .... I like mods, but I know modders who whine around because noones using their nice works.
I prefer it this way. But modders should be aware that modding isn't a popularity contest :)
Hellfire257
Jun 9 2012, 19:17
Ugh, what a mess. What's with the silence on the issue anyway?
.kju [PvPscene]
Jun 9 2012, 19:20
Please read and try to understand the statement before jumping to conclusions:
http://forum.iron-front.com/showthread.php?358-Iron-Front-Liberation-1944-Modding-possibilities-Announcement&p=2876&viewfull=1#post2876
Also you are best to follow the devs explanations in the official forum:
http://forum.iron-front.com/showthread.php?358-Iron-Front-Liberation-1944-Modding-possibilities-Announcement
Finally ask in the official forum, if things are unclear.
This whole speculation, people talking nonsense because they have no understanding of modding, and whining really is pointless and only hurts everyone.
you can also look here on the past Q&A With Panzer_Baron where he clarifies the situation a little bit more....
http://www.armaholic.com/forums.php?m=posts&id=124012
Kind regards
[APS]Gnat
Jun 10 2012, 09:09
Ooooh .... "paid DLC" .... there you go, thats why they did this ! ffs.
This game is annoying the shit out of me on all fronts.
raptor90
Jun 10 2012, 09:46
Gnat;2168913']Ooooh .... "paid DLC" .... there you go, thats why they did this ! ffs.
This game is annoying the shit out of me on all fronts.
DLC or patches FYI...
Anyway I did not ever see any "free DLC" ever.
.kju [PvPscene]
Jun 10 2012, 10:27
Are you people too lazy or dump to read? Sad to see this hate from vets like you Gnat.
DMarkwick
Jun 10 2012, 10:37
you can also look here on the past Q&A With Panzer_Baron where he clarifies the situation a little bit more....
http://www.armaholic.com/forums.php?m=posts&id=124012
Kind regards
I think this is the clearest explanation of all, thanks for linking to it.
Gnat;2168913']Ooooh .... "paid DLC" .... there you go, thats why they did this ! ffs.
This game is annoying the shit out of me on all fronts.
Thought you would have more respect for the guys who made there own standalone game from there favourite engine , maybe you should get together with the other addon makers in this thread and simply do what they did , grow a pair of balls and take the next step from being a hobbyist. Otherwise respect that they did and don't be so naive and think that they could allow BiS tools and bis code / examples in there game surely everyone recognised that BIS would lose all control over its key asset , a mod doable game with the potential to create any scenario you wish , if that was allowed in this game too then days ww11 would be out now and all other versions of arma 2 favourites and bis would lose a lot of future revenue .
People need to. Understand if this fails then future addon makers wanting to make there own version of what they want to see in the rv engine will become harder still.open your eyes people , you are killing the very thing you love imo, if you want arma2 with Germans and your own little addon it's already available a couple of pages back.
Are you people too lazy or dump to read? Sad to see this hate from vets like you Gnat.
Well to be honest, if I would read that "modding is restricted" and that "paid DLC will come" I also would come to the conclusion that the two things are related, e.g. "We restrict modding so we can sell our own stuff instead" - see Failmasters with their horrible shooters. :)
Quote from the official forums:
For addons and mods there is the possibility to create free DLC and the opportunity to make paid DLC to be provided in cooperation with X1Software/Awar.
Free DLC approved by X1/AWAR using community created content - alright, for now.
Paid DLC? Now it gets complicated. The only way (afaik) to create content for the RV engine is using BI Tools. And their EULA doesn't allow commercial exploitation of the tools. And so far I have not seen any official statement from BI which says that there will be an exception for IF44. Besides that, this is exactly what this community doesn't need - another FlightSimulator situation where you have to pay for - community created - content.
In the same post mlacix also confirmes that the BI Tools can't be used to create commercial addons:
To use the BI tools suite or Arma sample models to create assets for Iron Front (unless the modder gets a personal license from Bohemia Interactive itself).
To port any BI asset to Iron Front nor to attempt to port any Iron Front asset into BI games.
The work may have to be tested using Arma 2: Operation Arrowhead during the development. We still have to check the possibilities of development.
What now? Create paid DLC with X1/AWAR but don't use the BI Tools for it. :confused:
At Armaholic panzer_baron says:
1- The mod must NOT violate any other rights, for example no stolen sounds from other games allowed, no stolen models from other games.
2- Some quality. It's obvious that if the only way to release mods is through patches, we would like to release mods that have good quality.
1 - Alright, fine for me. The question is just how they want to know from where a sound, model or texture is. It's already hard enough to tell by this huge A2 community.
2 - Who defines what is 'some quality' ? One of their guys, or two? Who guarantees that some Addons are not rejected just because they don't like it or the creator?
Some more legal question:
And what if an American modder wants to add swastikas to the units - which is perfectly legal where he lives - will he ever gets his addon approved? I highly doubt that because in certain countries it's not allowed. So what law applies in such a situation? Now German law applies worldwide or what?
What if the bad bad sign is used in user missions? Will the world tear down then, or the creator gets into trouble? Is the mission blacklisted somehow then? Questions over questions.
Honestly, this whole thing stinks. Why the dscreatekey tool simply can't be expanded to allow the creation of if44 compatible signatures? That would be much easier than above procedure, but probably isn't wanted.
So, everything that made this community great is restricted with this game. The statements made by different members of the team are just confusing and create more questions than they answer.
Under such conditions I will not provide any content for this title at all.
Finally this way Iron Front will keep a hassle free Multiplayer experience with no missing addons to look for by yourself.
Yeah make sure generation xbox must not use their brain too much, it could explode when they must look for an addon and add it to their game...
Instead making it even easier for users, how about making it easier for modders to create content which in the end ensures the game lives a bit longer than the average restricted shooter?
Lame. And I'm really curious how successful this thing will be in the long run.
Important: This is not an official post made as moderator but as a community member!
2 - Who defines what is 'some quality' ? One of their guys, or two? Who guarantees that some Addons are not rejected just because they don't like it or the creator?
It doesnt remind you of anything ?
Surely thats how CWR2 etc where run , you would not put crap in it would you ? surely you trust this mod team like you trust your own process ?
Ithink your all post is Hypoctirtical quite frankly , you remember CWC sounds and Codemaster content problems or its all done now and forgotten that somethings were not owned by BIS ?
Completely Laughable how you have forgot your own Work flow hmmm ?
There is a hell lot of crap content in CWR² now, and in worst case will remain there if no replacements are found. Also all 3rd party content in CWR² is there because the creator wanted it to be there. And so far we have not rejected anything that has been offered and surely not because we don't like someone. ;)
The sound problem was never a problem for us, we were fine with the xbox sounds and only replaced them with the originals because the chance was there.
But there is one thing you forgot: CWR² is a project made by the community for the community. IF44 is a commercial project with the goal to make as much money out of it as possible.
If no one would play our Mod, that's fine for me and not the end. If no one plays IF44 in 6 months that's another story.
IF44 is a commercial project with the goal to make as much money out of it as possible
You are blinded by your rage i am afraid,
There is a thourough explanation of how to get free content in IF44 and you are omitting it , i am saying the process is based on trust .
I think people are really Missing the fact that this is not Arma 2.5 run by BIS but a group of hobbyist that have taken the next logical step from Paypal donation Button to making there hobby a paid full time adventure .
Simply allowing Freedom in this Game like Arma2 would just be to create an absolute mess for everybody .
KBourne
Jun 10 2012, 15:04
Well to be honest, if I would read that "modding is restricted" and that "paid DLC will come" I also would come to the conclusion that the two things are related, e.g. "We restrict modding so we can sell our own stuff instead" - see Failmasters with their horrible shooters. :)
Quote from the official forums:
Free DLC approved by X1/AWAR using community created content - alright, for now.
Paid DLC? Now it gets complicated. The only way (afaik) to create content for the RV engine is using BI Tools. And their EULA doesn't allow commercial exploitation of the tools. And so far I have not seen any official statement from BI which says that there will be an exception for IF44. Besides that, this is exactly what this community doesn't need - another FlightSimulator situation where you have to pay for - community created - content.
Well I think you have a good point here, I think they need to withhold them selves from releasing community addons as pay-ware as they might violate their own agreement by selling content trough Paid DLC's, unless they have something in that agreement where they will be able to do so ...
If we put the dots on the I's :cool: it might be even more complicated....
Kind regards
Icewindo
Jun 10 2012, 15:41
Well I think you have a good point here, I think they need to withhold them selves from releasing community addons as pay-ware as they might violate their own agreement by selling content trough Paid DLC's, unless they have something in that agreement where they will be able to do so ...
If we put the dots on the I's :cool: it might be even more complicated....
Kind regards
This is just a giant fail imo. If you work on a REAL game with $$$ involved you'd think the developers and publisher would have gone through careful deliberation before the release and actually did a little research about their licenses and conclude what a) they are not allowed to do and b) what the community is not allowed to do.
On the bright side I think the number of mods free / paid (to be decided?) content for this game will be even less than for TOH after the latest statement.
Well to be honest, if I would read that "modding is restricted" and that "paid DLC will come" I also would come to the conclusion that the two things are related, e.g. "We restrict modding so we can sell our own stuff instead" - see Failmasters with their horrible shooters. :)
Quote from the official forums:
(...)
Important: This is not an official post made as moderator but as a community member!
Full ack on this post, Wolle.
This is just a giant fail imo. If you work on a REAL game with $$$ involved you'd think the developers and publisher would have gone through careful deliberation before the release and actually did a little research about their licenses and conclude what a) they are not allowed to do and b) what the community is not allowed to do.
On the bright side I think the number of mods free / paid (to be decided?) content for this game will be even less than for TOH after the latest statement.
I dont think your being fair at all , not you alone of coures.
BIS will have thought of all scenarios too dont forget , its not all about the makers of this Franchise , Imagine already there would be DAYZ mod in this engine , BIS will soon hopefully make a good bit of revenue from it on there Engine and tthat will Pass too A3 development hopefully . This is just one Reason i imagine for such stringent Licences and also TOH rearmed content etc .
You really need to look at the Bigger Financial and Buisness implications before thinking like Hobbyist modder who cannot use BIS engine free and easy , because at moment some Posts here seem absolutely like Child living in a world without consequence who must have his candy , his way .
and this ?
On the bright side I think the number of mods free / paid (to be decided?) content for this game will be even less than for TOH after the latest statement.
I have seen some disgraceful sentiment in this forums but i believe that is definitely in the top 3 ;(
KBourne
Jun 10 2012, 17:02
This is just a giant fail imo. If you work on a REAL game with $$$ involved you'd think the developers and publisher would have gone through careful deliberation before the release and actually did a little research about their licenses and conclude what a) they are not allowed to do and b) what the community is not allowed to do.
In this case they dint think of it, you can call it a giant fail but on the other hand I don't think that it is that easy as you point it out.
Firstly they are pretty new on the turf, they are coming from a modding world in to the development of a full game.
Secondly the engine is not their property they merely licensed the use of the engine to build their content on.
There is a huge difference when it comes to copyrights which restricts them also in the freedom towards the community in a whole.
For example: and call it a fail again as you wish, If you lease a car are you then entitled to give the keys to a third party without informing the owner? And if the agreement says no! You cant, would you still give those keys?
I don't think so :)
I do hear the disappointment and I do understand that the whole issue is something that were not used to, considered that we had all the freedom to do as we liked on the Bohemia interactive products, but the comments that I read are seen trough the eyes of a hobbyist without thinking it trough.
They have said things e.g. not using bis tools, and then again ''yes you can'' and then there is still the point that they might release content trough payed DLC's while they morally cant allow it when the addons are made with the bis tools. It makes the situation confusing at the least and communication from their end is not been great, I also agreeing to a point that things might have been different if they had a slightly different approach but it doesn't change the fact that the situation is like it is and certain things might not be clear as of yet but you can always ask clarification on their forums if you wish.
The ops question, Is Modding Disabled? the answer is most certainly NO the only thing that is needed is a more personal approach with the development it selves, and from what Ive seen from the majority of the community is that they demands a different approach where they STATED more then once I want, I will and I must, this is definitely not how the world works for the most of us and this counts in the same way in the gaming industry whether you like it or not. And you cant expect that they will break a agreement just to please us, if things are not clear just ask them to clarify.
Kind regards
Hellfire257
Jun 10 2012, 18:14
If this was such a small issue, people wouldn't be so unhappy with it. I have started the game a grand total of 8 times since I bought it. It I could mod it, that figure would be much higher. If I'm 100% honest, IF was a total waste of money for me, and I wish there had been a statement about modding restrictions before release. If I had known, I wouldn't have bought it.
Max Power
Jun 10 2012, 18:33
What now? Create paid DLC with X1/AWAR but don't use the BI Tools for it. :confused:
If I was to hazard a guess at the situation it would be that while the community members don't have a license to make commerical stuff with the tools, the IF devs do. I am guessing that if you hand your stuff over to them, they have the ability to convert it. They were also talking about community members applying for special licenses.
I think the biggest problem is there's not stated guarantee that your thing will be approved.
metalcraze
Jun 10 2012, 19:17
So wait? You can't mod IF? Blasphemy!
It's like IF devs are trying to shoot themselves in the foot by going againt one of the most important RV-game basics.
Nicholas
Jun 10 2012, 19:26
So wait? You can't mod IF? Blasphemy!
It's like IF devs are trying to shoot themselves in the foot by going againt one of the most important RV-game basics.
You can, but you must jump through a bunch of hoops to do so.
therussiandong
Jun 10 2012, 19:54
It was nice to see a clear response to my question by one of the IF devs.
Sadly I wasn't happy with the response.
Its like the EA version of Bohemia Interactive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h472NmF1HEQ
SmokeDog3PARA
Jun 10 2012, 23:45
How would you make an island if you cant open the .ifa buildings file, and your not allowed to use visitor 3 for making the island, then you are allowed to test in oa, when you are not allowed to move models across games to test your island ? im confussed now lol.
Also what if the ww2 addon makers wanted to port them from arma2 to IF they would have to start again from scratch because they had used the bitools to make them, If you have to make a mod twice and use no bis tools on the second lot. its a crying shame and a big waste of time to me.
Hello
AFAIK one can use bis tools and one can port your own mod from a2 to IFL.
You just have to release it through them as part of a patch/mini free dlc.
Rgds
LoK
verde13
Jun 11 2012, 07:55
I was really looking forward to get IF and then i heard about the modding restrictions.
The one thing that attracted me to OFP, ARMA and ARMA 2 was the community mods. Without them there is no point in getting IF. It may be a nice game and all but its longevity without mods will expire sooner rather than later.
raptor90
Jun 11 2012, 08:43
So you buy games because of mods ?
LibMod was a mod and you want more mods on mod ?
Which mod would you like on IF ? Dayz, I44, ACE, ACRE ?
I don`t understand you people.
I don`t understand you people.
Spoiled community is spoiled.
Somehow they've gained the idea that ALL BI (and related) products must be able to be cross-ported and freely ripped apart.
I'm surprised we're not seeing "why cant we port the Carrier Command assets to ArmA2!?!?!?1" threads...
KBourne
Jun 11 2012, 09:06
I think the biggest problem is there's not stated guarantee that your thing will be approved.
You have a point here, but as far as I can tell there are already a few people involved with X1/Awar to create content for Iron Front for free
firstly we have someone working on a sound mod which will be implemented trough patching
secondly I saw a guy building a motor cycle with a side car, the devs are even giving advice how large the lods and meches need to be to implement them in the game...
I do not think the devs are giving advice to community members just to stick their middle finger in the noses of those that are working on models, I mean common it doesn't make any sense is it? For me it looks and sounds that the devs are really giving their best effort under these circumstances, and if community members are willing enough to put some time in making addons and work with the devs I think it might work perfectly.
Even at this point when the devs show some devotion and dedication the majority keeps acting stubborn without trying to approach Iron Front in an orderly manner, without giving the whole thing a real chance and to me thats even more disappointing then the fact that they had to put up some restrictions.
Kind regards
[APS]Gnat
Jun 11 2012, 09:28
Thought you would have more respect for the guys who made there own standalone game from there favourite engine , maybe you should get together with the other addon makers in this thread and simply do what they did , grow a pair of balls and take the next step from being a hobbyist.
Out of line mate.
I purchase the game 90% on the basis I could add content as a hobbyist. I was mislead by the developers. Sure, they didn't specifically say that there'd be hoops to jump through, but why would I have suspected that when the BIS tools I already have !!!
And as for growing some balls, back at ya.
I ENJOY being a hobbyist, with my own subject matter, my own schedule, not someone elses.
And I have a RL job that pays better than a risky game developer endeavour. I also have a RL mortgage to keep in check.
ArmA2AO hasn't crashed on me in MANY months, even with the select beta.
This thing crashes every time I turn my head!
Bloody annoying all over.
Spoiled community is spoiled.
BS
verde13
Jun 11 2012, 09:31
So you buy games because of mods ?
LibMod was a mod and you want more mods on mod ?
Which mod would you like on IF ? Dayz, I44, ACE, ACRE ?
I don`t understand you people.
Spoiled community is spoiled.
Somehow they've gained the idea that ALL BI (and related) products must be able to be cross-ported and freely ripped apart.
I'm surprised we're not seeing "why cant we port the Carrier Command assets to ArmA2!?!?!?1" threads...
Spoiled community ? I'm sure BIS is ruining the day DayZ came out and doubled the sales of ARMA 2. Come to think of it would any of BIS products have survived this long if they weren't moddable ? I doubt it.
In any case i've said my piece and whether you two like it or not is irrelevant.
KBourne
Jun 11 2012, 10:05
Gnat;2169569']I purchase the game 90% on the basis I could add content as a hobbyist.
Not personal Gnat but I do not find it very smart that you buy something only based on the fact that you can add stuff, I mean you say you are mis led by the Iron Front Development. To me it sounds that you where mis led by your own assumptions here and that doesn't sound really fair ...
Gnat;2169569']Sure, they didn't specifically say that there'd be hoops to jump through, but why would I have suspected that when the BIS tools I already have !!!
Your not new Gnat you should know after all its stated in the Tools Aula inst it? :confused: also they said that you can use the tools and test it on ArmA2 so they might have an agreement that when it passes trough them first that it will be o.k., its the Key which is copyrighted thats causing a slight problem and where they needed to decide to restrict the freedom we are used too. I understand that your not happy but your not thinking totally strait here ...
Spoiled community ? I'm sure BIS is ruining the day DayZ came out and doubled the sales of ARMA 2.
Now you want to say that DayZ made Bohemia interactive's sales :rolleyes: How long does DayZ exist? I bet BiS already had their share of the pie before DayZ was a hit, You are taking this WAAAY out of proportion.
Come to think of it would any of BIS products have survived this long if they weren't moddable ? I doubt it.
You have a point on the survivability but you cant expect that a game based on the same engine will allow the same freedom as the original Developer, and thats a big mistake everyone is making here even the ancients.
Kind regards
NoRailgunner
Jun 11 2012, 10:25
IF:Lib44 terms and conditions were signed by X1/Awar and KochMedia. Nothing one can really change - just live with it or move to another game that you can mod without bureaucratic approvements and annoyances. Its your spare time, fun and decision.... not really worth to get mad over contracts that you didn't sign! ;)
Hellfire257
Jun 11 2012, 12:31
Not personal Gnat but I do not find it very smart that you buy something only based on the fact that you can add stuff, I mean you say you are mis led by the Iron Front Development. To me it sounds that you where mis led by your own assumptions here and that doesn't sound really fair ...
An assumption fed by silence. You would have to be an absolute retard to not see how important modding RV engine games is to the players and the game itself. To know that you are restricting said ability but remaining silent about it is, from a consumer's point of view, misleading. From a marketing standpoint, it is great, because you're reeling in people like myself who expected modding to be unrestricted. What has happened is essentially a clever bait-and-switch, with the bait being the silence on the issue. Of course some people are angry. I wasted my money on this game, and I certainly wont be recommending it to people like I do ARMA.
Sickboy
Jun 11 2012, 12:59
I understand and respect the reasons for the lock, but I also can understand how people feel misinformed.
Its also an easy assumption to make, seeing the rest of the ARMA series. The misunderstanding by IF team didn't really help either :)
On the other hand, testing addons in A2, and requesting approval+sign for usage in IF, seems not that big of a deal, as long as it's maintained fairly well.
Perhaps things change with time?
Hellfire257
Jun 11 2012, 13:32
I understand and respect the reasons for the lock, but I also can understand how people feel misinformed.
Its also an easy assumption to make, seeing the rest of the ARMA series. The misunderstanding by IF team didn't really help either :)
On the other hand, testing addons in A2, and requesting approval+sign for usage in IF, seems not that big of a deal, as long as it's maintained fairly well.
Perhaps things change with time?
Yeah, it is an unfortunate situation. It is also why I'm holding onto IF rather than trying for a refund. It is a rough diamond at the moment. Only time will tell how this all plays out.
So you buy games because of mods ?
LibMod was a mod and you want more mods on mod ?
Which mod would you like on IF ? Dayz, I44, ACE, ACRE ?
I don`t understand you people.
Uhh yes.
If ArmA and ArmA2 wouldn't have that possibility, I probably wouldn't have purchased them.
Spoiled community is spoiled.
Somehow they've gained the idea that ALL BI (and related) products must be able to be cross-ported and freely ripped apart.
I'm surprised we're not seeing "why cant we port the Carrier Command assets to ArmA2!?!?!?1" threads...
That's not the point DM, as far as I can tell no one here said that they want to rip things apart and port them to IF44. The problem is more that every tiny little Mod must be approved and only distributed by them.
And while I'm at it, here's another problem with this procedure:
Let's say I sit down and create some big addon or even mod for IF44, something I spend weeks and months on and then they come and tell me to bugger off because it can't be included for whatever reason. Well thanks a lot then for letting me waste my precious time for nothing!
[APS]Gnat
Jun 11 2012, 14:35
To me it sounds that you where mis led by your own assumptions here and that doesn't sound really fair ...
Seems a whole bunch of people here are thinking the same as I
Your not new Gnat you should know after all its stated in the Tools Aula inst it? :confused: also they said that you can use the tools and test it on ArmA2 so they might have an agreement that when it passes trough them first that it will be o.k., its the Key which is copyrighted thats causing a slight problem and where they needed to decide to restrict the freedom we are used too. I understand that your not happy but your not thinking totally strait here ...
Huh ?! Dont know about "not thinking" ... but with that I gotta say "not understanding".
From a marketing standpoint, it is great, because you're reeling in people like myself who expected modding to be unrestricted.
Yeh.Exactly.
Two maybe examples;
1. Prior release potential buyer hears IF teams say "restricted / by approval moding/addons" ..... then hear early buyers say "similar to I44" (as they have). So now some potential buyers reconsider their purchase.
2. "Hello IF team, we're the I44 team (or example any other large WWII mod). We'd like to port our free mod content to IF. Please provide permissions" ..... Potential awkward silence as the IF team consider the lost income if they do so!
My guess now is the IF team had a completely different planned revenue model from this game.
Unlike BIS, they're not making most of their income from the initial purchase (it was cheap), they plan to do what 90% of the industry is doing. Selling a bunch of over priced DLC.
Glad to see BIS's go-to-market model (with free tools etc) was vindicated by the DayZ mod.
LOL .... bet a few developers were saying "WTF!" as the "old" ArmA2 raced back up the best seller charts :D
Selling a bunch of over priced DLC.
You can sell infinitely over-priced DLC`s as long as you want, but who gonna buy it? People will only pay for the DLC`s that are not overpriced on thier opinion. No one is staying behind you with a gun and demanding you to buy it. We`ve got a completed product from initial purchase ( yes, buggy, but patches are free and the game works without any DLCs ).
Of course - HOW THEY DARE TO DEMAND THE MONEY FOR THIER NEXT WORK? THEY MUST GIVE IT FOR FREE AND BEG US TO TAKE IT!
btw, while you whine about "modding disabled" people on IF official forums already linked up with devs and started to create thier addons on IF.
Of course - HOW THEY DARE TO DEMAND THE MONEY FOR THIER NEXT WORK? THEY MUST GIVE IT FOR FREE AND BEG US TO TAKE IT!
This x1000
[APS]Gnat
Jun 11 2012, 15:36
Yeh, and again you guys miss the point (or avoid the other text) that some of us are saying.
...... DONT CARE about the DLC ..... I may or may not buy some.
What I DO CARE about is having bought a game I though to could do as I did with OFP, ArmA, ArmAII, ArmAIIOA and TKH
And yes, TKH has DLC, as will ArmAII soon.
What I DO CARE about is having bought a game I though to could do as I did with OFP, ArmA, ArmAII
You base all your purchases on a THOUGHT, ?,
Gnat you are well aware of Bis tools and the EULA`s as others have said , it is incredulous for you to think BIS would allow another company to not only emulate there success by using there tools Engine Sample models and community ,they paid for a license not a piece of BIS business PIE. Just think about where it would go if we had 2 lots of Arma 2 ? there just isn't the crowd or the revenue to allow it , not even a share of it if you look at the facts.
I saw it and so did the countless 1000`s who didn't buy or post here .
unfortunately i think you have solved your own dilemma , "you thought and therefore it was" simply didn't come true this time i think. i`m sorry your labouring what is an obvious mistake on your behalf and trying to mask it by blaming someone else in this case .
Hellfire257
Jun 11 2012, 17:19
You base all your purchases on a THOUGHT, ?,
Nobody said modding would be restricted. Nobody said it wouldn't be either. Modding is an integral part of the RV engine games, so there was arguably more to suggest it would not be restricted than to suggest it would be. The IF team should have announced that they were forced to restrict modding, but of course, that would never have happened because it would have hurt sales.
aLmAnZo
Jun 11 2012, 17:40
This is the statement from the announcement made on the iron front forums: http://forum.iron-front.com/showthread.php?358-Iron-Front-Liberation-1944-Modding-possibilities-Announcement
"Dear Iron Front Fans
We have to apologize for our incorrect statements about being able to provide exactly the same possibilities and process of community modding for Iron Front as Arma does. There has been a misunderstanding on our side until very recently about our agreement with Bohemia Interactive on the possibilities and limitations.
Iron Front will allow modding, but there are limits and certain things to keep in mind. This is to not violate both our agreement with Bohemia Interactive and the license a modder accepts when he is using the BI tools suite.[...]"
Prior to release, and for quite the amount of time after released, the impression they (the IF developers) gave, was that the game would have the same modding ability as ARMA had. Me, and alot of others believed that to be true. It was stated several times. It sounded like an awsome product, and it was the main reason why I didn't mind the more or less buggy release and lame sound quality. I knew it would be modded, sooner or later.
Now, what do we have? A game with very little content, without the option to have it moded, unless the modders goes through a painfull and complex prosess to have their stuff released. I've been a BI costumer for years, and would never, ever expect them to do this to such a large portion of their own community. It's absolutely obvious that most costumers of IF, or at least a very large portion is part of the arma community as well. I did never in my wildest dreams think that Bohemia would do such a thing to us, and I am really thinking about NOT BUYING ARMA III due to this.
I find it rotten, simply rotten. And I think bohemia should be ashamed of this. It's a large stain on the reputation they have as a community friendly development team.
Seriously BI, please reconsider this. Please let modders have the tools they need to make Iron Front the great game it has the potential to be, as the community did with ARMA II. Without the work of the community, you wouldn't have as many loyal fans. You know that. Don't throw the trust you have away over this matter. Let Iron Front be the great game it deserves to be.
Nobody said modding would be restricted. Nobody said it wouldn't be either. Modding is an integral part of the RV engine games, so there was arguably more to suggest it would not be restricted than to suggest it would be
Your sadly watering down the facts , When asked a statement was made , YOU can mod the game however due to the fact thye bought a licence for using the RV engine and not the tools , your mod will be vetted , to ensure quality and copyright laws i guess .
doesnt seem a big deal for stability and financial security IMO. Some people had to jump through a hell of a lot more loops to be involved in Community mods and origianl OFP tools ill tell ya.
JUST make a mod and send it before spouting out splurge about Henny penny and the sky , so far this steam has been called a lot of not so nice things without any proof . it sad to see it.
Hellfire257
Jun 11 2012, 19:08
Not everyone wants to release their mods to the public.
Not everyone wants to release their mods to the public
I didnt see anywhere so far that you had to distribute your addon once made ?
or you dont want IF to see it is the problem ?
Anyway i think you have probably vented enough now , maybe its time you tried a real off the wall approach and send them an e-mail or PM and say i would like a IF Key for my own private /clan use for this addon ?
it may just work who knows ?
KBourne
Jun 11 2012, 19:55
An assumption fed by silence.
Nuhu, nodding nay here :q:. The assumption is fed by the harts and minds of the community, and I am not saying by this that the community is wrong now but you cant put this only on Iron Front development. Its easy to point fingers but also take some responsibility of your own.
You would have to be an absolute retard to not see how important modding RV engine games is to the players and the game itself.
True on the fact that it is important, true that you would be an absolute retard if one doesn't see it.
But what, IF they just made a blunder regarding copyrights and it turned out sour for them too?
To know that you are restricting said ability but remaining silent about it is, from a consumer's point of view, misleading. From a marketing standpoint, it is great.
You say they knew but I don't see any prove of that. Aren't we jumping to conclusions again here without any real facts? I like to give them some benefit of the doubt!
What has happened is essentially a clever bait-and-switch, with the bait being the silence on the issue.
We are jumping to conclusions here again....
Gnat;2169727']Seems a whole bunch of people here are thinking the same as I
That doesn't mean that you or they aren't mis led by your own thoughts, you made a decision based on the mere fact that the same freedom as on ArmA would be provided, an assumption that you and others made.
I might see things a little different but that doesn't necessarily means that I am attacking you or anyone else :j: the only thing I try to do is keeping an open mind towards it.
The future might give a more wider view upon things ...
Kind regards.
Hellfire257
Jun 11 2012, 20:29
Nuhu, nodding nay here . The assumption is fed by the harts and minds of the community, and I am not saying by this that the community is wrong now but you cant put this only on Iron Front development. Its easy to point fingers but also take some responsibility of your own.
The assumption of open modding, regardless of reasons, was a popular one, and it should have been blatantly obvious that such an assumption would be made by potential customers. I for one do not believe that the IF team are that oblivious to have not thought of it. So they chose to remain silent, neither proving nor DISPROVING the assumption. Therefore the arguably most logical choice is still unrestricted modding based on the heritage of the RV engine.
You say they knew but I don't see any prove of that. Aren't we jumping to conclusions again here without any real facts? I like to give them some benefit of the doubt!
What? Were they possessed and not self-aware when they made the decision to restrict? Of course they knew, unless they were stoned until release. Can you disprove my assertion?
You're not jumping to conclusions by defending their decision? You do not know any more than anyone else here (do you?). Everything here is simply speculation because nothing has been provided to prove OR disprove any assumptions/assertions made.
As with most developers, not communicating with your customers is a mistake. Their lack of communication prior to release has caused issues and unhappy customers.
KBourne
Jun 11 2012, 21:04
What? Were they possessed and not self-aware when they made the decision to restrict? Of course they knew, unless they were stoned until release. Can you disprove my assertion?
Now thats a different story, they made the decision based on copyright issues after release! so did they knew before or after? As far as I can recall they didn't knew they had copyright issues concerning modding at all at that point.
Whether I am able to disprove your assertion or not will not change anything about how you think or how you feel and to be honest I am not even planning to try.
You're not jumping to conclusions by defending their decision?
Defending? Well speaking of jumping to conclusions :rolleyes: there is a real difference between trying to understand the situation and defending the situation as far as I can look back I never stated that I agreed upon the decision they made, my conclusions are based on pure facts that we are all aware off by now, yours are given based on a hobbyist perspective which is understandable to a certain point but some where along the line you are taking it personal and also getting personal to everyone that is trying to give it a more calm approach ....
Everything here is simply speculation because nothing has been provided to prove OR disprove any assumptions/assertions made.
You might have a point here but there is no use on dragging this in to a hate blame conversation, you might want to turn a different page towards this issue and contact them and see how it turns out.
You never know how it will work out unless you try :)
As with most developers, not communicating with your customers is a mistake. Their lack of communication prior to release has caused issues and unhappy customers.
Totally agreeing here, communication was bad and I hope they will improve on this in the future so they can avoid this kind of situations ...
kind regards
GossamerSolid
Jun 11 2012, 21:23
This right here, love to hear reasonable comments about this one :rolleyes: :p
It's a valid question. Stop being such a blatant fanboy, it's fucking disgusting.
jblackrupert
Jun 11 2012, 21:30
I'd really like to hear from Bohemia on this.
I still find it extremely hard to believe that they would make anyone sign a contract that sabotages or puts all kinds of stumbling blocks in front of any games using the Arma 2 engine.
SmokeDog3PARA
Jun 11 2012, 21:36
Yes its ironic were in a bis forum under the thread iron front liberation 1944 \ addons and mods discussion, discussing weather or not we can make addons or not for iron front with no offical words from both parties that could resolve this pretty quickly I Imagen. lol
A sticky from bis like the one for videos on youtube and making profit from it.
KBourne
Jun 11 2012, 21:40
It's a valid question.
And its a valid request after reading so many hate and rage, whats going to happen if they would close there doors? Pointing to the fact no one will get even close to implement addons in the game ...
Stop being such a blatant fanboy, it's fucking disgusting.
Are we getting personal now? grow up start with that ..
I'd really like to hear from Bohemia on this.
I still find it extremely hard to believe that they would make anyone sign a contract that sabotages or puts all kinds of stumbling blocks in front of any games using the Arma 2 engine.
It might not be bad if they would, but the question is are they willing to do so?
kind regards
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.