New Rules of Modding for Arma 2 : Mod "clans" and "Projects" only ?

[EricM]

Arma 2 looks great, and that's good isn't it ? Still it's also a "curse" for the community, because we now have to match that quality if we want our addons to feel like "part of this world"

I'm going to quote myself on this one :

With each new generation of the engine, it gets harder and more time consuming to develop addons that look as good as the originals : see the MI24 in game ? How long will it take for the community to produce addons of that quality with all the great shaders and details ? A LOT !!!

I know, I worked on a Hind before, and though it's rather easy to get the rough shape right, the time you spend on fine tuning the details, UV, textures, specular, normals etc... is sickening (and don't get me started on the cockpits).

For OFP, it was easy to make something that looked as good as the original (blocky geometry, simple low-rez texture, lousy UV), for Arma 1 it's a little bit more tricky (more details, more attention to UV, multi-stage materials, higher quality maps), for Arma 2 it will be a pain to match the quality, and only professionnal-grade modelers and texture artists will be able to output game-quality mods...

That's how things go... the better looking and realistic, the more time consuming and complexe it will be. Otherwise, simple OFP-ported addons will look like a sore thumb in the lush and detailled gameworld of Arma 2.

This is why I believe the old way of "one-man-mod" or "one-man-addon" is going the way of the dodo with Arma 2. No hobbyist can now gather all the skills (real life expertise, modelling, UV, textures, shaders, configs) and freetime to produce game-quality addons on his own on a reasonable time frame (ie : before Arma 3....)

I believe that given the level of quality expected, only FOCUSED GROUP PROJECT will be able to survive in Arma 2.

"WWII on my own" or even "General Era" is mostly out of question and will never make it to final version, whereas things as "Project Antonov 12" or "Project Leopard II", where a team of artists gather to work one specific addon for the whole community has more chances of succeeding and delivering.

My two cents...

[.kju [PvPscene]]

level of quality expected

Sorry this is rubbish.

Everyone should make addons for himself, the joy and learning, as well his immediate
playing grouping / local community first and foremost.

The "BIF community", the "whole community" or whatever none sense does not exist,
and is no equation to take serious.


Another aspect is, that you are the one to decide where the prios are.
Perfect 1:1 remodelling, ultra high textures are NOT good ones IMHO.
It is always a compromise no matter what.
Despite that personally I prefer gameplay, non HW demanding, as error free ones.


Last aspect to put on the table for now.
Peoples knowledge improves, their techniques and experience with tools and
development in general does, so does the tools.

Still it's also a "curse" for the community, because we now have to match
that quality if we wants our addons to feel like "part of this world"

This is not true either.

Port your OFP stuff to A2, as well as your OFP environment and use only your stuff.
Pretty consistent in all means.

There is NO need what so ever to compare fan made work with professional.

FOCUSED GROUP PROJECT will be able to survive in Arma 2.

One more thought to peoples head to turn around.

In professional software development there is technique called iterative development.

The way to go here, as it is for real life projects most of the time nowadays.

[Celery]

I'm very much for this idea, I was going to suggest something similar if nobody else would.

It's all fine and well to make addons etc if you like it but if you really think that folks are going to actually use them just like that, you have to stop kidding yourself. If you look at which addons are widely used, you'll see that most of them are a part of a bigger mod.

Some general guidelines for making good addons

• Try to make your addon comparable to the vanilla ones: it sticks out like a sore thumb if it's uglier or its attributes are off. Always keep in mind that it will probably be used with vanilla stuff so make it blend in.
• If the addon you're making is already in the vanilla game, give it to a total conversion mod because a user-made XM-8 is not going to be used separately if the game already has one
• Unless you're making a larger mod, don't add trivial features (e.g. extendable smoking trays) that BIS-made addons wouldn't have
• Join forces with a modding team that is compatible with the addons you're making. That's the best bet you have to get your addons in use.
• The time for competition is pretty much over at this stage, so be cooperative with the whole community and encourage everyone to use your addons in their mods or as a base for their own addons
• Always remember to give credits where they're due. You're not winning anyone's admiration if you claim the work as 100% your own when it's not.

In my opinion the most important thing is that addons are put into larger mods and that the mods can be used with vanilla addons without blatant differences in speed, maneuverability, resilience, damage, recoil, look or sound.

[da12thMonkey]

To be honest, I've found that the very best examples of modelling and texturing for both OFP and ArmA community addons have been produced by extremely talented individuals, even if they're part of a larger mod team.

BIS's work looks great because they have the resources (money) to hire and maintain either an equal number of good modellers and texturers, or a collective of extremely talented individuals (including some of the talented comminuty members I just mentioned), who can produce awesome looking artwork on their own (the latter case is more probable).

We can't hope to replicate this in the community: Our talent will always be a tiered system, with an unbalance in the number of people who are actually able to accomplish the different disciplines needed to produce addons.

The main problem with your suggestion is that the number of good modellers in this community is not equal to the number of good texturers, and there are even fewer good scripters, animators and config wizards.

I don't really know any addonmakers in the current community who has refused an offer of direct help from someone who's talented enough to improve their work. However, when you can't find a brilliant skinner who can match BIS' amazing ArmA 2 addons because the good ones are all too busy, what do you do? Stick it on the backburner and wait, or settle for someone who can produce something that doesn't look quite as good as BIS' work?

The end result is just the same as we have now: some good looking addons, some not so good. It's unreasonable to believe that we as amateurs can homogeneously produce content of an equal standard to that of the professionals.

[S!fkaIaC]

Everyone should make addons for himself, the joy and learning

Of course, nevertheless quality is not rubbish.

Textures are not the only quality criteria, functionality as close to reality as it could get is rather important for me.

I was wondering in OFP why so many modders did exactly the same over and over again, the same wheel was many times invented.

The amount of shared/reused work has to grow, else it would be like for ArmA I : The best mods are released a few days before ArmA 2 release.

[Raptor]

I've to 101% agree to Q!
The Community live since OFP of the hugh variety of different Addon, ideas, solutions and ofcause their quality and that's what these community is based on.

So if you arn't happy with the quality of your addons, take the time for yourself but don't expect that the others will do so.

[Redkid Joker]

This idea seems an awful lot like the industrial revolution and mass production. Take the work made by craftsmen and split it up for several people to do one thing.

[Sennacherib]

I agree also with Q. I'm alone on my project for OFP, and i want to port my project in Arma2, and i would be still alone.

if I spend a lot of time to create addons, this is first of all for my pleasure.As I create scifi/futuristic addons, this is necessarly for my pleasure, because few people are interested

[RKSL-Rock]

I don't entirely agree with Eric or Kju here. I can see both sides but I don't really think its a new situation. The skills gap problem has become more obvious with ArmA but the same situation existed in OFP 8 years ago.

It's not impossible for one person to have all the required skills needed to make a good addon (ok its not really likely but i do know several people that come close). People just need the time and support to learn. But I do think its impractical for anyone to think that person will deliver anything quickly. And while I do favour the "many individuals approach" in some respects I know the "team up" method gives a higher probability of success. Sharing the workload helps a lot.

In 7 or 8 years of being part of the OFP/ArmA modding scene I've met a lot of the "Lone Addon Maker" types. They produce some amazing models, textures and features that just blow your mind. They may lack only one of the skills needed to get it in game. So they ask someone. If that person can help you they usually do. When i've asked for help in the past i've more often than not got it.

On the team side of the coin, there are some huge advantages. Sharing of skills, the ability to learn from each other. Motivation and social aspects too. (I met two of my best drinking friends via modding) There are some negatives. Some of the big teams can present a very intimidating presence in the community. I know one person at least who was talking about modding ArmA, he took one look at ACE and said "I cant compete with that" and stopped trying to make scripts and models. Its not really ACE's fault but that standard in this community is very high. It is hard for new people to make a start unless they join a team or someone has the time to help them through their first steps in ArmA.

Eric has hit on a point a lot of people have fallen foul of. ArmA1's engine demands more technical skills and a higher quality than OFP did. It is harder to make addons that look "right" next to the stock BIS models. The engine's limits demand a higher quality standard from the addon makers to work properly without error or performance problems so the perceived minimum quality standard has gone up. There are some that say they value game play of looks etc but its funny the moment an ugly addon is released they are in the front row condemning it. I don't think anyone will ever or could ever impose rules or a way of working on the modding community. Sure the engine will always have rules we need to follow but I don't think you can ever force people into teams unless they want to.

In my opinion what we need is better access to information, tutorials and practical examples. BIS are unlikely to do that for us. It would be nice I must admit. Community members need to share what they have learnt and take the time to write accessible tutorials. But for that to happen the general attitude in the community needs to change. The first initiative to write tutorials came to a grinding halt because of a bad community attitude. There wer alot of "I want you to do ....." sort of demands got a "why should i spent my time trying to help ungrateful bastards" response. We need to help new comers not shout them down. Some people need to learn to respect ownership and copyright. Others need to climb down off their ivory towers and learn what 'community' means dropping this elitist and 'holier than thou attitude' they have adopted. We also need a decent set of guidelines to help new addon makers make a start into the ArmA modding scene. And people need to have the option to work how they want to. Either way they should be supported.

[Max Power]

I agree with Rock in that there can't be rules for addon creation. This might mark a general trend if there is an impetus for adaptation imposed upon the community. Especially in the early days of ArmA, like the early days of OFP, people were happy playing with simple retexes and ofp ports and that sort of thing. Because a model is not as slick as the ones ingame does not mean that it won't be enjoyed.

There's another term to examine here aswell. What is survival? If I make a stand alone addon and 10 people like it for their scenarios or whatever does that mean it perished? How about 5 people got a kick out of it, and I had a good time making it? Does that mean it's dead?

How about those addons that make it into the photography thread multiple hundreds of times but don't actually really get played with? Is that a successful addon or is it a dead addon?

I don't think it's necessary to impose these terms on any fan development. Someone makes something because they want to, and if they don't want to spend the time to do it all by themselves then they join up with other people.