L4D

[Uraniun235]

My point is that the only thing stopping any mod being distributed without the base game is licencing, and this is obviously not an issue for Valve since it's their engine and their mod/content/etc. Are you saying the determinant of 'game' is 'paying for a licence' or 'being made by the same guys that made the engine'? In this way Red Orchestra would be a 'proper game' since it's sold independently, but it obviously started life as a mod and hasn't really undergone any giant shedding of original content or other changes bar licencing since then (since I don't think they ever used UT2k4 content at all).

I think that 'mod' and 'game' are separate (mod being a variation on the same game), but 'total conversion' would be a subset of 'game' - being those games which require you to already own another game in order to function, because the authors didn't have the resources to license or create their own engine. Under these definitions Red Orchestra would have been a game from the start, but was a total conversion initially. I can't remember if Counter-Strike ever used Half-Life content - if it didn't then I would definitely argue that it was its own game from the start.


I think it's certainly arguable as to whether the actual worth of the game is equivalent to the price being asked - I got L4D on sale and I enjoyed it, but I wouldn't want to pay full price for what I got. But that doesn't mean it's "just a mod" or that it's not worthy of being called a game, that just means that it's just overpriced.

Going back to your earlier post where you're mocking the whole 'gametype mutators as game' thing, that's really more of a "FPS genre is bankrupt lol" or "FPS players are easily amused by minor variations to the same game, lol" discussion. I'd like to ask the other side of the question - what part of Team Fortress 2 is the same as Counter-Strike or HL2 or L4D, besides being the same engine and besides sharing common FPS conventions that apply to numerous non-Valve products? What would it take for them to not be mods?

[General Zod]

Going back to your earlier post where you're mocking the whole 'gametype mutators as game' thing, that's really more of a "FPS genre is bankrupt lol" or "FPS players are easily amused by minor variations to the same game, lol" discussion. I'd like to ask the other side of the question - what part of Team Fortress 2 is the same as Counter-Strike or HL2 or L4D, besides being the same engine and besides sharing common FPS conventions that apply to numerous non-Valve products? What would it take for them to not be mods?

I'd argue that if they don't make any substantial changes to the underlying engine beyond tweaking a feature or two or changing bitmaps and level layout, then it counts as a mod. Gears uses the UT3 engine, but its been so heavily changed that it doesn't really count as a mod.

[Uraniun235]

Really? Even if they rip out every sound, every texture, every 3D model, every map, and replace it with new stuff - but still use the same underlying engine - you think that's still a mod?

What's your stance on engine licensing? Let's say for example that iD decides they're not going to make any more games at all, that Id Tech 5 is going to just be a bare engine which developers can license (even though their games also serve as demos of the engine to prospective licensees). And let's say that several developers license the engine and sell their product via retail channels, having made no changes to the engine. Would those developers' products just be mods? Mods of what game?

[General Zod]

Really? Even if they rip out every sound, every texture, every 3D model, every map, and replace it with new stuff - but still use the same underlying engine - you think that's still a mod?

It'd be a heavily refined mod, but still a mod. If it still feels like I'm playing the same game but with an updated GUI, then I don't see why calling it a mod isn't accurate.

What's your stance on engine licensing? Let's say for example that iD decides they're not going to make any more games at all, that Id Tech 5 is going to just be a bare engine which developers can license (even though their games also serve as demos of the engine to prospective licensees). And let's say that several developers license the engine and sell their product via retail channels, having made no changes to the engine. Would those developers' products just be mods? Mods of what game?

There's a reason the term shovelware exists, you know.

[Uraniun235]

I... really? All new stuff on an existing engine is just "an updated GUI" to you?

...We're operating on the same assumption as to what an engine entails, right? I think engine and I think stuff like the graphics renderer, what sort of graphics features it supports, netcode, that sort of thing. Is that really more important to what makes a game than the other content that the engine works with?


I will say that from a publishing standpoint, having several games that feel the same can be enormously advantageous if there's already an established enthusiastic player base.


I would also argue that even mere variations on the same theme are still worthwhile endeavors; for example, if I listen to Ride of the Valkyries, I may prefer listening to a different performance by a different orchestra the next time I listen to it. It's the same music, but subtle differences like how strong the trombone section is, or tempo, or how distinct the string articulation is can all make for a much more (or much less) satisfying experience for me.

[General Zod]

I... really? All new stuff on an existing engine is just "an updated GUI" to you?

...We're operating on the same assumption as to what an engine entails, right? I think engine and I think stuff like the graphics renderer, what sort of graphics features it supports, netcode, that sort of thing. Is that really more important to what makes a game than the other content that the engine works with?

Graphics renderer, physics, AI, controls, etc. I also said nothing about importance. I liked Fallout 3 even though it was mostly an Oblivion mod, after all.

I would also argue that even mere variations on the same theme are still worthwhile endeavors; for example, if I listen to Ride of the Valkyries, I may prefer listening to a different performance by a different orchestra the next time I listen to it. It's the same music, but subtle differences like how strong the trombone section is, or tempo, or how distinct the string articulation is can all make for a much more (or much less) satisfying experience for me.

I like how you seem to be under the impression I think all mods are bad. Makes my job easier?

[Acidburns]

I can see where your coming from but by your reasoning, Dawn of War 2 isn't a Company of Heroes mod because it uses Essence 2.0, whereas Mass Effect is an Unreal Tournament mod?

Rrrrriiiiight

[General Zod]

I can see where your coming from but by your reasoning, Dawn of War 2 isn't a Company of Heroes mod because it uses Essence 2.0, whereas Mass Effect is an Unreal Tournament mod?

Rrrrriiiiight

itt we learn acidburns is incapable of reading

[Resinence]

why is the source engine so ugly

lighting model whats that all we need is diffuse and overuse of specular

just layer some low quality post processing on no one will be able to tell

8 hours to compile a level? not our problem we just buy mods now

but then again i hear "doesn't look like it was made nearly a decade ago with DOF hacked on" = lol new engines everything looks like plastic

[Acidburns]

I can see where your coming from but by your reasoning, Dawn of War 2 isn't a Company of Heroes mod because it uses Essence 2.0, whereas Mass Effect is an Unreal Tournament mod?

Rrrrriiiiight

itt we learn acidburns is incapable of reading

So you'd say that neither of them are mods? Sorry then! I'd say Mass Effect is as different from UT as Left 4 Dead is from Half Life 2. I'd say Left 4 Dead is as different from HL2 as Gears is from UT.

If Oblivion and Fallout 3 were developed simultaneously, which would be a mod of which? I'd say something is only a mod if it's an unlicensed modification of an existing game that retains significant graphical and gameplay elements from it's original game, and requires said game to function. Personally, if it replaces all or almost all the graphical elements, and changes significant gameplay elements, but still requires the original to function it is called a total conversion.

The moment you no longer require the original it is no longer a mod or total conversion. This usually means it's licensed. I don't think it's been done but some mods would be similar to an expansion, total conversions would give you a new product. Such as Red Orchestra or Left 4 Dead. I'd certainly say Fallout 3 would be different enough to be considered a total conversion if it was free, and thus it should be considered in the same way as Red Orchestra.

[Zablorg]

god damn is there a facepalm image on the internet that isn't picard

[2000AD]

So, if I'm reading this right, the argument being put forward is that irregardless of their differences there are no indiviual games, only mods of the engine used?

So for example:

Source engine mods: Half Life 2, Left 4 Dead, Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines

Unreal Engine 1 mods: Unreal, Unreal Tournament, Deus Ex, Adventure Pinball

ID Tech 3 mods: Quake 3, Call of Duty, Jedi Knight 2

[General Zod]

So you'd say that neither of them are mods? Sorry then! I'd say Mass Effect is as different from UT as Left 4 Dead is from Half Life 2. I'd say Left 4 Dead is as different from HL2 as Gears is from UT.

If Oblivion and Fallout 3 were developed simultaneously, which would be a mod of which? I'd say something is only a mod if it's an unlicensed modification of an existing game that retains significant graphical and gameplay elements from it's original game, and requires said game to function. Personally, if it replaces all or almost all the graphical elements, and changes significant gameplay elements, but still requires the original to function it is called a total conversion.

The moment you no longer require the original it is no longer a mod or total conversion. This usually means it's licensed. I don't think it's been done but some mods would be similar to an expansion, total conversions would give you a new product. Such as Red Orchestra or Left 4 Dead. I'd certainly say Fallout 3 would be different enough to be considered a total conversion if it was free, and thus it should be considered in the same way as Red Orchestra.

Not only can you not read you like making stuff up that doesn't actually address what I said.

[Acidburns]

Sorry, I don't know what to say really. If I'm still talking shit just ignore cause I must be having a really bad day.

You'd say Fallout 3 is mostly an Oblivion mod, but Gears isn't a UT mod because they customised the engine? Do you consider Left 4 Dead to be mostly a mod, or would you say it's more like Gears?

[General Zod]

Sorry, I don't know what to say really. If I'm still talking shit just ignore cause I must be having a really bad day.

You'd say Fallout 3 is mostly an Oblivion mod, but Gears isn't a UT mod because they customised the engine? Do you consider Left 4 Dead to be mostly a mod, or would you say it's more like Gears?

I've already addressed this, but hey, don't take my word for it "Building a "mod" (a game which relies on another game's core technology) "

[Acidburns]

Gears uses Unreal's core technology.

L4D's a source mod anyway, not like there's a whole lot of difference

Ok, you said L4D is a mod, I missed that sorry.

Graphics renderer, physics, AI, controls, etc. I also said nothing about importance. I liked Fallout 3 even though it was mostly an Oblivion mod, after all.

Doesn't Left 4 Dead change these things just as much as Gears did? It has modified graphics renderer (there's a film grain effect when your in darker areas, for example). What did Gears change graphically? Physics is basic source, but that's the same with Gears as far as I know. It has new AI, especially the director, I think that's changed more from Half Life 2 than was the case with Gears. Controls are basic WASD in Left 4 Dead, Gears has it's wall high cover system. Left 4 Dead has customised netcode to allow 1 player to host co-op for 4 people with no lag and some pretty large zombie hordes. Left 4 Dead has a wholly new UI and HUD.

[General Zod]

Doesn't Left 4 Dead change these things just as much as Gears did? It has modified graphics renderer (there's a film grain effect when your in darker areas, for example). What did Gears change graphically? Physics is basic source, but that's the same with Gears as far as I know. It has new AI, especially the director, I think that's changed more from Half Life 2 than was the case with Gears. Controls are basic WASD in Left 4 Dead, Gears has it's wall high cover system. Left 4 Dead has customised netcode to allow 1 player to host co-op for 4 people with no lag and some pretty large zombie hordes.

You do realize l4d actually started off as a mod until valve bought it and repackaged it, right?

[Acidburns]

Yes. For the record, I agree with the article you posted. However I would think this would make Gears an Unreal Mod.

[Uraniun235]

I like how you seem to be under the impression I think all mods are bad. Makes my job easier?

lol well when you said 'shovelware' in response to 'engine licensing' i kind of took that seriously, you know?

[DPDarkPrimus]

So despite the fact that the Unreal and Source engines are developed not for one game specifically, but to be licensed and used by other publishers, using them means your game is actually a mod... but only if it resembles the first product that was released using the engine too much!

[JointStrikeFighter]

Same Engine, Same Resources, Same Gameplay. Pick any 2. If your game meets these conditions then its a mod.

[Uraniun235]

that's retarded, nobody's going to transplant the same content from one engine to another

[DPDarkPrimus]

Same Engine, Same Resources, Same Gameplay. Pick any 2. If your game meets these conditions then its a mod.

So all shooters using the Unreal engine are just mods.

Fuck that's retarded.

[Civil War Man]

itt we learn that nobody is original

star wars was a flash gordon mod

[Stark]

So, if I'm reading this right, the argument being put forward is that irregardless of their differences there are no indiviual games, only mods of the engine used?

So for example:

Source engine mods: Half Life 2, Left 4 Dead, Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines

Unreal Engine 1 mods: Unreal, Unreal Tournament, Deus Ex, Adventure Pinball

ID Tech 3 mods: Quake 3, Call of Duty, Jedi Knight 2

turns out you're just an idiot who can't read; the adults itt are discussing what criteria for 'mod' and 'game' make sense

Doesn't Left 4 Dead change these things just as much as Gears did? It has modified graphics renderer (there's a film grain effect when your in darker areas, for example). What did Gears change graphically? Physics is basic source, but that's the same with Gears as far as I know. It has new AI, especially the director, I think that's changed more from Half Life 2 than was the case with Gears. Controls are basic WASD in Left 4 Dead, Gears has it's wall high cover system. Left 4 Dead has customised netcode to allow 1 player to host co-op for 4 people with no lag and some pretty large zombie hordes. Left 4 Dead has a wholly new UI and HUD.

you can't be serious; UI and 'film grain' makes it a different game, despite being trivial, totally superficial changes that (for instance) you can apply to UE3.0 with four lines of code?

L4D's engine -> hl2 being compared to gears -> ut3 is totally unfair, since valve has spent the time since hl2 came out hacking in new capabilities. l4d didn't add those capabilities; valve already had hacked most of them in for the 'episodic' hl2 releases. conversely, between ut3 and gears2 there were such fundamental changes it's considered a new version of the engine and ut3 was recently upgraded to the same standard because they're developed in parallel. thus, l3d takes advantage of improvements in the interim not developed by the l4d mod team, whereas the gears team actually worked on and improved the ue engine itself.

similarly, anyone who thinks gears ai and ut3 ai have anything in common is a retard, and many other mods use different AI routines (remember, there are platform games and driving games modded into ue2.0, these clearly do not use ue2.0 AI) and yet are clearly 'just' mods

to be honest it really looks like everyone was fine calling fan-made manipulations of a game 'mods' for more than a decade, even if they were sold full-price like CS, but now that valve has released nothing but uplifted mods for years people consider it's time to change this without explaining how it makes sense beyond 'omg people licence'

i think u235s set-based idea that, say, all mods are games but not all games are mods probably makes the most sense on a case-by-case basis

So despite the fact that the Unreal and Source engines are developed not for one game specifically, but to be licensed and used by other publishers, using them means your game is actually a mod... but only if it resembles the first product that was released using the engine too much!

i'm glad you're contributing to the discussion here and not just throwing out meaningless one-liners

oh wai-