I'm not going to tell you that you are wrong, (even though that is my opinion) but questioning ones own beliefs semi-regularly is healthy. I would indeed like you to pick apart the arguments that came before, which you sidestepped instead - perhaps we're wrong somewhere.
However...
>...an untested, unendorsed and unreliable, hacked edition of my favorite game,
Untested is certainly not the case. Unless you refer to a specific type of testing, in which case you should specify it clearer.
Unreliable?
The mod hasn't made anything more unreliable - the only issues are also issues without the mod.
Hacked?
Now *that* a poor choice of word for any discussion - without specifying what you mean, which is why you wrote something in the first place...
And for the big one... unendorsed...
Just how far would it have to be endorsed before you would play it?
-Included in patch
-Developers say they like it?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jamie
I hope that the modders enjoy working on their projects as much we (and the rest of the community) enjoy playing them.
|
>I am certain that these thoughts are shared by the greater majority of players and gaming groups on the internet today.
If one considers it on the per-game basis, the player breakup would be in categories like:
1-Players who didn't like the game, and shelved it. (or returned it, either way they're not relevant)
2-Players who liked it somewhat, but didn't want to spend a lot of time at it
3-Players who liked the game a lot, but don't even look for improvements.
4-Players who liked the game a lot, and start looking for improvements/mods but don't use them.
5-Players who liked the game a lot, and start looking for improvements/mods and start using them.
6-Players who liked the game a lot, and start "tinkering".
Every game will have a different distribution of players in those groups. If you want to include #2 or even #1, then of course you're right - but then the whole thing is totally beside the point.
If #3 counts depends on the definition of success - is it a good product VS is it a "market-successful" product. The latter will require them to be counted. The former doesn't because this group would need it stuffed down their throats... That is, we'd need somewhat more "push" marketing. Usually this costs money. While IMO #6 should be counted, they are such a minority (I agree with you there) that they don't make a difference.
#4 vs #5 (&6) should give you some indication of the quality of the product. Add #3 to the left to get the "market-success".
Now here's what I consider an important point:
If a better product is available, but not as widely used, why go with the inferior one?
Note that the better product also provides backwards compatibility. There are no cost differences involved, no maintenance cost differences, or anything such.
Way I see it, you're going for the inferior product because "the biggest portion of the others has it". For me, this is a quite backwards way of thinking.
I would have you try the mod properly, and then explain why you'd want to discourage people from trying it. But given the way you've been speaking, I doubt you will, so I will have to modify the question: Why will you NOT try it?
By the sound of you, you may have been 'burned' by (a) bad mod(s) earlier, and associate the troubles you had with that with all mods. Is that why?
>I kick myself for even thinking you could make a difference with the public at large producing something worthy of even the slightest benefit of the doubt which would warrant a second look.
Please do keep the incendiaries tucked away somewhere safe, ok?
[i]>then find a mechanism to somehow get endorsements or at the very least, a public nod of approval from the developers to justify your work, and above all, gain the credibility of the public at large.
First of all, the "public nod of approval" is there. See the quote from the simhq interview mentioned earlier. Justification is *already* covered as soon as the modder himself (or the rare herself?) plays it and likes the changes. (Scratching ones own itch is the primary purpose...)
As for the last part of the sentence, I'll go by what you meant and not what you said...
That is, for reasons mentioned, a slow process, and one we're currently going through. The only "quick" way would be if SCS adopted the lwami mod, perhaps similarly to the way valve adopted CS - though maybe without the hiring part. For what we know, they may be restricted from doing so by reasons we can only guess at. The other way is to win them over one by one. (I suppose you may have noticed we've been trying with you
)
As Jamie said in the aforementioned interview, the community tries to increase the games success; to have it continue and grow better. We do that in several ways, but one is to have people use a mod which makes the game better. (At least we are convinced it is.)