BFME Modding FAQ - Page 3

AAK625 · 07-23-2004, 12:22 PM

Uh, DeeZire, you seem to know a tad more than the rest of us.... Do you have some special involvement in the development or testing of BFME that you haven't told us about?

I only ask, because if you have any special way of contacting EA, maybe you should try to convince them to add some modding extensions so we can do stuff. EA should know by now, that modding is what kept and is still keeping, Generals and Zero Hour alive. You'd think they'd learn enough to figure out that we're going to want to edit this game.

In a video, Skaggs mentioned more resources and a longer project cycle. Taking those into consideration, is it possible for them to maybe stay an hour after work and program something in for us?

Frankly, I am very sick of hearing "NO" to things that should, otherwise, be simple as hell to implement, but can't because of the engine. For example, landing helicopters that takeoff at the click of a button.

DeeZire · 07-23-2004, 03:55 PM

^ I cant speak with too much detail, Im still under NDA on the basis of the consualtancy agreement. Trust me, if anyone shouts about editing support its me

I hear what people are saying about editing keeping games alive and you all know I could not agree more. However, if you spent a week in EALA and looked upon the editing community from the outside, you start to see a young, talented and vibrant community yet its still 'fragmented'.

If the editing community was to produce something of real value and substance - like an unofficial patch, 1.03 for ZH (check the poll here http://www.deezire.net/modules.php?n...rder=0&thold=0) - then that community would be viewed very differently by outsiders. Take a look at the Community Bonus Pack for UT2K4 to see an example of how much impact a community can have on the developers of the original product. This is something that was received to very high acclaim by players and developers alike, with many people agreeing that the final product was at least as good in quality to the original product.

You would be very surprised to see the similarities between the devs and modders - they love what they do and they share some neat tricks, plus they actually learn stuff from mods. If the community did something good for the better of the game itself, it would certainly be noticed and looked upon highly, because instead of the community asking EA for support, instead the community would be supporting EA for a change, and that starts to generate a mutually beneficial relationship

@smurf, the -mod swicth seems to be the same, and yep its just an extended Generals engine. Im sure most, if not all, stuff will still work. Youd need a very talented artist with plenty of time to churn out a new living world object (map) to replace the default one, as like anything in the engine it can be changed - all you have to do is name your new map the same and replace the standard one.

@AAK - its not that they dont want to do it, and its not that they cant do it, the issue is that there is no real reason to do it, and so dev time wont get tied up on it. First and foremost, they have to finish the game, thats why the -mod switch didnt hit Generals until the patch, which was IIRC in response to community request.

smurfbizkit · 07-23-2004, 04:05 PM

I believe some people have been working on a sort of unofficial patch, and have even had some interest from the guys in EA Germany on it (who were pissed about EALA dropping support for ZH so quickly).

key0p · 07-23-2004, 04:18 PM

eh patch? are you saying we(well not me) can hack up generals and EA dont mind?

What files are you talking about 'patching'?

Mithril · 07-23-2004, 05:15 PM

As far as I can remember it wasn't about patching things, like fixing, repairing things, the unofficial patch was mainly about balance fixes. At least that's what I've gathered.

key0p · 07-23-2004, 05:28 PM

oh...how boring...

Mithril · 07-23-2004, 05:40 PM

Not boring for pro players. New content is done by mods, fixes\balance issues are resolved by patches, whether unofficial or official is only differentiated by law or technical related issues.

AAK625 · 07-23-2004, 07:07 PM

Come on.... Look at all of us, we'd need a father figure to nudge us in the right direction to make a patch or some giant joint project for the benefit of the community.

DeeZire · 07-23-2004, 07:17 PM

Id be prepared to lead a team on an official patch, but my view is that the patch should focus mainly on fixes - mainly because (i) ProGen fixes nearly all the games problems anyways so Ive already coded most of it, but (ii) balancing is such an emotive and individually subjective issue that we'd never get it right anyways - balanced for one player is lame for another. Wed have to get quite a few top players to contribute ideas for balance and that would need much time and much testing, but a patch that fixes the games problems and annoyances wouldnt be that hard to do nor would it take that long. The other thing about a 'fix' patch is I found that by fixing the games inherent issues, you also address some of the balancing concerns whilst doing so.

Heck, I could even throw it together with RTPatch which is what EA use to patch the actual game files so end users would never know the difference. If official support is just about over, then as long as its quality controlled, bug free and well written then I cant see EA having a serious problem with it.

key0p · 07-23-2004, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mithril

Not boring for pro players.

Done my dash with 'pro' rts gaming.Ive also done my dash with 'pro' first person gaming.I play for fun, even when I played 'pro'.I hate pro player attitudes lol

Why should the community have to do the work of a giant company that we finance in order to be recognised by them? That stinks.

Unfortunately for me no amount of balancing or error fixing would entice me to play generals.It needs more than that.