The State Of Things
Mouse
The Lighter Side of Pessimism Join Date: 2002-03-02 Member: 263Members, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
The Lighter Side of Pessimism Join Date: 2002-03-02 Member: 263Members, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
<div class="IPBDescription">Modding</div> This is a rant I wrote late last year in the forums of a HL2 fan site on the state of the HL2 modding scene as I saw it. I believe it is still relevant.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Looking through some of the mods listed here and on various HL2 sites, it seems that most of them are screaming at me, "get out of your sandbox, the real world is overrated. Come play in our sandbox, we have realistic sand physics and 10,000 polygon toddlers that realistically **** and generally complain when you kick sand in their face! Oh, did I mention the realistic shoe physics..." etc. etc. ad infinitum. What I am trying to say is (to paraphrase countless others before me), If I wanted reality I would go outside and play in my own real sandbox.
Yes, the occasional realism MOD is good fun, but there are only so many times you can look at a press release showing a M4A1 (which looks strikingly similar to the one in the press release before it, even though the previous one was from an entirely different MOD) before the mere threat of an M4A1 model makes you involentarily break out in convulsions and assume the fetal position with optional puddle of drool forming next to your mouth. Personally I'm waiting for realism MODs to branch out into the world of more obscure instances of art imitating life (anyone else feel the sudden urge to make a lawn mowing MOD?).
All this talk of mowing lawns and sand physics slides me nicely into my next topic. Feature creep and MODs that try and jog while beating themselves in the kneecaps. It seems that HL2 MODs on average have a tendency to subject themselves to the after effects of the obscure analogy mentioned in the previous sentence. What I was basically saying is, if your base concept is about as entertaining as beating yourself in the privates with a meat tenderiser, it doesn't matter how shiny and spiffy the engine is. Once the post release 'ooh, pretty colours' has worn off, odds are that the majority of the player base will stop playing your MOD; leaving only those who pass their spare time by maintaining their collection of shiny objects, the obligatory hackers/cheaters/ragers and the dev team. Yes it is indeed nice to play a MOD or a game where you are consistantly blown away by the visuals and artwork. but if you are trying to use this to support what is essentially a bad idea, you are in effect trying to jog while beating yourself in the kneecaps.
But do not fear. There are some things you can do to check if your MOD is indeed as bad as you now may fear it is.
First, write a list of all of the features unique to your MOD (engine related features are not to be included unless you believe they affect how the game plays in a major way). If you can't think of any unique features I suggest you either think of some or start work on an entirely new MOD, because chances are you are essentially 'cloning' a previous MOD or game; unless there is a decent gap of years between the original and your version there is a very low chance of success.
Second, assuming your MOD passed the above test; write a list of all of the gameplay features that make your MOD worth playing. (Once again, if you can't think of anything, I strongly suggest you review your reasons for doing that particular MOD) Hopefully there will be lots of features listed here, if not there is still hope; your MOD may be a nonsense MOD like (for example) Arse Rainbow Crowbar Half-Life also known as ARCHL. Like the name suggests, everyone has a crowbar and a rainbow coming out of their arse; the object of the game being to knock the other players off a platform into the void. While many of you (the guy who made it included) would quite happily dissmiss it as a MOD not even worthy of 15 seconds of fame. It has turned out to be a popular time waster amongst many members of the Natural Selection forums.
To conclude what has become a rather lengthy rant.
Is the Source engine a powerful engine? Yes
Does that mean you have to use all of its capabilities? No
Are realism MODs the most common? Yes
Does that make them the best thing on the block? No
I believe the whole point of MODing is to try new things without the limitation of having to keep a publisher happy.
Why do you think Flayra the designer and coder of Natural Selection left his job at Stainless Steel Studios to develop
NS as a MOD? The idea was too revolutionarily.
So people, please, at least try and design MODs that are somewhat original at first glance.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Discuss
Mouse
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Looking through some of the mods listed here and on various HL2 sites, it seems that most of them are screaming at me, "get out of your sandbox, the real world is overrated. Come play in our sandbox, we have realistic sand physics and 10,000 polygon toddlers that realistically **** and generally complain when you kick sand in their face! Oh, did I mention the realistic shoe physics..." etc. etc. ad infinitum. What I am trying to say is (to paraphrase countless others before me), If I wanted reality I would go outside and play in my own real sandbox.
Yes, the occasional realism MOD is good fun, but there are only so many times you can look at a press release showing a M4A1 (which looks strikingly similar to the one in the press release before it, even though the previous one was from an entirely different MOD) before the mere threat of an M4A1 model makes you involentarily break out in convulsions and assume the fetal position with optional puddle of drool forming next to your mouth. Personally I'm waiting for realism MODs to branch out into the world of more obscure instances of art imitating life (anyone else feel the sudden urge to make a lawn mowing MOD?).
All this talk of mowing lawns and sand physics slides me nicely into my next topic. Feature creep and MODs that try and jog while beating themselves in the kneecaps. It seems that HL2 MODs on average have a tendency to subject themselves to the after effects of the obscure analogy mentioned in the previous sentence. What I was basically saying is, if your base concept is about as entertaining as beating yourself in the privates with a meat tenderiser, it doesn't matter how shiny and spiffy the engine is. Once the post release 'ooh, pretty colours' has worn off, odds are that the majority of the player base will stop playing your MOD; leaving only those who pass their spare time by maintaining their collection of shiny objects, the obligatory hackers/cheaters/ragers and the dev team. Yes it is indeed nice to play a MOD or a game where you are consistantly blown away by the visuals and artwork. but if you are trying to use this to support what is essentially a bad idea, you are in effect trying to jog while beating yourself in the kneecaps.
But do not fear. There are some things you can do to check if your MOD is indeed as bad as you now may fear it is.
First, write a list of all of the features unique to your MOD (engine related features are not to be included unless you believe they affect how the game plays in a major way). If you can't think of any unique features I suggest you either think of some or start work on an entirely new MOD, because chances are you are essentially 'cloning' a previous MOD or game; unless there is a decent gap of years between the original and your version there is a very low chance of success.
Second, assuming your MOD passed the above test; write a list of all of the gameplay features that make your MOD worth playing. (Once again, if you can't think of anything, I strongly suggest you review your reasons for doing that particular MOD) Hopefully there will be lots of features listed here, if not there is still hope; your MOD may be a nonsense MOD like (for example) Arse Rainbow Crowbar Half-Life also known as ARCHL. Like the name suggests, everyone has a crowbar and a rainbow coming out of their arse; the object of the game being to knock the other players off a platform into the void. While many of you (the guy who made it included) would quite happily dissmiss it as a MOD not even worthy of 15 seconds of fame. It has turned out to be a popular time waster amongst many members of the Natural Selection forums.
To conclude what has become a rather lengthy rant.
Is the Source engine a powerful engine? Yes
Does that mean you have to use all of its capabilities? No
Are realism MODs the most common? Yes
Does that make them the best thing on the block? No
I believe the whole point of MODing is to try new things without the limitation of having to keep a publisher happy.
Why do you think Flayra the designer and coder of Natural Selection left his job at Stainless Steel Studios to develop
NS as a MOD? The idea was too revolutionarily.
So people, please, at least try and design MODs that are somewhat original at first glance.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Discuss
Mouse
Comments
Using source to create a world with realistic physics shouldn't be the same as creating a world that's a mirror of reality. Although arguably "the Sims" had success in emulating a real-world environment, you can't really port this across to FPS very well. You either get (with shooting) High School Massacre, a shoot-em-up with real disintegrating uniforms, or (without shooting) Real work Pro , a mind numbing first person puzzle game. Can you waste 7 1/2 hours each day without your boss catching you? If I read you right and thats what you're railing against Mouse, then I agree.
Give us realistic arterial spray, give us deformable objects and interactive environments, give us beautiful realistic lighting, and convincing water. Above all else, give us imaginitive applications of them. Escapism is fun, I don't want to play a game that mirrors my own life, I want to play a game that takes me out of it....
I'm for realism for the sake of innovation, but against realism for the sake of it being the 'safe' solution.
To me, this is a refinement of the old "graphics versus gameplay" argument that has been going on since the year dot. Even my old Crash magazines from 20-odd years ago for the Spectrum 48k games a graphics mark and a gameplay mark. I took the gameplay mark over the graphics mark because those were the games I was more likely to enjoy.
Frankly - I reckon the reason visuals are the main thing being raved about at said time is that no one is entirely sure what source is capable of, but we all know its going to have eyecandy. What else are they going to talk about?
The atmosphere of NS partly comes from the "realism" of its maps , models and effects. It doesn't matter if the rendered things have no chance of existing IRL , they must <i>feel</i> real.
Funny looking mods such as Monkey Strike get old way too fast.
Still , obviously gameplay > realism. Mods are games , if they have no gameplay they have no use. If NS is the best mod of the world , it's because of its gameplay.
Though, it would be kinda interesting to see a humans vs. aliens mod with realistic weapons. Hehehehe.... FN FAL vs. Gorge... <!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::gorge::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/pudgy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pudgy.gif' /><!--endemo-->