A note about client modifications

While I don't agree with the Devs about modding I DO understand that why they have it against the EULA. They want everyone to have the SAME experience playing the game. And any unauthorized modifications could break the game for the person doing the mod and they dont want to be held responsible for anything like that not to mention be responsible for any infringement of copyrights. I DO think that they should allow players to submit mods to the DEVs and they decide wether to include it or not. I do believe that the Devs don't have a lock on how to improve COH, but they are responsible to the COH community to do their best to improve and make it more enjoyable, not to mention that their livelihood depends on people playing the game.

The Devs have a careful balancing act to do A) they can't unbalance the game as it would cause mortal damage to the game B) they cant please everyone including me all the time because we are all different

[ QUOTE ]
While I don't agree with the Devs about modding I DO understand that why they have it against the EULA. They want everyone to have the SAME experience playing the game. And any unauthorized modifications could break the game for the person doing the mod and they dont want to be held responsible for anything like that not to mention be responsible for any infringement of copyrights. I DO think that they should allow players to submit mods to the DEVs and they decide wether to include it or not. I do believe that the Devs don't have a lock on how to improve COH, but they are responsible to the COH community to do their best to improve and make it more enjoyable, not to mention that their livelihood depends on people playing the game.

The Devs have a careful balancing act to do A) they can't unbalance the game as it would cause mortal damage to the game B) they cant please everyone including me all the time because we are all different

[/ QUOTE ]You're new to the game and the forums, so I'll let the whole you siding with the devs thing slide for now. The mods here that people talk about are visual and simple changes, like showing placement of badges and plaques on the map, or making the bananas of doom (spines) look like metal, rock, or something else. I saw a visual mod about two and a half years ago and it was a visual mod to the Assault Rifle and people called it the Super Soaker back then and the mod made it look like a super soaker. We're not talking a Speedhack or invincibility hack here.

Well, from the blazingly fast topic skim that I've done, all I can say is this:

I humbly submit, that if the Devs will not let people make changes, the Devs must then step up and listen to them all the more. It's my hope that this goes beyond just 'keeping their finger near the pulse of the community'. I think a lack of client modification warrants people being put almost explicitly on projects that players in the community are talking about and asking for. Let's face it: you've got more hands to lift the proverbial load after slashing the comic off your collective to-do lists.

Also, it should be noted that although the ToS is strict, it probably shouldn't be taken as gospel truth in all instances. Technically, that awesome Comic Book Creator contest we had awhile back was against section 7 of the document. Not that I would count Cryptic or PlayNC among the smartest companies in the world if they were to punish people for doing well in their sponsored contest mind you.

The real truth about mods...

The percentage of players who actually *create* mods is far less than 1%.

The percentage of player who will actually use a mod that was created by someone is a tiny percent as well.

The majority of players never use a hero planner or look up stats or debate the build on the forums. Most players never come to the forums. It's just a game. They pay their monthly fee, and the play the game.

Even the players who do/did use mods...how many of them would actually quit the game over the looping sounds issue? Not many. People talk a big talk, but very, very few follow through.

However, mods are a customer support nightmare. Now the original, less than 1%, of players who could actually create their own mods are fine, but the other players who downloaded them are still a liability. If a patch makes it so that all the modded clients crash on startup, people are going to be unhappy. It might be a small percent, but it will be a very vocal percent. If the modding community has enough members and enough interest, the more they know about the innerworkings of the game, the more likely it is that people will write mods that go beyond harmless happy animations or sounds into the relam of complete hacking/botting. Then you've got legit players upset that everyone else seems to be botting their way to 50, then you've got people getting upset because they spent $25 dollars for a bot that turned out to be a scam, then you've got bots being downloaded from BT that are infected with kegloggers and plenty of non-technical people getting screwed.

So, you can either say 'No modding' and have a few people complain but ultimately do nothing...or you can say 'Go ahead and mod' and bring on the possibility of a lot of headaches.

[ QUOTE ]
The real truth about mods...

[/ QUOTE ]

Was nowhere present in your post.

All of this anti-modding talk ignores the 800lb gorilla in the corner.

WoW... encourages... modding.

Blizzard embedded the LUA programming language into the client and wrote an API so the Addon authors are able to do some amazing things. By controlling the interface they are able to control what is done with the interface. Sure, there were complaints when 2.0 came out and broke a slew of addons because they tightened up the API to disallow a lot of dubious actions but by and large it has not been a support nightmare for them at all. Why? Simple, since they provided the interface and the API they went on to further state that they do not support or endorse any addon. Their answer is to turn it off. It is up to the individual addon authors to support their addon, period.

So the modding community supports its own product. They are the ones who shoulder the burden, not Blizzard. Blizzard's response when the client doesn't start is to turn off all addons. If the client starts then, not their problem.

Take a look at some of the exceptionally large addon sites for WoW and you see an thriving community with tons of support.

Contrast that with the first MMO I ever saw modded. Asheron's Call. Granted this is well before modding MMOs became commonplace but the different is striking. Asheron's Call's behavior was modified through the reverse engineering of the protocol in a utility called Decal. Decal allowed a ton of mods to be added. However since Turbine did not directly control the API they were unable to restrict the API to limited calls. As a result while there were tons of useful, benign mods for AC there were also some bad ones; completely autonomous bots which were able to fight/loot on their own. Amazing pieces of code, really, but detrimental to the game as a whole. Turbine's policy was that the Decal cat was out of the bag and instead of restricting its use entirely it restricted any active, AFK fighting while leaving many of the useful benign portions alone.

To me modding, esp. the controlled modding as evident by Blizzard's embedding of LUA, is a good thing for the MMO community at large. It allows the community itself to scratch itches that the developers simply don't have time for. It increases the quality of life dramatically. When I poke at MMOs other than WoW I am constantly dismayed at how horrible the UI is or at the missing features that could be addressed by a lively modding community.

Does it come with its own set of problems? Of course, anything does. Is it the bain of all gaming? Hardly. Is it appropriate for all games or in an unrestricted manner? Nope.

Anyone who is afraid of modding out of ignorance of some of the stellar community examples really has no place to judge. It can be done poorly, granted. But when done properly it is simply head and shoulders above the competition.

As stated controlling and channeling the modding community is becoming the dominant model in MMOs. In fact there are some MMOs which are going so far as to tap that large potential to help the developers provide content. Neverwinter Nights and it's successors are ample evidence of that trend. I don't recall the MMO which is going to do that as a matter of policy but I know there is one out there in development. I believe Ryzom (Sp?) is another that encourages development of content by players.

I have to agree with Greyed. The contrast between CoX and WoW in terms of modding is disturbingly stark. To a degree, by encouraging modding, Blizzard actually set very efficient boundaries for what is allowed and what isn't. In most cases, once modding is open to the public and supported by the company, most modders will pursue legal ways of modifying the client.

As long as modding is off-limits, it will encourage people to attempt hacking. Forbidden fruit and all that. And when people start pursuing the forbidden fruit, often times they manage to stumble upon some very dangerous opportunities, which Cryptic will have a far harder time controlling.

/rant
wow, what a .... fortunately she is gone, as well as wrong.

(edit: in the interest of clarity:

read the link to the TOS she provides. It talks about reverse engineering, derivative works, hacking the game code... cheats basically. Pretty standard stuff. The so-called "Mods" used by the community to change maps, turn off sounds etc, are using a provided-by-the-developers, pointed out to us by the developers, explained to us, by devs... resource. Put there, for the users, for allowable client side minor changes. Not modifying the game code etc. Not in violation of the TOS. Its not a violation of the TOS nor the laws of the United States of America for some kid to stick a Red S on his chest. Regardless of what some customer service rep that doesn't understand the technology nor the terminology that goes along with it. If it was, then NcSoft would be going after those sites that allow people to modify their game (which our "Mods" do not do anyway), just like every other game company has been doing for years. The whole thing was just one woman's powertrip thinking she was 'right' and 'something must be done'. Note that not a single other representative has EVER replied to this thread. I would be happy to hear a definitive answer, but honestly, this subject was covered, by developers, in other forums, years ago. Good luck finding those posts though, its been a long long time. They never did add that ability to disable sounds, though they did change several, why? They didn't need to! Users already figured out how to fix it on their own *shrugs*.)

OH AND IN THE INTEREST OF FULL DISCLOSURE I MOD MY CLIENT USING THE DATA FOLDER TO TURN OFF SOUNDS AND MARK MAPS... ok? I'm a 1%er? ha! I don't think so. Its so easy to do, because the developers make it so. You just stick a file in a folder that the game creates for you, to be used by you, the game doesn't use it, its an empty folder until you, the user, use it. Duh. Now if that's a violation of the TOS, please, I'm begging you, ban me. I could use the 15 dollars a month I been spending here for the last 4+ years. As much as I love this game, seriously, if this is really an issue, I'm asking for it, here I am. Also I am disabled and maybe we could do court I need something to occupy my time other than reading forums and science websites.

quotes from the tos:
you may not.. "(b) modify, adapt, reverse engineer or decompile the Software, or otherwise attempt to derive source code from the Software" - "Mods" as the word is used by the City of.. community do not do this.

"However, you acknowledge and agree that you shall not reproduce, prepare derivative works based upon, distribute, publicly perform, or transmit any Game Content for commercial uses without first obtaining the express written consent of NC Interactive."

Map "Mods" by editing the in-game maps are Specifically allowed, for non-commercial distribution. This would cover sound mods, costume mods, etc. Fan stuff. They want fans to do this stuff, they provide an in-game service to allow fans to do this stuff! Or the TOS would say don't do it and the game would not load our "Mods" for us. And that's why map sites like vidiots.com and costume change mods found on many Supergroup sites are not being targeted by NcSoft legal. Very stupid to attack your fans as long as they are just-being-fans! CuppaJo must be a very personable woman, but she did not understand this stuff when she first came to work here, and I guess the boys just did not want to contradict the new girl. Understandable.

(so tired of kiddies endlessly debating things they know so very little about but speak so authoritatively against. lets find out.)
/rant

[ QUOTE ]
Dudes! Necro thread!

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh wait... it's stickied. No wonder everyone is replying to it.

As far as I recall the moratorium on player mods was put in place soon after the little 'incident' with Marvel comics started.<ul type="square"> [*] Mods allowed players to breach Marvel copyright [*] Players wouldn't get punished NCSoft\Cryptic would as they allowed it on their servers[*] NCSoft\Cryptic ruled that modding was dissallowed.[/list]
Couple of other points;
IIRC, the PIGG reader that was downloadable WAS reverse engineered, therefore using it breached the EULA.

So what if WoW allows mods? Yeah it's the 800lb gorilla but it's a freak nontheless - it would almost certainly be as popular even if it didn't allow mods. Personally I always thought it was because the interface was so gorramed clunky that it needed players to work out what they wanted an implement it. CoX is much simpler to play and doesn't need such a complicated interface.

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I recall the moratorium on player mods was put in place soon after the little 'incident' with Marvel comics started.<ul type="square"> [*] Mods allowed players to breach Marvel copyright [*] Players wouldn't get punished NCSoft\Cryptic would as they allowed it on their servers[*] NCSoft\Cryptic ruled that modding was dissallowed.[/list]
Couple of other points;
IIRC, the PIGG reader that was downloadable WAS reverse engineered, therefore using it breached the EULA.

So what if WoW allows mods? Yeah it's the 800lb gorilla but it's a freak nontheless - it would almost certainly be as popular even if it didn't allow mods. Personally I always thought it was because the interface was so gorramed clunky that it needed players to work out what they wanted an implement it. CoX is much simpler to play and doesn't need such a complicated interface.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a good reason for banning them, but alternatively they can just disable the ability to modify your character in such a way (WoW did such that actually).

I can understand your aversion to mods, but do try to understand that some of us like to modify things to better fit our preferences. I will give you that CoH is simpler, and it does have a good UI, but it doesn't mean that us mod fanatics can't do a thing or two with it (if it were allowable).

In the four years this topic has been open, there have been many questions and calls for clarification noted here that have not been adequately addressed by a Red Name. Are they waiting for the thread's five year anniversary or something?

[ QUOTE ]

I can understand your aversion to mods,

[/ QUOTE ]

For the record I don't have an aversion to mods, just don't see their usefulness within CoX

I can understand the peeps at NCSOFT not wanting anyone to mess with the software, so how about letting us edit the maps from with in the game as you can in Everquest.

In EQ you can input names, draw lines and pretty much edit your map anyway you want to ( since for whatever reason SOE doesn't like to actually like to provide maps at all... that sucks)

I think that would be a nice thing to beable to do to your own maps. then you always know on your maps where badges /plaques are certain lvl of mobs in the different areas of the zone your in.

Editing your own maps of the various zones doesn't give anyone an advantage in the game. You still have to collect the badges/ plaques etc your self, your just jotting down the locations of them on your maps so that you have a personal reference to them for your other toons.


Please let us edit our own maps with in CoX. please please please


Even if you produced an issue and the only thing you put in that issue was the ability to edit your maps in game, I would be happy as a pig in Poo. ( if a pig is truely happy in poo )

I am new to this game. I understand how cheats can be made, and distributed, but censorship is hardly the answer, infact its part of the problem. Removing threads reduces the information available to NCSoft developers to others who desire to follow the rules. In addition, it brings an entire community underground onto websites that have little or no regard for the rules. Innocent people will install these programs without knowing that they are breaking the rules.

In addition, removing discussions about what may be valid modifications, further restricts this conversation, and many people will find out about them in game or in other, non-trusted sources.

Effectively this decision to CENSOR these discussions are limiting the ability for individuals who want to follow the TOS to obtain accurate information regarding these mods.

Since they may not see, or realize, that this decision has been made... Many people may have valid topics regarding Mods, which may lead to the conclusion that this is against the TOS.

Now I will wait for someone to say that you are responsible for reading and understanding the TOS. However, TOS agreements are in question within the court system. If you write a legal document that is widely ignored, unreadable, confusing, etc... Then those documents have no Merritt. Since TOS and License agreements are so widely used (in fact EVERY website has one), the courts are beginning to widely disregard these documents. To then refuse your customers access to information pertanent to understanding the TOS is to further reduce the users ability to make an informed decision in regards to accepting that TOS. Thus, one may make a very valid argument, that their ban/removal of the game for usage of a 3rd party modification or cheat is illegal under the grounds that the company intentionally with held information that would have otherwise prevented this mistaken and uninformed decision. Personally, I welcome these court challenges, and would like to see less censorship, more freedom, and non-confusing 12 page TOS agreements that you must agree to, when ever 20 minutes.

Please Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_license_agreement for more information and case law examples of current trends in License and TOS agreements.

But I digress. Censorship is limiting information. Information empowers people to do right or wrong. Now you can say that most people will do wrong, however limiting information consistently leads to the inability for good people to do good, and generally empowers the strong to take advantage of the weak. If you want examples of this happening, I can pull hundreds of thousands of situations where decisions where decisions like this have failed.

Example: Borders made the decision to NOT to sell 2600. The problem is that most of the 2600 readers are individuals who are looking to secure their systems. They read about exploits and use that information to strengthen the computer systems they are in charge of. Limiting this information, brought this source of information out of the mainstream community (the book store consumers), and the publication was widely embraced by the underground and often criminal community. Eventually Borders witnessed this occur and they reversed their decision.

If I was NCSoft, I would look long and hard at these issues. These decisions are often knee jerk reactions without significant understanding and investigation of the topics and impacts that they have. I would suggest that they talk to information systems specialists (like Myself), who spend their lives studying how information is shared, used and how to allow for it to empower people to make the right decision. Their are many competent individuals who understand the impact both negative and positive behind these decisions.

Five years, and still no answers. So much for "good communication", eh?