Mods discussion, links, etc

[SaQSoN]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

Yeah, mod packs are so lame. All you get are:

I could go through each of your points and explain in detail, why each of them is lame. But I will not. Because a) I know, that if not you, then most of the mod users will not listen to any reasons, so it would be a pure waste of time and effort; b) I respect your preferences and your desire to use mods - in no way I will try to prevent you from having and using them.

I just say, that all that lame stuff will never get into the official add-ons. That's all. At the same time DT is happy to cooperate with people, who produce really high quality stuff and are willing to include it into DT releases.
The IL-4 cockpit, shown in one of the DT updates, is a good example of such cooperation. You may also ask Sita (one of the SB cockpit authors) on this forum: I bet, he would have a lot's of good words for us.

[Sita]

Originally Posted by SaQSoN

At the same time DT is happy to cooperate with people

confirm ... from the DT we get a lot of support, advice and materials! and clearly see a desire to cooperate with us and help us)

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by SaQSoN

I could go through each of your points and explain in detail, why each of them is lame.

I'm not saying that all the mods out there are flawless, but some of them are very good. Technically, they might not be up to the standard that
TD/1C expects, but they're "good enough." More importantly, they point the way to where a large portion of the IL2 community wants to go. If DT is smart, they'll run to catch up.

Originally Posted by SaQSoN

I just say, that all that lame stuff will never get into the official add-ons. That's all.

Of course. I wouldn't want it any other way.

But I also get very skeptical about arguments that 1C/DT add-ons are flawless, while all mods are dreck. There's a continuum of mods from lousy to great.

Likewise, there are also plenty of places where 1C's work has been shoddy and modders have fixed it. Cases in point: the screwed up dihedral on the Hawk 81/P-40B and the messed up length of the P-51D (which, in turn, screwed up CG and made the plane fly strangely). Fans of the game were complaining about those problems for years and 1C did nothing. After the game was cracked, within a year modders fixed those problems.

In a few places, modders have even fixed DT's mistakes, although DT has been much better about quickly releasing patches to fix bugs.

DT should go out of its way to recruit the more talented modders. Not necessarily add them to the team, but supervise them as "outside contractors." For the less talented guys with good ideas, DT should contact them and say, "can we use your idea" and do the work yourselves.

There should also be formal standards set and tutorials to help modders get up to DT standards. Currently, there's no way to do that.

Yes, you guys occasionally recruit folks like Sita, but it seems like you ignore or alienate lots of other talented modders. There are a lot of sensitive egos in the IL2 modding world, but everyone shares a passion for the game. Obviously, you can't work with the guys who are taking the game in directions which are off-limits (e.g., Korea, high poly cockpits), but that still leaves lots of folks who could be allies if you just approached them correctly.

Being a bit friendlier and using a bit more diplomacy would help everyone (including me).

[_1SMV_Gitano]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

DT should go out of its way to recruit the more talented modders. Not necessarily add them to the team, but supervise them as "outside contractors." For the less talented guys with good ideas, DT should contact them and say, "can we use your idea" and do the work yourselves.

There should also be formal standards set and tutorials to help modders get up to DT standards. Currently, there's no way to do that.

Yes, you guys occasionally recruit folks like Sita, but it seems like you ignore or alienate lots of other talented modders. There are a lot of sensitive egos in the IL2 modding world, but everyone shares a passion for the game. Obviously, you can't work with the guys who are taking the game in directions which are off-limits (e.g., Korea, high poly cockpits), but that still leaves lots of folks who could be allies if you just approached them correctly.

There is a lot of cooperation between DT and modders, much more than you can imagine. It is just not publicized on forums.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by _1SMV_Gitano

There is a lot of cooperation between DT and modders, much more than you can imagine. It is just not publicized on forums.

Good to hear it. But, what I'm saying is publicize it more!

You guys need a website or something like it, with tutorials, restrictions, a "wishlist" of add-ons, and ideas on how folks can help.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

You guys need a website or something like it, with tutorials, restrictions, a "wishlist" of add-ons, and ideas on how folks can help.

That would surely be helpfull. Unfortunately we do not have the ressources to set up such a place.

[BadAim]

I think it's a shame that our nature is not to forget who "fired the first shot" and get about the business of cooperating for the greater good. Much pain could be avoided. Much good could be done. Oh, well....Such is the human condition.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

That would surely be helpfull. Unfortunately we do not have the ressources to set up such a place.

Why not?

Is there any chance that one of the fan sites, like Mission 4 Today or SimHQ could host?

[Maori]

Originally Posted by _1SMV_Gitano

There is a lot of cooperation between DT and modders, much more than you can imagine.

Actually that is the kind of things we, IL2 lovers, want to hear

Not arrogant or threatening posts like Mr SQN.

Friendly goes better for everybody always (and same sort of things I've said in modding forums to those few that keep throwing rocks at TD)

Thank you for showing the right way.

[SaQSoN]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

they're "good enough."

There is no such thing, as "good enough". It is either fits technical requirements and "political" restrictions (like NG issue), or not.

From the point of "fitting official requirements" view, one could divide all mods into 3 category:

1. Those that don't even close (90% of all).
2. Those that almost fit.
3. Those, that fit exactly.

In the category Nr1 goes all the franken-stuff. No exceptions.
The category Nr3 mostly consists from mods, that are being developed by people in close cooperation with DT (like IL-4 and SB cockpits, Ki-44 by JapanCat, Ki-45 by Kashiide, etc.). All those authors either contacted DT themselves, or were approached by DT members and agree to work in cooperation with us.
The category Nr2 are mods, made by really talented people without any help from outside. Often those mods have small flaws, that can be relatively easy fixed. In most cases, DT members approach authors of this mods and suggest cooperation. If the author agrees to include his creation in the oficial add-on, we ask him to fix the problems. If the authors agrees, his work automatically goes into cat.Nr3.
But, unfortunately, some authors of this high quality mods either do not want their creations in official add-on, or do not want to make the said modifications to their work. In this case, such mods are left out as well.

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

But I also get very skeptical about arguments that 1C/DT add-ons are flawless, while all mods are dreck.

Being skeptical is your right. No one would argue with you about it.

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

it seems like you ignore or alienate lots of other talented modders.

When something seems to you, it doesn't mean, it is how it actually is.

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

lots of folks who could be allies if you just approached them correctly.

And what exactly would be this "correct approach"?

We see it exactly, as we do: a person is being politely asked, if he/she wants his/her creation to be added into official ad-on. Basically, there is only 2 possible replies: yes, or no. If the reply is "no", then well, we go away. Why should we bother this person any longer, after all?