There seems to be a lot of strong disagreement between people about what they want from ED.
Examples:
Some want FSD autopilot, some want a more engaging experience, some like it as it is.
Some people find the stars & planets boring/repetitive, some like the realism.
Some players dislike the console-friendly UI, some are happy with it as it is.
Etc.
I'd be interested in a discussion about the possibility of FD allowing &/or supporting a modding community in an attempt to resolve a lot of these differences.
There would absolutely need to be a restricted framework within which mods could work:
Solo/Private Group *only* - all mods disabled in Open Online play. I would also propose that if your character had used mods of any kind in solo/private group then you would be barred from swapping to open play with that character. To support this option I'd love to see more than 1 character per account, so that you could have an Open char and a Solo/modded char.
Limitations on mod capabilities - there would need to be restrictions on what mods could change. No changes to commodity/ship/fittings prices, nor to mission payouts, etc. No changes to the *time* it takes to FSD from place to place, just changes in the *way* it happens. Obviously FD would need to set and enforce these limitations and further discussion would be important.
Mod curation & approval - people would need to be protected from potential malicious code and mods would need some kind of 'stamp of approval' before they could be installed, to ensure that they didn't contravene any of the aforementioned limitations.
There are a couple of responses that I am sure this thread will receive. Firstly there will be many people who say "This is FD/DB's game, they will make it how THEY want it, if you don't like it go away". That is a valid point but I believe that the more players FD attracts and keeps the better (within reason of course). All of us here want the game to succeed. We want there to be further development and we want the promised expansions to be released and to be good. That requires continuing funding. As it is now, I believe, ED will be a niche game with a small potential market. The only way that I can see enough money being generated to fund the continuing development is by ramping up microtrans from the existing player base. Active modding communities are a fantastic way of maintaining long term interest in games, and there are many examples of this (Kerbal Space Program springs to mind).
Secondly it should be pointed out that this idea would entail a large increase in the workload required from FD. Developing, supporting and maintaining a modding system is no trivial matter and has ongoing implications. The cost:benefit analysis of this idea may well doom it to irrelevance. However one thing that can be said to add to the benefit side of the equation is that a happy and active modding community can be very effective in implementing things that might not be worth a dev team doing. It can also streamline the process of prioritising features. An example of this is World of Warcraft, where mods that are used by significant proportions of players often end up being replaced by official code - the WoW developers use mod success as an indication of what needs doing.
I think it would be great if, as a community, we could have a civil and engaging discussion about this idea. Disagreements are inevitable on any subject, that's because we're all different, it's not something to be afraid of nor to attempt to suppress. I feel that modding could provide a "3rd way" for many of these disagreements.
Examples:
Some want FSD autopilot, some want a more engaging experience, some like it as it is.
Some people find the stars & planets boring/repetitive, some like the realism.
Some players dislike the console-friendly UI, some are happy with it as it is.
Etc.
I'd be interested in a discussion about the possibility of FD allowing &/or supporting a modding community in an attempt to resolve a lot of these differences.
There would absolutely need to be a restricted framework within which mods could work:
Solo/Private Group *only* - all mods disabled in Open Online play. I would also propose that if your character had used mods of any kind in solo/private group then you would be barred from swapping to open play with that character. To support this option I'd love to see more than 1 character per account, so that you could have an Open char and a Solo/modded char.
Limitations on mod capabilities - there would need to be restrictions on what mods could change. No changes to commodity/ship/fittings prices, nor to mission payouts, etc. No changes to the *time* it takes to FSD from place to place, just changes in the *way* it happens. Obviously FD would need to set and enforce these limitations and further discussion would be important.
Mod curation & approval - people would need to be protected from potential malicious code and mods would need some kind of 'stamp of approval' before they could be installed, to ensure that they didn't contravene any of the aforementioned limitations.
There are a couple of responses that I am sure this thread will receive. Firstly there will be many people who say "This is FD/DB's game, they will make it how THEY want it, if you don't like it go away". That is a valid point but I believe that the more players FD attracts and keeps the better (within reason of course). All of us here want the game to succeed. We want there to be further development and we want the promised expansions to be released and to be good. That requires continuing funding. As it is now, I believe, ED will be a niche game with a small potential market. The only way that I can see enough money being generated to fund the continuing development is by ramping up microtrans from the existing player base. Active modding communities are a fantastic way of maintaining long term interest in games, and there are many examples of this (Kerbal Space Program springs to mind).
Secondly it should be pointed out that this idea would entail a large increase in the workload required from FD. Developing, supporting and maintaining a modding system is no trivial matter and has ongoing implications. The cost:benefit analysis of this idea may well doom it to irrelevance. However one thing that can be said to add to the benefit side of the equation is that a happy and active modding community can be very effective in implementing things that might not be worth a dev team doing. It can also streamline the process of prioritising features. An example of this is World of Warcraft, where mods that are used by significant proportions of players often end up being replaced by official code - the WoW developers use mod success as an indication of what needs doing.
I think it would be great if, as a community, we could have a civil and engaging discussion about this idea. Disagreements are inevitable on any subject, that's because we're all different, it's not something to be afraid of nor to attempt to suppress. I feel that modding could provide a "3rd way" for many of these disagreements.
