The ethics of modding

**Myrddraal** · 12-07-2004, 20:09

A major part of modding is that the player appreciate the effort of modding (at least for me). If the mod is crap, but nobody criticises or points out flaws, then everyone is denying the modders chance to make his mod enjoyable, and that, I think is a goal all modders have.

If everyone pretends the mod is good, never criticises, never argues, then the modder will never know if he has achived his goals. In my oppinion, thats worse for the modder than being criticised. At least he can change that.

PS That doesn't mean you should grill modders ;-)

**Silver Rusher** · 12-07-2004, 21:35

This topic is going deep beyond it's point I think. This reads like a backroom thread.

There don't seem to be any "sides" to this, as everybody has their own opinion, which is interesting IMO. Anyway, my opinion is that at the end of the day modders can do what they want, and if they release it to the public then "whatever". The only thing the public has a right to say is either suggesting ways of improving it (partly by pointing out bugs) or complement it. The modder isn't paid by the public, so who cares if they dislike it? It's his/her mod, he/she can do whatever he/she wants with it. I think it really is as simple as that, to be honest.

**tommh** · 12-08-2004, 00:35

Well I don't see it as that simple. What if the mod deleted save games? A recent videogame demo in a major mag for a PS2 game erased any save carts installed, was that OK because it was free? As I said becasue the modder gets little direct reward doesn't mean there isn't any cost for the user.

What about the host? If a mod is broken or malicious do they have any responsibility? If their are more bad mods then good then what happens to the games mod playing community?

It's interesting to look at a very heavily supported and deep community like NWK. The major mod sites all have elaborate rating systems for mods which include breakdowns by feature and even reviews by users as wll as by staff. This sort of infrastructure is nessecary to support the sheer number of modders and users. It will be interesting to see what sort of changes the introduction of the profit element brings to the table.

I think a lot of the posts here are are in reaction to posts that complain about a mod in immature and useless ways. We've all seen these sort of posts, quibbling about every change, complainng about any percieved reduction in power of a favorite unit, lots of use of caps and !'s and the word crap. I don't think anyone objects to useful constructive criticism.

For instance with RTR, it was rushed out and it did have too many bugs but posts saying that it should'nt have been released unless it was completley bug free or that "THE NEW BUILDINGS ARE CRAP!" doesn't help anybody.

**Proletariat** · 12-08-2004, 03:22

After claiming my logic was flawed I haven't seen you say anything contrary to my point that has been relevant. Since the differences between our opinions seem to be semantic in nature, I digress.

I think a wonderful example of a successful mod community is with the Neverwinter Nights game at nwnvault.com. The developers and avid modders are all in close contact along with the masses of users that critique and rate the finished mods.

Everything in this thread (and it's parent thread) has been valid to a degree, although some more tact could've been implemented here and there. My only bone to pick was with public's post.

It came across as feckless and intellectually dishonest from a modder's view point.

I don't think Silver was referring to mods that actually cause harm to your property (ie, deleteing save games and whatnot), but merely a subpar product.

I believe there's a responsibilty for a modder to accept criticism (otherwise keep your mod to yourself) and at the same time, of course there's a responsibilty of the moddee to make their criticism tactful and their requests realistic. This seems to be what everyone here agrees on and is the crux of the 'mod ethic' imvho, but I'd like to see public's thoughts.

**Turbo** · 12-08-2004, 16:44

It is interesting that modding (in the case of RTR) has such differing opinions.

There are some people that will never be happy with any mod and expect perfection from modders. Comments like "it sucks" aren't constructive and don't contribute anything. I have seen the results of heavy handed criticism that results in fewer modders willing to release mods.

On the other side of the spectrum there seems to be the apologists that ruthlessly attack any criticism of the mod often engaging in the most immature personal attacks and name calling. I believe these people actually hurt a mod by discouraging criticism and promoting an attitude of indifference to the users of the MOD. This unblinking support can pump up egos and may explain why RTR 4.0 was premature released.

There are two extremes here. Nether of them are helpful.