EA: No Modding Tools With Battlefield 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for deactivated-635601fd996cc
deactivated-635601fd996cc

4381

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#301 deactivated-635601fd996cc
Member since 2009 • 4381 Posts

[QUOTE="ocstew"][QUOTE="cobrax55"]

oh **** there has yet to be anything to advanced for mod makers to grasp, if developers can use it, somebody among 1000's of modders will figure it out. The idea that its to complicated for Mod teams when people have figured out how to use the Source SDK (which is unbelieavably unituitive) is just a absurd.

and all other Mod tools require middleware as well, theres nothing unique about that.

cobrax55

The difference is, that FB2 is designed for server environments and recompiling. Not to mention the completely new systems of GI and Destruction that would need a ton of documentation, that should, frankly be spent on making a new game. DICE aren't in the business of leasing their engine like Crytek or Epic so I can see why they wouldn't bother making simple engine that are suited to a wide variety of genres. More importantly you should read the reasons behind the choice, rather than just thinking BS BS BS.

I have, and its very obviously complete Billsh*t, for starters, none of Dice's SDK's have ever come with documentation of any kind as far as im aware either (lets be honest, DICE's community support is pretty terrible). Documentation is nice, but can be done without. The idea that an engine is to "difficult" for modders is absurd...They went so far beyond anything Dice did with their previous engine, despite absolutly no support on Dice's part.

And the fact that their not licening their engine is irrelevent.

DICE will have to release source code for their tools to work. I hope you understand why they don't want to do that. Not to mention PC gamers shouldn't instantly cry greedy and DLC, when a game doesn't get an SDK. It's an added bonus not something that should be expected.
Avatar image for deactivated-5d0e4d67d0988
deactivated-5d0e4d67d0988

5396

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#302 deactivated-5d0e4d67d0988
Member since 2008 • 5396 Posts

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

A DICE developer.

Wasdie

That's only going to fuel the "laziness" excuses by people. Even though we are talking 6-12 months (estimated) of time to make the tools and possibly $3 million of costs, and that was just for the Frostbite 1.5. I'm sure the Frostbite 2.0 is even more complex to try to build the tools.

Funny thing is, DICE said that FB2.0 has fixed many of the pipeline complexity issues dice had with 1.5 so in fact it should be easier by that regard,

Avatar image for razgriz_101
razgriz_101

16875

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#303 razgriz_101
Member since 2007 • 16875 Posts

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

A DICE developer.

October_Tide

That's only going to fuel the "laziness" excuses by people. Even though we are talking 6-12 months (estimated) of time to make the tools and possibly $3 million of costs, and that was just for the Frostbite 1.5. I'm sure the Frostbite 2.0 is even more complex to try to build the tools.

Funny thing is, DICE said that FB2.0 has fixed many of the pipeline complexity issues dice had with 1.5 so in fact it should be easier by that regard,

the thing is it still runs in primarily a server enviroment :S so its still fairly impossible and unstable to do anything with the engine without these :S