DICE: No mods for Battlefield 4

Excerpt of the article:

DICE general manager Karl-Magnus Troedsson confirmed to PC Gamer at E3 that Battlefield 4 will not support mods. Troedsson caveated that user-generated content is something that DICE finds very interesting, and that its something the studio has been talking about at a high level.

PCG: Is there any chance of Battlefield 4 being moddable?

Karl-Magnus Troedsson, DICE GM: We get that question a lot. I always answer the same thing, and then the community calls me bad names. We get the feedback, we understand it. We also would like to see more player-created content, but we would never do something like this if we feel we couldnt do this 100 percent. That means we need to have the right tools available, we need to have the right security around this regarding what parts of the engine we let loose, so to say. So for BF4 we dont have any planned mod support, I have to be blunt about saying that. We dont.

Full Article

Personally, my stance on this is of complete indifference.

Battlefield 4=Battlefield 3=No mods.

That sucks. I get that it's tough to do that with a new engine and it takes time, but even basic modding or a map editor would be fine for me.

BF is the sort of game that almost needs a map editor for people to come along and make amazingly fun maps to play in.

I wish the CS games didn't allow user created content.

olol surfing, gungame, garbage maps, etc.

That sucks. I get that it's tough to do that with a new engine and it takes time, but even basic modding or a map editor would be fine for me.

BF is the sort of game that almost needs a map editor for people to come along and make amazingly fun maps to play in.

SPYDER0416

Its really not that tough. The thing is if they allow mods, then they wont be able to sell their crappy DLC.

Oh well, we have ARMA3 and Rising Storm for mods :cool:

Excerpt of the article:

DICE general manager Karl-Magnus Troedsson confirmed to PC Gamer at E3 that Battlefield 4 will not support mods. Troedsson caveated that user-generated content is something that DICE finds very interesting, and that its something the studio has been talking about at a high level.

PCG: Is there any chance of Battlefield 4 being moddable?

Karl-Magnus Troedsson, DICE GM: We get that question a lot. I always answer the same thing, and then the community calls me bad names. We get the feedback, we understand it. We also would like to see more player-created content, but we would never do something like this if we feel we could Make Lots of Cash. That means we need to have Low Sales, we need to have the right security around this regarding what parts of the engine we let loose, so to say. So for BF4 we dont have any planned mod support, I have to be blunt about saying that. We dont.

Full Article

Personally, my stance on this is of complete indifference.

Miroku32

Fixed

Does this suprise anybody? DICE is pretty content not putting out mod tools for their engine. It would be nice but I'm not going to make them the enemy for the decision.

Bethesda sells plenty of DLC along side their PC version of their games despite the mods and so do other games. So that's probably not the main reason.

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

That sucks. I get that it's tough to do that with a new engine and it takes time, but even basic modding or a map editor would be fine for me.

BF is the sort of game that almost needs a map editor for people to come along and make amazingly fun maps to play in.

way2funny

Its really not that tough. The thing is if they allow mods, then they wont be able to sell their crappy DLC.

Well no, there really is an issue with licensing. 

Oh well, we have ARMA3 and Rising Storm for mods :cool:

kozzy1234

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

That sucks. I get that it's tough to do that with a new engine and it takes time, but even basic modding or a map editor would be fine for me.

BF is the sort of game that almost needs a map editor for people to come along and make amazingly fun maps to play in.

Jebus213

Its really not that tough. The thing is if they allow mods, then they wont be able to sell their crappy DLC.

Well no, there really is an issue with licensing. 

Nice sig my man:lol:

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

That sucks. I get that it's tough to do that with a new engine and it takes time, but even basic modding or a map editor would be fine for me.

BF is the sort of game that almost needs a map editor for people to come along and make amazingly fun maps to play in.

way2funny

Its really not that tough. The thing is if they allow mods, then they wont be able to sell their crappy DLC.

Other devs sell their DLC fine along side of mods. The PC community represents like 1/3rd of all sales so adding mod tools wouldn't drop their DLC sales by much if at all. Clearly there are other reasons it's just much easier to point a finger and make them the enemy. 

Licensing is always a difficult thing. Games like Rising Storm and ArmA 3 get the advantages of engines built for modding. They use a very low amount of licensed tech OR have worked out deals with their licenses (Unreal 3 Engine is built for free development). The Frostbite Engine wasn't built like that. It was built to have pretty much the best stuff it can and that meant more restrictive licenses. 

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Oh well, we have ARMA3 and Rising Storm for mods :cool:

Miroku32

Can't wait to continue my medic work in the standalone :cool:

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

That sucks. I get that it's tough to do that with a new engine and it takes time, but even basic modding or a map editor would be fine for me.

BF is the sort of game that almost needs a map editor for people to come along and make amazingly fun maps to play in.

Wasdie

Its really not that tough. The thing is if they allow mods, then they wont be able to sell their crappy DLC.

Other devs sell their DLC fine along side of mods. The PC community represents like 1/3rd of all sales so adding mod tools wouldn't drop their DLC sales by much if at all. Clearly there are other reasons it's just much easier to point a finger and make them the enemy. 

Licensing is always a difficult thing. Games like Rising Storm and ArmA 3 get the advantages of engines built for modding. They use a very low amount of licensed tech OR have worked out deals with their licenses (Unreal 3 Engine is built for free development). The Frostbite Engine wasn't built like that. It was built to have pretty much the best stuff it can and that meant more restrictive licenses. 

We represent nowhere close to 1/3rd. Sorry to burst your bubble.

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Oh well, we have ARMA3 and Rising Storm for mods :cool:

Miroku32

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

Its really not that tough. The thing is if they allow mods, then they wont be able to sell their crappy DLC.

HyperWarlock

Other devs sell their DLC fine along side of mods. The PC community represents like 1/3rd of all sales so adding mod tools wouldn't drop their DLC sales by much if at all. Clearly there are other reasons it's just much easier to point a finger and make them the enemy. 

Licensing is always a difficult thing. Games like Rising Storm and ArmA 3 get the advantages of engines built for modding. They use a very low amount of licensed tech OR have worked out deals with their licenses (Unreal 3 Engine is built for free development). The Frostbite Engine wasn't built like that. It was built to have pretty much the best stuff it can and that meant more restrictive licenses. 

We represent nowhere close to 1/3rd. Sorry to burst your bubble.

I think you're proving his point if you're saying we represent less than 1/3 of BF sales.

I mean, along with the mentioned restrictions that come with trying to make modding possible on Frostbite, for less than 1/3 of potential consumers is it really worth it?

eh, not that big a deal. BF4 still looks pretty great

[QUOTE="HyperWarlock"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Other devs sell their DLC fine along side of mods. The PC community represents like 1/3rd of all sales so adding mod tools wouldn't drop their DLC sales by much if at all. Clearly there are other reasons it's just much easier to point a finger and make them the enemy. 

Licensing is always a difficult thing. Games like Rising Storm and ArmA 3 get the advantages of engines built for modding. They use a very low amount of licensed tech OR have worked out deals with their licenses (Unreal 3 Engine is built for free development). The Frostbite Engine wasn't built like that. It was built to have pretty much the best stuff it can and that meant more restrictive licenses. 

SPYDER0416

We represent nowhere close to 1/3rd. Sorry to burst your bubble.

I think you're proving his point if you're saying we represent less than 1/3 of BF sales.

I mean, along with the mentioned restrictions that come with trying to make modding possible on Frostbite, for less than 1/3 of potential consumers is it really worth it?

Exactly this. Too much work for too little of an audience. 

Who would've thunk it?

I mean really, who didn't see this coming?

Don't really care, the way BF is built now, it doesnt need mods and making them fit into it would be a nightmare

Meh, don't have enough time for mods anyway. I really don't mind. 

I hope infantry engineers/demolition becomes viable again. One of the things I loved doing in Bad Company 2 was taking down helicopters and destroying tanks. It was my favorite class in BC2. In BF3, the engineer felt so gimped that I didn't even bother with it. Too many players cried about the Stinger, which is only viable if you team up with another engineer player.Elann2008

I love engie in BF3, it was like the best of assault combined with AT

If there was user generated content they couldn't charge for DLC, as said above.

If there was user generated content they couldn't charge for DLC, as said above.

kraken2109

If there was user generated content they couldn't charge for DLC, as said above.

kraken2109

Yeah I'm sure they would be so concerned about a small decrease in their DLC sales from 1/4th of their community.

It could be that they don't want to spend the time or the money to support mods for that same 1/4th slice of their community. Or does that make too much sense? 

Does this suprise anybody? DICE is pretty content not putting out mod tools for their engine. It would be nice but I'm not going to make them the enemy for the decision.

Bethesda sells plenty of DLC along side their PC version of their games despite the mods and so do other games. So that's probably not the main reason.

Wasdie

It's a shame though. Battlefield 1942 had so many awesome mods. I'm sure they had an impact on the creation of Battlefront and definitely had an impact on Battlefield 2.

BF3 didn't have mods. Why would BF4 be any different?

Not releasing mod tools is probably more of a way to prevent hacking.

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

If there was user generated content they couldn't charge for DLC, as said above.

Wasdie

Yeah I'm sure they would be so concerned about a small decrease in their DLC sales from 1/4th of their community.

It could be that they don't want to spend the time or the money to support mods for that same 1/4th slice of their community. Or does that make too much sense? 

I honestly think that if BF4 had mod support it would out sell Cod Ghost at least on pc.Travis_Odell

the people that buy CoD don;t care about mod support

why are people getting their panties in a bunch not being able to mod an online shooter that's on dedicated servers?robokill

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

That sucks. I get that it's tough to do that with a new engine and it takes time, but even basic modding or a map editor would be fine for me.

BF is the sort of game that almost needs a map editor for people to come along and make amazingly fun maps to play in.

way2funny

Its really not that tough. The thing is if they allow mods, then they wont be able to sell their crappy DLC.

What crappy DLC is that? BF3 map packs were all awesome.

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

That sucks. I get that it's tough to do that with a new engine and it takes time, but even basic modding or a map editor would be fine for me.

BF is the sort of game that almost needs a map editor for people to come along and make amazingly fun maps to play in.

way2funny

Its really not that tough. The thing is if they allow mods, then they wont be able to sell their crappy DLC.

Exactly this. All the talk about how difficult it would be to make modding possible, or the security needed, etc. is all bullshit. They want to sell a bazillion DLC packs, and PC gamers won't buy them if they have mountains of (probably) better content, for free. Simple as that.

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

That sucks. I get that it's tough to do that with a new engine and it takes time, but even basic modding or a map editor would be fine for me.

BF is the sort of game that almost needs a map editor for people to come along and make amazingly fun maps to play in.

the_bi99man

Its really not that tough. The thing is if they allow mods, then they wont be able to sell their crappy DLC.

Exactly this. All the talk about how difficult it would be to make modding possible, or the security needed, etc. is all bullshit. They want to sell a bazillion DLC packs, and PC gamers won't buy them if they have mountains of (probably) better content, for free. Simple as that.

Again. You're saying they are worried about a small decrease in total DLC sales (look at Bethesda, they sell to their PC community just fine despite the mods) instead of them not wanting to renegotiate licensing fees that could cost millions (not an exaggeration) so they can spend other hundreds of thousands of dollars developing and documenting mod tools for the smallest community of Battlefield fans all while their work would not see any real net gain in profit. What, you think mod tools don't cost hundreds of thousands to develop and millions more to to maintain and support? You think people are willing to work for free?

It makes absolutly no sense. I guess it's just easier to make them the enemy becuase basic logic is too difficult.

The PC community makes up less than 1/4th of total Battlefield sales today. Why should they spend millions to develop tools that will see them very little gain for such a small community? Their DLC will still be sold to the other 3/4ths so the amount they would lose out on would be tiny. Other games, like Skyrim, prove that depsite mods people are willing to purchase DLC. So at the most we're looking at a a tiny percent of DLC sales dropping due to mod support that could cost them litterally millions for minimal gain. The only real gain would be that you guys can now bitch at modders for not putting out content for you to play for free instead of bitching at DICE for not putting out the tools in the first place.

I've seen it happen before.

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

That sucks. I get that it's tough to do that with a new engine and it takes time, but even basic modding or a map editor would be fine for me.

BF is the sort of game that almost needs a map editor for people to come along and make amazingly fun maps to play in.

nunovlopes

Its really not that tough. The thing is if they allow mods, then they wont be able to sell their crappy DLC.

What crappy DLC is that? BF3 map packs were all awesome.

Sure they were awesome, but they were nickle and diming everything they released. Someone could have easily made a mod that mimics new maps that wouldnt have to be paid for, Someone could also make a mod just enabling all the guns you couldnt use or haven't unlocked yet.

The difference with Bethesda games is they are RPGs. The DLC/expansions they release are content-story based. Its a lot harder to replicate bethesda's DLC which is why bethesda can still sell DLC for their RPGs and a whole lot easier to just make a mod that allows people to use any gun even if they didnt unlock it.

[QUOTE="nunovlopes"]

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

Its really not that tough. The thing is if they allow mods, then they wont be able to sell their crappy DLC.

way2funny

What crappy DLC is that? BF3 map packs were all awesome.

Sure they were awesome, but they were nickle and diming everything they released. Someone could have easily made a mod that mimics new maps that wouldnt have to be paid for, Someone could also make a mod just enabling all the guns you couldnt use or haven't unlocked yet.

The difference with Bethesda games is they are RPGs. The DLC/expansions they release are content-story based. Its a lot harder to replicate bethesda's DLC which is why bethesda can still sell DLC for their RPGs and a whole lot easier to just make a mod that allows people to use any gun even if they didnt unlock it.

That's a shitty difference. Just saying. You're desperately trying to justify the fact you want free content at the expense of the developer. Who are you to say what is easier or more difficult? 

They weren't nickle and diminig anybody. They were well worth their value. Four new maps, new weapons, new vehicles, and usually a new game mode was well worth its $15 value. You've probably never developed a multiplayer level from scatch (not using some level editor and pre-fabricated obects and textures like in the Unreal 3 Engine, CryEngine 2-3, or Source engine) or have ever spent time coding your own game mode for a video game. But yeah, it's all really easy when you look at the surface and write it all down in a post on the internet. 

You'll probably come back saying how easy it is for some modder to do it but I can only see very rare cases where mod teams can produce that level of quality and NO cases where they can produce that level of quality 4 times over a year.

Simpley put, people don't like to work for free. You want them to work for free.

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="nunovlopes"]

What crappy DLC is that? BF3 map packs were all awesome.

Wasdie

Sure they were awesome, but they were nickle and diming everything they released. Someone could have easily made a mod that mimics new maps that wouldnt have to be paid for, Someone could also make a mod just enabling all the guns you couldnt use or haven't unlocked yet.

The difference with Bethesda games is they are RPGs. The DLC/expansions they release are content-story based. Its a lot harder to replicate bethesda's DLC which is why bethesda can still sell DLC for their RPGs and a whole lot easier to just make a mod that allows people to use any gun even if they didnt unlock it.

That's a shitty difference. Just saying.

You're desperatly trying to justify the fact you want free content at th expense of the developer.

No, I'm just saying thats why they dont release mod tools for battlefield anymore, and why bethesda can release mod tools and DLC. I don't care for battlefield. And just as a reminder some great things came out of the old battlefield mods (Desert Combat is a popular example) and they were still able to sell expansion packs for it (DLC). But the way DLC has become, basically microtransactions, allowing mods would be contradictory.

Bethesda also releases their games on multiple platforms but still gives mod tools out. Thats something to consider.

[QUOTE="way2funny"]

[QUOTE="nunovlopes"]

What crappy DLC is that? BF3 map packs were all awesome.

Wasdie

Sure they were awesome, but they were nickle and diming everything they released. Someone could have easily made a mod that mimics new maps that wouldnt have to be paid for, Someone could also make a mod just enabling all the guns you couldnt use or haven't unlocked yet.

The difference with Bethesda games is they are RPGs. The DLC/expansions they release are content-story based. Its a lot harder to replicate bethesda's DLC which is why bethesda can still sell DLC for their RPGs and a whole lot easier to just make a mod that allows people to use any gun even if they didnt unlock it.

That's a shitty difference. Just saying. You're desperately trying to justify the fact you want free content at the expense of the developer. Who are you to say what is easier or more difficult? 

They weren't nickle and diminig anybody. They were well worth their value. Four new maps, new weapons, new vehicles, and usually a new game mode was well worth its $15 value. You've probably never developed a multiplayer level from scatch (not using some level editor and pre-fabricated obects and textures like in the Unreal 3 Engine, CryEngine 2-3, or Source engine) or have ever spent time coding your own game mode for a video game. But yeah, it's all really easy when you look at the surface and write it all down in a post on the internet. 

You'll probably come back saying how easy it is for some modder to do it but I can only see very rare cases where mod teams can produce that level of quality and NO cases where they can produce that level of quality 4 times over a year.

Simpley put, people don't like to work for free. You want them to work for free.

Where did I say that? If they believe their content is worth it, they shouldn't be threatened by modders. Its obvious they are, because giving away the mod tools isn't much extra work. And I can say this because I'm in the software industry and have worked on giving out mod tools myself.

No, I'm just saying thats why they dont release mod tools for battlefield anymore, and why bethesda can release mod tools and DLC. I don't care for battlefield. And just as a reminder some great things came out of the old battlefield mods (Desert Combat is a popular example) and they were still able to sell expansion packs for it (DLC). But the way DLC has become, basically microtransactions, allowing mods would be contradictory.

Bethesda also releases their games on multiple platforms but still gives mod tools out. Thats something to consider.

way2funny

They don't release Battlefield mod tools anymore becuase they are working with an engine that they utilized a lot of licensed tech which always adds to the complexity of modding tools on the business end. Why should they bother spending time and money developing mod tools from scratch for such a small amount of their total commuinty today? Remember, BF1942 and BF2 were built from tech used in the Quake engine. It was a lot more simple back then than it is today.

Bethesda is still using the engine they built for Morrowind all of those years ago. They've worked the licenseing for the few licensed software components of their engine and have built their game for modding for the past decade. It's just not the same.

By the way. DICE is no stranger to DLC. In fact they were one of the first companies to utilize cheap DLC with 2 map packs for BF2.