[VC] Are you going to release the module source?
- 主题发起人 Ratvioli
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
kraggrim
Marquis
Start a change.org petition 
.
.
Rarilmar 说:Problem is if people start building modules on VC who will keep buying they're DLC? I mean to play a warband module you need to have the original game... but to play a VC module you only need WB.
think again. Just look at NW modules, it requires the DLC serial key to work
there is also called "forum policy". Any content that is posted against the rules will be removed (like a mod copying VC stuff without permission)
kraggrim
Marquis
Rarilmar 说:Problem is if people start building modules on VC who will keep buying they're DLC? I mean to play a warband module you need to have the original game... but to play a VC module you only need WB.
For one thing the mod maker would have to upload the whole of VC+their changes, which they aren't going to do since it would be unnecessary for legit users. It would only happen if they changed literally every file for their mod.
And even so, it would be a shame to prevent legit users enjoying the usual MB modding experience because of pirates.
kraggrim 说:Start a change.org petition
So they refuse?
Indeed we will, but we have to decide some details of "how" it will be release and to whom.
uly
Sergeant at Arms
It's been more than a year since VC came out and nearly 6 months since RE. If the devs are honest about releasing the MS, it can only mean that MS release is so low on the priority list that it's just as likely to be forgotten.
So I guess it's safe to say, at this point, that the MS will never come out. What a shame.
So I guess it's safe to say, at this point, that the MS will never come out. What a shame.
Hi uly,uly 说:
We are developing a new patch and it will be release with this patch.
Please, is it possible to have even a very rough estimate?
Before the latest patch (2.0.21) I used to play with a heavily modded version of the txt files.
When the patch came out, I found out that the original .txt files were changed, and because of those changes, I couldn't simply apply the same edits, I had to redo everything from scratch because the lines, reference numbers etc were different.
I would like to remake my mod, but I don't want to waste my time doing that if it means that in a couple of weeks a new patch will come out and I'll have to do it yet again.
On the other hand, if the patch won't be out for months, it will be worth to do it, since otherwise it would mean not being able to play for a long time.
Before the latest patch (2.0.21) I used to play with a heavily modded version of the txt files.
When the patch came out, I found out that the original .txt files were changed, and because of those changes, I couldn't simply apply the same edits, I had to redo everything from scratch because the lines, reference numbers etc were different.
I would like to remake my mod, but I don't want to waste my time doing that if it means that in a couple of weeks a new patch will come out and I'll have to do it yet again.
On the other hand, if the patch won't be out for months, it will be worth to do it, since otherwise it would mean not being able to play for a long time.
Indeed, it's a little bit sad that there is absolutely no mods out there for VC. I would really enjoy to see "a Clash of Kings" mods for VC, with Lordly/King campaign, naval battle and refuge (for mercenaries).
Maybe you can include a lock inside the source code to prevent anybody to use a modded Viking Conquest if they don't own Viking Conquest ?
You should have release it earlier, because if TaleWorlds releases Bannerlord on July, only a little group of modders will work on long term projects for Viking Conquest.
Maybe you can include a lock inside the source code to prevent anybody to use a modded Viking Conquest if they don't own Viking Conquest ?
You should have release it earlier, because if TaleWorlds releases Bannerlord on July, only a little group of modders will work on long term projects for Viking Conquest.
uly
Sergeant at Arms
Couldn't agree more.
Frankly I can't see any rational reason to delay the MS release. VC wouldn't have existed in the first place if it wasn't for M&B's open and supportive attitude to modding. Indeed, M&B itself wouldn't be such a success without the very active participation of the modding community from the early beta days.
I also don't understand why it'd be a problem if everyone get access to the MS, anyway. If someone build a mod with a pirated VC, it still benefits the legit owners and the community as a whole. There is nothing the MS could do to somehow promote piracy, and there is nothing the modding community could do to somehow damage a singleplayer game's appeal. The idea that mods needs to be controlled is, IMO, completely self defeating.
I still haven't picked up VC because of the lack of modding support. And I don't imagine there would be many ambitious mods for VC with Bannerlord just over the horizon.
Frankly I can't see any rational reason to delay the MS release. VC wouldn't have existed in the first place if it wasn't for M&B's open and supportive attitude to modding. Indeed, M&B itself wouldn't be such a success without the very active participation of the modding community from the early beta days.
I also don't understand why it'd be a problem if everyone get access to the MS, anyway. If someone build a mod with a pirated VC, it still benefits the legit owners and the community as a whole. There is nothing the MS could do to somehow promote piracy, and there is nothing the modding community could do to somehow damage a singleplayer game's appeal. The idea that mods needs to be controlled is, IMO, completely self defeating.
I still haven't picked up VC because of the lack of modding support. And I don't imagine there would be many ambitious mods for VC with Bannerlord just over the horizon.
ThorsHammer
Veteran
Thought I'd come back months after playing to see if what mods have been released, just to find out they still have released the MS! Seriously, I gave you the benefit of the doubt for ages, boy do i regret that. Terrible start and a terrible finish
