Are developers actually justified by hating mods?

Are developers actually justified by hating mods?

>Hurts Bottomline, by competing against DLC
>Can compete with the sequel, therefore reducing sales
>Extends the life of a game well pass the developers intention

Attached: skyrim-mods-achievements.jpg (720x450, 130K)

who cares what developers think, its not my duty to make sure they earn enough money

maybe they should make better games instead

Since when do developers hate mods?

Only Todd's games are significantly affected by mods. He knows it's for the better though.

I loved every minute of the Xcom remake, then added more hours to mods in it, and pre-ordered Xcom2 and loved every minute of that too.
Just make good games, god I wish they could fix optimization for Xcoms though, that's the one standout flaw for me.

no one hates mods except Bethesda specifically because it showed how shit they were that unofficial patches could fix THOUSANDS of bugs in 1 day of release that Beth couldn't or wouldn't fix in years of dev time.
All the reasons OP stated are a smokescreen to cover the real thing - it makes them look bad because autists do it for free and do it better.
Beth used to love mods until the most common mods used were unofficial patches, highlighting their incompetence.

>Hurts Bottomline, by competing against DLC
pardon? modders love DLC because it means more assets
>Extends the life of a game well pass the developers intention
now you're just being stupid

Did you forget about Valve buddy

They sell them so they're also only positively affected by them.

Mods make it so your game can sell much longer, which means you have to make a better game when you make a sequel, since you can't shit out a yearly iteration. So you don't have to constantly spend cash, but you do you have to actually make a game people want to play.

didn't they hire the frostfall modder for the sse survival mode? maybe they'll come to their senses a bit and actually scout talent from community

>but you do have to actually make a game people want to play.
This seems to be the real problem nowadays. Devs (AAA) actively don't want to make the game you want, they want to shove some garbage skinnerbox ATM in your face until you learn to like it.

They would be if they didn't release unfinished garbage.

Mods means they should try harder and make a game worth a fuck to begin with.

Attached: garuga.png (604x405, 229K)

> He knows it's for the better though
Does he? Because creation club constantly breaking script extender says to me he doesn't know that.

Maybe mods wouldn't hurt sales of sequels and DLC if developers were able to deliver content quality that modders couldn't.

When your game needs mods just to be playable, they get no sympathy from me.

Attached: h2ACE7D65.png (500x500, 60K)

>Extends the life of a game well pass the developers intention
>"Oh no, I hate that people are continuing to love and play my game for years and years"
said no developer ever

Attached: 1524800808776.png (127x122, 14K)

This.

>"Oh no, I hate that people are continuing to love and play my game for years and years"
>said no developer ever
Says plenty of developers. As they want you to buy their next game. You think Todd wants you to keep playing Skyrim for 20 years? No, he wanted you to buy Fallout 4 and 76 and TES Online and TES VI and all his other crap games.

>only produce one game
>people keep buying it for twenty years

literally what todd is trying to do with skyrim, he is almost at a decade

He wants you to buy the other games. He only wants you to buy Skyrim once. Each new time he releases it, it costs less. Not to mention being on Steam for less than $5 (and even free sometimes).

Skyrim is meant to be a teaser for all his other games. The bait on the hook. But instead, people are just playing Skyrim and ignoring the other games.

>want you to buy their next game
>re-releases the same game 5 times in the span of less than a decade
gee

>>Hurts Bottomline, by competing against DLC
If your DLC is of such cheap quality that a mod can compete, we already have issues. Not to say a mod can't be good quality, but they rarely have the resources of a company.

>>Can compete with the sequel, therefore reducing sales
See above. If you're worried mods will BEAT AN ENTIRE SEQUEL, it's already flawed.

>>Extends the life of a game well pass the developers intention
This is a good thing. Extending the life of a game extends sales and allows people to grow attached to the company subconsciously. This means more dev time on the sequel for a better product and if modding is such a big deal, work with it, not against. See; Skyrim vs Sims 4

What, no?
If you can't hide the ability to mod a game don't be surprised that people will do so.

Even the crappy Dark Souls 1 port had the FPS fix in less than an hour after release.

They didn't, it was their "own" mod due to how similar it is to Fallout 4's survival mode.
Had it been Chesko, it would have included a fully implemented perk tree and many more things (since CC modders have full access to the source code).

no

Oh, damn right.
Your post just reminded me that these cunts only care about fucking money and if people still play their game for hours on end with content that wasn't bought of course they will start hating mods or try monetizing it, especially for consoles.

Attached: 1478905643631.gif (160x160, 178K)

>You think Todd wants you to keep playing Skyrim for 20 years?

Sure as hell fucking feels like it. Took 4 fucking years after Skyrim to push out fallout 4. Then another fucking 4 for 76. Whatever it is, the company is taking their sweet ass time doing whatever. 8 fucking years for an Elder Scrolls game and we dobut even know anything about ES6. Skyrim is here for at least 2 more years.

I don't know what the intended developer longevity for Skyrim is, but it's really fucking long.

Attached: 1533692010783.jpg (397x230, 37K)

ยจ>only sims 4
>not the entire series

Well. You're right. I only really mentioned 4 cause it was right there.

>Hurts Bottomline, by competing against DLC
you what?? more dlc means more mod parts to play with
>Can compete with the sequel, therefore reducing sales
sequel mean new possibilities
>Extends the life of a game well pass the developers intention
means i can keep having fun while devs move on to the sequel.

Why does he think people buy 1 game and then just never buy others?
I played Skyrim modded for years, but I don't buy their current games because they are HOT FUCKING SHIT.
Not because I'm monopolized on Skyrim.

Not a developer but zenimax seem to hate mods.

they don't. the vast majority of fallout 4 is based on mods. you could build bases and shit the same way 4 does it in 2009 in fallout 3.

What you said makes no sense. Bethesda created Skyrim with mods intended to be made. They even made a mod editor to do it with.

Turn off auto updates.
There is nothing even remotely important being added or fixed anymore.

Attached: 1438515247657.jpg (600x522, 260K)

But how else am I supposed to ruin the artist's original vision of the game?

Attached: NotRiskOfRain2.png (533x589, 365K)

But Skyrim is also bad. So why did you play Skyrim?

I just started watching Kill la Kill today, up to episode 6.

because skyrim (with mods) is not bad. I don't care about your opinion, it is objectively a good game modded because I can make it into anything I want.

>Oh no our old games are competing with it's sequel.
You might as well say they are justified in hating PC for having automatic backward compatibility.
>Consoles lack backward compatibility so your old games stay in old consoles and don't compete with your new title.
>In PC you are competing against all your old games even those on other consoles thanks to emulation.

Fallout 4's base building system looks like the ripped of that crappy mod in Fallout 3/New Vegas called Real Time Settler.

>Extends the life of a game well pass the developers intention
"Don't ask questions, just consume product and get excited for next product"

>I don't care about your opinion, it is objectively a good game modded because I can make it into anything I want.
>still have all the shitty base story, gameplay, dialogue and characters to deal with, no matter how much good content you add on top
Putting sprinkles on a mound of dung won't make it taste like Ice Cream.

>because skyrim (with mods) is not bad.
No mods fix the shallow combat.

The only reason Skyrim sold so well so many times was due to mod support. They offloaded development costs onto volunteer hobbyists in exchange for lifetime sales.

And the only reason this is even threatened is the advent of microtransactions and games as service is more profitable than actual game sales.

Attached: 1523756986863.png (500x584, 296K)

>spends 5 minutes looking at a Skyrim mod showcase video from 2015
>I know conclusively that there are no ways to improve the poorly outlined faults I have with the game.

Attached: 1557593280803.gif (220x190, 2.17M)

>Mods can compete with DLC
Sounds like DLC should be substantial content like The Witcher 3 instead of little cosmetic shit like a slightly different outfit.

See Dead or Alive

Mods make games better. If the developers want people to enjoy games, they will support mods. If they're Jews they will oppose them.

Because the game is already known and liked for reasons they can't affect. It's not like they can make or acknowledge Schlongs of Vvardenfell, but if autists refuse to drop Skyrim and don't mod 6, it will simply make lots of people not buy it.

>games as service
I wonder why publishers keep going after this when the majority of paypigs always latch on to a singular game, there can only be so much amount of "Services"

Nice blog.

Because suits run shit not the geeks.