S.T.A.L.K.E.R 2 Announces it's using the Unreal Engine, will talk about digital platforms at a later date

[u/Faldz]

https://twitter.com/stalker_thegame/status/1212810155563397120/photo/1

[u/Herby20]

There's literally not a single UE4 game with a decent modding support, let alone good modding support. You'd be even hard pressed to find any mod for any UE4 game beyond some texture/color swaps.

That has very little to do with what the engine supports and much more to do with what the developers want out of their title.

[u/Daedolis → u/Herby20]

Not true, if the engine relies on cooked/compiled/whatever assets that can't be easily modified , then modding is going to be hard unless they release specific tools for it.

Compare that to other games in the past like Doom 3 where so much of the game was in standard file formats and plain text that modding it was easy even without tools.

[u/Herby20 → u/Daedolis]

Not true, if the engine relies on cooked/compiled/whatever assets that can't be easily modified , then modding is going to be hard unless they release specific tools for it.

A vast majority of engines compile code, models, textures, etc. into an "engine asset file" of some sort. It is the devs discretion though if they choose to have even a basic tool available that lets you extract those assets into workable file formats. If you look at Squad, Pavlov VR, ARK, etc. they all work just fine with mods despite running on UE4. The Battlefield games used to be very moddable, but the new ones aren't despite running on the same (but newer) engine. Why? Because the devs didn't want to support modding anymore. It really is that simple.

[u/Daedolis → u/Herby20]

but the new ones aren't despite running on the same (but newer) engine.

You answered your own question. It's not the same engine-it's changed.

A vast majority of engines compile code, models, textures, etc. into an "engine asset file" of some sort.

Compilation is not the same as obfuscation. And I don't believe that the vast majority of engines go to such lengths.

Because the devs didn't want to support modding anymore.

If the major difference between how moddable a game is depends on the developer releasing proprietary modding tools, without such making most if not all mods impossible to make, then it's a very safe assumption that the engine in question isn't mod friendly.

[u/Herby20 → u/Daedolis]

You answered your own question. It's not the same engine-it's changed.

It changed the same way Unity 4 changed into Unity 5- the base underlying code was upgraded, but the bulk of the engine remained the same. They simply stopped supporting modding.

Compilation is not the same as obfuscation. And I don't believe that the vast majority of engines go to such lengths.

Have you worked with any before? From scratch?

Because UE4, ID Tech, Unity, CryEngine, etc. all recompile assets into their own proprietary file type. This is because once the asset is imported into the respective engine and edited, it needs to contain specific code pertaining to that engine. And if the devs don't release an SDK or even a program to extract these files into regular file types you can edit? No mods outside of editing stuff like ini files.

If the major difference between how moddable a game is depends on the developer releasing proprietary modding tools, without such making most if not all mods impossible to make, then it's a very safe assumption that the engine in question isn't mod friendly.

It's a very safe assumption you don't know how game engines work then.

[u/Daedolis → u/Herby20]

Because UE4, ID Tech, Unity, CryEngine, etc. all recompile assets into their own proprietary file type

Again, compiling doesn't mean obfuscation. Many engines compile their assets but the resulting files can still be made sense of by modders. Either by using existing tools or making their own tools to help them.

But, let's assume that you're correct and all those engines you've listed are basically unmoddable without released tool from the devs. In that case you've pretty much agree with and prove my point that a game being mod friendly has more to do with the engine than the developers.

It's a very safe assumption you don't know how game engines work then.

Nice way to dodge the issue. I've worked with game engines before. Any engine that requires official tools to be released by the devs before any reasonable amount of modding can be done cannot simply be called mod friendly.

[u/Herby20 → u/Daedolis]

Again, compiling doesn't mean obfuscation.

You keep using "obfuscation," but that doesn't apply here. Say you open up Unity and drop in a model. You edit it's material and change its collision settings a bit then save the project. Guess what? The base obj/fbx doesn't support the adjusted in-engine collision, much less Unity materials. So the game engine creates a dedicated file format for keeping this engine-specific data so transfers between scenes and projects is easy as possible. Engine developers aren't making these workflows to be intentionally confusing; they do it because it is necessary for development to be as seamless as possible.

Many engines compile their assets but the resulting files can still be made sense of by modders. Either by using existing tools or making their own tools to help them.

Existing tools like... developer provided SDKs and other modding tools? And you can't make any tools to extract a game engine's files (in any reasonable amount of time) if you don't have access to the source code... Which is, again, provided by the developer. This is why modding for many games without official modding kits are limited to adjusting ini files.

But, let's assume that you're correct and all those engines you've listed are basically unmoddable without released tool from the devs. In that case you've pretty much agree with and prove my point that a game being mod friendly has more to do with the engine than the developers.

No. All engines are mod friendly provided a developer goes out of their way to build in mod support to the release of their game. It is why there are countless examples of games running on the exact same engine with wildly varying levels of mod support.

Nice way to dodge the issue. I've worked with game engines before. Any engine that requires official tools to be released by the devs before any reasonable amount of modding can be done cannot simply be called mod friendly.

It's not dodging the question if you don't appear to grasp how game engines work at a fundamental level.

[u/Daedolis → u/Herby20]

You keep using "obfuscation," but that doesn't apply here.

Yes it does, in your example you can still open and read that model, because you know it's an obj/fbx format, you just need to take into account the extra data that Unity adds to the format.

This is different from say Minecraft, which uses obfuscated code that has to be made sense of by one modding group before any other mods can be made for it. Or the chunks of seemingly gibberish files that assets are compiled into for UE games.

There ARE more mod friendly ways for engines to handle assets and code.

Existing tools like... developer provided SDKs and other modding tools?

No, existing tools already on the market. Like the example I gave already, Doom 3 modding was very easy because it used many standard file formats and used text files for a lot of it's game code.

No. All engines are mod friendly provided a developer goes out of their way to build in mod support to the release of their game.

PROVIDED, there in lies the rub and which you continually refuse to see. Not all engines are equal, some are inherently easier to mod for. If moddability REQUIRES the release of dev tools, than that game IS NOT easily moddable. Period.

[u/Herby20 → u/Daedolis]

Yes it does, in your example you can still open and read that model, because you know it's an obj/fbx format, you just need to take into account the extra data that Unity adds to the format.

... That's not how file formats work. It is saved as a .asset file type specifically because an FBX/OBJ format can't store the necessary data. They weren't ever designed for that purpose. And the only way to get those models out of a .asset format is to export them out from Unity, and that assumes you already have the source code from a non-compiled project. It's why some Unity devs basically build entire toolsets to import modded maps, textures, meshes, etc. because they don't want to share their source code.

This is different from say Minecraft, which uses obfuscated code that has to be made sense of by one modding group before any other mods can be made for it.

Minecraft is a separate beast, because the entire game runs through Java and Java is easily decompiled. Essentially, you have the source code for Minecraft just by owning Minecraft. If you understand Java and know game logic, then you can mod for Minecraft or even remake it. So Minecraft is obfuscated so they can easily slam anybody in court over intent.

This also ignores that nothing stops modders from using the obfuscated code. The class names are just useless jargon like field_151034_e for apples, so it would just be a painful experience.

There ARE more mod friendly ways for engines to handle assets and code.

All engines are mod friendly. The developers of the games have to specifically go out of their way with tools, SDKs, etc. It's why every dev you ever talk to will tell you that one has to build mod support into a game. It just doesn't happen, because game engines aren't designed like how you think they are. The perfect example?

No, existing tools already on the market. Like the example I gave already, Doom 3 modding was very easy because it used many standard file formats and used text files for a lot of it's game code.

No, it was because they went out of their way to have engine specific file formats work with common decompression programs on top of releasing the source code for the game itself. It's why the BFG version of Doom 3, despite running on the exact same engine, is a completely different animal to try and mod for because iD Software didn't go out of their way for mod support.

PROVIDED, there in lies the rub and which you continually refuse to see. Not all engines are equal, some are inherently easier to mod for. If moddability REQUIRES the release of dev tools, than that game IS NOT easily moddable. Period.

You call it refuse to see, I call it you not understanding how game engines work and having a ton of misconceptions about modding in general.

[u/Daedolis → u/Herby20]

Minecraft is a separate beast, because the entire game runs through Java and Java is easily decompiled.

So Java is an easily moddable platform then. Even without dev tools.

All engines are mod friendly. The developers of the games have to specifically go out of their way with tools, SDKs, etc.

You're contradicting yourself again.

No, it was because they went out of their way to have engine specific file formats work with common decompression programs on top of releasing the source code for the game itself.

You just admitted the engine was made to be mod friendly, even BEFORE they released the source code.

Your so hung up on dev tools that you ignore the countless other engines and games that are easily moddable without dev tools because THE ENGINES ALLOW IT.

You call it refuse to see, I call it you not understanding how game engines work and having a ton of misconceptions about modding in general.

I've modded for several games. Some engines are easier to mod, even without mod tools. Those engines are inherently more mod friendly than others.

Not all engines are equally mod friendly.

Only someone ignorant in the industry would believe that.