Would you mod console games if the platform was open like the PC?
with 10,607 votes
I don't give second chances
Poll started by INtense! with 1,207 votes and 36 comments. Browse the poll archive.
If the mod doesn't rock, I won't try it again (352 votes)
Mods improve every release, i'll try it again (855 votes)
Post a Comment
Only registered members can share their thoughts. So come on! Join the community today (totally free) and do things you never thought possible.
Poll
Hot Polls
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Blog | About | Contact | Advertise | Join Mod DB | Site Map | Media Kit | RSS 
© 2002 - 2009 DesuraNET Pty Ltd. All Rights Reserved. 1131 modders online.
© 2002 - 2009 DesuraNET Pty Ltd. All Rights Reserved. 1131 modders online.
Subjective opinion here: it's a mod. Not a fully developed triple-A title. If you vote #1, mods probably are not for you.
I agree. Considering the fact that even AAA titles don't always get it right the first time, I don't see how anyone can expect mods to either. Counter-Strike, for example, went through quite a few revisions before it became what it is today.
Quite a few is a flaming understatement.
I've been playing it since beta. Its a different game in many respects. Sometimes you HAVE to play things and get them wrong before you can get it right. So - Amen dude.
Agree too.
agree.the mods always just get better and better why not trying them always?
If a mod doesn't appeal to me in the first version I try I won't try another version. A patch does not change the mod all that much. If I liked it and patches make it better, fine. If I didn't like, chances are I still won't like it if the reload-time of a weapon has been lowered by 0.2 seconds, a car has slightly more friction in corners and there are two new playermodels to chose from...
That said, if a mod's release is clearly labeled as being very early in development I won't count it as the "first version I tried" but more as a look behind the scenes of a growing project.
On a similar note, if a new release comes with a changelog that basically says the whole thing has changed to something I might enjoy more I will of course give it another chance.
I am also rather forgiving when it comes to bugs and small missing features if I see the mod is on the right track and the developers care about fixing problems in future patches.
The amount of overhaul can be determined by the version difference ;)
not always true version numbers are arbitrary.
depends what they're trying to achieve, if it's a mod that copies a game onto another engine almost completely, then if it lacks what it needs the first, then I wont try it, but if it does it successfully each release, go it. If it fails to anything but, no point.
But...if the mod is something thats seemingly original to me, I'll always watch and follow it until it eventually reaches full version release :D
Many mods that first appear on the verge of 'bad' during their very first alphas or public betas often have the habit of eventually evolving into something Great! It's been seen so too often!
As 'decyx' has said... even AAA titles don't always get it right 1st time round! They often need a second chance via patches or whatever... So it's only common sense that Mods deserve nothing less, if not more than these Licensed Retail Titles! Afterall... we're doin' it for free and in our own time right? ;)
So yea... good and basic point 'paragraph5'... Agreed! lol ;)
[/rant] :P
If the storyline of a game sucks donkey balls, it will still suck donkeyballs no matter how many patches you apply to it.
The real problem is that wether a mod rocks or not depends a lot on the expectation of the player.
I play a lot of mods for AvP2, but I still voted #1.
All so true. Like what decyx said, take garrys mod for example, it grew from a simple mod to a very very popular game. And it improved on every update.
Incorrect dude. If a mods game mechanics do not appeal to you ( in general, not because of nitpicks ) then it's not going to please you in an upgraded version so #1 is what it goes with.
Second CS is a good example of how later versions ruin a previously good mod. CS prior 1.0 rocked while anything beyond it is annoying as hell. Here betting on #2 is fatal.
There are situations where mods improve over time but the core gameplay stays the same as otherwise it would not be the same mod. Hence people voting for #2 are illusionists. Gameplay can be refined, yes, but not changed from bad into superb. If the gameplay doesn't please you and you vote for #2... you should not be playing mods ;)
If the mod improves ill try it again then :)
It's good to see how the poll's swinging towards the latter option. As a mod developer I can say there's nothing more frustrating than players picking up an early release (clearly marked ALPHA or BETA) and then never touching it again after that. Despite community insistence on the Counter-Strike "early and often" release system.
Cheers ModDB!
if I play a mod, and its not my cup of tea (IE melee combat mods, or fps' which are boring and the same thing over again, just with slightly different charastics), then sure, i won't try it again, though if its a mod that has bugs, but a good idea behind it, i'll try it again
You can expect a mod to "rock" if it's a Alpha or Beta release, try it again when the newer version comes out
It depends if the release is touted as a 'beta' or as a '1.0'. If it's a beta, the mod team accepts it's a beta, and it's advertised as such then as xMurphyx said it's only a sneak-preview. Bad gameplay may change, and although I may not try it every release I'll certainly revisit it. On the other hand a '1.0' release with a mod team going "it's finished!" gets less sympathy if it's bad. They should have playtested more.
Of course there's a lot of personal opinion as well and I'm not going to go decrying a mod because I personally dislike it, but some mods refuse to listen to enormous amounts of feedback and keep making the mod worse instead of better - they don't get a second chance unless the leadership changes.
if the mod is a beta release and it sucks, i might try it again later but if its a 1.0 release and it sucks then i probably wont try it again later... just trying to give a truthful opinion: i put option 1.
If the idea just doesn't really work for me, I don't play the mod
anymore.
Unless something like a really nice patch can convince me otherwise.
Once again, I'll try anything at least once...even if it was a crappy mod that states they've updated.
I think it all refears to the question why you didn't like
the mod. If you didn't like it because it crashed every 3minutes,
you can simply wait for a patch of a fix.
Of course, if you don't like the whole kind of gameplay
you cannot be blamed if you don't try again^^
i allways try again.respect for all.
i go for the #2.. i mean ive seen a lot of mods and some of them have good concept and all... but because of some problems like real life stuff they just didn't pull through it.. but if it's alive like there is new every month or so.. i can at least use them and help the modders tell them what's wrong and if there is a sussgestion it will help them realize things.. im just glad to the modders of doing them and it's every mod they create... they create new gaming experience for all the people out there... and being recognize as susch is a good achievement.. and they should be proud of it :D
I'm always willing to give a mod a 2nd or even 3rd chance! So... Option 2 for me! ;)
Definitely willing to try a mod more than once. A single patch can change so much and really developers are always learning what works and what doesn't from testing and community participation. Option #2 for me.
I take a mod for what it is. I understand that it's not a AAA title, but when it doesn't have a decent concept (gameplay, artist, etc) behind it, I aint coming back until it has a 'Team Fortress' to 'Team Fortress 2' scale revision. Fair enough. But tastes are different.
They are always fixing mods(well most of the time) so why not give it a second chance?
Its a game, not a movie.
my above comment was about herr_alien when he said: If the storyline of a game sucks donkey balls, it will still suck donkeyballs no matter how many patches you apply to it.
I agree with some of the above. If the mod doesn't appeal to me the first release, if I doesn't manage to convince me it has potential I won't try it again. But if it is a cool idea but it needs balancing, bug fixes or more content I will try new versions.
Well, the difference would be if you played a mod and just didn't like the aesthetic, setting, or theme, then it's understandable if you don't want to try it again. The fact that someone may not like a mod because it has pirates and vikings in it (not saying that I don't like that mod, just citing a random example), then that's not gonna change in later releases.
But yeah, if you like what the creator's are striving to achieve, then of course, you should keep trying the mod out with every new release.
Honestly, I will try a mod that appeals to me, if the base gameplay is broken on first release, I'll probably not pick it up ever again. But if a mod is fun but rusty on first release, I'll give it another shot. Mostly I spend most of my time modding and not playing so I dont have alot of time to go back and play mods that have new patches.
Depends
I don't care that these are full fledged, super polished games. If I don't have fun when I play it, there's no reason to come back.
I'd always return to good mods, my problem is just a lack of time. So, if I tried a mod in a first beta release and didn't like it, I won't try any new releases.
Yet, if the mod appealed to me on first sight but has issues, which will probably disappear (rubber-banding, slow servers, etc)I'll be happy to give it another try.
Good teams constantly make their mod better and listen to a lot of the problems that only came up BECAUSE they released a beta version. As long as I see there is change to the better, I'll start playing, again and again and again...