Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:37 am Post subject: Research question
Hi all,
My name is Maaike Lauwaert and I'm a researcher. I am currently doing research for an article for the "International Journal of Innovation Management". And the topic is, well, to be honest, you! I want to look into the mods created for Battle of the Bulge as a form of user-driven innovation - which it clearly is.
Some of my question are: Why do these mods get created? What do these mods do? Enhance the historical accuracy? Or ease the gameplay? How difficult is it to make mods? How many people actually play with mods? Do the mods created by fans get used sometimes in official re-releases or in different games? And if so, do the game companies consult the modders first?
And more generally, what makes this B of the B game good? Have you played other B of the B games like Tigers in the Mist or Ardennes '44?
I hope some of you will have time to answer me!
If you do, please let me know if I can quote you in the article and under what name (user name or real name).
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:40 pm Post subject: Re: Research question
maaike wrote:
Some of my question are: Why do these mods get created?
Because of affinity with a specific topic/battle
maaike wrote:
What do these mods do? Enhance the historical accuracy? Or ease the gameplay?
Both. Primarily those mods that are historically accurate are the best in terms of atmosphere.
maaike wrote:
How difficult is it to make mods?
I costs time. Leads to divorce. Solid data research is not an fast task it takes years to finish. You should know, if you are "researcher."
Coding maps takes a life time if done alone. This means it is all difficult because we die before making all the mods we want to make.
maaike wrote:
How many people actually play with mods?
everybody, who likes a classic game, is a history buff, like strategic and tactic thinking, gets sick if people say good games need good graphics.
maaike wrote:
Do the mods created by fans get used sometimes in official re-releases or in different games?
do you think your professor wont take away your ideas as well?
maaike wrote:
And if so, do the game companies consult the modders first?
Yeah, mostly as much as Hitler consulted his general about stalingrad
maaike wrote:
And more generally, what makes this B of the B game good?
B of the B? Close Combat and its mods are best game since the olympics, because it has many mod covering different battles.
The Vatican will declare its apotheosis in several years, believe me it is A of the A.
maaike wrote:
Have you played other B of the B games like Tigers in the Mist or Ardennes '44?
No, and take your consumer survey somewhere else, if its about introducing other games to this cool site here. Better setup a Questions survey and attach it here. then provide an email and wait for incoming data to evaluate.
Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:35 am Post subject: Re: Research question
Hi,
Thanks for getting back to me!
I have some follow up questions if that's okay.
maaike wrote:
How difficult is it to make mods?
Polemarchos wrote:
I costs time. Leads to divorce. Solid data research is not an fast task it takes years to finish. You should know, if you are "researcher."
Coding maps takes a life time if done alone. This means it is all difficult because we die before making all the mods we want to make.
Okay, I'm not so sure what you mean by this. I know that doing things thoroughly takes ages but what do you mean by data research and coding maps? Would be great if you could explain this some more.
maaike wrote:
How many people actually play with mods?
Polemarchos wrote:
everybody, who likes a classic game, is a history buff, like strategic and tactic thinking, gets sick if people say good games need good graphics.
Do you mean then that a mod/game for you doesn't necessarily have to have the 'best' graphics possible? But that a good game is about good gameplay and accuracy?
maaike wrote:
Do the mods created by fans get used sometimes in official re-releases or in different games?
Polemarchos wrote:
do you think your professor wont take away your ideas as well?
True, good point.
maaike wrote:
And if so, do the game companies consult the modders first?
Polemarchos wrote:
Yeah, mostly as much as Hitler consulted his general about stalingrad
But do you feel 'cheated' or more like honoured when you're ideas are taken on by others?
maaike wrote:
Have you played other B of the B games like Tigers in the Mist or Ardennes '44?
Polemarchos wrote:
No, and take your consumer survey somewhere else, if its about introducing other games to this cool site here. Better setup a Questions survey and attach it here. then provide an email and wait for incoming data to evaluate.
[/quote]
Sorry, didn't mean to 'spam'. These are older board games of the battle.
Well, actually, I choose BoB because the Battle is of such historical importance to the area where I live and of course to the outcome of WWII. But maybe you're right that in wanting to say something about modding as a case of user-driven innovations, i should pick a more 'modded' game.
platoon_michael wrote:
When what you need is CCV with many many more mods.
Which one would you recommend?
platoon_michael wrote:
CCIV is reserved for serious gammers only.
Why is BoB for serious gamers? And does that mean that serious gamers use/create less mods?
data research = to create a mod u need to read tons of books and offcial material regarding unit composition, Battlegroup setup, weapons available. Then u check the military history of the conflict and can start modding.
From a techinicalk perspective un eed to know penetration ranges of shells, size of ammo magazines etc.. to code them into game
= Thorough research here take some time
map coding:
I never done it, but most people refer to time span of 2 years and more just to create maps for the game. the more people you have the faster work is done
This means a good mod may take you 2-3 years to create. Doing it alone completely takes a decade , but mostly someone kicks in to help
I dont feel cheated or tricked when companies steal ideas, the community mostly stole their game in the first place and updated it. We dont want money, we want a plethora of mods and a littel recognition within the thankful community is enough. So no i guess most modders dont feel cheated
Q: But that a good game is about good gameplay and accuracy?
data research = to create a mod u need to read tons of books and offcial material regarding unit composition, Battlegroup setup, weapons available. Then u check the military history of the conflict and can start modding.
From a techinicalk perspective un eed to know penetration ranges of shells, size of ammo magazines etc.. to code them into game
= Thorough research here take some time
Are these then complete mods - that are basically a new game on the existing engine - or partial mods - like additions to the existing games?
Polemarchos wrote:
I dont feel cheated or tricked when companies steal ideas, the community mostly stole their game in the first place and updated it.
That's a great point. Never considered it from that point of view.
Thanks again!!! This really helps me a lot to get a better idea of your work and the community!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
I want to look into the mods created for Battle of the Bulge as a form of user-driven innovation - which it clearly is.
