Richard Dower wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 11:52 am
I would say the opposite is happening, Giants are becoming more strict about mods and standards, ergo the reduced number of mods per day now.
Look at the majority of Brazilian mods - this is not the case. They let Brazilian mods though with problems that a modder from any other location would have their mod denied for.
eric21 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 10:50 am
The problem is modders say it's stolen after the mod is out and not before
This is because you can only conclusively say that a model is stolen when it's out - you need to look at the geometrical data for the mod.
One thing I noticed about the modhub is seems like the same massey Ferguson tractors get updated every week. Some of them must be on like their 10th update since release
garyst wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 1:56 pm
One thing I noticed about the modhub is seems like the same massey Ferguson tractors get updated every week. Some of them must be on like their 10th update since release
-Testing issues with the mod hub is nothing new. This has been going on for YEARS through multiple iterations of the game. Sometimes they are too strict, sometimes they aren't strict enough, etc. Unlike some of the previous posters I will give 2 SPECIFIC examples to illustrate this point:
1. In FS19, GlobalCompany - probably the best PC mod to be released for 19 - failed Giants testing one time because of IMPROPER tabbing of the XML lines in the modDesc. This all had to do with how the lines are arranged. It had nothing to do with the functionality of the mod itself.
2. FS22 - John Deere 2410 plow, currently on the mod hub right now. First of all thanks to the modder for bringing this to 22. BUT. It has now been through 2 updates on the mod hub. It skips every other row. It will plow one, then drive down the next one with the plow up, and then drop it down for the next row. Why does this happen you ask? The modder coded it as a moldboard TURNING plow. So when it gets to the end of that first row, it thinks it needs to be turned, hence then it skips a row. Did Giants even test this with a worker? Obviously not.
-If anyone truly believed their video from Farmcon with how mods are tested then you may need some help. They made a complete joke of the process. My theory: they run the mods through their internal checker, which is probably very similar to the testrunner they gave us, and then as long as it passes it is released. I HIGHLY doubt mods are put into game and actually tested.
-As far as the topic goes - is everything OK? Personally I don't think it is. Giants employs probably about 10x the amount of marketing people vs people that actually program / code the game. Why do we get these patches with like one or two bugs fixed and then the list of 20 other bugs go ignored? Let me tell you, these marketing people are worth every penny. You sold over 3 million copies? Awesome. Now, if these issues that are still going on don't get fixed you'll never sniff anywhere near that number again in future FS versions. The CEOS need to take some of that cheddar and start investing in PEOPLE to make the game better instead of the beamers and Ferraris. Time to start hiring some real programmers to fix the real issues. Time to get these programmers to add something innovative. Time to update or change your engine which is OLD and past its prime. All you have to do is look at (and you can bet your bottom dollar they are looking at this) Twitch and the streaming numbers. Look at how many people are watching. It is ABYSMAL. Even VirtualFarmer (who I enjoy) does half his streams nowadays on different games.
You are right. They are ignoring flickering trees shader issue for too long now its almost a year from release. Also no mod contest this year whats up with that. Too much focus on dlcs and promotions and that dumb fsl leauge and too little on meaningful updates and constant improvements via patches. Remember when they promised to improve ai further down the road after game release via their blog post? I remember and guess what that never ever happened
But as far as the FSL - even that is running on fumes. I've seen roadside lemonade stands that are run better than that. They are still running FS19 for FSL.... but that sponsorship money (10k minimum to be a sponsor) keeps rolling it so FSL will as well...
JMGaming_ wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 11:03 am
Hello,
I have 3 mods on the modhub. And the hardest thing to get is 'feedback'. I Work very hard to find feedback somewhere : YouTube, twitch or others... i found only a few lines.
You think modhod have low quality mod ?
Where have you send your feedback ?
Modders want more feedback. More feedback they have more quality you will get after.
What mods are they? Have you made a specific threads here on this forum? I’ve seen some lengthy conversations on mods here on this forum. Just be ready for things you might not like or odd requests for specialty fixes for an individual or two.
Well, I’m a console player, and according to some responses here, all these poor quality mods must be my fault because I’m so anxious for mods. Of course this is garbage. As a console player why would I want hurried mods that I cannot fix? Why would I want a map that doesn’t accept bales? Or a plow that doesn’t plow? I have absolutely no way of opening a file and fixing it. So placing blame on console players is a cop out and weak.
Most importantly from a consumer standpoint we must STOP rating mods so highly. Giving such high ratings for any mod from ANY modder is a recipe for disaster if the mod isn’t actually high quality. There is no way the best modders want anyone to give their mods junk ratings. I can’t imagine a world where Alien Jim or Oxygen David or Blacksheep Modding wouldn’t want to know their stuff is broken or lame or just unfinished. Those folks wouldn’t want us giving them such high marks if they didn’t deserve them.
If there are bad mods their ratings should reflect that. If the modder wants to improve that mod, or as a modder, they will seek answers on public forums. If they’re just looking for five minutes of fame and a few bucks in their pockets, well they will certainly gain that with junk ratings. Encouraging mediocrity is never the answer for higher quality. Too many friends rating stuff for friends.
As for how Giants goes about the testing, I cannot speak for them. I’m not excusing them for not properly testing mods from modders, or themselves for that matter, but I don’t actually know their process for testing.
I think one solution for substandard mods is to make a Work-in-Progress category on ModHub for players to test. Make the mod available for an amount of time for testing purposes. I mean that’s what players are already doing, right? Just make it a category. Have an accompanying forum page for that category to help prevent those posts from cluttering up the General Discussion page.
As for mod authors wanting feedback. Ask right here. The Illinois map has a lengthy thread. The Selectable Bale Capacity mod sought out experiences and concerns here. If you try locking feedback down behind Facebook or other platforms where people must go elsewhere, the results will be less feedback. Expect the unexpected. Don’t take feedback personal. And most people ever offer feedback if they have complaints. Gratitude is rarely expressed at a higher rate than complaining.
As for mods doing crazy things, go for it. I don’t have to download Light Saber chainsaws. Or 200k liter forage wagons or 5X capacity pallets if I don’t want to. This is only a game after all. It’s a fantasy world regardless of what it’s trying to be. Besides some of those mods are better than more realistic mods that do the same thing.
Finally for modders who purposely steal assets or release poorly tested mods just to get their stuff out there. Well just because you can doesn’t mean you should.
They had a wip section (well, was called beta, wasn't it?) some years ago.
Stuff tended to be stuck there....
And another thing to keep in mind, they do not test mods against other mods.
And, how can they know that a mod contains stolen parts? Well, that's an easy one, we, the community just have to report those, with the needed proof of theft. They do use the hammer on those issues
About giving feedback.
Currently this is PITA - where should it go?! Some mod descriptions have a link to the feedback thread in the forum itself, some have discord channel etc. Most have nothing. Should I open (possible Nth) thread about "baler X doesn't push bales out" and just hope that the specific modder actually reads the forum and finds my thread?
So when I find something, it really has to bug me a lot to actually go and find the place where my feedback might be noticed. Most of the times I either ignore the thing (if it's not substantial) or I just delete the mod.
So in case any Giants workers read this - in the next iteration of FS please make the system so that while the mod is uploaded to the modhub specific support thread is created in the forum and working(!) link to this thread is presented in the mod description. Bonus points if you can show this working link in ingame "shop" menu too - I would like to give feedback on the go when I find the bug without having to go through save-> quit-> feedback.
While I agree to most of the comments already mentioned I still want to add my 2cents:
1. Visual mod quality:
This is a very difficult topic. While some people see it as nostalgia when mods from older game versions are brought back without texture quality change, others hate the outdated quality. Should Giants refuse to release those "bad texture quality" mods?
Same is true for maps. One player wants to have as many details as possible, nice predefined yard to start with. Others want an empty map with just the bare minimum already prepared. And there are pretty much all stages in between. So an "unfinished" map for one player can be the perfect map for another one.
2. Functional mod quality:
I see functional mod testing completely as responsibility of the mod creator. I do not see Giants testing an entire map, every single sellpoint, trigger, ... for the correct function. That should already be done as good as possible upfront to submitting it to Modhub. Same is true for other kinds of mods. Even it is "just" an edit of a ingame vehicle. And that's why there are still mods in Modhub having some functional issues. Giants responsibility is simply making sure the mod runs without creating issues for the game itself, being it performance impact or straight up crashes. For granted, there where still mods released causing issues mainly on consoles, but that is a whole different topic.
3. Error reporting:
For sure, modders have plenty of possibilities to collect feedback. Especially for Modhub released mods, the official forum might be the main point of contact to give/collect feedback. But to be fair, the forum search is a joke. Even if a modder creates a topic, if it does not get comments keeping it on top, it will be burried quickly and nobody would find it easily.
Would a link in the mod description help to find the forum topic? Should there be a mandatory feedback box to fill out if you want to rate a mod? That is another endless discussion we can participate in.
In the end it is still left to us players to give proper feedback in whatever way we can think of. Everyone can create a topic for specific mods. But the modder also needs to be active in the forum then to get awareness of it. It would already help if the modders name in browser-Modhub would directly show the forums member name/contact. This way it would be very easy to contact the modder.
I often see error reportings like: "Mod does not work, is junk". Oh well thanks you for nothing. It is also our responsibility to give PROPER feedback. If possible include the log, test the mod without any other mod installed, what does not work exactly, ... and all that in a constructive, friendly way.
A very good modhub update could be a minimal playing time to unlock rating system. And if you send a bad rating you must explain your reason with a minimal text size.
The main question is : my mod pass the Giants certification but you send a 1 star mark. What's wrong with this mod ?
Because a large part of ratings are not serious it's only hate or from friends.
I think that just a comment section below each mod would go a long way. Some unofficial websites already have that and you can learn a lot about a mod and it's problems from the comment section.
JMGaming_ wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 11:59 am
Hello,
A very good modhub update could be a minimal playing time to unlock rating system.
That I'd definitely agree with I've seen maps release and within minutes have ratings no way can an accurate opinion be formed in such a short space of time.
