"dont dl it????"
oh so if someone makes a mod that installs a virus and bricks your pc, the creator is completely innocent cause you dont have to dl it?
This is as equally poor a comparison as the child research one. If this mod happened to have a virus in it then your argument would be true. "Just don't download" isn't a valid argument when someone is spreading viruses.
But when you're looking at a mod that describes itself as a Gay Pride Parade mod, and you've been made well aware that the NPC's are indestructible, then you are to solely to blame if you download the mod knowing you don't like any of that.
It's like hating cheese&onion crisps, then buying and eating a packet, and complaining that they make cheese&onion crisps.
No, nobody is going to be abused or molested by this mod, but I seriously do believe that it's a VERY bad thing as a content creator to waste somebody's time. Believe it or not, game designers (and modders) have moral standards they should be aiming for to. Just because you don't want to think about them doesn't mean they exist.
My point is that not acknowledging something doesn't make it go away.
I simply don't understand how the mod is wasting anyones time. It's clearly described what it is, and if you look at that and choose that you want it, you're getting what you want. It's not a lucky dip, or a falsely advertised product.
And I likewise don't see how removing a feature is failing to meet a moral standard. Particularly when morals are entirely subjective, and the reason that they have removed the feature is on account of their own morals (They originally had the killability in, and accepted it as a fact of the medium, but decided against its inclusion following the Orlando attack).
And rather than enhancing the gameplay experience, it ends up ruining it and blocking off players from interacting with the game world. Other GTA mods give players more interactions, rather than taking away from them.
It'd be acceptable if there was an actual decent statement about the gameplay in the mix (see that one DOOM mod design to riff on Call of Duty). There's literally no relevance of the message of the mod to the core gameplay.
It's entirely subjective as to whether their design choice ruins the gameplay experience, particularly given the people the mod is marketed at are people wishing to celebrate in a gay pride parade. Those who would use the mod to destroy a parade aren't the intended audience, and I don't believe that the mod developers owe the alternate market. Not when the developers ask for and get nothing in return for people using their mod.
Yes, it does.
As I said, the role of mods is to enhance the player's experience of a game (the exception are total conversions/overhauls, which you can basically see as new video games on top of the pre-existing and compiled engine). My experience is not enhanced when I literally cannot interact with part of the world thanks to the mod.
I don't think you have the responsibility to say what a mod can and cannot do. You clearly want different things from mods than these people wish to give.
And at any rate they're enhancing their own view of a sandbox game. If that's not what you want from the mod then it does come down to deciding not play or the endorse the mod.
If I felt that the hobbyist was wasting their time and could be using that time to achieve amazing, cool stuff that would benefit themselves and others, I would do anything in my power to get them to do things better.
I've seen so many talented people waste their wonderful talents on producing stuff, because they haven't learnt better by figuring out who their audience is. Why make stuff and spent the effort to upload and release it if nobody wants to play with it because it ruins their experience? Wouldn't you want to be known for making awesome stuff that makes the game twice as good?
If you force a hobbyist to do as you want, to design things how you want (which is ultimately what this boils down to), then you're restricting their hobby. People have clashes of opinion, and it's not right to insist yours upon someone else.
Now yes, you can say that a modder insists their opinion on design on another person, but it's not something anyone has to agree to put up with.
Hobbies are often more about pleasing yourself at any rate than pleasing anyone else. Hence it not being professiona.
This is LITERALLY the worst argument used by anybody ever.
Not posting, commenting or critiquing on something that is clearly stuff does NOT make that thing less stuff, nor does it let others know why they shouldn't make stuff. The Internet is about allowing people to have a voice; it's completely unfair to silence those who have a different opinion to you on the basis of "they don't like it", especially when there's deeper reasoning at play.
Let me state that I'm not saying people shouldn't criticise, or discuss these things. But I don't get the need for such vehemently bitter response to such a bbrown town and non-impacting issue.
The most self-evident means of critique are the ratings/download-numbers on these mods. And there's room for discussion on the internet to critique too, but getting antsy and insisting that the mods never be created, or that they're some sort of almight affront to all things proper is just so out of proportion to the debate at hand.
The opinions reaching that side of the argument go so far as to inhibit creativity, and slap down those who even try, or are doing the most simple of things in sharing their creation.
Yes, every time somebody does something wrong, rather than have them understand and fix it, let's just have other people copy it with minor changes and upload that? Because that's going to go down well! No copyright complaints, flame wars or large-scale drama ever came from that!
What you find wrong is not an ultimate truth. We're talking about an area of creativity where everyone gets a go, and no one is forced to do as they like. The beauty of the system is you can try your own hand.
We're in a great community here where we encounter this all the time. If you join someones Blockland server and find them building a castle, or hosting a TDM, or roleplaying, and it's not quite to your tastes, or there's something about it you don't like, then it's not acceptable for you to scream and shout for changes to be made. We know that from Dramas about people who do it, or who make Dramas to complaing about someone else banning them for being demanding.
But you're more than free, and even encouraged, to try your own hand at it. Or find someone else doing it better, who is more in line with your views.
You're not going to face copyright charges because you imitated a concept on a sandbox game which you're not making money for. And there's always going to be drama about mods, and the case is either that you're causing it arguing over someone elses work that isn't right for you, or you can make what is right for you and enjoy that, and then put up with whatever drama happens from people complaining about you copying.
Yeah, buy a $30USD expansion pack which has far less refined mechanics and interactions just to compensate for the fact that a mod doesn't let me do the same things to the parade pedestrians that I can do to every other pedestrian in the world.
You can't always have your cake and eat it.
The options are there for you. Make your own, or find an alternative.
I'm just giving one suggestion if you happen to be adamant about gunning down gays.
There are also fairly large groups of gay people who hang out near the gay-clubs in northern Los Santos, if you want to run those people down too.
I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree however, McJob.
I know you have different views to me on how games, and their various aspects should be handled. And I respect that you're committed to them.
I don't think that there's a be-all and end-all to how games, or mods should be run, is my opinion, really.
I might not like the decision in this case, but I understand why it was made, and it doesn't have to impact my enjoyment of the game, and I don't think it should have to impact the enjoyment of anyone else.