Microsoft Says Allowing Mods Is "Inviting Trouble"

[lolhey]

From Wired.com (http://blog.wired.com/games/2008/04/microsoft-allow.html):


Microsoft's Chris Satchell says that mods on a console, such as those for Unreal Tournament 3 on the PlayStation 3, "could be really dangerous" because "there's a lot of people out there that just want to prove they can screw things up."

"Any platform that lets you do that, and doesn't have the right security measures in place -- whether it's Sony, whether it's Nintendo, whether it's Apple, whether it's anyone -- you're inviting trouble, because sooner or later someone will want to prove they can do it," he said.


Personally, I'm a "little disturbed" that content released for free on the PC (custom skins, maps, etc) will never see the light of day on the 360 unless it costs 800 points!

[H.Bogard]

You forgot a / in the quote tag.

And yeah, sour grapes.

[Sazime]

You forgot a / in the quote tag.

And yeah, sour grapes.
What are you talking about? ;)

[Haemorrhage]

Here is the original interview (http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=131505) by Eurogamer with Chris Satchell.

[H.Bogard]

What are you talking about? ;)

*bows to your ninja skills*

Some day... some day...

[Goronmon]

I think it's a valid concern. PC gaming isn't perfect, so I don't think making consoles more PC-like is the answer to everything.

[Telefrog]

I've said this before, but I'll repeat it again. I think Microsoft felt burnt when hordes of idiots used the car painter app in Forza 2 to make a ton of liveries with pornographic and racist themes. I think they didn't anticipate the amount of asshattery some people will display when given the opportunity to screw with a game's systems online.

[GunnyMo]

Well, then why not make all mods be sent to MS for approval before posting? That will keep the riffraff out.

I agree that it's more a matter of MS not getting any money out of it than anything. The PC Mod community has proved beyond a doubt the quality that can come out of this.

Wake up, MS.

[GrinR]

Gunny is correct. Submission to a review board for user-submitted content.

[Tyrant]

I agree that modding on consoles opens up the possibility for malicious exploitation. For instance, someone could release a mod that appears innocent enough on the outside, but it secretly overclocks the GPU on your 360 whenever run to cause the solder joint disconnects nessary for a RRoD. Don't ask me how they managed to get access to system level control like GPU speeds though.

[SpectralWolf]

I see. And since when has Microsoft been the great paragon of security, Mr. Satchell? Windows sure took a long time to plug all of its holes up.

[Texas Speed]

Gunny is correct. Submission to a review board for user-submitted content.

But who pays for the team of people that have to be the reviewers from now until forever? I'd say it's a valid concern.

[torrefaction]

I see. And since when has Microsoft been the great paragon of security, Mr. Satchell? Windows sure took a long time to plug all of its holes up.

Since they put a huge focus on security due to all the criticism? Arguing about how a company USED to be after they've changed strikes me as a little funny.

[Meatgortex]

Well, then why not make all mods be sent to MS for approval before posting?

If they setup an approval board then they are responsible for all content released. If someone sneaks something past them MS becomes responsible, there is no way they are going to do that. This is why you see so many user rated things online. It shifts responsibility to the community and away from the hosting company.

[SpectralWolf]

Since they put a huge focus on security due to all the criticism? Arguing about how a company USED to be after they've changed strikes me as a little funny.

They haven't changed. They don't see user-created mods as lucrative enough. And setting up a team whose full-time job is to certify mods would only be a bother for them. An opinion, of course.

[torrefaction]

They haven't changed. They don't see user-created mods as lucrative enough. And setting up a team whose full-time job is to certify mods would only be a bother for them. An opinion, of course.

What? Weren't we talking about security? They HAVE changed, absolutely. If you don't think so, you know very little about the Vista closedown, or Jim Allchin, not to mention the drastic reduction in their public vulnerability rate.

Here's a good start:
http://net127.com/2005/09/24/battling-google-microsoft-changes-how-it-builds-software

[PathMaster]

There has got to be some way to setup some type of automatic protection. Listening to several podcasts of late, multiple titles have newer tech that does not allow for possible objectionable material to be posted, such as drawings of a penis. If the tech is not there, someone has to be on the verge of creating it.

[bKangy]

Why can't they do a YouTube of mods though? Vote up useful submissions and report offensive ones?

[SpectralWolf]

What? Weren't we talking about security? They HAVE changed, absolutely. If you don't think so, you know very little about the Vista closedown, or Jim Allchin, not to mention the drastic reduction in their public vulnerability rate.

Here's a good start:
http://net127.com/2005/09/24/battling-google-microsoft-changes-how-it-builds-software

Dude, The point I'm trying to make is I think that this is just an excuse. Sure, I know they've tightened up their security in Vista. It sure took them long enough after almost 10-15 years of poorly designed software. But, I don't think this is justification enough for keeping their platform so tightly closed. Since they're in the solutions business, I'm sure a solution can be found that can safely deliver quality user-created content to the Xbox 360. It'll probably mean they may have to throw some money at the problem.

But who am I kidding? This is Microsoft. They'd rather build Live Search for more advertising revenue than cut a deal with Google. They'd rather charge people for Windows Live for services already present for free on the PC. They'd rather not use standards like Bluetooth and instead peddle a substandard wireless microphone accessory. They'd rather charge 800 points for 4 maps which the original developer wanted to be free.

*sigh* never mind.

[Evil Avatar]

But who pays for the team of people that have to be the reviewers from now until forever? I'd say it's a valid concern.

The problem isn't that this is about mods or "malicious content", this is flat out about Microsoft wanting full control over all the content on your Xbox 360 and the pricing on all the content on Xbox Live.

Epic already got into it with Microsoft over content for Gears of War. Epic wanted to give stuff away for free and MS wanted to charge for the content.

What happened? As other people have noticed -- Epic just decided not to support Gears of War with new content.

And the same thing will probably happen with Unreal Tournament 3 on the Xbox 360. Epic will sit back and be happy with whatever sales that they get and then just let it go at that without providing much (or any) additional content.

I think Microsoft's big concern isn't "making money", it is the overall value of the products on Xbox Live. If we have Epic out there supporting their games for free the way Epic always supports their games -- you are talking about Gig afte Gig of free content.

Compare that with a company like Electronic Arts who wants to CHARGE for a couple of extra weapons. Who charged for in-game money and cheat codes. Who is building a whole "Free" PC game based around the idea of charging for every little thing you might want in the game.

Why would you buy EA's shooter where even a new costume is going to cost you 200 points when you could just load new costumes into Unreal Tournament 3 for free?

That is the concern... they want everyone charging so that the expectation is the same for everyone -- and they want that expectation to be that all additional content costs money.

It is a great business model, but it sucks if you are the consumer.

[bKangy]

It's a terrible move though. One of the advantages MS had coming into this race was the fact developers seemed to like them and Live more than Sony. Making demands that the devs charge for content etc is going to cost them relationships and titles next time around

[cp#]

Counter Strike is the number one example. There are dozens of custom maps out there that put the official ones to shame. In fact, most maps that are now official were user created for the original CS (aztec, dust, dust2, etc etc). There is also a huge skinning community and there are hundreds if not thousands of skins available for each weapon.

How is it all controlled? If a server (Live does not have servers.. hmm...) enables a simple command: sv_pure 1 or pure 2, then no custom skins are even allowed and each player just sees the normal skins thus keeping everything consistent (no unfair advantage, think pink heads). Also, the admin chooses the map rotation so some crazy map will never sneak in there randomly.

Another example is TF2, Random has loaded the server with dozens of mods including a melee only sudden death which I think is loads of fun. Try coordinating a melee only sudden death on Live (assuming the whole 'server' is not one big party)

[torrefaction]

Just so it's clear, so people don't misunderstand me, the whole charging for content devs want to be free is bullshit, and they SHOULD have a legitimate system for this. On the other hand, the security concerns aren't exactly completely invalid either, and calling Microsoft out for security in this day and age strikes me as uneducated from a technology perspective. I did plenty of calling out of Microsoft over that over the years...but you're supposed to encourage companies when they change bad habits.

[AversionFX]

I think it's a valid concern. PC gaming isn't perfect, so I don't think making consoles more PC-like is the answer to everything.

No, not really. Counter-Strike, among other successes, says hello.

[Heretic Machine]

Translation from marketing speak: "Until we figure out how to charge you people for stuff that we don't make or hold any right to, you aren't getting it on our console."

[OrangePulp]

As far as mods being a security risk... They're in the software business; shouldn't they know how to lock things down so that mod content wouldn't be able to access dangerous stuff?

I really think Evil hit it on the head, though; When some stuff is free, you're going to expect other similar content to be free. When it all has a price tag, well, what's the big deal?

[TKO]

Instead of banning objectionable content, why not just classify it? All players will be set up, by default, to not be open to receiving objectionable content ..content that's submitted for distribution needs to have a number of users classify it before it's unlocked. Stuff that's crap might be ignored and not even opened up for use. Stuff that's objectionable can be used, but only offline. All online forms of play default to non-objectionable skins/decals.

..To further refine the system, I'd suggest users be able to rate other users classifications, so making the moral extremists ineffectual in blocking 'soft' content. (ie: a decal of a sexy woman that has no nudity, or a mario with a hitler moustache, might still see the light of day if the appeal/humour of the material wins the votes of the more level headed voters.) Maybe rating the submitters would make it possible to partially auto-block people who continually put crap online too?

Damn, this idea sounded simple before. Think I over thought it too much as I wrote. :) Initially I'd thought of having specific criteria: sexist, racist, gorey, teeny ;), crap-quality, etc ..and allowing players to opt in to these for online (thus allowing the 'big-tits' car, but to a niche audience of perverts :D) but I don't want to open this system up to, say, a sub-clan of racist racers, etc.

[Deadend]

As far as mods being a security risk... They're in the software business; shouldn't they know how to lock things down so that mod content wouldn't be able to access dangerous stuff?

I really think Evil hit it on the head, though; When some stuff is free, you're going to expect other similar content to be free. When it all has a price tag, well, what's the big deal?

Well, the 360 does not have the strength of PCs... which can handle things if a game uses too much RAM or tries to do something WEIRD.

Lets say a usermade UT3 map has a special miniscript in it that will spawn tons of items and overrun RAM, bam! everyone on the map has their 360s crash.

I think there is some marketing BS to it.

An oversight committee is possible, but the devs want MS to do it, and MS wants the companies to monitor their own damn games.

I think it's lame they want to charge for all the maps, I bought the CoD 4 maps as I love that game... Halo 3 and Gears I skipped on buying them, as there so few maps out of the box it was sad.

[h20fowler]

Okay, first off, I'm not in favor of MS charging for what a dev wants to hand out free. So, that argument is off the table.

However, Microsoft has a point bringing up the security concerns of mods. I’m not a PS3 expert, but imagine a mod that causes a buffer overflow that then completely compromises the OS of the system. Is this possible? I don’t know, but even the remote chance that this could happen would make me say no to mods if I was the console maker. I’m surprised an exploit doesn’t already exist that can be delivered via the web browser on the PS3. If this type of exploit came in through a mod (or the browser) and crashed a very large percentage of a console say the first week of November, that console maker would be finished.

[Pluvious]

They will change their tune when Little Big Planet and Spore become major hits. The future is customizable content in video games. IMHO.

[Deadend]

They will change their tune when Little Big Planet and Spore become major hits. The future is customizable content in video games. IMHO.

Whoa, stuff made ingame such as Little Big Planet and Spore is TOTALLY different from Mods. Halo 3 lets you edit levels some.

We are talking Player Models in Unreal and stuff, creating NEW content, not remixing bits of content which is what Little Big Planet and Spore let you do.

[h20fowler]

One other thing. Who is doing user content extremely successfully right now??? Yep, Bungie with Forge on the 360. If you have not played GrifBall, then you don't understand how cool Forge can be. Heck, several of my friends have forged some really cool maps we have played. Add to that the web intergration of H3 and Forza 2 and I really think folks are forgetting how "web 2.0" (I freaking hate that word by the way) the 360 is. It is amazing how people dismiss Forge because it is in Halo.

[Kamalot]

Microsoft making a statement on mods, one way or another, is inviting trouble.

[SalaciousPuck]

This is a valid concern, and I think MS is right by prevent content from the wild. I'm definitely a critic of the nickel and dime model of XBL, but that's not why they are preventing mod content. It's a legitimate security concern.

Microsoft has put a lot more thought into brining their console online than the competition, and it will only take one virus, hack, worm or trojan on the PS3 or Wii to really show that.

What they need to do for next gen is create some kind of virtual machine environment where mod's can run in isolated space on the console. Limit code branded as 'mod' to just the necessary calls to where it could effect the system....stuff like save game / retrieve save / etc.

[citizen13]

I had a feeling this was going to happen. once epic said they were waiting to hear back from MS i knew it was going to be bad news.

[Farsight]

Game developers ---can--- produce free content on the 360. As a developer on a game that did just that, I know this to be the case. The problem is that MS has fees and limitations based on the size of all content posted to Live, so if a developer like Epic wanted to have 100 free downloads available for UT3, they might have to pay $1 million to do so.

This is why most content has at least a small fee. Unless you can sneak the content into a title update (patch) you were planning to post anyway, making new content "free" means paying to develop it, then paying again for Live to host it.

It is odd that Epic seemingly has said "aw, screw it" and released nothing, rather than just creating a massive pack with a small price tag, and simultaneously making money while generating goodwill and interest in their game...

[Talvish]

I'm always amazed at the number of people that jump on the bandwagon and assume there are alternate agendas.

Let's be clear, MS IS concerned about security and we should be happy for it. Microsoft has made strong improvements across a variety of products. IIS and Windows server, for example are among the best for security. Even on recent hack-a-thons the Vista won out over Mac OS (and the vulnerability that in Vista was due an Adobe product). MS also has one of the best records for patching vulnerabilities and has seen the number of issues drop drammatically.

Second, this ISN'T about making money, this IS about security. Using XNA you can build entire games that users can get for free. While currently only other members can use this content, that is all changing this fall. This is the ONLY console that supports this. What Chris is saying is that MS is comfortable with games built in .NET using XNA because .NET is a platform that allows for tight and fine control of security. And if a vulnerability is found, they simply patch .NET. But .NET has been in use for many many years now, so they are comfortable with where it is from a security standpoint.

Even outside of XNA, plenty of games have allowed for user created content, including Halo 3, Forza, Band of Bugs, etc. Some are simply things like logos, others are full on level editors.

The issue is, if a game provides a scripting mechanism, like U3, MS starts to become uncomfortable because they don't have control over the programming environment which may have security holes the script writers can make us of. Ultimately, as much as Epic would get some flak, most people will bitch at the console manufacturer since the potential impact is a bricked console, or loss of credit card/MS Points.

Update: To be clear, I DO like the idea of user generated content, including mods that support scripting, the question is how to ensure an acceptable level of security.

[karak]

I've said this before, but I'll repeat it again. I think Microsoft felt burnt when hordes of idiots used the car painter app in Forza 2 to make a ton of liveries with pornographic and racist themes. I think they didn't anticipate the amount of asshattery some people will display when given the opportunity to screw with a game's systems online.

I agree. Not only that but they saw that a save game(bond and Splinter Cell) could allow soft modding of a system. I think its 50/50. Wanting to charge and wanting to save their system from the easy software hack. People actually lost jobs due to that, so it makes sense that they would be worried.

[vallor]

MS is a business and they want to make money (SHOCKER!). Just about every suggestion in this thread pretty much demands that MS, for some reason, be completely altruistic and spend their own money with no return, or even potentially reliable revenue returned ("I might buy more games if they..." isn't something the bean counters call reliable).

This isn't unique to gaming as a hobby. If you build model airplanes you usually have to buy your own paint (if you want the good stuff) or rubber cement. That is above and beyond the pieces that were included in the box with the model. When I buy my D&D players handbook they don't toss in the dice, which are arguably *required* to play the game, nor do they include the figurines that I liked to play D&D/Battletech/Warhammer/40K with because they make all of those games so much better.

No matter how "cool" it might make them, MS shouldn't be in the position of financing your hobby and, IMO, people here who expect them to are wrong.

Remember, one of the big differences is because they own LIVE (unlike the PS3 where each dev is responsible for their own online experience) anything that goes up on or generates traffic on LIVE not only costs them money (because developers don't want MS backbilling them for that stuff and, based on the responses here heaven forbid the users pay to extend their gaming experience unlike models, dice, and figurines) but it makes MS liable.

Doing nothing and just letting user content go hog wild is asking for trouble (see the aforementioned Forza issue, and that WAS fairly well controlled).

A MS team assigned to ratings won't work. Any inkling at ALL of microsoft preference for ANY user generated content opens two big bad doors that no one in their right mind want opened:

1) Security is a big concern MS has done as much as possible to keep the LIVE ecosystem clean. User generated content has the potential to compromise the who shabang. It doesn't matter what COULD or MIGHT be done to run in a restricted sandbox to mitigate some (not all) of the risk (NOTE: a mitigated problem is just an attempt to manage the issue, and doesn't actually fix the issue). The 360 is unreliable enough without adding in threats from more vectors than MS could possibly protect players from.

Hai2u 10s of millions of hackers worldwide! Sorry but MS has been having enough trouble keeping LIVE staggering along without all of you trying to add an "I wrote a script that killed Xbox LIVE for 3 weeks!" to your script kiddy resume.

2) "MS approval board didn't approve my character model because I, and the character skin are BLACK/Islamic/a female/supressing my freedom of speech! Microsoft is a racist/religious discriminator/sexist/unamerican! I'm suing and even though I probably don't have a case I can pretty much get a nice large settlement anyway just to shut me up."

Sounds dumb, but look at all the stupid shit people sue for these days. MS would have to hire even MORE lawyers than they already have.

Keep in mind that content generated with assets that ship with the game are GENERALLY fine. It is very possible to have a more robust mapping program than what Forge already allows. Spore isn't going to have any problems because they will ship with all the construction assets you'll need. Sharing pinatas in Viva Pinata even shows that MS isn't adverse to allowing user "mucked with" content from using their bandwidth.

[51|RandoM]

It isn't just about risk, it is about reward... and Microsoft doesn't get any if you play mods for older games instead of buying the latest flavor of the week when you see half of your friendslist playing it.

Can't blame them for going the high reward, low risk route, can you?

[Azriel77]

translation: Why give something away when we can nickel and dime you to death.

[Chaos Machine]

Its more of a free speech thing with forza 2, personally, i think that there should be parental controls thats prohibit voice communication in multiplayer games. in the case of forza 2 it should also include blocking custom skins. Perhaps putting a warning label on the box for parents that explain to them that they need to turn it on if they dont want their kids to see goatse pictures or listen to racist/ethnocentric bigots over voice com that they should step up and turn the parental controls on. game developers and publishers wouldnt like it, but it beats the alternative of being censored and regulated to oblivion by the govt.

[Goronmon]

No, not really. Counter-Strike, among other successes, says hello.Have you seen animated spray tags of a chick getting screwed by a dog? Because I sure have. Or maybe a classic like goatse?

[mister_slim]

He's just grouchy because mods made the Master Chief playable on PS3.

[Micasa]

Its more of a free speech thing with forza 2, personally, i think that there should be parental controls thats prohibit voice communication in multiplayer games. in the case of forza 2 it should also include blocking custom skins. Perhaps putting a warning label on the box for parents that explain to them that they need to turn it on if they dont want their kids to see goatse pictures or listen to racist/ethnocentric bigots over voice com that they should step up and turn the parental controls on. game developers and publishers wouldnt like it, but it beats the alternative of being censored and regulated to oblivion by the govt.

There are. It's not Microsoft's fault that parents don't use them.

[Rakael]

I think it is pretty plain that MS just wants to charge for everything it can. Comparing them to PC gaming is like comparing US broadband providers to those in other countries. Over here, they are trying to charge us more for less access, whereas in other countries the providers offer faster speeds than their US counterparts for less money. Don't get me wrong, I understand the security issues, but MS of all companies could afford to pay for a review board that approves free mods. They just choose not to.

I love my 360, or I will when I get the dead beast back, and I also love Live, but I grow more and more fed up with MS' business practices. This is where free markets and competition come into play however. If Sony allows free mods and such, MS will look ever more like asshats for nickel and diming us to death.

[Micasa]

Don't get me wrong, I understand the security issues, but MS of all companies could afford to pay for a review board that approves free mods. They just choose not to.

I was unaware the Xbox division was run as a charity.

[Rakael]

I was unaware the Xbox division was run as a charity.

Wow, so insightful and thought provoking. Thank you so much for furthering this discussion with your well thought out and moving reply.

[Micasa]

Wow, so insightful and thought provoking. Thank you so much for furthering this discussion with your well thought out and moving reply.

You did a bang-up job with your insightful "they have money, they should just pay for it" line, so I'll consider the source when you comment on my post.

Why in the world would they commit resources to that, when there's no guaranteed financial payoff and it would make them liable for anything that slips past? As I said, it's not a charity - it's a business.

You think Sony's not nickel and diming gamers? Check out PAIN some time - it's head and shoulders above all that "the sky is falling" crap that the whiners were spouting when Live was first announced. It's the most blatant crippling of a release I've seen yet - created as a vehicle to sell DLC.

[Ancalagon]

I think its pretty clear MS only wants chargeable content on the XBox.

I mean, look at youtube. Aggregate user created content, that is also censored by the users (they report bad videos to management, who take action). That works okay. Yes, some losers will upload pictures of inappropriate content, but only one person needs to flag it as inappropriate for it be investigated and deleted.

As for security - it should be simple to prevent any mod from accessing sensitive system stuff. Just keep it in user mode, and disallow it from making any kernel mode calls (hopefully the XBox has such a distinction!)

[Rakael]

You did a bang-up job with your insightful "they have money, they should just pay for it" line, so I'll consider the source when you comment on my post.

Why in the world would they commit resources to that, when there's no guaranteed financial payoff and it would make them liable for anything that slips past? As I said, it's not a charity - it's a business.

You think Sony's not nickel and diming gamers? Check out PAIN some time - it's head and shoulders above all that "the sky is falling" crap that the whiners were spouting when Live was first announced. It's the most blatant crippling of a release I've seen yet - created as a vehicle to sell DLC.

There now, something worth replying to. Why should they set up a review board you ask? Because their customers want cool mods, free of goatsee type bullshit, and they don't always want to pay for them. It isn't like it would cost MS a whole hell of a lot of money to pay a few salaries, and it would create a lot of good will from their user base. This would boost their image and help to sell more consoles in the end, thus netting them more money.

Also, did you ever hear me say Sony isn't trying to cash in on the microtransactions? Nope, sure didn't. All I said was that they were allowing some user made mods. I don't know if the mods have to undergo any screening, but just by allowing them, Sony is taking a step in the right direction.

Also, may I point out that with all the money MS has lost on the Xbox division, it may as well be a charity my friend.

[Chainblast]

I think it's a valid concern. PC gaming isn't perfect, so I don't think making consoles more PC-like is the answer to everything.

I might agree with you if the other side wasn't full of money-making potential. There is a good middle ground to the subject, but since danger straddles one pole while the other is dominated by the potential of coin, I have to disagree with what MS has said. To me it seems like they benefit from the the money making control side and have little interest in adjustment.

I'm content with the PC gaming philosophy and and am more than thrilled Sony has chosen to embrace some of those fundamentals.

[Bahamut]

There now, something worth replying to. Why should they set up a review board you ask? Because their customers want cool mods, free of goatsee type bullshit, and they don't always want to pay for them. It isn't like it would cost MS a whole hell of a lot of money to pay a few salaries, and it would create a lot of good will from their user base. This would boost their image and help to sell more consoles in the end, thus netting them more money.

Also, did you ever hear me say Sony isn't trying to cash in on the microtransactions? Nope, sure didn't. All I said was that they were allowing some user made mods. I don't know if the mods have to undergo any screening, but just by allowing them, Sony is taking a step in the right direction.

Also, may I point out that with all the money MS has lost on the Xbox division, it may as well be a charity my friend.

I'm pretty sure Microsoft did all of the research and decided that their approach is better for them as a whole. Otherwise, why aren't you working at such a respectable company?

[Kem0sabe]

I'm always amazed at the number of people that jump on the bandwagon and assume there are alternate agendas.

Let's be clear, MS IS concerned about security and we should be happy for it. Microsoft has made strong improvements across a variety of products. IIS and Windows server, for example are among the best for security. Even on recent hack-a-thons the Vista won out over Mac OS (and the vulnerability that in Vista was due an Adobe product). MS also has one of the best records for patching vulnerabilities and has seen the number of issues drop drammatically.

Second, this ISN'T about making money, this IS about security. Using XNA you can build entire games that users can get for free. While currently only other members can use this content, that is all changing this fall. This is the ONLY console that supports this. What Chris is saying is that MS is comfortable with games built in .NET using XNA because .NET is a platform that allows for tight and fine control of security. And if a vulnerability is found, they simply patch .NET. But .NET has been in use for many many years now, so they are comfortable with where it is from a security standpoint.

Even outside of XNA, plenty of games have allowed for user created content, including Halo 3, Forza, Band of Bugs, etc. Some are simply things like logos, others are full on level editors.

The issue is, if a game provides a scripting mechanism, like U3, MS starts to become uncomfortable because they don't have control over the programming environment which may have security holes the script writers can make us of. Ultimately, as much as Epic would get some flak, most people will bitch at the console manufacturer since the potential impact is a bricked console, or loss of credit card/MS Points.

Update: To be clear, I DO like the idea of user generated content, including mods that support scripting, the question is how to ensure an acceptable level of security.


Sony is doing it with the PS3, they even allow you to install linux on it.

Is the PS3 more vulnerable for it? well, it hasnt had any problems yet, in fact, its the only console that still hasnt been cracked to play backups and run custom firmware, while the 360 was almost imediately hacked.

[sleepbox]

It's sad that the one game that is all about console mods sucks as bad as UT3

[beefyjr]

No, not really. Counter-Strike, among other successes, says hello.

So you've never had a poorly made map unintentionally grind your machine to a halt? I know I have, and I'd imagine that's the kind of experience Microsoft wants to avoid.

On one hand, I agree with the notion that Microsoft wants to maintain a stranglehold on Live. But that argument completely disregards the very real potential security risk (Xbox Live would make an extremely large target) that user generated brings to the table. And given the fact that Xbox Live is a total fucking sewer and Microsoft knows it, they don't want to have to deal with all the outraged phone calls when someone's kid inevitably downloads a map covered in vaginas. This country is so lawsuit-happy that I don't blame them for not wanting to be responsible for approving every last piece of content that gets submitted. If something slipped through (and something always does), that opens them up to a lot of liability.

I would love to see user-generated content on Xbox Live, but it's a pretty tough nut to crack.

[Orrey]

Its a security and PR nightmare to let the users add content to your game.

To mis quote Raph "Never forget the client is in the hands of the enemy"

Just look at Second Life it took one month to devolve to a laggy land of flying penii and server killing lag bomb scripts.

Personnaly I dont need the same folks posting Halo mods for my Kid :cool:

Spore and the like handle it by only using "user" created content that was created in game using their 100 percent controlled creation engine and not giving real control to the users.

[Evil Avatar]

It's sad that the one game that is all about console mods sucks as bad as UT3

What is wrong with Unreal Tournament 3? Have you played it on the PS3? It rocks.

I play it all the time against the bots and every time I play I keep thinking how much it would rule if it was on Xbox Live and I could put a game together with all the EvAv regulars like we did with Gears of War and like we still do with Call of Duty 4.

[TheEpicOfTyler]

Could someone permanently bork a 360 by running a mod inside a game? Like outside of a potential overheat RRoD.

[lockwoodx]

Could someone permanently bork a 360 by running a mod inside a game? Like outside of a potential overheat RRoD.

That's what I was wondering too. If a mod created by a malicious user could literly brick a few million 360s.

[listereo]

Or they're still keeping their heads down after Hot Coffee. The Live Camera has already saturated their networks with pictures of bored teenage boys' nether parts, and it's only a matter of time before maps, games, and player models take a sinister, media-inflaming turn for the worse.

God knows I remember 'naked fury' player models in Quake 2. Besides making money on 'official' downloadable mods in the future, they're safeguarding against the highly likely scenario that mods will introduce mature content and it will be Hot Coffee all over again. What better position to be in then to say "we knew it was coming, and took steps to ensure that this didn't reach the precious, unattended children who show people their scrotums when they lose a round of Uno."

[bapenguin]

Frankly I think things like Hot Coffee and the Oblivion Nude Mod ruined the chances of us seeing unregulated free content on live. Stupid frivilous lawsuits surrounding them scares content providers.

[Tazo]

Newsflash: PC and Console gaming is SUPPOSED to be different.

[jeffbax]

As a gamer, the amount of MS apologizing here is disheartening. I have played mods in PC gaming for ages now, and not once have I had anything malicious happen. Yeah, a naked spraypaint... big fucking deal you can turn them off pretty easily as I always did anyway.

While I haven't played Second Life, I have never seen a malicious mod, or something as simple as a user-created map crashing my game and blowing my computer up. Most mods, like custom models or maps really have no danger at all of crashing things, and similarly the scripting languages used for Unreal is pretty solid. The game would crash much sooner than the console.

Secondly, if something is going bad, the community will know and alert itself as they always do. Seriously, of all gamers I hear to cry about something happening to their machine... 360 gamers? Really? A console that is defective by design and will explode anyway?

I'm curious of what kind of precedent there is for this worry besides Second Life (which gives too much power to the wrong kinds of fucktards but then again that is the appeal). It is simply a matter of Microsoft not wanting free content unless they are making money off of it because they demand that they host everything and that their users pay to use the service.

This is exactly another reason I sold my 360 and really have no regrets. Sorry, but the PS3 is a far more open platform. User swappable hard drive, developer freedom in terms of hosting their game networks and add-on content and allowing things like mods in UT3. It might be a little rough now (though its quickly changing) but in the long run the freedom will be worth it. Hell, the UT3 mods aren't even on the PSN site you get them via PC like usual with the benefits of 3rd party mirrors to support the cost of transfer instead of only through one source (Live)

Seriously, have fun parroting the MS PR line now, but don't complain later when games like UT3 on PS3 get a gigantic and free Epic Community Map Pack and the 360 gets to pay for or deal with little to no content at all. Lately the 360 is quickly bringing the worst aspects of Microsoft to light and you guys are for the most part just taking it happily.

[maverick106]

Gunny is correct. Submission to a review board for user-submitted content.


Which may be a fine solution eventually, but think of the money it will cost to employ people to sit around and test this content. Plus, a lot of people may just see it as an extra challenge to see if they can get sneaky stuff by a review board.

Its a step in the right direction, but not a perfect solution, and MS would still probably charge a little bit for user-created content to recoup costs for the review board.

[Deadend]

As a gamer, the amount of MS apologizing here is disheartening. I have played mods in PC gaming for ages now, and not once have I had anything malicious happen. Yeah, a naked spraypaint... big fucking deal you can turn them off pretty easily as I always did anyway.

While I haven't played Second Life, I have never seen a malicious mod, or something as simple as a user-created map crashing my game and blowing my computer up. Most mods, like custom models or maps really have no danger at all of crashing things, and similarly the scripting languages used for Unreal is pretty solid. The game would crash much sooner than the console.

Secondly, if something is going bad, the community will know and alert itself as they always do. Seriously, of all gamers I hear to cry about something happening to their machine... 360 gamers? Really? A console that is defective by design and will explode anyway?

I'm curious of what kind of precedent there is for this worry besides Second Life (which gives too much power to the wrong kinds of fucktards but then again that is the appeal). It is simply a matter of Microsoft not wanting free content unless they are making money off of it because they demand that they host everything and that their users pay to use the service.

This is exactly another reason I sold my 360 and really have no regrets. Sorry, but the PS3 is a far more open platform. User swappable hard drive, developer freedom in terms of hosting their game networks and add-on content and allowing things like mods in UT3. It might be a little rough now (though its quickly changing) but in the long run the freedom will be worth it. Hell, the UT3 mods aren't even on the PSN site you get them via PC like usual with the benefits of 3rd party mirrors to support the cost of transfer instead of only through one source (Live)

Seriously, have fun parroting the MS PR line now, but don't complain later when games like UT3 on PS3 get a gigantic and free Epic Community Map Pack and the 360 gets to pay for or deal with little to no content at all. Lately the 360 is quickly bringing the worst aspects of Microsoft to light and you guys are for the most part just taking it happily.
Oh shut up.

I love you on the threads when you don't get all console partisan, but man... let the hate die, it's tired.

[Vandenh]

It makes sense. On a platform that is serious about age protection, mods pose a risk. Same reason Nintendo will never allow this.

PCs are for mods...

MS is taking a very different route. XNA will allow anybody to do game development on a 360 (something other consoles do not). XNA games go through testing and approval just like XBLA games so they should be safe and support parental rights management. That is were the console action is. The XNA player is already in... now MS just needs to open the XNA gates (expect this in next dashboard update).

[the soUL TRAder]

The irony is, that if the popularity of mods becomes more than the small PC based community it is today, all these mod/map/skin makers are going want to be paid when 10million gamers want to play their products.

I would pay for good mods on the 360 that were certified, and would respect the owners if a few PCs and PS3s get borked along the way to weed out the diseased code.
I think that this specifically is a place were both models are needed to support one another. The open platforms to foster the creativity of mod makers, but with minimal impact to the bottom line of the industry overall, plus a platform where the very best of the community created content can be appropriately valued along side industry created products.

[torrefaction]

Frankly I think things like Hot Coffee and the Oblivion Nude Mod ruined the chances of us seeing unregulated free content on live. Stupid frivilous lawsuits surrounding them scares content providers.

This is almost certainly true.

@jeffbax, since I think his post was partially directed at me.

No. This sucks. But there ARE a multitude of legitimate business reasons to be concerned about doing this, from both a liability and from a security perspective. I'm not HAPPY I can't get user created content, and Sony definitely wins on that side. I'm just not blind to the issues, either.

[ONI5]

Actually MS allows this type of stuff but they have to make that option using the XBOX LIVE SERVER PLATFORM, in which EPIC could host the mods on their own servers. Similar to how EA has the replays of Burnout Revenge hosted on their own servers. The problem here is that EPIC doesn't want to host the files so they're pinning the blame on MS when they could kill the problem alltogether by hosting it themselves. They just have to have it approved by MS, which was already questioned back in 2006 GDC before the game was released.
http://http://www.xbox.com/en-IE/community/news/gdc2006.htm (http://www.xbox.com/en-IE/community/news/gdc2006.htm)
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3161957

[Variable Gear]

But who pays for the team of people that have to be the reviewers from now until forever? I'd say it's a valid concern.

The taxpayers.

[Kamalot]

Actually MS allows this type of stuff but they have to make that option using the XBOX LIVE SERVER PLATFORM, in which EPIC could host the mods on their own servers. Similar to how EA has the replays of Burnout Revenge hosted on their own servers. The problem here is that EPIC doesn't want to host the files so they're pinning the blame on MS when they could kill the problem alltogether by hosting it themselves. They just have to have it approved by MS, which was already questioned back in 2006 GDC before the game was released.
http://http://www.xbox.com/en-IE/community/news/gdc2006.htm (http://www.xbox.com/en-IE/community/news/gdc2006.htm)
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3161957

Thank you. This post was VERY insightful.

[Disgustipated]

As a gamer, the amount of MS apologizing here is disheartening. I have played mods in PC gaming for ages now, and not once have I had anything malicious happen. Yeah, a naked spraypaint... big fucking deal you can turn them off pretty easily as I always did anyway.

While I haven't played Second Life, I have never seen a malicious mod, or something as simple as a user-created map crashing my game and blowing my computer up. Most mods, like custom models or maps really have no danger at all of crashing things, and similarly the scripting languages used for Unreal is pretty solid. The game would crash much sooner than the console.

Secondly, if something is going bad, the community will know and alert itself as they always do. Seriously, of all gamers I hear to cry about something happening to their machine... 360 gamers? Really? A console that is defective by design and will explode anyway?

I'm curious of what kind of precedent there is for this worry besides Second Life (which gives too much power to the wrong kinds of fucktards but then again that is the appeal). It is simply a matter of Microsoft not wanting free content unless they are making money off of it because they demand that they host everything and that their users pay to use the service.

This is exactly another reason I sold my 360 and really have no regrets. Sorry, but the PS3 is a far more open platform. User swappable hard drive, developer freedom in terms of hosting their game networks and add-on content and allowing things like mods in UT3. It might be a little rough now (though its quickly changing) but in the long run the freedom will be worth it. Hell, the UT3 mods aren't even on the PSN site you get them via PC like usual with the benefits of 3rd party mirrors to support the cost of transfer instead of only through one source (Live)

Seriously, have fun parroting the MS PR line now, but don't complain later when games like UT3 on PS3 get a gigantic and free Epic Community Map Pack and the 360 gets to pay for or deal with little to no content at all. Lately the 360 is quickly bringing the worst aspects of Microsoft to light and you guys are for the most part just taking it happily.

Just a little... bit... wider... I think you've almost got Sony's balls completely into your mouth.

[Hemalin]

So you've never had a poorly made map unintentionally grind your machine to a halt?


No, that is what community sites are for. They rate maps and tell you what is worth downloading and what isn't.

[Kamalot]

No, that is what community sites are for. They rate maps and tell you what is worth downloading and what isn't.

Good luck accessing community sites on the Xbox 360.

Also note, you need a PC to use all those Unreal Tournament maps for the PS3. There isn't a way to seamlessly access them directly from the PS3 or from within the game.

[Kamalot]

Just a little... bit... wider... I think you've almost got Sony's balls completely into your mouth.

For serious.

The PS3 may be more 'open' but I want a system that has games more than I want another PC.

[Hemalin]

Good luck accessing community sites on the Xbox 360.

Also note, you need a PC to use all those Unreal Tournament maps for the PS3. There isn't a way to seamlessly access them directly from the PS3 or from within the game.

You can access those community sites and mods from the PS3 browser.

[gojira]

But who pays for the team of people that have to be the reviewers from now until forever? I'd say it's a valid concern.

400 points per submission would reduce the asshattery and pay for review teams.

[f1sh3r]

The PC Mod community has proved beyond a doubt the quality that can come out of this.

Wake up, MS.

ever played counter strike? ever seen 99% of the tags?

one game, both sides of the mirror.

[jeffbax]

Just a little... bit... wider... I think you've almost got Sony's balls completely into your mouth.

If i opened my asshole as wide as Microsoft has yours, well it just wouldn't be original now would it.

[Disgustipated]

If i opened my asshole as wide as Microsoft has yours, well it just wouldn't be original now would it.

Nice try, but I'm a multi-platform kind of guy. :) I've got consoles and handhelds from the Big Three.

Could you move Sony's testicles a little bit to the left? They're obscuring most of the things you say.

[mister_slim]

Actually MS allows this type of stuff but they have to make that option using the XBOX LIVE SERVER PLATFORM, in which EPIC could host the mods on their own servers. Similar to how EA has the replays of Burnout Revenge hosted on their own servers. The problem here is that EPIC doesn't want to host the files so they're pinning the blame on MS when they could kill the problem alltogether by hosting it themselves. They just have to have it approved by MS, which was already questioned back in 2006 GDC before the game was released.
http://http://www.xbox.com/en-IE/community/news/gdc2006.htm (http://www.xbox.com/en-IE/community/news/gdc2006.htm)
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3161957

Sony's not distributing UT3 mods through the PSN though.

[SpectralWolf]

Just a little... bit... wider... I think you've almost got Sony's balls completely into your mouth.

If i opened my asshole as wide as Microsoft has yours, well it just wouldn't be original now would it.


haha. Classic!
:)

[Kamalot]

You can access those community sites and mods from the PS3 browser.

But you CAN NOT download the maps from the PS3 browser, so you STILL need a PC for the whole process. Hell, you could access the community web sites from a Wii or a goddamn cellphone. But that does not solve the problem of people making shitty maps. :rolleyes:

[Dukefrukem]

I think it's a valid concern. PC gaming isn't perfect, so I don't think making consoles more PC-like is the answer to everything.

Yes it is. Why do you think consoles are becoming more like PCs!??

[mister_slim]

But you CAN NOT download the maps from the PS3 browser, so you STILL need a PC for the whole process. Hell, you could access the community web sites from a Wii or a goddamn cellphone. But that does not solve the problem of people making shitty maps. :rolleyes:

Yes you can. You just need some external storage (memory stick, USB drive, even just connecting a PSP).

[Morratut]

I agree with MS on this.

Most user mods are garbage anyway. I think mods aren't that important in console gaming.

The ones that are truly great I will play on PC. Only 2 I can think of which are great Counterstrike and Desert Combat.

[Deadend]

Yes you can. You just need some external storage (memory stick, USB drive, even just connecting a PSP).

Well, that is quite stupid. The phrase "You're doing it wrong!" springs to mind about that. Even though I am just counting the days before someone makes a map that crashes PS3s.

[Lunar Blue]

Newsflash: PC and Console gaming is SUPPOSED to be different.

Amen brother.

[Ondo]

I think its pretty clear MS only wants chargeable content on the XBox.
But their XNA initiative seems to demonstrate that that's not the case. Which is why I find this confusing.

I mean, look at youtube. Aggregate user created content, that is also censored by the users (they report bad videos to management, who take action). That works okay.
Yeah, and that's the system Microsoft is using for XNA games.

I'd like a straight answer as to why Microsoft isn't allowing mods - Chris Satchell is pretty clearly being dishonest. He points out that XNA runs in a sandbox, and is therefore safe, which is true. He then says running native code that runs scripting code is unsafe, which I suppose is potentially true. He ignores that the scripting code is always in a sandbox, and that their sandbox is native code running interpreted code.

Mods are easier to make safe than something like XNA, as they require a lot fewer features. They don't need any ability to access the disk, or directly draw anything on screen, for example.

[Kamalot]

Yes you can. You just need some external storage (memory stick, USB drive, even just connecting a PSP).

You are right. I even found a video showing how (http://video.aol.com/video-detail/ut3modcom-downloading-ut3-mods-using-your-ps3/3124401562). You still need a PC to set up the correct folders on the Memory Stick.

The video was insightful, but overall this isn't a consumer-level task. It is more complex than the vast majority care to do. Loading levels is a hobbyist level activity. In fact, the instructions are about as difficult as soft-modding your xbox (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko_JRzb_2-A&feature=related), not 'difficult' but more effort than most console owners are willing to go through.

Whoever implements custom maps needs to have them implemented as a seamless part of the game, not some 'jump-through-hoops' routine of making special folders on a memory card, if they are really going to catch on with joe-consumer.

[mister_slim]

You are right. I even found a video showing how (http://video.aol.com/video-detail/ut3modcom-downloading-ut3-mods-using-your-ps3/3124401562). You still need a PC to set up the correct folders on the Memory Stick.

The video was insightful, but overall this isn't a consumer-level task. It is more complex than the vast majority care to do. Loading levels is a hobbyist level activity. In fact, the instructions are about as difficult as soft-modding your xbox (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko_JRzb_2-A&feature=related), not 'difficult' but more effort than most console owners are willing to go through.

Whoever implements custom maps needs to have them implemented as a seamless part of the game, not some 'jump-through-hoops' routine of making special folders on a memory card, if they are really going to catch on with joe-consumer.

As of the latest patch you no longer need a special folder, you just save at the root folder.

[Micasa]

But their XNA initiative seems to demonstrate that that's not the case. Which is why I find this confusing.

It's hardly confusing though. The most popular XNA titles will get picked up for publishing on XBLA, with MS as the publisher and making money off the venture. For that reason - and likely that reason alone - they're willing to deal with the legal issues that user-created content can (and no doubt will) cause.

There's zero financial benefit for Microsoft in user created levels for a game - so why open themselves up to being liable for what some idiot created?

As someone else pointed out, if the developers feel that strongly about it, the system is in place for them to set up their own servers and host the content themselves. At that point, however, THEY become liable for checking that content...and maybe that's why they don't want to do it.

[Headcase]

Mods are awesome, but I think they're something that separates consoles from PCs. One thing I'm excited about in consoles though is a lot more editors, rule\physics customizations, etc (ie soft mods). Things like Halo 3's forge which has already been mentioned, and the Smash Bros stage builder. Some games have somewhat elaborate mission editors though they tend to suck in practice.

Over time though these things will probably become deeper and more popular. Mouse and keyboard input will be accepted; hell, it's even possible for them to make a PC application for the editor and then load it onto the console, but of course at that point the potential for disaster has to be checked carefully. But, as an example that it can be done, In The Groove 2 (arcade) accepts custom songs with stepcharts, which are prepared in Stepmania (PC\Mac\Linux), through a USB key. Since any sound file is allowed there's potential for abuse, but no known way of bricking a cabinet with it.

It's arguable that these kind of soft-mods don't help for the rising costs of games, but I'd expect them to be more prevalent in sequels, where the groundwork is already laid down so they can focus on the soft mods as a major selling point.

For this generation I think the PS3 and 360 will have games with more powerful soft modding tools, but the Wii might eventually get some games with their own channels for distributing soft mods (think the Check Mii Out channel but with soft mods). But most likely, until Nintendo does it, they won't let any 3rd party do it, so it's up to them whether that happens.

[Dr. Douche Nozzle]

I hate MS....greedy bastards....

[digitalErich]

MS wanting to keep one of their systems closed down under lock and key? If you're at all surprised, you haven't been paying attention for the past two decades.

[jeffbax]

Nice try, but I'm a multi-platform kind of guy. :) I've got consoles and handhelds from the Big Three.

Could you move Sony's testicles a little bit to the left? They're obscuring most of the things you say.

I've got a Genesis, Saturn, Dreamcast, Xbox 1, Gameboy Color, SP and DS, Had a N64 and GameCube. Two dead Xbox's, a 360 and bullshit DRM have left me understandably not a fan of Microsoft's console services. Paying for a P2P gaming service full of ads and nickel/dime schemes is not something I find of value.

Yeah, I think there's plenty of reason to prefer the route Sony is taking of regular monetary prices for the online store, free online gaming in an age where online gaming is almost expected as PART of the $60 package seems a better deal than paying extra or getting half the game... not to mention Sony letting developers run things and allow options like modding. Oh, being able to swap the hard drive myself instead of getting fucked over accessories is something that I find valuable too - and the machine isn't an unreliable POS.

Please tell me why I'm not justified in liking what Sony is doing again :confused:

In my eyes the Wii is entirely uninteresting, and Microsoft has fucked over gaming in my eyes enough that I feel justified not supporting their endeavors anymore. My first Sony console ever (when I get it in June with MGS4) is looking promising for a next-gen fix. I'd appreciate you getting off my nutsack over that - if you haven't noticed I'm not the only one bitching about Live being increasingly unattractive and closed.

[oldjadedgamer]

Yes you can. You just need some external storage (memory stick, USB drive, even just connecting a PSP).

Why in the world do you need an external storage when every single PS3 made has one built in?

[Gott]

I love when people bitch about xbox live. It is a revolutionary service that has been around for over 5 yrs. If you can't afford to pay 5 bucks a month for the service then don't pay for the service. How much is WOW a month? 13 bucks or something? All the bitching in the world isn't going to make xbox live free. Because they are constantly staying on the cutting edge and offering what Sony can't whether it is HD movie downloads or tv shows or full original xbox games...You don't pay for Sony's service because it is constantly playing catch-up, and until it offers more than Live you shouldn't have to.

[jeffbax]

I don't pay for Sony's service because for decades people have played online without paying fees. I think that $60 is enough to pay for a game without having to pay more perpetually to continue to enjoy it. Sony has had full PSX and PS3 releases over PSN before MS had Xbox 1 games btw.

[Dukefrukem]

I love when people bitch about xbox live. It is a revolutionary service that has been around for over 5 yrs. If you can't afford to pay 5 bucks a month for the service then don't pay for the service. How much is WOW a month? 13 bucks or something? All the bitching in the world isn't going to make xbox live free. Because they are constantly staying on the cutting edge and offering what Sony can't whether it is HD movie downloads or tv shows or full original xbox games...You don't pay for Sony's service because it is constantly playing catch-up, and until it offers more than Live you shouldn't have to.

So you're saying we should pay for it because it's been around for 5 years?

And FYI the PSN allows for PS1 games.

[Gott]

So you're saying we should pay for it because it's been around for 5 years?

And FYI the PSN allows for PS1 games.

grasping at straws huh? I am making a statement of fact that Live has been revolutionizing console online gameplay for the last 5 years. As for PS1 games...really? I would never play ps1 games for more than 1 or 2 sittings, they're crap. Xbox originals are equivalent to ps2 games remember...

[Gott]

I don't pay for Sony's service because for decades people have played online without paying fees. I think that $60 is enough to pay for a game without having to pay more perpetually to continue to enjoy it. Sony has had full PSX and PS3 releases over PSN before MS had Xbox 1 games btw.

the ps3 games you speak of are basically beefed up demos...I'm not impressed in the least.

[jeffbax]

WarHawk is certainly not a demo.

[Deadend]

WarHawk is certainly not a demo.

How did you turn a thread about Microsoft into your "PS3 is teh bestest!" crap?

[jeffbax]

How did you turn a thread about Microsoft into your "PS3 is teh bestest!" crap?

I didn't do anything, you guys do because you get so cranky and defensive any time someone talks bad about your precious Microsoft. Then you bitch at me and I explain pretty clearly my opinion which still somehow makes you even angrier. That, and the thread is about MS shitting on modding (and people accepting that) where Sony allows it ... and Sony's got the better position perhaps?

You did it more than anyone.

[Deadend]

I didn't do anything, you guys do because you get so cranky and defensive any time someone talks bad about your precious Microsoft. Then you bitch at me and I explain pretty clearly my opinion which still somehow makes you even angrier. That, and the thread is about MS shitting on modding (and people accepting that) where Sony allows it ... and Sony's got the better position perhaps?

You did it more than anyone.

Well, see there was a conversation about Microsoft doing crap and you made it about Sony, whatever, your kinda rabid in this shit.

Also, Microsoft does do modding better. Ever used Windows? Heyyo!
Wait, no, Linux does it better than that! But you can put a version of Linux with only partial access to the PS3 hardware... therefore Sony wins?

Basically you take the shit too god damn seriously. Even if you do have good tastes in the games themselves and good opinions on other stuff, your caring way too much about MS/Sony... I am tired of it and would rather look at why things are how they are.

[Ondo]

There's zero financial benefit for Microsoft in user created levels for a game - so why open themselves up to being liable for what some idiot created?
User created levels would make the game better, increasing its sales and (slightly) those of the Xbox 360. Not enough financial benefit, maybe, but certainly not zero.

[RMan]

I love when people bitch about xbox live. It is a revolutionary service that has been around for over 5 yrs. If you can't afford to pay 5 bucks a month for the service then don't pay for the service. How much is WOW a month? 13 bucks or something? All the bitching in the world isn't going to make xbox live free. Because they are constantly staying on the cutting edge and offering what Sony can't whether it is HD movie downloads or tv shows or full original xbox games...You don't pay for Sony's service because it is constantly playing catch-up, and until it offers more than Live you shouldn't have to.
This attitude completely misses the point, has nothing to do with what a player can afford (think it's a knee-jerk reaction from die-hard Xbox fans to try to call others cheap because they don't buy into what they have). I'm sure many players could afford to pay for internet searches, or watching video clips, but as long as Google and Youtube have set a precedent that you shouldn't be paying for these services, you'd be a fool to do so. And make no mistake, you don't pay for Live because it's so superior, you pay for it because MS feels they can get away with it, and to a degree they can for some time (of course, nobody knows what they are losing by wedging themselves into an increasingly hardcore market). You could make the same statements about Steam, Google, Youtube, Myspace, or any other leading service if they choose to charge, but they don't, and MS could decide not to charge for Live, just like Sony has, both should consider the service as a value add. You may feel Live deserves special concessions because they came out earlier, but for most people it's silly to pay for something you can get elsewhere for free (arguably everywhere else, since the leaders on all other platforms are free). Do you seriously feel that you pay infinitely more for Live because it's slightly better than PSN right now? Mass market software prices are not based on development costs, never have been, never will.

[Micasa]

User created levels would make the game better, increasing its sales and (slightly) those of the Xbox 360. Not enough financial benefit, maybe, but certainly not zero.

The people who'd take advantage of user-created levels in a FPS are the hardcore - they buy it anyway.

[Linkreincarnate]

But who pays for the team of people that have to be the reviewers from now until forever? I'd say it's a valid concern.
QFT Not to mention the nightmare that would cause with the esrb and parent groups? What happens when little Johnny downloads a porn mod for an e or t rated game?

[RMan]

Frankly I think things like Hot Coffee and the Oblivion Nude Mod ruined the chances of us seeing unregulated free content on live. Stupid frivilous lawsuits surrounding them scares content providers.
I doubt these events have done anything in this regard, since they were about content in actual games, not 'unregulated content'. Consoles have, and continually offer unregulated content, it's called communication. When you allow voice support, you've potentially made whatever rating the game has obsolete, that's why online games have that "Online Interactions Not Rated by the ESRB." And by 'content providers', I'm assuming you just mean MS, since that seems to be the hurdle.

In the end, this seems a purely technical consideration by the Xbox folk, they are afraid that a perception of online will be 'you go online you download viruses' with some. Who knows if that'd happen, but I do think it's interesting that they are the hardcore online solution and taking the most conservative approach, seems to me MS's audience would be more resilient to the possible negatives than their competitors. Anyways, I'd imagine they'll change their position if user created content really took off, like if a Half-life level cross platform title had something like counterstrike, they'd totally cave.

[Micasa]

I doubt these events have done anything in this regard, since they were about content in actual games, not 'unregulated content'. Consoles have, and continually offer unregulated content, it's called communication. When you allow voice support, you've potentially made whatever rating the game has obsolete, that's why online games have that "Online Interactions Not Rated by the ESRB." And by 'content providers', I'm assuming you just mean MS, since that seems to be the hurdle.

The difference there is that there's no onus or expectation on Microsoft to do real-time monitoring of voice chat. If they offer up user-created DLC...yes, there'd be that expectation.

[RMan]

The difference there is that there's no onus or expectation on Microsoft to do real-time monitoring of voice chat. If they offer up user-created DLC...yes, there'd be that expectation.
Big difference between 'offer up' and 'allow', but still, why is there no expectation on voice chat? Simple answer is because there isn't (expectations come from assumption, conditioning, and/or explicit statements). Just because internet content comes through IE, for instance, I don't assume MS created or endorses that content. So, my question is, if I don't have that expectation, nor do you, and getting to said content contains the same warnings that online does, then who is this mass group that would have these silly expectations?

Heck, you can browse porn on the Wii browser, and I don't see people going nuts about it. The oblivion and hot coffee things were big deals because it was NOT user made content, not sure how that's still not clear to some.

[Ondo]

The people who'd take advantage of user-created levels in a FPS are the hardcore - they buy it anyway.
Bullshit. If Unreal Tournament 3 for the Xbox 360 doesn't have user mods, I won't buy it. If it does, I probably will.

And the hardcore who would buy it anyway are probably going to get the PS3 version if it supports user-created content and the 360 doesn't.

[Variable Gear]

Having voice chat is inviting trouble, but Microsoft gives users the ability to leave feedback on other XBL Gamertags. It's rare to see the feedback lead to a suspension, but in any case Microsoft can assert a certain amount of control over what is acceptable in that space. So, in the case of mods, Microsoft should simply devote a team to validating user-generated content. This is especially true in the case of mods, which may not be completely safe to execute.

So, yes, allowing mods is inviting trouble, but Microsoft has proved that the trouble is worth the cost in the case of voice communication, which is a similar situation.

[oldjadedgamer]

Bullshit. If Unreal Tournament 3 for the Xbox 360 doesn't have user mods, I won't buy it. If it does, I probably will.

And the hardcore who would buy it anyway are probably going to get the PS3 version if it supports user-created content and the 360 doesn't.

No, the hardcore will buy it for PC so they can make the maps themselves. I would rent this game with user generated content and I would rent it without. This was never a purchase in my book.

[static321]

MS is really losing it to sony lately. Also not too happy with microsoft direction as well. But to keep on topic i think live is a rip off. If i'm paying for online it better be all dedicated servers with other features as toppings on the cake. And not allowing mods because its inviting trouble, well then they need to find solutions to these problems, not brush them off and say "were thinking about the gamer". The issue here is MS wanted to keep control of pricing model with little outside influences to hinder them. Lawsuits are a legit concern but is more of smoke screen for MS other interests. Everything you do has legal implications, and the risks are lowered by well placed internal controls.

Besides MS earlier in the 360 life took no expense to spend money to get the exclusives and send that message that they had the gamers interest. Then they stopped doing what their doing, also annoyed with real big exclusives always being fps. Anyways this all about protecting their nickle and dime system in live and don't want anyone thinking about free stuff. I can't see MS being in the lead for much longer than a year and half anyways. The gaming community is starting to shy away from MS toward nintendo and sony, just look at the recent month sales firgures or news topics.

[oldjadedgamer]

also annoyed with real big exclusives always being fps.

You mean like Resistance 2 and Killzone 2?

[Variable Gear]

You mean like Resistance 2 and Killzone 2?

Where's the Xbox 360's answer to Little Big Planet or The Eye of Judgment?

[Kamalot]

Where's the Xbox 360's answer to Little Big Planet or The Eye of Judgment?

I haven't played Little Big Planet yet, but I'm looking forward to it.

As for Eye of Judgment, Microsoft looked at the sales (and the ability to print your own cards) and determined that no 'answer' is necessary.

There are more exclusive titles on the Xbox 360 than there are on the PS3. That is a plain and simple fact.

[Talon-]

Where's the Xbox 360's answer to Little Big Planet or The Eye of Judgment?

Eye of Judgment? Seriously? Seriously?

LBP, I buy, but not Yu-Gi-Oh for PS3. ;)

[Gorvi]

Having user mods = good for gamers. Having to pay for user mods = bad for gamers. Having to use some convoluted method for using user mods = bad for gamers. Not having user mods at all = bad for gamers.

That should about cover it.

[Dukefrukem]

grasping at straws huh? I am making a statement of fact that Live has been revolutionizing console online gameplay for the last 5 years. As for PS1 games...really? I would never play ps1 games for more than 1 or 2 sittings, they're crap. Xbox originals are equivalent to ps2 games remember...

not really. I paid for a Gold membership cuz I could give a fuck. But your reasoning doesn't make any sense. *** can do what they do because its currently the best online community. And now I know YOU"RE grasping at straws when you call PS1 games crap. gimme a break. :rolleyes: