MODELS IMPORTING POSSIBLE IN WARHAMMER

steam_164191850448yoMgfCp

https://www.reddit.com/r/totalwar/comments/7urzf4/modding_morions_confirmed/
a guy called Marthenil managed to get custom models ingame
I will shammelessy copy @Cataph post I hope he doesn't mind
if you do just say so and I will take it down

EDIT EDIT Cataph suggested to delete it to stimulate people to keep reading on reddit because there is basically a FAQ under the OP on reddit

hence why I cut the OP

NoSkill4U#6552

Like

Armitage13#6843

Well done. By pushing the envelope you’re going to force CA’s hand in locking down their engine and mod support even further.

I read on steam - no way of confirming if true - that unauthorized models in the game was the reason for the Norsca delay. CA are having to work on the engine to make sure it’s locked down so they don’t break the terms of their licensing agreement.

NoSkill4U#6552

rad13 said:

Well done. By pushing the envelope you’re going to force CA’s hand in locking down their engine and mod support even further.

I read on steam - no way of confirming if true - that unauthorized models in the game was the reason for the Norsca delay. CA are having to work on the engine to make sure it’s locked down so they don’t break the terms of their licensing agreement.

Ahem, the Norsca delay announcement was far earlier then the discovery of this.

Furthermore, in TWW 1 there was nothing like this known

Urgat

Right. Anything more complicated than static props possible?

Beast_of_Guanyin#8747

rad13 said:

Well done. By pushing the envelope you’re going to force CA’s hand in locking down their engine and mod support even further.

I read on steam - no way of confirming if true - that unauthorized models in the game was the reason for the Norsca delay. CA are having to work on the engine to make sure it’s locked down so they don’t break the terms of their licensing agreement.

I doubt your second paragraph, but your first has the ring of truth. The poster of it as good as acknowledges it when they discuss the seriousness of it.

I don't think CA is going to trust self appointed mod police.

Armitage13#6843

Actually OP, several months ago someone got some buildings models into the game and created a similar buzz about being able to build entire new mods. It seemed to die away and I hadn’t thought about it further, until I read that poster’s theory on steam. But suddenly the timing makes sense.

VG, I have no way of confirming or refuting this theory. But the poster was very convinced that it was the real reason.

Multiple posters on here have said they don’t believe the official explanation - that it was going to take 6 months to redo Norsca into game 2; because this is longer than they needed to build it from scratch, and many assets can be re-used.

But whether that theory about Norsca is true or partially true or false... this news is only bad for CA and bad for their overall plans with the trilogy.

boyfights

That's pretty interesting, and seems to make a lot of sense. I'm not sure that the timing of the norsca announcement is necessarily proof that they're unrelated, it's possible that CA noticed the holes before modders were able to find/confirm them

InuOkami#8640

IIRC it was Maruka who first bring up some imported building models to game 2, and it was in late december, after the "Development Update" blog, so doesn't seem to be the cause though.

Chatapp

I don't see how the delay of Norsca is in any way connected to modding. Even if they wanted to re-engineer the engine to block some possibilities, tying this to the release of the game's preorder bonus is not necessary and more harmful to them than anything.

As far as I know they have already directly intervened on EULA issues when the first maps came up with suspicious shapes and even more suspicious names. None of that happened when Maruka imported models in maps, or when Marthenil and he demonstrated banners. And that started to happen after the delay.

If they wanted to forbid people from even trying their hand at models, they could have simply written it in the EULA. There is no need to don our tinfoil hats about something already quite sad like the norscan delay.



The post made it clear that we are on CA's side on that front. The process is extremely complicated and will not be divulged to anybody but the most trusted modders, that will likely not even have the time to import something remotely close to challenging DLC material in magnitude. And that's assuming it's a Hat DLC because as we said that's pretty much the extent of it.

So there won't be Lord of the Warcrafts mods anytime soon in this century, or even loli packs.


@blaat Actually I would suggest not pasting the OP, if only because I would invite people to keep reading, as there are answers below that are pretty much a FAQ already.

steam_164191850448yoMgfCp

Cataph said:

I don't see how the delay of Norsca is in any way connected to modding. Even if they wanted to re-engineer the engine to block some possibilities, tying this to the release of the game's preorder bonus is not necessary and more harmful to them than anything.

As far as I know they have already directly intervened on EULA issues when the first maps came up with suspicious shapes and even more suspicious names. None of that happened when Maruka imported models in maps, or when Marthenil and he demonstrated banners. And that started to happen after the delay.

If they wanted to forbid people from even trying their hand at models, they could have simply written it in the EULA. There is no need to don our tinfoil hats about something already quite sad like the norscan delay.



The post made it clear that we are on CA's side on that front. The process is extremely complicated and will not be divulged to anybody but the most trusted modders, that will likely not even have the time to import something remotely close to challenging DLC material in magnitude. And that's assuming it's a Hat DLC because as we said that's pretty much the extent of it.

So there won't be Lord of the Warcrafts mods anytime soon in this century, or even loli packs.


@blaat Actually I would suggest not pasting the OP, if only because I would invite people to keep reading, as there are answers below that are pretty much a FAQ already.

alright will cut it out

FlyingWarPigWithPaws#8481

If the custom capital model mod gets shut down by CA , that would really really suck ALOT.

That mod enhances the campaign so much.

MrJade

I don't expect CA to throw a hissy fit since their official line has always been "we just don't want to release the mod tools" or "third party tools". With this, we are avoiding those pitfalls, so unless CA changes it's story again, it should be good.

steam_164191850448yoMgfCp

MrJade said:

I don't expect CA to throw a hissy fit since their official line has always been "we just don't want to release the mod tools" or "third party tools". With this, we are avoiding those pitfalls, so unless CA changes it's story again, it should be good.

nope that was GW
what you are talking about is for camping map tools for historical games due third party tools indeed

Armitage13#6843

from what I can recall from all sorts of developer interviews and DLC updates etc (especially post Norsca release),

CA have a great relationship with GW;
If they want to introduce brand new IP into the game, they take the design/ideas/etc to GW and get their sign-off;
They are confident taking ideas and new IP to GW because they have Andy Hall on staff and have demonstrated track record of honouring the world and IP.

So everything in TWW1 and TWW2 has GW"s blessing, either from existing lore or through explicit approval during game development process.

If there is a means of introducing content into the game that breaks this model, to the extent where GW have their IP infringed; or even worse a 3rd party IP (LOTR for example) IP is introduced into the game, then all hell will break loose.

I don't think CA or GW are concerned about the custom capital mod tools.

The threat of completly new, non-GW approved models/units/even races being modded into the game will get their attention, really quickly.

MrJade

blaat said:

nope that was GW
what you are talking about is for camping map tools for historical games due third party tools indeed

Then why does Dawn of War have such a thriving mod community that lets them add in units without GW freaking out?

GW doesn't care.

steam_164191850448yoMgfCp

MrJade said:

blaat said:

nope that was GW
what you are talking about is for camping map tools for historical games due third party tools indeed

Then why does Dawn of War have such a thriving mod community that lets them add in units without GW freaking out?

GW doesn't care.

the old GW did and IIRC that was when the license agreement was made
and even if what you said was true [[which it could be I dunno]
aside from campaign map and music modding CA has always given us the tools to play with so why would they change
no something is holding them back and I suspect GW

MrJade

blaat said:

the old GW did and IIRC that was when the license agreement was made
and even if what you said was true [[which it could be I dunno]
aside from campaign map and music modding CA has always given us the tools to play with so why would they change
no something is holding them back and I suspect GW

Again, someone from CA talked about this, giving us mod tools was simply less of a priority than other things, not because GW cares.

And here is some proof that GW doesn't care.

steam_164191850448yoMgfCp

MrJade said:

blaat said:

the old GW did and IIRC that was when the license agreement was made
and even if what you said was true [[which it could be I dunno]
aside from campaign map and music modding CA has always given us the tools to play with so why would they change
no something is holding them back and I suspect GW

Again, someone from CA talked about this, giving us mod tools was simply less of a priority than other things, not because GW cares.

And here is some proof that GW doesn't care.

Lastly, if GW does care, you'd have to cite a source as the one postulating the argument.

can you give me a source for your first point

in the meantime I will dig up mine
EDIT EDIT here http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?687395-New-game-announced-Total-War-WARHAMMER&p=14478941&viewfull=1#post14478941

#902441

blaat said:

the old GW did and IIRC that was when the license agreement was made
and even if what you said was true [[which it could be I dunno]
aside from campaign map and music modding CA has always given us the tools to play with so why would they change
no something is holding them back and I suspect GW

GW has over the past couple of years discovered the joys of IP and become rather aggressive about it, many years after joyfully ignoring that of other people.

But I suspect CA is none too keen on giving modders, some of whom are very good, the tools to create what they may wish to later sell to us for £20 amidst a fanfare of publicity.

MrJade

@blaat It appears that CA was talking about map tools, but obviously did eventually replace them, and they also did say that due to "paperwork" between them and GW they couldn't release full modding tools, but are working on it.

Seems strange, as mods and fanworks have no IP impact.

Armitage13#6843

for fun, go to google and type into the search bar "games workshop sues" and then a space

steam_164191850448yoMgfCp

MrJade said:

@blaat It appears that CA was talking about map tools, but obviously did eventually replace them, and they also did say that due to "paperwork" between them and GW they couldn't release full modding tools, but are working on it.

Seems strange, as mods and fanworks have no IP impact.

this was talking about the attila like assembly kit
I very clearly remember

#902441

rad13 said:

for fun, go to google and type into the search bar "games workshop sues" and then a space

It's hard not to read the story of GW threatening to sue Marvel and running off with its tail between it's legs when Marvel revealed it's far more expensive lawyers without chuckling.

steam_164191850448yoMgfCp

Arsenic said:

blaat said:

the old GW did and IIRC that was when the license agreement was made
and even if what you said was true [[which it could be I dunno]
aside from campaign map and music modding CA has always given us the tools to play with so why would they change
no something is holding them back and I suspect GW

GW has over the past couple of years discovered the joys of IP and become rather aggressive about it, many years after joyfully ignoring that of other people.

But I suspect CA is none too keen on giving modders, some of whom are very good, the tools to create what they may wish to later sell to us for £20 amidst a fanfare of publicity.

I dont believe that since else CA could just block the tools

Krilral

The only realistic reason i can think of, that GW would care about modding, would be if the modders end up creating content that infringes on other people's IPs and put it in games with GW's name on. And that would be handled by CA on a per-case basis, not by shutting down modding entirely (in many countries it's probably doubtful if they even have that right).

CA obviously have the added incentive that less modded content means more potential for DLC, but I doubt the amount of people using mods is even great enough for them to care (not to mention the amount of people who would actually forego DLC because of mods). And of course mods can just never reach the quality of a well-made DLC, so I doubt they're too worried about that.

So I say go ahead if you want to make custom hats or something. I seriously doubt CA will even care about something as small as that.

Marthenil#7433

Urgat said:

Right. Anything more complicated than static props possible?

A helmet is not a static prop. It's weighted on the humanoid skeleton.

A static prop is something like a weapon, it has no weights.

Another example of a weighted prop + animation is the previews in my Standard Bearers mod (which I should get back to working on :P) Check the 2 gifys at the end of the description.




(I'm Marthenil, this is just an older account).

#332735

Arsenic said:

rad13 said:

for fun, go to google and type into the search bar "games workshop sues" and then a space

It's hard not to read the story of GW threatening to sue Marvel and running off with its tail between it's legs when Marvel revealed it's far more expensive lawyers without chuckling.

the thing with IP and brand names related sues, is that even if its a minor thing you have to keep suing for the legal precedent

Arthas_Menethil#3421

MrJade said:

@blaat It appears that CA was talking about map tools, but obviously did eventually replace them, and they also did say that due to "paperwork" between them and GW they couldn't release full modding tools, but are working on it.

Seems strange, as mods and fanworks have no IP impact.

Tell that to Warner Brothers who sent a Cease and desist order for a LOTR total conversion mod for Skyrim back in 2012.

MrJade

Ardrej said:

the thing with IP and brand names related sues, is that even if its a minor thing you have to keep suing for the legal precedent

This is incredibly wrong:
This is one of those places where people confuse copyright and trademark. The truth is, copyright holders may enforce their copyright claims at their discretion. Failing to enforce your copyright claim does nothing to weaken your copyright (although if someone else claims to be the owner of your copyright, you may want to clear that up).

This isn't a trademark issue, but would be copyright, and therefore, you don't have to sue.

Arthasmenethril said:

Tell that to Warner Brothers who sent a Cease and desist order for a LOTR total conversion mod for Skyrim back in 2012.

Tell that to 3rd Age Total War, or hundreds of other total conversions. Or this Skyrim LotR mod.

There is more to the story than just LotR. They were either pretending to be official, or making a profit on the mod.

Lord_Xelos

OP: Long story short, instead of Robin-Hood'ing how-to-guides to the public they're going to keep it to themselves. Ergo, there's no profit from this to anyone interested, other than simple realization that it can indeed be done.

As to the copyright discussion: as far as I'm concerned modders that ever got shut down should just release their work in darkweb in a "well, leak happens" fashion and stick middle finger to anyone daring to limit creativity.