Automatic Mod Downloading

[sickboy 13]

Personally I feel ArmA III could be well served by Six Updater, but again as I pointed out earlier, only if it's included with the game, or even better integrated for in-line automation to standardize all mod packaging and distribution methods...

+1 ;-)

[hoak 0]

Thanks I don't read anything about incremental updates (talking about just changed bits within a file, not by-file or gradual download / resume / blocks). FTP is out of the question for it (AFAIK), Bittorrent is as well.

Well if your speaking of Pando Networks, Digital River or GFace products/services you have to contact them about their enterprise products to get the poop on extended protocols, delta patching etc... These are not however cheap products and services....

Bittorrent is also problematic due to possibility of peer polution, security etc, though it seems there might be some solutions there, we're exploring.

Yes, the protocol is FOSS and can be customized (as PN has done) for your application...

Bittorrent support is on the menu for SU as well, while FTP would be very easy to add. Still, both are IMO not great solutions.

Well much more important than the protocol(s) SU may or may not roll with is have you contacted BI with respect to including or integrating it with the game and Sprocket services? Standardizing a patch and mod distribution system, that could also serve as catalog, game downloader, and hosting tool will only happen if it get the BI rubber stamp on it -- and that would be an 'everybody wins' outcome.

Don't be shy SickBoy, you have some fine software there that would be to everyone's benefit were it made part of the game; sell what you have!

:kungfu:

Edited June 18, 2012 by Hoak

[sickboy 13]

Cheers, we'll investigate some more

:) BIS and me/us are no strangers, no worries ;)

Edited June 18, 2012 by Sickboy

[hoak 0]

Well then let's have [T]he Full Monty of features and capabilities then! Server game detection, automated packaging and upload of requisite files to various hosts, p2p switching, a standardized mod catalog and hosting tools (should remain external), and full game and update download and patching. There's also some nice opportunity to get BattleEye's Developer involved -- as if the ArmA III SU becomes the single point source for all A3 content it also becomes another layer of security to the game that can be leveraged nicely (if ya know what I mean).

:kungfu:

[Tonci87 163]

+1 ;-)

That would be very good for newcomers.

If only sixupdater could allow us to host "custom" Mod sets that could be downloaded from our server. Our unit uses quite a lot of addons and we resigned them all to prevent compatibility problems (someone connecting with the wrong ACRE version is enought to ruin the whole game for everyone). That is why we still use Yoma to manage our mod collection.

[sickboy 13]

That would be very good for newcomers.

If only sixupdater could allow us to host "custom" Mod sets that could be downloaded from our server. Our unit uses quite a lot of addons and we resigned them all to prevent compatibility problems (someone connecting with the wrong ACRE version is enought to ruin the whole game for everyone). That is why we still use Yoma to manage our mod collection.

Damn, is THAT the reason? :P You always made me wonder really, and i'm dumb for never asking :)

I'm happy to say that you're incorrect, SU supports Custom Repositories for over a year (or is it two already? hm) :)

http://www.six-projects.net/Six_Updater+CustomRepos_Setup

http://www.six-projects.net/Six_Updater+CustomRepos_Setup+UI

Its very flexible too, you can host all the mods yourself, take all the mods from the official network, or mix as you please.

There's also flexible configuration for servers, communication services, etc.

[Tonci87 163]

Damn, is THAT the reason? :P You always made me wonder really, and i'm dumb for never asking :)

I'm happy to say that you're incorrect, SU supports Custom Repositories for over a year (or is it two already? hm) :)

http://www.six-projects.net/Six_Updater+CustomRepos_Setup

http://www.six-projects.net/Six_Updater+CustomRepos_Setup+UI

Its very flexible too, you can host all the mods yourself, take all the mods from the official network, or mix as you please.

There's also flexible configuration for servers, communication services, etc.

Oh well, I guess I´ll forward this to http://forums.bistudio.com/member.php?65542-MadMike-Brig2010

He is the one who manages all the mod related stuff for us.

[sickboy 13]

Oh well, I guess I´ll forward this to http://forums.bistudio.com/member.php?65542-MadMike-Brig2010

He is the one who manages all the mod related stuff for us.

Cool, if there are any questions / issues; http://www.six-updater.net/p/support.html

(sorry, we should probably get back on topic :O)

[rory_pamphilon 16]

Ok its been a while since this thread has been used but this is still v relevant.

Over the summer we have witnessed an arma mod achieve great success & now become its own game.

Has any decision been made on whether arma 3 will have an external bis (aided by sickboy) application for managing mod downloading or will it have an entirely internal mod downloading function similar to half life 2, cod etc?

What do other feel they want? I didnt initially enjoy external apps as six used to be so complex but dayz commander has shown us how simple an interface can be & yet remain functional. The bad point is that i seem to be continually paging in/out or exiting arma completely due to broken server browser (in beta).

Sickboy, any inside information you can share? :-)

[Covert_Death 11]

not sure which launcher you are referring too but "Play withSIX" the latest version of six launcher, is an AMAZINGLY simple launcher. you click the game, it gives you a list of mods, you click install on the ones you want and thats it, then from there you can click "Play" on the MODs you want to play and it will launch the game with that mod

[doveman 7]

Whilst not about Mod Downloading, I posted this ticket https://dev-heaven.net/issues/35469#change-139457 with my idea about Automatic mod management a while ago, as I also feel that currently it's a mess. I've downloaded a ton of mods and missions but I have barely used or played any of them, as I keep finding that a mod will break a mission and I've just wasted 30-60mins playing it only to find I have to start again (with no mods as I don't know which one broke it). Please take a look and vote for it if you agree with the idea.

I doubt I'll be buying A3 unless they implement something like this, as it's just been too much like debugging rather than enjoyable playing with A2.

[gossamersolid 155]

Whilst not about Mod Downloading, I posted this ticket https://dev-heaven.net/issues/35469#change-139457 with my idea about Automatic mod management a while ago, as I also feel that currently it's a mess. I've downloaded a ton of mods and missions but I have barely used or played any of them, as I keep finding that a mod will break a mission and I've just wasted 30-60mins playing it only to find I have to start again (with no mods as I don't know which one broke it). Please take a look and vote for it if you agree with the idea.

I doubt I'll be buying A3 unless they implement something like this, as it's just been too much like debugging rather than enjoyable playing with A2.

Honestly, you probably won't be buying A3 then.

I'm not sure how you had such a hard time getting mods to work, it's really quite simple. There are tutorials everywhere and there are third party launchers that do the work for you.

[doveman 7]

Honestly, you probably won't be buying A3 then.

I'm not sure how you had such a hard time getting mods to work, it's really quite simple. There are tutorials everywhere and there are third party launchers that do the work for you.

Which third-party launcher enables the required mods (and not any mission-breaking mods) automatically for the mission I want to play before launching A2 and eliminates the need to close A2 and restart it if I want to play a mission that requires different mods?

[maddogx 13]

Enabling and disabling mods without restarting the game would be an awesome feature, and one that has been requested for a very long time.

However I don't think it will be possible to automatically unload/block mods that break certain missions, because how is the game supposed to detect those? Listing them in the mission won't work because you'll never be able to create an exhaustive list (not to mention that new mods are being released all the time). So this is one thing that will always require a certain level of common sense from the player.

[doveman 7]

Well my idea is to have a simple text file that accompanies each mission, specifying both required mods (so that the mission would not be playable if they're not present on the user's system), allowed mods (i.e. those that aren't required but have been confirmed not to cause problems) and incompatible mods (those that have been found to break the mission). Obviously what you say about creating an exhaustive list and new mods is true but for the allowed and incompatible mods, the idea is that firstly the author can list any that he knows are OK/will cause problems simply because he designed the mission and has some insight into what functions it uses, but also he may have tested with some mods himself. As well as individual mods, it should allow for designating categories of mods (for example he may know that any AI mods cause problems, whilst any weapon mods/packs don't) and then A3 could block/allow using any such mods (either each mod would need to have a way of specifying what category it comes under, or probably more practically, this information could be stored in a repository and retrieved for each mod the user has installed, with this information then stored on the user's system for future reference).

After that, the idea is that users will test with different mods and discuss on the mission/campaign forum thread and if the author gets enough information to satisfy himself that a certain mod is OK/not OK with his mission, he can update the text file, which would be stored online alongside the mod, causing the updated text file to be downloaded when the user next checks if any of his installed mods have been updated (whether with something like PwS or a built-in update checker).

As I mention in my ticket, there should be an override function so that the user can choose to enable mods that are not specified by the author, in case they know or believe a mod should be OK and the text file hasn't been maintained or updated but hopefully my idea would eliminate a lot of trial and error and wasted time that's currently required, allowing users to just get on and play the missions.

Note that I don't propose that A3 should automatically unload/block mods as such because when the interface is loaded, no mods should be loaded and this should only happen after the mission/campaign is selected at which point it would automatically load the "required" mods and any "allowed" mods that the user has selected. The incompatible mods list is mainly to mark/hide those mods to prevent the user trying to enable them for that mission.

[gossamersolid 155]

Which third-party launcher enables the required mods (and not any mission-breaking mods) automatically for the mission I want to play before launching A2 and eliminates the need to close A2 and restart it if I want to play a mission that requires different mods?

Didn't read your ticket, I was replying directly to what you said in your post.

[kylania 568]

the idea is that firstly the author can list any...

After that, the idea is that users will test with different mods and discuss on the mission/campaign forum thread and if the author gets enough information to satisfy himself that a certain mod is OK/not OK with his mission, he can update the text file ...

hopefully my idea would eliminate a lot of trial and error and wasted time that's currently required, allowing users to just get on and play the missions.

Those two goals are mutually exclusive. Having to make the author of a mission test and approve mods that work or kinda work or shouldn't be used, no sir then having players discuss on forums any changes to be made so the author can update a list is the very definition of "trial and error and wasted time".

[doveman 7]

Those two goals are mutually exclusive. Having to make the author of a mission test and approve mods that work or kinda work or shouldn't be used, no sir then having players discuss on forums any changes to be made so the author can update a list is the very definition of "trial and error and wasted time".

Well the author doesn't have to do anything other than specify the Required mods so that A3 can automatically enable those when the user selects the mission. If they know that certain mods or categories of mods (i.e. weapons packs) don't cause any problems then they can specify those in the Allowed list, likewise if they know of any mods that will cause problems, they can specify those in the incompatible list but even if only the Required mods are specified and the list is never updated, it would make life so much easier for users as they could just select a mission and play it, with A3 automatically enabling the required mods (and downloading them if necessary), then select another mission and play it, without having to research what mods are required (if any), create a profile for each mission with the necessary mods enabled, exit and restart A3, etc. If just this part of my idea was implemented, A3 would be a pleasure to use rather than a pain in the a** like A2 and I'd be jolly happy.

Of course updating the list requires someone to test the mission with additional mods but the idea is that by sharing their results they can save everyone else wasting their time trying to play a mission only to find out mod x has broken it. Without some sort of system like this, users are faced with the dilemma of "do I try playing with this mod and risk finding I've wasted an hour and have to start from the beginning again without it, or do I just not bother trying any mods other than those that are Required", which seems likely to leave many mods unused, other than those that are Required by the mission creator, which is a shame considering all the work that goes into creating them.

[maddogx 13]

Well the author doesn't have to do anything other than specify the Required mods so that A3 can automatically enable those when the user selects the mission.

The author doesn't actually need to specifiy required mods for a mission - missions already store these themselves, as soon as you place mod content in them (look in the mission.sqm file). The only thing missing here is for Arma to load the mod content automatically as needed. One thing that could be specified manually are compatible mods - i.e. mods that aren't required but are known to work.

As for the rest regarding non-compatibility, I would recommend a different approach:

All mods should contain some kind of meta data that specifies what kind of changes they make to the game, including whether or not they may have an effect on missions. For example, sound, texture or FX mods could be tagged as "passive", basically making them globally compatible with all missions so they never need to be unloaded. Pure "addons" such as islands and new units that don't overwrite any existing configs would be equally benign and should be tagged as such.

Full modifications like ACE, on the other hand, would be tagged to let the engine know that they can have an effect on gameplay, so the engine would mark them as potentially disruptive when a mission is loaded that doesn't list them as required or compatible.

In the latter case, a pop-up window should inform the player of potentially incompatible mods and give him the option to disable them.

EDIT: Basically what I am saying is, don't try to list incompatible mods - instead give the engine the required info to detect these by itself.

[doveman 7]

The author doesn't actually need to specifiy required mods for a mission - missions already store these themselves, as soon as you place mod content in them (look in the mission.sqm file). The only thing missing here is for Arma to load the mod content automatically as needed. One thing that could be specified manually are compatible mods - i.e. mods that aren't required but are known to work.

Well that's cool then. So yeah, A3 should just take this information and enable the Required mods automatically when the user selects the mission. One idea I had was to have a setting (drop-down probably) for each mission that can be set to Required Only (so it will only enable the Required mods), Required+Global (where the user can specify elsewhere a list of Global mods they want loaded with all missions in addition to any Required mods, i.e. stuff like JSRS, WarFX), Required+Custom (where the user can select specific mods to be loaded in addition to the Required mods) and Required+Global+Custom (should be self-explanatory). Obviously it should show a list of enabled mods when selecting a mission so that the user can see what's going to be loaded but only for the two Custom settings does it need to list all mods so that the user can enable specific ones.

As for the rest regarding non-compatibility, I would recommend a different approach:

All mods should contain some kind of meta data that specifies what kind of changes they make to the game, including whether or not they may have an effect on missions. For example, sound, texture or FX mods could be tagged as "passive", basically making them globally compatible with all missions so they never need to be unloaded. Pure "addons" such as islands and new units that don't overwrite any existing configs would be equally benign and should be tagged as such.

Yeah, that would probably work better. As I suggested, if mods were categorised then the author could specify which categories are OK but perhaps if most mods are passive/benign this is not really necessary and it's easier to just have some mods, like ACE and AI mods, categorised as "danger" and have these either hidden in the above Custom list, or clearly marked to dissuade the user from enabling them (unless of course they're Required by the mission, in which case they should be enabled normally).

[gossamersolid 155]

The author doesn't actually need to specifiy required mods for a mission - missions already store these themselves, as soon as you place mod content in them (look in the mission.sqm file).

Only works if the content is physically already on the map at mission compilation.

If something is added in at runtime (example, via createVehicle), it'd cause problems still.

A possible way to fix this is for the engine to only allow functions/code/etc to reference third party classnames if a reference to these third party addon files is made within the addons array in the sqm file.

[doveman 7]

Only works if the content is physically already on the map at mission compilation.

If something is added in at runtime (example, via createVehicle), it'd cause problems still.

A possible way to fix this is for the engine to only allow functions/code/etc to reference third party classnames if a reference to these third party addon files is made within the addons array in the sqm file.

OK. In that case we probably need to go back to my original idea of having the author specify the Required mods in an accompanying text file that A3 can read to determine which mods it needs to enable. Or what you said but I don't understand that and it sounds more complicated ;)

[wipman 1]

Hi, im againist the Automatic Modifications Download, mainly because:

- Where the mod will save the compressed files and where and how will save the decompressed/installed files?.

- Where or how will it save/store the documentation needed for use the Mod content in the game as mission (SP & MP) maker in example?.

- How will the system prevent to download/install incompatible content?.

I fail to see a simple answer to this questions, at least withing inside the game's files management system and the game's core itself as we know it from the ArmA 1.

The missions editor is not user friendly, the official tools are not user friendly (mainly because the leak of official documentation, in booth cases IMO); later on... i guess that such AMD system will require a management, or some kind of supervision. Who will review the mods that the game is allowed to install?, under what criterium?, how, who and when will check out and aprove the mods? and again... under what criterium...?. This are my main concerns about this issue. Let's C ya

[batto 17]

Didn't Ivan already kinda confirm it at GamesCon or E3?

- Where the mod will save the compressed files and where and how will save the decompressed/installed files?.

- Where or how will it save/store the documentation needed for use the Mod content in the game as mission (SP & MP) maker in example?.

Under some known directory maybe?

- How will the system prevent to download/install incompatible content?.

Game you're trying to join will send list of packages it require. Each package will have list of packages it require and list of packages with which it conflicts. ArmA will get packages from some central repository.

Who will review the mods that the game is allowed to install?, under what criterium?

Repository admins.

Edited October 25, 2012 by batto

[hyzoran 17]

It's as simple as this: Unreal did this back in 1998, it can be done now. The only difference is larger filesize, which can be combated with a redirect server (which later UT also did in 1999)