Habe zum Thema Battlefield 3 Modding diesen interessanten Thread gefunden, in dem einige DICE Angestellte ausführlich Rede und Antwort stehen:

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3...90208755766/1/

Hier mal die interessantesten Aussagen:
Zusammenfassung: Wenn sie es implementieren, dann mit allem drum und dran, also gut dokumentiert und in Battlelog und Server integriert, dann evtl noch eine Art Steam Workshop wie bei Skyrim etc. Das kostet schonmal eine Menge Zeit und Ressourcen. Dann kommt noch dazu, dass die Frostbite Engine anscheinend ganz anders ist als UDK und CDK, d.h. dass zB man den Editor gar nicht nutzen kann, ohne Source Code Access, was für ein Public Release unmöglich ist. D.h. einiges müsste an der Architektur der Engine verändert werden, um ein Mod SDK möglich zu machen. Dann kommt da noch das Problem mit mehr Cheatern hinzu. Außerdem besteht Frostbite aus viel lizensierter Software (z.B. Enlighten), die man nicht einfach so für ein Public Release benutzen dürfte. Ausführlicher und vollständiger gibts weiter unten alles:
Nobody has ever said, nor can I imagine anyone saying, that they flat out don't want mod tools (quite the opposite in fact, it's a regular topic of discussion). It's not even a matter of processing power, even though the rigs we use are constantly upgraded, and the Frostbite devs burn out graphics card on a weekly basis.

The issue is pretty straight forward, though complicated and difficult to address. Frostbite is extremely complicated and relies on a lot of licensed technologies that are not easily (even by throwing lots of money at them) re-licensed for public consumption. This is further compounded by the fact that it's not a single editor, and thus can't be released as an easy-install do-everything package.

Can it be made into such a package? Of course, anything is possible, but the time frame and resources required for it is pretty tremendous. The package would then also have to be maintained, documented, have very thorough testing, and some level of support provided. The game would also have to have mod endpoints to support custom packages being added to it, as well as ways to ensure anti-cheat and such are handled properly. We'd probably also want to make sure there's an easy and convenient way to distribute and maintain these mods, similar to Steam Workshop, where authors can upload their creations, receive comments, ratings, etc. The server software would also have to be upgraded to support these mods, followed by updating the backend to allow searching and finding of these servers, plus provide a way for server owners to actually load the content into their server as currently our ToS does not allow any viewing/editing/modifying of the server files.

It's not a simple thing as just dumping all our internal tools and letting people figure things out. I don't think anybody thinks that our tools are beyond the comprehension of everyone, because we obviously use it, and we are all human (last I checked anyways..). But there is a massively steep learning curve because they are just that, dev tools.

I'll give you an example. I wanted to play around a bit with making a map and poke around Frostbite's internals and see what kind of cool map I could make. I used to do maps for older games (AvP2, Starcraft, Bf1942), so I figured "can't be that hard". I never even got to the point of creating a basic empty map before being completely overwhelmed with the amount of options, programs, and data required to begin work before I had to give up and go bother some of the senior mappers and get a crash course on everything I needed to know to set things up. I'm sure I could have figured it out eventually, but the steep entry bar could easily turn away some otherwise fantastic community mappers just because they didn't have the time available to learn things.

So to summarize, yes, anything is possible given enough time and resources, but in order to release good tools that would benefit the community and really bring out the amazing talent you guys have, an enormous amount of work would be needed to get everything set up properly to enable you guys to really shine (and this isn't counting the legal and licensing barriers either). Work would also have to be done in order to not release the game source with it, while still making the build process ensure that the maps load as quickly as the game base assets, which is no small feat, and ensuring the servers are stable and everyone is able to enjoy them fully.

tl;dr: It's a tremendous undertaking
Correct!

Building just a map requires jumping between ~20-30 different programs, and that doesn't even take into account the process of getting it into the game to test/play it, which requires the game source as everything is highly optimized and packaged for incredibly low loading times, despite the massive size of the map data and assets.

Everything, down to the way the game is compiled, is built and optimized for maximum performance.
The big difference is, of course, that the Unreal Engine is built to be used by others. Sure, Frostbite is growing into a more versatile engine, being used by several development studios at EA, but it's still all within EA and it's still a transition period. Who knows, maybe in a year or two, Frostbite has developed to a state where it makes a lot of sense to add modding tools.
TheBikingViking Enlisted: 2011-10-27

2013-03-18 21:24
McTash said:
Yes it was a nice suprise to see such interaction in this thread and I applaud DarkLord and BikingViking for taking the time and answer some of our questions. I also agree with you about the distinction between mapping and modding although UDK is blurring the lines there in my opinion. You could just map with UDK but why stop there when so much more is available to you (in fact if you did just map for UDK you wouldn't really have much of a game ).
UDK is awesome, but as I said before, it's also part of Epic Games' business to build and publish a complete game development package that can be used by as many people as possible. Even so, you don't see a lot of games based on UDK actually offering mod tools; although a game is built on UDK, it still takes a substantial effort to provide good mod support.

Try to consider this case; let's say we offered the ability to build your own maps. How would you play them? Ok, that's simple, you get a server admin to import them to the server and then set them up in the map rotation.

So what happens when you join? No problem if you have the map, but what if you don't? Then we need to handle that. We somehow have to inform people what they're missing to play on this server (what if it's in rotation, but not currently played?), and we have to guide them so they can get the missing content. We have to have a good installation procedure and tell them how to install it. Maybe we should also add controls to the server filter, so you can filter out servers with user-generated content you don't own, which means that the servers need to be able to effectively communicate that.

And that's just the PC end-user flow for trying to join a game. We already have a good amount of work there and all the testing that comes with it. Just trying to say that while some things appear simple when you just think about them, they often unfold into something more complex once you actually get to work and discover all the weird edge cases and what not.
Money doesn't have very much to do with it, it's mostly human resources and time, both of which are very difficult to come by in any given high quality/quantity. Unfortunately, development is one of those things that there's a certain point where throwing more people at something doesn't make it happen any faster.

So yes, it's not a philosophy problem, we LOVE everything the community does, we often discuss the latest awesome video we saw, or what you guys are modding into the game despite how difficult it is to do so.

Nobody has forgotten that mods are what made BF2 from BF1942, and all the other fantastic mods that BF1942 had.
Zum Thema kein MOD SDK wegen DLC Verkäufen:
Actually, I think history has proven that mods can be very beneficial for games, even on a commercial level. The sales of Arma, for example, really took off after the Day Z mod was released. So what you're saying is actually not true whatsoever.

Also, if we remove the support of any modifications to the game, it's solely due to potential security and cheating issues, or because it explicitly violates our Terms of Service.
Well, there's no point in trying to convince people like you otherwise, because you want to believe EA is the root of all evil. Which is fine, if you want to believe that. I'm trying to say, as a person actually working for DICE, that it's not the case, but hey, what do I know, right?
Hier stimme ich auf jeden Fall zu, Bethesda hat sehr guten Modding Support und trotzdem werden ihre DLCs gekauft . Außerdem verbessert es ihre Spiele und es werden mehr gekauft. Und es gibt kostenloses Marketing.