[Suggestion] Don't make open.mp a "custom engine that you can mod"

[BloodMaster]

Hey guYzzZzZZzZzZ, modZ and DeveLoPerZZZzzZz

So first of all, great initiative and idea, I really appreciate?that somebody still sees light in a decade old game, and furthermore making it compatible with existing scripts is just insane. I love you.

Now, as it comes with ambition, people tend to get carried away with what they can do and what is possible. But, I would like to remind you that this is "San Andreas", and that, no matter how much I disagree with K***** (Developer of SA:MP), I do agree with some of his fundamental rules that I personally believe made the mod so good and important.

Here's stuff that I agree with:

?-Don't add the ability to remove HUD
Okay okay!! Stop throwing bananas and tomatoes at me, calling me "You're Kyes secret agent that wants to destroy open.mp", and you Josh... Yes you. Please stop biting my leg.
San Andreas' HUD is one of the core branding's for the San Andreas, and I think being able to remove it and make your own custom HUD would ruin the feel of San Andreas and make transitions from server to server more confusing.
Here's what I propose instead; Make it a bit more flexible. What I mean by that, is add that thingy where your max health can increase ( http://prntscr.com/nehsv4 ),?and maybe if you plan on adding custom images, make it so?we can add custom weapon image (but make the black border default?so it doesn't lose shape and doesn't vary much from server to server ).

[i]?-Don't add custom vehicles. At least, not fully.
If you don't want to see 99% of the servers filled with SUPER-FULL-HD BMWS', MERCEDESS' AND AUDIS, you will not make custom vehicles.. Now, people like me, would use that functionality to create more vehicles like the existing ones. Let's say 4 door turismo, or custom trailers for trucks to pull, I would create much better variety of vehicles that fit the San Andreases agenda.
But. I am willing to sacrifice all that just because of the people that would abuse it. There are some solutions I think. For example limiting the amount of polygons for custom models?or make additional vehicles yourself that we could use.

?-Don't make custom skins
Instead, I would prefer being able to add existing skins and re-texturing them. Yes, people would still retexture them to look like teletubbies, but hey, it's better than a full-hd Steve from Minecraft. (Although, that's already kinda possible with AttachObject)

Now that I am done, please put down your pitches and forks and let's have a civil discussion.[/i]

[Pinch]

, Bloodmaster has 700K subscribers, listen to him ??

[LaszloR1]

These things shouldn't be limited just because they can be "abused". A good compromise would be a file size limit so you could only add low-poly san andreas style vehicles. If you see a server with a car ported from Forza or something and you don't approve of it just don't play on it. Limiting what people can do, because some people might do something you don't like is dumb. And I'm saying that as someone who also hates HQ, High Poly, Real, New cars in gta. (Even in gta v, the server I'm creating will only have lore friendly and necessary vehicles.)



About custom skins it would be great to have a body part system or something so we don't overwhelm the client with models. Although hard to achieve it would add a lot if we were able to swap heads on skins without needing to download every variant separately. Currently to do a headswap it needs a new skin and we have to do it in modelling software like 3ds max. That way if servers want more cop skins don't have to make you download 10 extra skins.

[shourya]

--Don't add the ability to remove HUD

-Don't add custom vehicles.

-Don't make custom skins....

lol then why we are here?

[BloodMaster]

--Don't add the ability to remove HUD

-Don't add custom vehicles.

-Don't make custom skins....

lol then why we are here?

To fix the burning issues of SA:MP, to give the community more freedom.

If you want those things, you've got MTA already.?

I have nothing against customization, I just want this to be San Andreas.



If we allow absolute freedom, ask yourself, what is the difference between MTA and open.mp?

Why did SA:MP achieve?bigger success than MTA did? I think it's the charm of natural San Andreas.

I might be wrong, but it's all pointing at that.

If you see a server with a car ported from Forza or something and you don't approve of it just don't play on it.

I agree with you here. I am sure those servers wouldn't even see much success due to reasons mentioned above.

So yeah. I changed my mind about that :)

It's better to let 1000 servers do random stuff than to limit one person with a vision.

[Sasino97]

I agree about the HUD, but not about the skins and vehicles.

The ability to extend San Andreas with custom skins, vehicles and objects is really a huge plus for those wanting to make their game mode be unique.

[BloodMaster]

I agree about the HUD, but not about the skins and vehicles.

The ability to extend San Andreas with custom skins, vehicles and objects is really a huge plus for those wanting to make their game mode be unique.

Yes. That's the conclusion I came to after reading your thoughts. Keeping only the HUD would be enough of the branding keep the spirit of San Andreas.

[Zow]

Stop comparing MTA with SAMP would be better, I agree with you about san andreas is san andreas but why all those thing you are talking about is matter? HUD Skins Vehicle etc.
All these things can be change the game to another game? People can choose their choice right? I don't want to move to MTA just because of HUD.
I need to say this too "Stop throwing bananas and tomatoes at me" Hope you understand me too.

[Josh]

Here's stuff that I agree with:

?-Don't add the ability to remove HUD
Okay okay!! Stop throwing bananas and tomatoes at me, calling me "You're Kyes secret agent that wants to destroy open.mp", and you Josh... Yes you. Please stop biting my leg.
San Andreas' HUD is one of the core branding's for the San Andreas, and I think being able to remove it and make your own custom HUD would ruin the feel of San Andreas and make transitions from server to server more confusing.
Here's what I propose instead; Make it a bit more flexible. What I mean by that, is add that thingy where your max health can increase ( http://prntscr.com/nehsv4 ),?and maybe if you plan on adding custom images, make it so?we can add custom weapon image (but make the black border default?so it doesn't lose shape and doesn't vary much from server to server ).

First of all, I am a dog. I'll bite anyone's leg! Many SA-MP servers already remove this HUD by using hacks in place such as textdraws, you just have a big black box (or some other colour) overlapping the HUD, basically making it useless. So I don't see any point in preventing people from removing the HUD for their own benefits.

[i]?-Don't add custom vehicles. At least, not fully.
If you don't want to see 99% of the servers filled with SUPER-FULL-HD BMWS', MERCEDESS' AND AUDIS, you will not make custom vehicles.. Now, people like me, would use that functionality to create more vehicles like the existing ones. Let's say 4 door turismo, or custom trailers for trucks to pull, I would create much better variety of vehicles that fit the San Andreases agenda.
But. I am willing to sacrifice all that just because of the people that would abuse it. There are some solutions I think. For example limiting the amount of polygons for custom models?or make additional vehicles yourself that we could use.

I think custom vehicles are a good idea, most server owners since 0.3.DL didn't go crazy with custom skins in SA-MP, maybe they will if this were to be added (still not discussed) but I see major creativity stemming from custom vehicles.

?-Don't make custom skins
Instead, I would prefer being able to add existing skins and re-texturing them. Yes, people would still retexture them to look like teletubbies, but hey, it's better than a full-hd Steve from Minecraft. (Although, that's already kinda possible with AttachObject)

Custom skins are in 0.3.DL, we want to have compatibility with SA-MP so that's out of the question.

[BloodMaster]

I am not sure if you changed your name just for this purpose, but I swear on everything I have that?I just chose a random name and didn't know Josh was an actual administrator XD XD XD



Thanks for the insight, it does make sense. Case closed.

[Josh]

I was confused as to why you mentioned my name! Then I figured my dog picture would make it seem I would bite a leg...

[BloodMaster]

I was confused as to why you mentioned my name! Then I figured my dog picture would make it seem I would bite a leg...

I should play lottery!

[Y_Less]

We are very much on the same page! If we wanted a complete new game engine then as you say there already is one. We stuck with SA:MP for a reason - this was it. Now where we draw the line is open to debate. It seems to me that in a game primarily about stealing cars, then extensive car options are within scope. But how much and how far? Don't know. As you say, it can be abused, or used in a lore-friendly manner.

[Expert*]

Yiks 2.0, vehicle moding is non of your business, i should be able to have BMW's and flying D's if i want to.
I don't want to see modern vehicles in RP servers ( or i wouldn't do that in my own server ), but i SHOULD be able to...
If lets say i want to make "Need for speed" /like gamemode that is all about car racing and i want to use real car models why not ?

Kalcor banning youtube -?funny.
You policing our servers -?will not be tolerated.

[Escoburger]

Ok so im going to make a copyright contract with Audi and BMW for my racing server, and add them high poly cars that look like out of space comparing to gta sa world.



Los Santos Underground soon....

[Jack F. Dunford]

In my case, my community would lose out on big plans to be creative with its' military RPG server. We're doing 3d design for vehicles, models, and skins?tailored to team decals, nation themes and more. It's about modernizing the redux of San Andreas for us. So with due respect, I hate this thread. Let the server owner fuck or not fuck up their server. Stifling our creativity is just that.

[javelin]

I do agree with you. I hate seeing this project to the point where MTA is.

[Gravityfalls]

I'd say how about we wait until we see the open mp launch?

[TwisT3R]

Removing the ability of having custom skins will most likely break the "backwards compatibility" if we want 0.3DL users to drag and drop their gamemodes.

[Expert*]

Ok so im going to make a copyright contract with Audi and BMW for my racing server, and add them high poly cars that look like out of space comparing to gta sa world.



Los Santos Underground soon....

Contract is a must,?i've heard that they have well paid special?forces team that plays MTA and?assassinates server owners who don't have it - ninja style.

[drauxen]

It should let servers devs to make what they want/need to do with their servers. In my case, my server do not need the default health, armour and oxygen bar, and putting a huge TD box above it makes the screen look so ugly.

[ohmios]

If we allow absolute freedom, ask yourself, what is the difference between MTA and open.mp?
Why did SA:MP achieve?bigger success than MTA did? I think it's the charm of natural San Andreas.
I might be wrong, but it's all pointing at that.

On MTA you have to download 50-300mb just to join a new server, and that download is usually slow regardless of the speed you contracted to your ISP. That's a big issue considering the impatience of the average human.

Edit: It would be better if the player had a way of knowing how much MB he would have to download before even entering to a server.

[ronfino]

to give the community more freedom.

?-Don't add the ability to remove HUD



?-Don't add custom vehicles. At least, not fully.



?-Don't make custom skins

sorry for the sarcasm, but what you said hurts my soul

[Codeah]

?-Don't add the ability to remove HUD
[i]?-Don't add custom vehicles. At least, not fully.
?-Don't make custom skins[/i]

I can agree with the custom vehicles point you made. Good vehicle models are hard to make, thus you'll mostly find the "SUPER-FULL-HD BMWS', MERCEDESS' AND AUDIS" which I assume are just ripped off vehicle models from other games.

I can agree with only being able to change skin textures. This would ensure that the game still looks like GTA:SA. And then on top of that it'd be nice if you could apply decals to those textures during run-time. That way you could have tattoos, custom clothing.

However I disagree with the HUD point. In some situation the default HUD can be very annoying and would be better off hidden. Let's say I'm creating a mini-game for my server where I want a completely different HUD. It would be nice to have that option.
I can see the issue here though, some server owners might disable the HUD indefinitely and replace it with their own, I wouldn't like that either. (It depends on the game-mode though)

Server owners shouldn't be given too much power. I wasn't able to find any good MTA servers to play on just because of that, but it wouldn't hurt giving them a bit more power.

[BloodMaster]

?-Don't add the ability to remove HUD

[i]?-Don't add custom vehicles. At least, not fully.

?-Don't make custom skins[/i]

I can agree with the custom vehicles point you made. Good vehicle models are hard to make, thus you'll mostly find the "SUPER-FULL-HD BMWS', MERCEDESS' AND AUDIS" which I assume are just ripped off vehicle models from other games.



I can agree with only being able to change skin textures. This would ensure that the game still looks like GTA:SA. And then on top of that it'd be nice if you could apply decals to those textures during run-time. That way you could have tattoos, custom clothing.



However I disagree with the HUD point. In some situation the default HUD can be very annoying and would be better off hidden. Let's say I'm creating a mini-game for my server where I want a completely different HUD. It would be nice to have that option.

I can see the issue here though, some server owners might disable the HUD indefinitely and replace it with their own, I wouldn't like that either. (It depends on the game-mode though)



Server owners shouldn't be given too much power. I wasn't able to find any good MTA servers to play on just because of that, but it wouldn't hurt giving them a bit more power.

Exactly my thoughts. You need to find a good balance of what's possible and what's useful. Giving too much freedom would result in non-gta looking servers which would just result in MTA-reputation where players get bored of anything quickly.

It should let servers devs to make what they want/need to do with their servers. In my case, my server do not need the default health, armour and oxygen bar, and putting a huge TD box above it makes the screen look so ugly.

I am not trying to insult you, but if you're doing something like that, why don't you try making your own game where you won't be limited by anything? There's so many free resources online that would allow you that.

[Gaudeamus271]

What about making a global models workshop or something like that, where administrators can decide what model is good for the game and what's not. I imagine a global CDN from where clients can download these mods, and server owners just have to allow them/integrate them. It would be something similar to Southclaws's https://samp-objects.com/, but models should have some kind of unique identifiers.

[drauxen]

Message to Kalcor,?Y_Less and anyone who want to mod a game:

I am not trying to insult you, but if you're doing something like that, why don't you try making your own game where you won't be limited by anything? There's so many free resources online that would allow you that.

Making a new game is way way hard than mod one. That's why people like me come to this kind of forums.

[BloodMaster]

Message to Kalcor,?Y_Less and anyone who want to mod a game:

I am not trying to insult you, but if you're doing something like that, why don't you try making your own game where you won't be limited by anything? There's so many free resources online that would allow you that.

Making a new game is way way hard than mod one. That's why people like me come to this kind of forums.

Yes, it is easier, but if you choose an easier way, I think you should at least stick to the lore of the game. I mean, that seems fair to me at least, and there's MTA for everything else -?that's equally easy in my opinion.

[Godfather]

I don't agree with you that this modification should be limited with mentioned features because those features if added or not some developers will still make a lot of content that don't have any relation with gta theme. Personally I think that gta should stay gta but let the server owners choose how will they use supported features to make some great stories on their communities.



I would like to get some options in server configuration where I can choose to enable/disable some features that I don't like so I can in some way shape gaming experience for my community. Example is lagcomp.



Saying to someone to build it's own game if he wants to use this multiplayer modification as game engine is wrong. I could tell you that you go and make yourself your sa-mp client if you don't like this one. I support and appreciate any new work that is done that can help anyone to make something of this community and mod. And simply if you don't like some features, don't enable them or don't use them on your community.



Even if I'm not big fan when people make gamemodes that don't have any relation with gta theme, they are still part of the community and having them is cool because they show us anything is possible when you have imagination and inspiration to do something cool.



I agree with you when you say things like super modified bmw or audi don't belong in this game environment. You are right. I personally wouldn't use them, would rather go with simple clean gta default style. But as much as I like to have some custom vehicles that are similiar to current gta vehicles,?I would take risk even if someone would add rocket or horse as a custom vehicle on their community. Their community - their choices. I won't play on it. Let people who like it that way play on it and enjoy.



Also one more thing, hiding hud elements is such a big plus for devs. Yes, you are right that people can make their own huds and their own styles that will be different than gta sa but I'm saying, hiding specific hud elements would bring so much new possibilities (I'm saying about rp type of servers).

[RenanMsV]

...?It's about modernizing the redux of San Andreas for us. So with due respect, I hate this thread. Let the server owner fuck or not fuck up their server. Stifling our creativity is just that.

THIS

[iReal Worlds]

Okay, I have read what you want, but what I can't find in your post is why. Why add this limitations to developers? I understand that you personally like the original HUD of San Andreas and don't want to see it changed. But I do not understand why it should not be possible to do so.

The majority of us here and on sa-mp.com are developers. And I see developers arguing that something should not be possible be done. Why are you so reluctant for what is basically the engine that drives our server to allow us to do more? When all's said and done, we are the ones who decide what's on our servers, so it can't be the fear that your favourite server changes it and you don't like it anymore, as I would hope your own server is your favourite. Of course there will be servers with Buggatis, Ferrarris, Audis etc. There will also be servers that look nothing like San Andreas, hopefully to the point where you would not even know it's San Andreas. But noone makes you play on these servers if you don't agree with this. What other people do does not hurt you.

The only way it could really affect server developers who do not want to implement this is if your players request it of you. But if a majority of your players requests this and you still don't want to change the interface because you like the vanilla one, I would like to point out that you may want to reconsider whether your target audience is right. Anyways, limiting everyone because you don't like what some people would do with this is not right.

As I've said time and time again, let the developers do whatever they want with their servers. If they want to screw it and just show a picture to anyone who joins the server and that's all there is to it, let them. If they want to add all the newest vehicles from 2019 to san andreas, they should be able to do it, and I'm sure there would be an audience for that kind of servers. But to impose limits on everyone based on what you want on your server is not right. If this was added to open.mp, you would be faced with a choice. To use it or not to use it. Don't take this choice from us the other developers.

What about making a global models workshop or something like that, where administrators can decide what model is good for the game and what's not. I imagine a global CDN from where clients can download these mods, and server owners just have to allow them/integrate them. It would be something similar to Southclaws's https://samp-objects.com/, but models should have some kind of unique identifiers.

I do not want to insult the developers of this mod, but who are they to decide for the whole community what is good? What makes a model good? I thought the open in open.mp stood for freedom and departure from centralized decisions.

Message to Kalcor,?Y_Less and anyone who want to mod a game:

I am not trying to insult you, but if you're doing something like that, why don't you try making your own game where you won't be limited by anything? There's so many free resources online that would allow you that.

Making a new game is way way hard than mod one. That's why people like me come to this kind of forums.

Yes, it is easier, but if you choose an easier way, I think you should at least stick to the lore of the game. I mean, that seems fair to me at least, and there's MTA for everything else -?that's equally easy in my opinion.

By the way, it's not a good idea to tell people to use another mod if they want more features. EA (as in the big company) did this too with one of their games. They said if you don't like the game, don't buy it. Needless to say, it didn't end up well, especially for the one who said it :)

We are very much on the same page! If we wanted a complete new game engine then as you say there already is one. We stuck with SA:MP for a reason - this was it. Now where we draw the line is open to debate. It seems to me that in a game primarily about stealing cars, then extensive car options are within scope. But how much and how far? Don't know. As you say, it can be abused, or used in a lore-friendly manner.

With all due respect, I think you're completely wrong. In my opinion, people stuck with SA:MP because it was the first and it achieved a kind of snowball efect, coupled with the perfect name. The players who started playing sa:mp when it was the only option called their friends and they did the same with their friends and so on, until SA:MP became the main multiplayer mod in the public's mindset, so, when a new player decides to start playing this game in multiplayer, as is with any other game, they will of course choose the more popular mod over the niche one. This is also a problem that open.mp is going to face.

[BloodMaster]

Okay, I have read what you want, but what I can't find in your post is why. Why add this limitations to developers??

Because this is San Andreas and not Unity/Unreal Engine.

In my opinion, people stuck with SA:MP because it was the first and it achieved a kind of snowball efect

MTA was released in 2009, which is around 2 years before SA:MP's boom effect. Also MTA:Race and MTA:Deathmatch were available from 2006.

By the way, it's not a good idea to tell people to use another mod if they want more features. EA (as in the big company) did this too with one of their games. They said if you don't like the game, don't buy it. Needless to say, it didn't end up well, especially for the one who said it :)

They didn't. They said if people don't like their business model they shouldn't buy the game. Completely different, however, equally wrong and counter productive in my opinion.

This is also a problem that open.mp is going to face.

Why don't you just go to MTA already? It already has all the?features?you want. Why are you waiting for another mod to re-invent the wheel?

There will also be servers that look nothing like San Andreas, hopefully to the point where you would not even know it's San Andreas. But noone makes you play on these servers if you don't agree with this.?

If that was a good business model, people would make their games like that out of the box. But it's not. I'll take MTA for an example, but when a person enters a server and is faced with a new interface of different designs every time, they will eventually get overwhelmed and just bail the mod itself if they don't like first few servers that they join.



Look at Minecraft, it achieved a huge popularity while servers kept true to their cores. Yes, there were minigames, yes there were custom recipes and such. But every server had blocks and?every UI was the same. No custom terrains, no custom blocks, no custom sounds... Servers adapted to what's available, and Minecraft wouldn't be what it is today if it wasn't for those limitations.

[Godfather]

Stop imposing limitation for this mod,?if you don't like some of the features don't use it on your own server. You would like to shape mod for everyone how you like when everyone should have opportunity to use mod how they really want.



And you can't make comparison about sa-mp with mta, or both of them with another game.

[BloodMaster]

And you can't make comparison about sa-mp with mta, or both of them with another game.

But I just did.

[iReal Worlds]

Okay, I have read what you want, but what I can't find in your post is why. Why add this limitations to developers??

Because this is San Andreas and not Unity/Unreal Engine.

It isn't indeed. But MTA (since everyone seems to compare open.mp to MTA, although I consider this an apples to oranges comparison, as each project has a different goal and starting point) is not Unity/Unreal either.

In my opinion, people stuck with SA:MP because it was the first and it achieved a kind of snowball efect

MTA was released in 2009, which is around 2 years before SA:MP's boom effect. Also MTA:Race and MTA:Deathmatch were available from 2006.

Yes, but when one is new to this and wants to play San Andreas with a friend, one will almost always search for San Andreas Multiplayer. :)

By the way, it's not a good idea to tell people to use another mod if they want more features. EA (as in the big company) did this too with one of their games. They said if you don't like the game, don't buy it. Needless to say, it didn't end up well, especially for the one who said it :)

They didn't. They said if people don't like their business model they shouldn't buy the game. Completely different, however, equally wrong and counter productive in my opinion.

My mistake here, it is actually worse the way you said it. I personally think the final product should be reviwed independently from the people who created it.

This is also a problem that open.mp is going to face.

Why don't you just go to MTA already? It already has all the?features?you want. Why are you waiting for another mod to re-invent the wheel?

Because everyone I know plays samp and not MTA, because MTA is a niche mod, because all of my work towards developing a server until now would've been in vain, because MTA is, in my opinion, mostly used for stunt servers and the like, and not for roleplay, and roleplay is pretty much the only game mode I like (and develop). This isn't to say I don't like SA:MP. In my opinion, focusing on the API and everything that has to do with making the mod run smoothly should be the top priority, before any cosmetic changes. This should also be true for open.mp. But, when it reaches a stable state, with all major bugs, performance issues and security vulnerabilities fixed, I strongly consider that the focus should be shifted to giving the developers the ability to do more with the mod. The first step I think should be the ability to do every single thing the single player game does. (for example the health bar size). But afterwards, the addition of new functionality should be pursued.

There will also be servers that look nothing like San Andreas, hopefully to the point where you would not even know it's San Andreas. But noone makes you play on these servers if you don't agree with this.?

If that was a good business model, people would make their games like that out of the box. But it's not. I'll take MTA for an example, but when a person enters a server and is faced with a new interface of different designs every time, they will eventually get overwhelmed and just bail the mod itself if they don't like first few servers that they join.



Look at Minecraft, it achieved a huge popularity while servers kept true to their cores. Yes, there were minigames, yes there were custom recipes and such. But every server had blocks and?every UI was the same. No custom terrains, no custom blocks, no custom sounds... Servers adapted to what's available, and Minecraft wouldn't be what it is today if it wasn't for those limitations.

Yes, this could impact the image of the mod. But this impact can be tackled. My solution would be to greet new players with a list of the most popular servers on open.mp, when they open the custom launcher (which should be matured before any work on any of these features should begin). If a server is popular, it is almost impossible for it to damage the mod's image, as it wouldn't be popular if it was bad. If they still choose to join a server other than the "featured" ones, they are bound to have watched a video of it or to have been brought by a friend. so they'll be knowing what they're getting into. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this would be sufficient to cancel any damage to the mod's image that this feature could bring.

[BloodMaster]

My solution would be to greet new players with a list of the most popular servers on open.mp, when they open the custom launcher (which should be matured before any work on any of these features should begin). If a server is popular, it is almost impossible for it to damage the mod's image, as it wouldn't be popular if it was bad. If they still choose to join a server other than the "featured" ones, they are bound to have watched a video of it or to have been brought by a friend. so they'll be knowing what they're getting into. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this would be sufficient to cancel any damage to the mod's image that this feature could bring.

I agree. However, they said multiple times that there'll be only one independent list... So there goes that.



It's really an interesting situation. I see your cries, and I feel them too. We'll just have to wait and see how they resolve this.

I want custom content as much as anybody else, I was just thinking about the good of the community, but it's on developers to balance it out.

[Godfather]

My solution would be to greet new players with a list of the most popular servers on open.mp, when they open the custom launcher (which should be matured before any work on any of these features should begin). If a server is popular, it is almost impossible for it to damage the mod's image, as it wouldn't be popular if it was bad. If they still choose to join a server other than the "featured" ones, they are bound to have watched a video of it or to have been brought by a friend. so they'll be knowing what they're getting into. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this would be sufficient to cancel any damage to the mod's image that this feature could bring.

I agree. However, they said multiple times that there'll be only one independent list... So there goes that.



It's really an interesting situation. I see your cries, and I feel them too. We'll just have to wait and see how they resolve this.

I want custom content as much as anybody else, I was just thinking about the good of the community, but it's on developers to balance it out.

You are being arrogant and selfish. You are not thinking about the good for the community, you are thinking for your pesonal interest and wishes related to this?mp mod.



Custom content will shape each community different and it is to server owners and players to choose how will they shape their gaming experience, not your choice to limit all of them by stupid ideas.

[carl]

Understandable.

[BloodMaster]

My solution would be to greet new players with a list of the most popular servers on open.mp, when they open the custom launcher (which should be matured before any work on any of these features should begin). If a server is popular, it is almost impossible for it to damage the mod's image, as it wouldn't be popular if it was bad. If they still choose to join a server other than the "featured" ones, they are bound to have watched a video of it or to have been brought by a friend. so they'll be knowing what they're getting into. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this would be sufficient to cancel any damage to the mod's image that this feature could bring.

I agree. However, they said multiple times that there'll be only one independent list... So there goes that.

It's really an interesting situation. I see your cries, and I feel them too. We'll just have to wait and see how they resolve this.
I want custom content as much as anybody else, I was just thinking about the good of the community, but it's on developers to balance it out.

You are being arrogant and selfish. You are not thinking about the good for the community, you are thinking for your pesonal interest and wishes related to this?mp mod.

Custom content will shape each community different and it is to server owners and players to choose how will they shape their gaming experience, not your choice to limit all of them by stupid ideas.

yOu aRe bEiNg ArRoGAnT AnD SeLfIsH

Why so mad bro? It's not like I have a saying in what happens. I'm just sharing my wishes, just like you.
We just don't share the same definition of "good for the community", that's all.

[nik]

I agree completely with OP. This is the fundamental problem with MTA. MTA is barely related to San Andreas.
If anyone disagrees they have MTA that they can visit.