To start with, you'll cut off the retarded 10MB limit. That is an absolutely ridiculous file size, even "minor conversions" for SC1 were bigger than 10MB. As to your link, that just loads a map. When you stop playing it it will be gone, a mod should stay, and remain in a cross-map environment, a mod's like completely changing a SC2 game type, for example melee becomes something else, melee could become anything and you could play many melee maps, from Kulas Ravine to Lost Temple and you'd have the same gameplay, the mod's one.
"Just loads a map"? That's how the whole campaign works! There is cross-map, there's saving, there's custom UI, unlimited size. I'm not sure you understand the possibilities the editor offers.
Look at the wings of liberty campaign - everything done there can be done in a total conversion (well, except for the stupid, blizzard-only functions).
Theoretically you can make total conversions that would work, look and play like Baldurs Gate, Dungeon Siege or Heroes of M&M (I actually considered making that last one :D)
Having a mod that affects all melee maps is a great idea, but it's not possible right now (or rather, it is, but you'd get banned). it would also totally screw up any custom maps on battle.net.
Blizzard could implement something like that by allowing us to publish standalone sc2mods that could be attached (like a dependancy) to any melee map we choose. All within the battle.net interface. An example would be attaching the SC2 Brood War mod to any melee map.
That's the real beauty in a total conversion/modification, how far can you actually go with it. Imagine you're making a pony mod. You're going to want your battle.net menus all pinky and butterfly-y and not... tychus... Though, let's go out of the box and think this "elements outside of the map" do not extend to just battle.net menus.
If you're doing a singleplayer total conversion, then the battle.net menus shouldn't even be seen. They're pointless, their only purpose is to facilitate multiplayer, and modded multiplayer is impossible.
I'm going to repeat myself: this all sounds like modding for the sake of modding. What is the point if the game offers a tool for that?
If Rome Total War had an editor with the capabilities of the SC2 editor, then Europa Barbarorum would be done in that editor, not by modding files.
Let's continue the discussion without trolling. Iskatu, you're defining mod as changing 1 things in the game, all map will be changed. While mapping is the changes of a map, where other map will not be effected. (Dota map example).
As I stated before, map does not "add" things to the engine, they override default setting. Let's say for example you changed the paladin's voice acting. Now that involve editing the default mpq and all map with paladin will took that changes. For sc2, its entirely different. If I have a map where I already imported my voice acting for paladin and not using the default one, mine will be played, not yours. The mod in a map override the default mod of the game.
Now if you want to change voice acting of paladin for many map to take effect. sc2mod file is the blizzard's "mod" way of doing it. Load some modification on a mod file, let your map depends on that mod, and it will be affected.
With the sc2 engine designed like this, the line between mapping and modding is effectively non-existent. All of this arguing is now just boil down to "wanting a freely modding environment without arbitrarily restriction and size restriction".
As I stated before, map does not "add" things to the engine, they override default setting. Let's say for example you changed the paladin's voice acting. Now that involve editing the default mpq and all map with paladin will took that changes. For sc2, its entirely different. If I have a map where I already imported my voice acting for paladin and not using the default one, mine will be played, not yours. The mod in a map override the default mod of the game.
Now if you want to change voice acting of paladin for many map to take effect. sc2mod file is the blizzard's "mod" way of doing it. Load some modification on a mod file, let your map depends on that mod, and it will be affected.
Their point, though, is that a "mod" would change any map you play through StarCraft 2, rather than being limited to a single map. Adding a mod dependency to a map requires the map to be unlocked and then you're still limited by the size of the map and the amount of possible maps that can be uploaded (supposing you want to play with a friend or friends). Maybe I just get it because I came from SC1, but what they're saying makes sense and it does seem like a big difference. Then again, I've always seen "total conversion" as being synonymous with SC1 modding, so perhaps that's why.
I just have to say that all members of all sides of this conversation are horribly butchering the actual meaning of words and thus creating silly posts and superfluous arguments simply because you're saying the same thing without realizing it.
Mapping/Campaigning
When you are Mapping, you're creating a setting that is NOT transferrable. This usually means the physical placement of assets and what have you on a map. Campaigning is exactly the same but relates to the story driven aspects of the map. While plots are easily transferrable, they MUST be adapted in order to fit the new setting.
Modding
When you are modding, you are not creating a Map or Campaign. You're creating a ruleset, engine, assets etc. The objects that can interact inside a map or campaign. Many of the people arguing in here seem to think that Modding requires you to alter Blizzard's MPQ files. This is entirely false. When you create a Mod through the Editor it creates a new MPQ file for you. In fact, everything you make gets its own MPQ file. This means the idea that you can only create a Mod outside of the Editor is also completely false because Blizzard has done an amazing job supporting Modding.
If you like the editor you use the Trigger and Data UIs to create content. If you're code savvy you can certainly create custom material outside of the editor using XML or Galaxy. As long as you are creating a NEW file and not messing with Blizzard's MPQs you're not doing anything illegal and its business as usual.
There is a general misunderstanding that the map upload limit applies to mods as well. This isn't true. While a map has a limit on the number of dependencies (mods) it can have, you can actually apply dependencies to those dependencies. This means you can chain mods together to create as many alterations as you need. Each of the mods can now fit under the size limit and you have an infinitely large game.
Now it is unknown if there is a hard limit to this given that nobody has tried (mostly due to lack of knowledge), but there ARE many projects (that I have seen first hand) that are running online (privately during testing) with massive art mods engine mods and [insertwhateveryouneed] mods that are chained together and working wonderfully on Battle.Net.
Conversion
Most of you who think that the Editor can't mod are actually talking about conversions: replacing the vast majority of content in Blizzard's dependencies. It is ENTIRELY possible to completely replace Blizzard dependencies in so far as you don't change the actual coding of the game. That means that if you are willing to put for the effort. Just take a look in the Project thread. There are several projects that are replacing large portions of the game already and anyone who wants to claim SC2 isn't modding is blind. Simply put, conversions are large-scale mods.
Hacking
All that remains is physically altering Blizzard's dependencies. This is where a lot of you are getting the most confused. The ones who are claiming SC2 Modding doesn't exist are actually talking about hacking. SC1 Modding wasn't modding. . . it was hacking.
The defining feature of hacking is that you aren't adding to (modding) or replacing (conversion) parts of the game, you're removing or changing them. Changes made through hacking are internal rather than external. What you believe to be new restrictions on modding in SC2 is actually entirely false. SC1 was far more restrictive because all you could do was hack, map or campaign. SC2 is amazing flexible in that you can now tell the game to use something other than itself to function. Hacking is completely unnecessary.
If you think that Blizzard's decision to make this illegal is restrictive, then you're very confused. Hacking destabilizes the game in that you don't have a solid foundation to build on. It really doesn't matter how good you are, at the end of the day Blizzard can't expect any sort of reliability from your hacked MPQs.
Thus if you take a moment to really think about this, SC2 modding is vastly superior to SC1's custom environment in every way.
While I agree with those definitions of Maps and Mods, it seems like the only difference between a Map and Mod would be if you're using a custom SCmod file or not.
You could have a custom map that imports custom assets and be considered a 'Map'. However, if you have the exact same map with the assets packed in its own mpq and suddenly that is now considered a 'Mod', even though it is contains the exact same content as the former? So this means L2D in its current incarnation is a 'mod', but if the models were included in the map it would be a 'map'?
Arbitrary size restrictions are fatal to pretty much any project of a significant scale, map or mod. Who does not want a free environment?
Blizzard's "mod" system is just the wc3 campaign system with a different interface, basically. It's a bit easier to work with but you need to change the maps for it to function.
Ugh... why would you want to go through the anguish of chaining together dependencies? A better solution would be to make a single large dependency and externally distribute it, if that's even possible.
Your missing the point, there is much more to DoTA than the map. In fact you can not create a DoTA map with just mapping. I never said anything about how big the map is, but DoTA involves heavy trigger work and lots of data editor modifications.
Whether it's 1 map or more is irrelevant, a mod doesn't HAVE to be a total conversion that works with multiple maps.
Even if you think it does, you could easily take DoTA, modify the map and have the same game mechanics. I.e. It's a mod even by your own definition.
Yeah, but the difference between a Map and a Mod is that a map is one single instance. If there was a DotA Mod, it would be like using DotA heroes in melee maps, TD's, Line Wars, Footies, etc.
I like the examples used already, however I think Blizzard has given us a perfect example of what a Mod and a Map are. We can make SC2Mod files. They are Mods. Mods are applied and used not in just one map, but in numerous maps. In this specific case, we are talking about complete mods, where we don't need to apply the SC2Mod to separate maps, but we "apply" it once to the game itself and the changes in our mod exist in an and all maps.
There is a general misunderstanding that the map upload limit applies to mods as well. This isn't true. While a map has a limit on the number of dependencies (mods) it can have, you can actually apply dependencies to those dependencies. This means you can chain mods together to create as many alterations as you need. Each of the mods can now fit under the size limit and you have an infinitely large game.
Now it is unknown if there is a hard limit to this given that nobody has tried (mostly due to lack of knowledge), but there ARE many projects (that I have seen first hand) that are running online (privately during testing) with massive art mods engine mods and [insertwhateveryouneed] mods that are chained together and working wonderfully on Battle.Net.
They have a cap on the size we can upload in total, ;\.
Ugh... why would you want to go through the anguish of chaining together dependencies? A better solution would be to make a single large dependency and externally distribute it, if that's even possible.
Well, I mean, what happens when you try to access a map using a dependency that's not actually located on battle.net, but on your drive? Does it still try to download it?
Yeah, but the difference between a Map and a Mod is that a map is one single instance. If there was a DotA Mod, it would be like using DotA heroes in melee maps, TD's, Line Wars, Footies, etc.
There is no where that specifies a mod has to be used on multiple maps =).
I think the main issue here is that there is a difference between "A Mod" (as in SC2mod) and "Modding".
You could move the DoTA data (heroes, abilities) to a mod, include it in the same map as a dependency, and then by your definition it is a mod, even though you are using the exact same modified data.
So I guess if you want to be technical, you could say DoTA is a map, not a mod. However it's not possible to make DoTA without modding. But the thread of this title is about "Modding", not "Mods" =)
Well, regarding the original topic, 'mapping' and 'modding' would come down to intent. That definition would apply if the creator intends to create a single custom map, or if they intend to create a mod. However, that definition is flawed, because there is no mutual exclusivity between maps and mods. You can make a Map into a Mod and vice versa. Making a custom map doesn't prevent you from turning it into a mod.
This is why I don't think the verb should be used as such, but rather to define the difference between someone who is actively working within the confines of the Map editor (thus mapping, and being a mapper) and someone who focuses on using external or abstract means of customization, such as creating custom assets or coding (thus modding, and being a modder). It's still a loose definition, but one that more aptly defines the two.
In my case specifically, I am a modder and not a mapper. I create models to be used in maps, but I don't create maps themselves. I would not consider this the same as someone who simply creates a SC2Mod/dependancy. I am a modder because of what I do, not whether or not I intend to put my work into a solitary map or packaged into a SC2Mod. This is the definition that I see being most practical and definitive. Where the line is drawn is another story, since there is a major grey area with what can be done with the map editor.
Well, I mean, what happens when you try to access a map using a dependency that's not actually located on battle.net, but on your drive? Does it still try to download it?
(To be specific, in a multiplayer game.)
You can't upload a map that has non-blizzard dependencies outside battle.net. I've experimented with uploading a dummy dependency and having the real one in the mods directory - that didn't work. I've tried editing the xml files that list the dependencies - that only managed to crash the game. I don't think there's any way to cheat the game into loading a local dependency :/
Chaining dependencies together is a stupid practice and we shouldn't be accepting it, we should be telling blizzard how much it sucks! Publishing a map with half a dozen dependencies on 3 separate regions is a serious pain in the ass.
You can't upload a map that has non-blizzard dependencies outside battle.net. I've experimented with uploading a dummy dependency and having the real one in the mods directory - that didn't work. I've tried editing the xml files that list the dependencies - that only managed to crash the game. I don't think there's any way to cheat the game into loading a local dependency :/
I'm sure it's possible, the same way it's possible for us to use fake maps. When you download a mod, does it go into your Battle.net Cache as well? If so, that's how you do it, :P.
The definition is very much technical and not related to the kind of assets being created, just the way in which they are employed. Blizzard, not communicating or supporting anything, doesn't make the situation any easier.
I personally see GalaxyEdit as no different than any of the other tools I have ever used, with the attribute that its primary function is oriented around mapping and not creating mods. However, since you can just pull data out of the map mpq with a single click, the editor - like wc3's - can be used to make something much larger. The Data Editor is just a very slow XML parser.
I personally don't see any reason to call a modeller something other than a modeller. I did voice work for an independent game - I'm just a voice actor. Not a modder, not an artist, not a game designer. Just a voice actor. I created a probe model for a Homeworld 2 total conversion that, like most projects, never made it past concept stages. For that project, I was just a modeller, not a modder. If I were a modder, that would insinuate I was doing much more with that project than just making a keeper probe. But I must made a model. I didn't interact with their project in any other manner.
The only perceived gray area is because in many of these games maps cannot contain these assets. In wc3 and sc2 they can contain these assets, but still restricted to their environment. I don't see any gray area at all. Just a set of tools and a set of environments.
Now to the chaining mod issue, it is a smart way to host up to hundred MB of project on battlenet. I will try to explain it with the current raised limit.
Let's say you have 300MB of project, then you need at least 3 bnet account
The map itself is 20MB and will depends on 4 mod, 20MB each: Assets1, Sounds1, Images, Library. That's 100MB of the 1st account
Then since your map has so much custom model and voice acting, the Assets1 mod file will again depends on Assets2 to Assets6, 20MB each hosted on the 2nd account. So on with Sounds1...
The other way someone else suggested for large map is make a 300MB .sc2mod stored locally. The file with the same name will be uploaded on bnet with empty contents. If any users attempt to run the map with the bnet mod file, it will tell them to go download the 300MB file and replace it with the empty cache version for the map to play properly. A patcher can be written to do this task for users. Map using mod like these can perfectly be run on an online environment.
Switching the map/mod files in the cache doesn't work, it just crashes the game.
How many people have 168KB/s upload (about 1.4mbps in marketing speek)? Because that's the minimum it takes to upload a 20MB file within the 2 minute limit.
They really need to increase the timeout, especially with the new limits. I'm not entirely sure why such a strict timeout is needed at all? The publishing system will prevent you from uploading bigger files, and you need to be logged in to publish, so if anyone tries to maliciously upload a really big file you would know the account it's linked to.
Timeout cap, as Ko cap, were both instated because "everything" multiplayer is done online.
These caps avoid them having to "properly address" potential traffic jams (also time related issues such as desynch) or other product control/security issues.
blizz's is testing its "new" system (remember this is one of the largest selling "projected" product ever made).
blizz had no way of knowing how many mapmakers were going to be using their system.
Now, with no lan, i hope they quickly realize that these caps are beyond ridiculous, they are indeed counter productive. In fact, beyond being "groomed" by them directly, i think it is "technically" impossible to upload a "major" multiplayer (playable online) mod (one that would qualify as "original" (models/sounds etc), this from their own wording).
ps: i'm basing this on MaverK's brood war tribute ; the timeout cap is his only concern and blizz should know/have recognized by now their own position/shortcomings when it comes to something so "close to home".
"Just loads a map"? That's how the whole campaign works! There is cross-map, there's saving, there's custom UI, unlimited size. I'm not sure you understand the possibilities the editor offers.
Look at the wings of liberty campaign - everything done there can be done in a total conversion (well, except for the stupid, blizzard-only functions). Theoretically you can make total conversions that would work, look and play like Baldurs Gate, Dungeon Siege or Heroes of M&M (I actually considered making that last one :D)
Having a mod that affects all melee maps is a great idea, but it's not possible right now (or rather, it is, but you'd get banned). it would also totally screw up any custom maps on battle.net.
Blizzard could implement something like that by allowing us to publish standalone sc2mods that could be attached (like a dependancy) to any melee map we choose. All within the battle.net interface. An example would be attaching the SC2 Brood War mod to any melee map.
If you're doing a singleplayer total conversion, then the battle.net menus shouldn't even be seen. They're pointless, their only purpose is to facilitate multiplayer, and modded multiplayer is impossible.
I'm going to repeat myself: this all sounds like modding for the sake of modding. What is the point if the game offers a tool for that?
If Rome Total War had an editor with the capabilities of the SC2 editor, then Europa Barbarorum would be done in that editor, not by modding files.
@Tolkfan: Go
If you make a functional HoMM with RMG and computer turns that don't take 10 minutes sign me up bro.
@IskatuMesk: Go
Let's continue the discussion without trolling. Iskatu, you're defining mod as changing 1 things in the game, all map will be changed. While mapping is the changes of a map, where other map will not be effected. (Dota map example).
As I stated before, map does not "add" things to the engine, they override default setting. Let's say for example you changed the paladin's voice acting. Now that involve editing the default mpq and all map with paladin will took that changes. For sc2, its entirely different. If I have a map where I already imported my voice acting for paladin and not using the default one, mine will be played, not yours. The mod in a map override the default mod of the game.
Now if you want to change voice acting of paladin for many map to take effect. sc2mod file is the blizzard's "mod" way of doing it. Load some modification on a mod file, let your map depends on that mod, and it will be affected.
With the sc2 engine designed like this, the line between mapping and modding is effectively non-existent. All of this arguing is now just boil down to "wanting a freely modding environment without arbitrarily restriction and size restriction".
Their point, though, is that a "mod" would change any map you play through StarCraft 2, rather than being limited to a single map. Adding a mod dependency to a map requires the map to be unlocked and then you're still limited by the size of the map and the amount of possible maps that can be uploaded (supposing you want to play with a friend or friends). Maybe I just get it because I came from SC1, but what they're saying makes sense and it does seem like a big difference. Then again, I've always seen "total conversion" as being synonymous with SC1 modding, so perhaps that's why.
Administrator of Staredit.net and GalaxyWiki.net
I just have to say that all members of all sides of this conversation are horribly butchering the actual meaning of words and thus creating silly posts and superfluous arguments simply because you're saying the same thing without realizing it.
Mapping/Campaigning
When you are Mapping, you're creating a setting that is NOT transferrable. This usually means the physical placement of assets and what have you on a map. Campaigning is exactly the same but relates to the story driven aspects of the map. While plots are easily transferrable, they MUST be adapted in order to fit the new setting.
Modding
When you are modding, you are not creating a Map or Campaign. You're creating a ruleset, engine, assets etc. The objects that can interact inside a map or campaign. Many of the people arguing in here seem to think that Modding requires you to alter Blizzard's MPQ files. This is entirely false. When you create a Mod through the Editor it creates a new MPQ file for you. In fact, everything you make gets its own MPQ file. This means the idea that you can only create a Mod outside of the Editor is also completely false because Blizzard has done an amazing job supporting Modding.
If you like the editor you use the Trigger and Data UIs to create content. If you're code savvy you can certainly create custom material outside of the editor using XML or Galaxy. As long as you are creating a NEW file and not messing with Blizzard's MPQs you're not doing anything illegal and its business as usual.
There is a general misunderstanding that the map upload limit applies to mods as well. This isn't true. While a map has a limit on the number of dependencies (mods) it can have, you can actually apply dependencies to those dependencies. This means you can chain mods together to create as many alterations as you need. Each of the mods can now fit under the size limit and you have an infinitely large game.
Now it is unknown if there is a hard limit to this given that nobody has tried (mostly due to lack of knowledge), but there ARE many projects (that I have seen first hand) that are running online (privately during testing) with massive art mods engine mods and [insertwhateveryouneed] mods that are chained together and working wonderfully on Battle.Net.
Conversion
Most of you who think that the Editor can't mod are actually talking about conversions: replacing the vast majority of content in Blizzard's dependencies. It is ENTIRELY possible to completely replace Blizzard dependencies in so far as you don't change the actual coding of the game. That means that if you are willing to put for the effort. Just take a look in the Project thread. There are several projects that are replacing large portions of the game already and anyone who wants to claim SC2 isn't modding is blind. Simply put, conversions are large-scale mods.
Hacking
All that remains is physically altering Blizzard's dependencies. This is where a lot of you are getting the most confused. The ones who are claiming SC2 Modding doesn't exist are actually talking about hacking. SC1 Modding wasn't modding. . . it was hacking.
The defining feature of hacking is that you aren't adding to (modding) or replacing (conversion) parts of the game, you're removing or changing them. Changes made through hacking are internal rather than external. What you believe to be new restrictions on modding in SC2 is actually entirely false. SC1 was far more restrictive because all you could do was hack, map or campaign. SC2 is amazing flexible in that you can now tell the game to use something other than itself to function. Hacking is completely unnecessary.
If you think that Blizzard's decision to make this illegal is restrictive, then you're very confused. Hacking destabilizes the game in that you don't have a solid foundation to build on. It really doesn't matter how good you are, at the end of the day Blizzard can't expect any sort of reliability from your hacked MPQs.
Thus if you take a moment to really think about this, SC2 modding is vastly superior to SC1's custom environment in every way.
@ProzaicMuse
While I agree with those definitions of Maps and Mods, it seems like the only difference between a Map and Mod would be if you're using a custom SCmod file or not.
You could have a custom map that imports custom assets and be considered a 'Map'. However, if you have the exact same map with the assets packed in its own mpq and suddenly that is now considered a 'Mod', even though it is contains the exact same content as the former? So this means L2D in its current incarnation is a 'mod', but if the models were included in the map it would be a 'map'?
Don't worry, my team and I have a good mod in the works, which will go with our game. Hang tight.
@progammer: Go
Arbitrary size restrictions are fatal to pretty much any project of a significant scale, map or mod. Who does not want a free environment?
Blizzard's "mod" system is just the wc3 campaign system with a different interface, basically. It's a bit easier to work with but you need to change the maps for it to function.
@ProzaicMuze: Go
Ugh... why would you want to go through the anguish of chaining together dependencies? A better solution would be to make a single large dependency and externally distribute it, if that's even possible.
Whew, I didn't expect the thread to blow up like this, haha. So yes, I read it all! Keep up the discussion...
Yeah, but the difference between a Map and a Mod is that a map is one single instance. If there was a DotA Mod, it would be like using DotA heroes in melee maps, TD's, Line Wars, Footies, etc.
I like the examples used already, however I think Blizzard has given us a perfect example of what a Mod and a Map are. We can make SC2Mod files. They are Mods. Mods are applied and used not in just one map, but in numerous maps. In this specific case, we are talking about complete mods, where we don't need to apply the SC2Mod to separate maps, but we "apply" it once to the game itself and the changes in our mod exist in an and all maps.
They have a cap on the size we can upload in total, ;\.
That's what Mapster is for, :).
Well, I mean, what happens when you try to access a map using a dependency that's not actually located on battle.net, but on your drive? Does it still try to download it?
(To be specific, in a multiplayer game.)
There is no where that specifies a mod has to be used on multiple maps =).
I think the main issue here is that there is a difference between "A Mod" (as in SC2mod) and "Modding".
You could move the DoTA data (heroes, abilities) to a mod, include it in the same map as a dependency, and then by your definition it is a mod, even though you are using the exact same modified data.
So I guess if you want to be technical, you could say DoTA is a map, not a mod. However it's not possible to make DoTA without modding. But the thread of this title is about "Modding", not "Mods" =)
Well, regarding the original topic, 'mapping' and 'modding' would come down to intent. That definition would apply if the creator intends to create a single custom map, or if they intend to create a mod. However, that definition is flawed, because there is no mutual exclusivity between maps and mods. You can make a Map into a Mod and vice versa. Making a custom map doesn't prevent you from turning it into a mod.
This is why I don't think the verb should be used as such, but rather to define the difference between someone who is actively working within the confines of the Map editor (thus mapping, and being a mapper) and someone who focuses on using external or abstract means of customization, such as creating custom assets or coding (thus modding, and being a modder). It's still a loose definition, but one that more aptly defines the two.
In my case specifically, I am a modder and not a mapper. I create models to be used in maps, but I don't create maps themselves. I would not consider this the same as someone who simply creates a SC2Mod/dependancy. I am a modder because of what I do, not whether or not I intend to put my work into a solitary map or packaged into a SC2Mod. This is the definition that I see being most practical and definitive. Where the line is drawn is another story, since there is a major grey area with what can be done with the map editor.
You can't upload a map that has non-blizzard dependencies outside battle.net. I've experimented with uploading a dummy dependency and having the real one in the mods directory - that didn't work. I've tried editing the xml files that list the dependencies - that only managed to crash the game. I don't think there's any way to cheat the game into loading a local dependency :/
Chaining dependencies together is a stupid practice and we shouldn't be accepting it, we should be telling blizzard how much it sucks! Publishing a map with half a dozen dependencies on 3 separate regions is a serious pain in the ass.
I'm sure it's possible, the same way it's possible for us to use fake maps. When you download a mod, does it go into your Battle.net Cache as well? If so, that's how you do it, :P.
@KratsAU: Go
The definition is very much technical and not related to the kind of assets being created, just the way in which they are employed. Blizzard, not communicating or supporting anything, doesn't make the situation any easier.
@Triceron: Go
I personally see GalaxyEdit as no different than any of the other tools I have ever used, with the attribute that its primary function is oriented around mapping and not creating mods. However, since you can just pull data out of the map mpq with a single click, the editor - like wc3's - can be used to make something much larger. The Data Editor is just a very slow XML parser.
I personally don't see any reason to call a modeller something other than a modeller. I did voice work for an independent game - I'm just a voice actor. Not a modder, not an artist, not a game designer. Just a voice actor. I created a probe model for a Homeworld 2 total conversion that, like most projects, never made it past concept stages. For that project, I was just a modeller, not a modder. If I were a modder, that would insinuate I was doing much more with that project than just making a keeper probe. But I must made a model. I didn't interact with their project in any other manner.
The only perceived gray area is because in many of these games maps cannot contain these assets. In wc3 and sc2 they can contain these assets, but still restricted to their environment. I don't see any gray area at all. Just a set of tools and a set of environments.
@ProzaicMuze: Go
Muze is the man.
Now to the chaining mod issue, it is a smart way to host up to hundred MB of project on battlenet. I will try to explain it with the current raised limit.
Let's say you have 300MB of project, then you need at least 3 bnet account
The map itself is 20MB and will depends on 4 mod, 20MB each: Assets1, Sounds1, Images, Library. That's 100MB of the 1st account
Then since your map has so much custom model and voice acting, the Assets1 mod file will again depends on Assets2 to Assets6, 20MB each hosted on the 2nd account. So on with Sounds1...
The other way someone else suggested for large map is make a 300MB .sc2mod stored locally. The file with the same name will be uploaded on bnet with empty contents. If any users attempt to run the map with the bnet mod file, it will tell them to go download the 300MB file and replace it with the empty cache version for the map to play properly. A patcher can be written to do this task for users. Map using mod like these can perfectly be run on an online environment.
Switching the map/mod files in the cache doesn't work, it just crashes the game.
How many people have 168KB/s upload (about 1.4mbps in marketing speek)? Because that's the minimum it takes to upload a 20MB file within the 2 minute limit.
I've only got 100kb/s unfortunately.
They really need to increase the timeout, especially with the new limits. I'm not entirely sure why such a strict timeout is needed at all? The publishing system will prevent you from uploading bigger files, and you need to be logged in to publish, so if anyone tries to maliciously upload a really big file you would know the account it's linked to.
@progammer: Go
Well, let's say I don't have 3 sc2 accounts available, so we go with option 2. Has anyone actually tested this-
Awww. It was a good idea. But I figured Battle.net would stand in the way.
I have 300kb/s but almost no one else I know has even 1/3 that.
Timeout cap, as Ko cap, were both instated because "everything" multiplayer is done online.
These caps avoid them having to "properly address" potential traffic jams (also time related issues such as desynch) or other product control/security issues.
blizz's is testing its "new" system (remember this is one of the largest selling "projected" product ever made).
blizz had no way of knowing how many mapmakers were going to be using their system.
Now, with no lan, i hope they quickly realize that these caps are beyond ridiculous, they are indeed counter productive. In fact, beyond being "groomed" by them directly, i think it is "technically" impossible to upload a "major" multiplayer (playable online) mod (one that would qualify as "original" (models/sounds etc), this from their own wording).
ps: i'm basing this on MaverK's brood war tribute ; the timeout cap is his only concern and blizz should know/have recognized by now their own position/shortcomings when it comes to something so "close to home".