Give mods an option to not disable achievements

[OdinYggd]

I got the idea from a discussion about adding blueprint import/export capacity to the game.

Currently blueprint export is implemented in mods, but if you use mods you cannot get achievements. Many people are now playing strictly vanilla for achievement hunting purposes, and matters that would normally be solved by modding are left as unresolved issues requiring in-game workarounds in order to avoid disabling achievements.

Would it be possible to provide a data field on the modding interface that allows the mod maker to specify if they feel their mod should disable achievements?

Like so, useful tools like blueprint export and various calculators with in-game UIs can be loaded and used without harming achievement earning. At the same time, mods that affect game balance such as weapons packs and resource spawners still disable achievements because they do not necessarially respect the vanilla game balance or rules.

In a single player game, the definition of cheating is highly variable and opinion based. This type of system could at least allow mod makers and the community to suggest useful features for promotion as well as letting the game player define what they consider cheating while still keeping the game enjoyable for as many people as possible.

[ssilk]

Would it be possible to provide a data field on the modding interface that allows the mod maker to specify if they feel their mod should disable achievements?

Hm. Like so this is really easy to hack.

[Klonan]

Mods don't disabled achievements, mods can even add their own achievements, they are simply separated from vanilla achievements

[OdinYggd]

Would it be possible to provide a data field on the modding interface that allows the mod maker to specify if they feel their mod should disable achievements?

Hm. Like so this is really easy to hack.

Somewhat intentionally, because the definition of cheating varies with each player. The achievements should be more of goals to try to get to, not any sort of competitive measure of a player's skill.

Unfortunately anything that can be controlled by a mod author can also be customized further by players who know how. Even a system wherein the game staff issue unique identifiers for each mod so that the game can recognize them individually and decide what is a cheat and what isn't- savvy players would figure out they can copy this code from a mod that isn't a cheat into one that is, allowing them to cheat their way to vanilla achievements.

[Koub]

An achievement shows what you have achieved under defined (and controlled) conditions.
An achievement of, let's say, kill 1000000 biters obtained in a vanilla game will not have the same intrinsic value than the same achievement obtained with a mod that spawns continuous hordes of modded biters that fave 1 hp and make no damage.

The only thing I'd feel should be OK are purely cosmetical mods (for color blind people, or with only high res textures, ...) For this, I agree, I'd like the game to be able to detect if a mod changes anything to the game apart from vieuals, and not disable vanilla achievements for these. But I don't know if it's technically possible, and how much effort it would take to add this.

[mattj256]

IMHO the best way to handle this is for the developers to make a list of permitted Lua commands (whitelist).
If something is on the list it has no effect on achievements. Otherwise achievements are disabled.
This probably involves significant development work and/or changing the API. I don't expect it to be implemented. I figure it never hurts to ask.

Unfortunately anything that can be controlled by a mod author can also be customized further by players who know how. Even a system wherein the game staff issue unique identifiers for each mod so that the game can recognize them individually and decide what is a cheat and what isn't- savvy players would figure out they can copy this code from a mod that isn't a cheat into one that is, allowing them to cheat their way to vanilla achievements.

It's possible to use cryptography to verify that a mod hasn't been tampered with. Whether the developers want to implement this is another matter...

I really wish I could use the "No hand crafting" mod when going for the "lazy bastard" achievement!

[zebediah49]

It's possible to use cryptography to verify that a mod hasn't been tampered with. Whether the developers want to implement this is another matter...

Pretty sure that goes against most everything that the game devs appear to stand for in terms of the game being open.

Strictly speaking, I'm pretty sure you could manually mod the base-game without breaking it being considered vanilla. You shouldn't, and it'd be a pain in the neck, but you could.

[CorBlimey]

I would love it if using the console didn't disable modded achievements. Achievements on a modded game are local only anyway so I don't see the problem with ignoring console use.

I used a simple little time slow-down command to debug some combinators and now locked out forevermore

[ssilk]

CorBlimey, what you want are more specialized commands. Like /color: A /speed-command.

But if you use the console it is currently like using a mod.

[orzelek]

CorBlimey, what you want are more specialized commands. Like /color: A /speed-command.

But if you use the console it is currently like using a mod.

Console is now worse then a mod. Any /c command disables any kind of achievements.

With mods you have separate modded achievements that are still tracked.

[usafphoenix]

No. the only way to keep the game relatively open source and also make it "possible" to do what has been suggested is having the game upon load, connect to a server for a list of hashes, created by the authors for specific versions of mods on the mod portal. and those mods would be excluded.
This.....is too much work. it's really not worth the chances of it breaking or being circumvented in such a way that enables cheating. Even using hashes is not perfect.

[Koub]

Seriously ? that's a helluva necro.