this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2023
66 points (100.0% liked)
PC Gaming
25 readers
1 users here now
Discuss Games, Hardware and News on PC Gaming **Discord** https://discord.gg/4bxJgkY **Mastodon** https://cupoftea.social **Donate** https://ko-fi.com/cupofteasocial **Wiki** https://www.pcgamingwiki.com
founded 1 year ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think that there are certain things that can be modded on consoles, but console modding is inexorably going to run into a large limitation -- games tend to push consoles closer to their limits than they do PCs. If you're a game developer, you know what a console user has and can consume resources up to that point. On PCs, you don't, as different users have different computers, so you have to have a somwhat-soft resource usage cap and have some headroom for some users even at release time.
Not all mods eat up memory or CPU time or GPU cycles. But a number do.
With PCs, one major thing that modding has done for Skyrim or Fallout 4 is to just update the game with higher resolution textures and models to reflect what current hardware can handle, as PCs continue a more-incremental march forward. Throw shaders, ENBs into the mix to leverage more-plentiful GPU cycles. That's directly-tied to there now being more headroom to work with. Can't really do that on the consoles in the same way.
There are certainly some major areas that modding has explored that mod authors could do, like adding new areas or the like. But what could be done on consoles is always going to face that limitation. And you can't fix it by making consoles upgradeable or something, or you lose the benefits of the console in the first place, the fact that it's a consistent, fixed system.
Another issue -- consoles are designed to be easy to set up and hard to break. A number of tools that have existed for past Bethesda games act on the game in ways that could break it in confusing ways. I'm not saying that safer analogs couldn't be built for at least some of these -- and even on the PC, I wish that there were better tools for identifying issues and rolling them back. So this isn't a fundamental limitation like the above. But I think that to some degree, the aim of a console vendor, to create an easy-to-use, reliable, cannot-dick-it-up environment is going to conflict with at least some of the tools that exist on the PC.
For at least some users, I think that it might be easier to provide a way to just use their PC to game on a TV. Steam has tried to do that to some extent, with Big Picture Mode and such. some people don't want to have a dedicated gaming PC in their living room, though. Maybe you could facilitate that with hardware. Like, okay, if you've got a computer in one room and Ethernet between the TV and the PC, have a little device in the living room that:
That doesn't solve the issue for people who want a console because they want to avoid PC-style upgrades or troubleshooting, but I think that those people may tend to hit the more-fundamental issues I mentioned above of console vendors aiming for more of a plug-and-play experience on a predictable device clashing with modding.