Released Cherrier Picnic ('92 - '03) [PAID] 1.4

Yeah, it's "just" a mod. I'm not a big fan of paid mods myself BUT I can see why modders like Lucas want to make some cash off their mods. They spent a crap load of time and effort into making them as high-quality as possible, at least with most paid mods. And as someone who tried the demo version of this one, I have to say that the full mod would be worth the few dollars.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. Or just wait until you're old enough to get a credit card.

 

So don't?

I wouldn't even call this a mod, it's (third party) content in its own right. It has value because I derive value from it as a consumer.

 

I think I mentioned this in one of the (many) other threads about paid mods. It's a semantics thing, sure, but I think that within the context of that discussion, there ought to be a distinction.

It makes sense to me that if you modify something, like parts of the game itself, it's a mod. If you create additional content for the game, it's content. I might have used this metaphor before, but if you change/add walls, paint or replace the windows in your house, you've modified it, but you haven't modified anything if all you've done is add some furniture, you've added contents.

Could you mod a Covet into a Picnic? Maybe, but that's not what's happened here. It's built from scratch and drops into the game without modifying the game itself. That ought to make it content, surely.
If you took a Covet Jbeam and stuck a Saxo mesh over the top of it, that makes it more of a mod (a shit one at that).

But more importantly, think about people's perception of paying for mods versus paying for content.

I'd argue that third-party is the perfect description. If it doesn't come from BeamNG themselves then it's third-party, Lucas is a third party, so are the developers of BeamMP and KissMP, until such time that they're employed by BeamNG at least.

Like I said, it's semantics and challenges established nomenclature, but food for thought nonetheless.

 

Semantics and challenges, yadda yadda yadda, Picnic is a mod as it modifies the vanilla game content.

 

It doesn't touch vanilla game content. It adds to it.

 

So then 90% of the mods out there aren't mods?

 

If it changes the behaviour of the game, including its base content, then it's a mod.
If it's entirely separate then it's content.

Examples of mods might be vehicle skins, sounds, camera tools, UI tweaks.
Examples of content might be entire vehicles or maps, but only if they don't use base game assets.

 

Correct.

@LucasBE - does the Picnic use any base game assets?

 

Probably tires, maybe rims, possibly a few textures

 

It does indirectly, the main thing I can think of are the tires and the steel wheels ( as mentioned by @jackmo2207 ), it also reuses the same LUA code for the gauges clock as the one in the I-Series.
That's about it I think.

 

People, I hate to be that one guy, but I have to question why we are arguing about this? Does it matter?

Clearly this is what I call "non dev made dlc" /s

 

I think it does matter. If people put all third-party mods in the same boat, then it's harder to make the justification that mods are worth paying for, because good quality work is being tarred with the same brush as meshslaps. Just look at the other threads, or worse still, Facebook comments. There's a lot of ignorance within the community over the amount of effort it takes to make vehicles for this game. Those making cars properly aren't hacking the game to work different to how it's intended, they're extending the game by adding playable content to it. People pay for content, they don't want to pay for mods.

@LucasBE - I'm assuming your car is referencing duplicates of the actual in-game assets within its own file structure though, instead of referencing them directly, right?

Like I've said before, it's semantics, I'm not expecting anyone to change the way they refer to user-created material. I'm just pointing out that if people are going to complain about this "wave of paid content" that's apparently going to ruin the game, they ought to at least be aware of what it is they'd be paying for.

 

nice mod, but its expensive ._.

 

no its not

 

its... its like less than 4 euro

 

Just earn the money by taking out the trash. You'll probably earn it in less than 3 days.

 

Still expensive if you compare the base price of the game to the price of the mod. How many default cars do we have in game? 25? So even ommitting maps the price of a car should not be more than 22€/25 =~ 1 €.

 

Wow that one was a duesy to unpack. Have you ever considered the fact that maybe the base game is underpriced? Also this mod could be considered DLC. Games sell community made DLC packs all the time. I want you to find me a solid 5 examples not on-sale where a DLC has the exact same price to content ratio as the base game its based on. Now you might be thinking well LucasBE isn't the Beamng.drive developer so the price for the mod is overpriced. However a simple economics lesson will prove why that is false. It's called supply and demand. Now the supply of Picnic hatchbacks is infinite. LucasBE is not going to run out of copies of the mod. However the total potential audiance is. Everyone who bought the game is not an infinite number. Now obviously some of those people aren't active in the community, can't afford to spend extra money or simply don't play the game anymore. Now the fact that as much of the demographic that is active in the community has bought the mod proves there is demand for the product at that price. Which obviously means that it is not overpriced. Now if he only sold 1 or 2 copies a month then yes the mod might be overpriced. Any other questions?