Black mesa Garry's Mod

[wafflewarrior7]

Don’t hold this against me, But I play garry’s mod every now and again, And when black mesa comes out, I’d love to have it’s NPC’s on it. How cool it would be to have Hecu grunts against hordes of combine or zombies or even antlions.
So, for all you Lua coding geniuses out there, When black mesa comes out, Would you be so good as to post the npcs on Garry’s mod . org

[Mont_Blanc]

No.

[Stewy]

I would like to know that to.

1. I like gmod
2. It would be fun to walk around in black mesa from BMS and not the stupid remakes of it in garry’s mod.org:’(
3. Some of the black mesa source props could be fun to use in gmod.:freeman:

[sebbie10]

They could release a model pack

[Stewy]

@sebbie10

They could release a model pack

That would be nice.

[Nosehole]

Yeah, but they have stated multiple times that they won’t.

[JohnKiller118]

@Mont_Blanc

No.

[Ramirezoid]

Officially, no. Somebody on facepunch will eventually port the models over to GMOD and make snpcs with broken animations.

[Luigis_1]

@Ramirezoid

Officially, no. Somebody on facepunch will eventually port the models over to GMOD and make snpcs with broken animations.

sadly this will probably be the case

[Dillxn]

Thanks for visiting us with your question! There will be no official content pack made for Garry’s Mod containing assets from Black Mesa. The developers have stated that they do not wish for their work to be used in other modifications. The next time you have a question, please feel free to ask it in here, rather than starting a new thread about it.

[Sitten_duck]

You can make a mod that uses BM assets as long as it requires BM to be installed on your computer, but any modification that takes BM assets and repackages them into another mod, without requiring BM to be installed, is against the dev’s wishes. Wafflewarrior, haven’t you asked this before? or am I thinking of someone else?

EDIT: NVM it was someone else. For some reason when I saw your name it almost seemed like you had asked that before.

[Danny_Smith]

The dev team would not make the addon, it would be the comunity.

[Sitten_duck]

I’m not sure how the whole garry’s mod thing works, whether you can make it be a mod of BM or if you have to repackage the models, but if you do the latter that is against the dev’s wishes. there was a whole thread about this awhile ago, I’ll see if I can’t look it up.

edit: Here’s some commentary on it. Here is a post that probably explains it the best.

@RabidMonkey

Yes, this, basically. Minimods and custom content designed for use in BM will be acceptable; ripping our content without permission to use in your own separate mod or elsewhere will be unacceptable.

@raw_bean

Firstly, single-player is harder to do, so that’s why multiplayer is done more often and why single-player mods are often poor.

Secondly, the devs have no problem with people making extra maps/campaigns and mods for/to Black Mesa, that require Black Mesa to be installed to play. What they have a problem with is a mod or content pack that takes Black Mesa content and repackages it without permission. So for example if someone made a seven hour war mod that only required HL2 to play yet the download contained BM models taken from BM and repackaged into the seven hour war mod files, that would be essentially theft. You compared them to Valve, but Valve would be just as down on a mod which repackaged their content so that it could be used by players who didn’t have the game it came from, with the exception of the shared content in the Source files. So BM can reuse things from HL2 like headcrabs and vorts even if the person using the mod doesn’t have HL2, because they come packaged with every Source game that includes the SDK, but they’d come down on BM like a ton of bricks if for some reason BM included models from Left 4 Dead that could be played with by people who didn’t own that game. Same thing here.

Though it’s probably inevitable, they’re not keen on people packaging up BM content for use in GMod. Even if whoever does this first does credit the team it’s unlikely that every person who makes a video or picture or webcomic or whatever with it will do.

EDIT: The issue of credit is more complicated that whether people pass off work as their own. On the flip side, if they DO give the mod credit, but themselves do very poor or offensive work, the mod will become associated with this bad or offensive content through no fault of the BM devs and with no way of quality controlling what their work is used in or how it’s presented.

[Mabilis]

@Sitten_duck

You can make a mod that uses BM assets as long as it requires BM to be installed on your computer

So, to clarify. I can use models (and textures ?) from Black Mesa if it is installed on my computer for my mod? And I WILL credit the BM devs.

[Stewy]

Just found this can’t believ people do that!
That’s so NOT awsome!
?i am new so is this from the leak?

CONTENT REMOVED BY USER

[Sitten_duck]

@Stewy

Just found this can’t believ people do that!
That’s so NOT awsome!
?i am new so is this from the leak?
-snip-

If you suspect a leak, do not post a link to it on the forums for everyone and their brother to view and go download, if you suspect a leak PM a dev. Now remove the link in your post.

Second, I don’t have gmod account to see what that is to tell you. There are some BM leaked material floating around on the web from a leak LOOOOOOOOOOOOONG ago. So whatever it is could be, but don’t support it by downloading it.

edit:

@Mabilis

So, to clarify. I can use models (and textures ?) from Black Mesa if it is installed on my computer for my mod? And I WILL credit the BM devs.

Pretend BM is L4D, and your mod is a L4D mod. If posted on file planet for some random guy to download, will it work without the game being on his computer? If you answered yes to this question, then no, you cannot do that, because that would mean that you repackaged the game’s content into your mod instead of making it dependent on the game to be owned. I maybe oversimplifying it, but I think that’s how it works. Here is some extra reading material for you to look over and to think on:

@raw_bean

I think the point is that the devs don’t want anyone passing work off as their own, but if they were to allow some level of credited use then that would make it seem (to people not paying attention enough or caring) that anything was free game, hence the overall blanket ban on use of their stuff which is much easier to tell people.

It’s also entirely possible that all the various devs would have different personal opinions on the matter of their own content (some might not want their stuff used anywhere at all, some wouldn’t mind as long as they got credit, some might not care at all) that it would become really complicated to enforce different rules for different parts of BM content, so it’s again simpler to just set one overall rule for the mod as a whole.

Then again there’s another point as well. Instead of pretending that the work was someone else’s, if it was allowed to be used some of it might be used in something that was illegal or obscene or simply very poor quality (other than the BM portion, obviously ), in which case the devs wouldn’t want their names attached to it as people might associate them with it and tarnish their reputation because they see the devs’ credits on it.

So now that’s it’s been explained about as thoroughly as is humanly possible, I think, I’m making this the final word on the topic. [COLOR=‘Red’]No use outside of BM for any BM content. (Obviously derivative works based on BM like trailer videos made with footage from it, or mods and levels made to be used in it are another matter.)

[COLOR=‘Red’]On which note, back on topic.

@RabidMonkey

Yes, this, basically. Minimods and custom content designed for use in BM will be acceptable; ripping our content without permission to use in your own separate mod or elsewhere will be unacceptable.

No, he’s doing his job as a moderator…you’re keeping the conversation going by posting pointless replies and being a twat. If I was a moderator you would be banned just for posting this shit.

@raw_bean

Firstly, single-player is harder to do, so that’s why multiplayer is done more often and why single-player mods are often poor.

Secondly, the devs have no problem with people making extra maps/campaigns and mods for/to Black Mesa, that require Black Mesa to be installed to play. What they have a problem with is a mod or content pack that takes Black Mesa content and repackages it without permission. So for example if someone made a seven hour war mod that only required HL2 to play yet the download contained BM models taken from BM and repackaged into the seven hour war mod files, that would be essentially theft. You compared them to Valve, but Valve would be just as down on a mod which repackaged their content so that it could be used by players who didn’t have the game it came from, with the exception of the shared content in the Source files. So BM can reuse things from HL2 like headcrabs and vorts even if the person using the mod doesn’t have HL2, because they come packaged with every Source game that includes the SDK, but they’d come down on BM like a ton of bricks if for some reason BM included models from Left 4 Dead that could be played with by people who didn’t own that game. Same thing here.

Though it’s probably inevitable, they’re not keen on people packaging up BM content for use in GMod. Even if whoever does this first does credit the team it’s unlikely that every person who makes a video or picture or webcomic or whatever with it will do.

EDIT: The issue of credit is more complicated that whether people pass off work as their own. On the flip side, if they DO give the mod credit, but themselves do very poor or offensive work, the mod will become associated with this bad or offensive content through no fault of the BM devs and with no way of quality controlling what their work is used in or how it’s presented.

@raw_bean

Am I talking to myself? I just said a) the problem with credit could be BEING given credit on a project they really don’t want to be as much as it could be having their work passed off as some else’s (did you read my edit above? Example: someone makes a GMod picture of BM soldiers gang-raping Alyx and prominently credits BM and the dev who designed the soldier - can you see why they wouldn’t want to be associated with that?) and b) people are perfectly free to make kick-arse single-player mods based on BM content, as long as they require BM to be installed instead of including BM files in their own packages, which is exactly the same way mods of Valve games work (those HL2 headcrabs and vorts will be nowhere in the downloaded BM files, they’re already on the on the hard drive of anyone with a SDK-included Source game).

Does anyone remember how BM used to use, along with the shared source HL2 models, a load of CounterStrike: Source assets? The reason the devs went to great efforts to replace all those assets with custom content was because by using them they would either have to require that all BM users have [noparse]CS:S[/noparse] installed which would limit their userbase and piss some people off, or they would have to package up the [noparse]CS:S[/noparse] files into the mod and that would get them shut down by Valve because it would be theft.

If the BM devs are being unreasonable then so are Valve and pretty much every commercial game developer ever.

@raw_bean

No. The source code of the mod would still not necessarily be released even if it were a commercial release, just SDK support for making new content for it. Let’s use an example - the source code for Left 4 Dead isn’t available, just the ‘authoring tools’ which is essentially just the Source SDK, for making new content for the game. The SDK being used for BM is already available - it’s the Orange Box SDK. The amount you can map/mod for BM is probably comparable to the amount you can map/mod for Left 4 Dead, and that would be the same whether the mod was commercially released or not, in all probability.

HL2 is a special case as a large portion of it’s code and content is available to all Source mods as it’s bundled with the Source SDK/SDK Base content. Basically, all Source mods are, in a way, also HL2 mods and all Source games come with a certain amount of HL2 content for free use. With all other Source games, that is not the case. So while I believe you could make a CounterStrike: Source mod that included headcrabs, a CounterStrike: Source mod couldn’t be made to include Day of Defeat: Source or Left 4 Dead content without requiring that you also have those games installed, for example. Black Mesa will be like those games, not HL2.

EDIT: technically Nosehole, HL2 is a little different. You can use some HL2 content in a mod of any SDK-equipped source game that you own, not just HL2 itself. Hence why BM will not require HL2 to be installed, but just any SDK-equipped Source game.

As a caveat I’m speaking as a modding virgin (well, I made a short Doom WAD back in the day, lol), but I’ve been around a while and I like to think I’ve picked up a reasonable layman’s understanding of this issue.

:facepalm:

I don’t know how else to phrase it, but you already do have the same modding privileges as with any other source game (which is to say access to content from that game on computers that have it installed, along with access to some shared content from HL2). If you still can’t understand that then it’s beyond my powers of explanation.

Welcome to the forums Will. Glad someone understood me, thought maybe I was speaking in tongues or something.

@RabidMonkey

Modders would need to provide their own code but there is no way for us to make this a practical option. Modding HL2/Source is a very unique setup as the game source code is provided and mods are distributed as their own individual entity; the only unifying factor between them is shared content through the use of required games (like HL2) and engine code (SDK bases). Handing out the source code for BM and letting people create their own code-based mods could turn into a real nightmare for everyone as every BM mini-mod that has code changes would replace the DLL files. Ultimately this would lead to incompatibilities with other mini-mods and create a big headache.

In theory, you should be able to reference other directories in /sourcemods as gameinfo.txt search paths to use their content in a different, custom mod. However any custom code would require new DLLs for that mod, and would override/take priority over BM’s DLLs.

Ultimately, everyone should have a good range of freedom to edit what they please within the mod, but code is really out of the question.

EDIT: This doesn’t apply to any multiplayer that may come along later; mind you - most servers will probably be running as pure servers; so all content will have to match to avoid cheating (via material ‘hacks’, etc)

[wafflewarrior7]

@wafflewarrior7

So, for all you Lua coding geniuses out there, When black mesa comes out, Would you be so good as to post the npcs on Garry’s mod . org

@Danny Smith

The dev team would not make the addon, it would be the comunity.

durp durp durp

[Medevilae]

It will happen;

NO MATTER WHAT.

It’s just a matter of time.

[Danny_Smith]

@Stewy

Just found this can’t believ people do that!
That’s so NOT awsome!
?i am new so is this from the leak?
*URL REMOVED

For the respect of the developers of Black Mesa, I think you should remove the link to that leaked map.

[Sitten_duck]

Danny, when you quote something, even if the original poster edits his post, your quote will appear unchanged. That’s why I edited it to not have the link in the quote.