[REL][WIP] PaZzMod V 1.4.01 | Imperial County, East Riverside County, La Paz County, Yuma, Mexicali, San Luis R.C.

Forum rules
SCS as a company do not wish to have paid mods on this forum. While we understand that not all paid mods use the Intellectual Property of other companies/people, it is very hard to moderate what is and isn't acceptable when money is involved. There are also concerns that it could look unfavorable to potential work partners going forward if SCS allow mods that may potentially use unlicensed branding.
Posting in the Mods forum (ATS and ETS2) is restricted to sharing free-to-the-public mods and providing support for mods. For more details, please check chapters [4] and [5] of Forum Rules.
User avatar
Lolsmurf
Posts: 205
Joined: 16 Jun 2013 13:26
Location: BE

Re: [REL][WIP] PaZzMod V 1.4.01 | Imperial County, East Riverside County, La Paz County, Yuma, Mexicali, San Luis R.C.

#641 Post by Lolsmurf » 22 Feb 2021 11:14

flight50 wrote:
22 Feb 2021 04:37
I am with cdawg9999. I have mixed feelings about that. I too would rather have separate map mods. I don’t want all those in my game. No worries though. No need to complain. I’ll just have to stick with ProMods and wait for SCS’s update for the reworked base map. I liked having SN and PaZz but I cannot do all the Mexico maps. All the Mexico maps could merge and it should have been left at that. I respectfully disagree with the decision made.

Well good luck to you guys with the merge, I can’t get behind what’s coming unfortunately.
Hi Flight50, I am only replying to your post as I'm sure Pazz will do a better announcement for the rest too. I wonder if you will do the same once Promods adds extra Canadian states? Will you also request them to carve it up per state and decline a one mod with multiple area's in it?

Having all these seperate mods creates incompatibility and every single mod needs to create corridors or fixes after each patch or update. I really don't understand how people can be against one map mod containing all the seperate maps together in 1 bundle from the same team. If you don't like some area's for being outside the USA, then just don't drive there ? We cant create map mods where we let every person decide which parts they like and dont like and release 10000 different versions.

In the end it is everyone's right do not use certain mods or maps, we can't force. We do this as a hobby and the more people enjoy our work the better of course. But if some don't that's fine as well.
For some of us mappers it's better to be able to work together in one big map mod, like Promods does, to ensure better quality. Having to disappoint certain players who received personalized map mods until now is a part of the risk we are willing to take I would say.

User avatar
koolizz
Posts: 468
Joined: 05 Aug 2019 10:30

Re: [REL][WIP] PaZzMod V 1.4.01 | Imperial County, East Riverside County, La Paz County, Yuma, Mexicali, San Luis R.C.

#642 Post by koolizz » 22 Feb 2021 11:45

Largely have to agree with the boys I'm afraid. I mean I get that you can't tailor to everyones needs and that it gets difficult managing several mods, but I'd really prefer it if we at least could get one alternate version of Reforma that does not include Mexico, as a single alternative for strictly US map players. I think thats were the biggest split in the userbase of these mods is, some people are just not interested in having Mexico on the map at all. If you would poll this you would probably find out that it is even likely the majority of the users. Some people just want the enhancements to the SCS base map, not sectors outside of it. Also, not having Mexico means you aren't vulnerable should anything down in Mexico break or need updating. I have seen the map for the Mexico part and it is quite huge so that is a big risk even if you would never go there, that something else would break on the US end.

Another annoyance with having the whole Mexico section on there - if I am not mistaken - is that each time you want to view the map in the game menu you'd end up with a much more zoomed out view, as Mexico would be on it now. The whole continent of North America continent is zoomed out then, so you basically lose the focus on US, and instead the map initially will be even further away zoomed out showing basically all of North America, which will make everything pretty tiny. Sure you will zoom in immediately but the maps default view will then always be US + Canada + Mexico + even Central America. Lots of people probably don't want that, they want a clear view of the 50 states.

Generally though I understand the sense in consolidating mods, but I don't quite agree with forcing such a huge outside-the-base-map section of Mexico on everybody, I feel that is somewhat excessive of a consolidation. You could easily have a non-Mexico alternative. It is a huge chunk that isn't even part of the base map, not to mention, it is outside of the US so it isn't very lore friendly either for people who want to map mod only lightly.

But worst case, what do you guys think of the possibility of manually removing the sectors from the consolidated Reforma mod that are Mexico. At least that would work right? I'm no expert modder though.
Last edited by koolizz on 22 Feb 2021 14:06, edited 1 time in total.

angrybirdseller
Posts: 2410
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
Location: Minnesota

Re: [REL][WIP] PaZzMod V 1.4.01 | Imperial County, East Riverside County, La Paz County, Yuma, Mexicali, San Luis R.C.

#643 Post by angrybirdseller » 22 Feb 2021 12:35

I do not mind Mexico sectors if they are well done, but I understand where some do not want to bother with Mexico areas. My preference is only the USA sectors to be honest unless the Mexico sectors developed with routes of quality. Baja California along with Sonora and Chihuahua these northern states in Mexico most major cites are connected by highways if you do not want to bother with switch back roads. Pazz was doing cities along the border before the announcement was made.

User avatar
Vinnie Terranova
Posts: 1717
Joined: 09 Nov 2017 10:24

Re: [REL][WIP] PaZzMod V 1.4.01 | Imperial County, East Riverside County, La Paz County, Yuma, Mexicali, San Luis R.C.

#644 Post by Vinnie Terranova » 22 Feb 2021 12:40

koolizz wrote:
22 Feb 2021 11:45
it is outside of the US
Mexico is outside the US, but the game is called American Truck Simulator (ATS) and not United States Truck Simulator (USTS). Mexico is part of North America. And now I speak for myself: in the end I want to drive in the US, Canada and Mexico, and I hope that SCS will create Canada and Mexico DLCs. Until that time I really love to play the map mods we have right now, including Mexico.
But worst case, what do you guys think of the possibility of manually removing the sectors from the consolidated Reforma mod that are Mexico. At least that would work right? I'm no expert modder though.
If you want to stick with the US only, it should be possible to exclude the Mexican and Canadian parts of the new mod. The same has been done, albeit in a smaller scale, with the US Expansion mod. This would mean that both Mexico lovers and Mexico haters still will be able to play the parts of America they want. For the Mexico haters it will cost some effort, but it should be doable.

ikeSeki
Posts: 94
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 15:41

Re: [REL][WIP] PaZzMod V 1.4.01 | Imperial County, East Riverside County, La Paz County, Yuma, Mexicali, San Luis R.C.

#645 Post by ikeSeki » 22 Feb 2021 13:49

Sad to hear this... I wish there was a poll before this decision was made to merge with Reforma.
Pazz + Promods was my go to because those are the two best quality maps for ATS.

And quality of PazzMod is a LOT better imho then Reforma maps (I tried Sierra Nevada and can't stand bad optimization and a tons of bugs) so that is the reason why I would prefer PazzMod as separate.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 18573
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: [REL][WIP] PaZzMod V 1.4.01 | Imperial County, East Riverside County, La Paz County, Yuma, Mexicali, San Luis R.C.

#646 Post by flight50 » 22 Feb 2021 13:53

@Lolsmurf I'm not the only one against this but as usual, I get called out for my comments, lol. Its cool but I'll explain.

Your comment about ProMods is a head scratcher for me. Why would I ask ProMods to split up their map? The entire team is doing Canada, not several modders. They are not merging with Canadream. Here is the biggest difference for me:
Who is doing ProMods Canada - ProMods.....one team
Who is doing Mexico - Reforma, PaZz, Hugoces, Jordi and I think someone else. I don't know who did Baja
Who is doing US - SCS...but its their game

Each large area in the US and Canada is done by 1 team in which the quality is fairly consistent across the page. Obviously SCS has gotten better over time just like a good map modder would do so the older areas get outdated. Is everything perfect in US and Canada, no but its consistent. Look at how many people are doing Mexico. Baja, Viva, Extremo and Messimap. I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong. I'd rather play map mods that are on the same quality level. Mexico is not that...sorry. If Reforma did all of Mexico, different story but I will not force myself to play or load such a project. Loading up Mexico but not going there is not a valid solution. Why would I take up hard drive space for something I don't want. If I don't want Canada, I can unload it. If I don't want any US state, I don't have to buy it. Reforma consolidation, we have zero options with this combined. Options......they are removed now. It makes sense to merge all of Mexico. I can agree with that. It doesn't compute to merge in the US with it though. Just my opinion. You don't see ProMods going into the US besides connecting roads. Its SCS's game so eventually they'll go across borders.

PaZz has done a great job with his mod. He does a great job with quality with very few bugs. He's gotten better and better over time. SN is a good quality map now as over time, fixed a lot of their bugs. Very fast mapping but many bugs that needed to be fixed. Huge map but very buggy in the beginning. I was part of the beta roll out so I seen a ton. Its very solid now and much better quality than what SN started with and compared to the non Reforma parts of Mexico. If SN and PaZz combined, not a huge issue there. I'd support that. It's no fault of map mod fans that one team decided to take on projects from two different countries done by different people. Not everyone wants to go into Mexico and why should they even load it if they don't want it. If it easier for the modders to work with less files, that is understood. No issues with that. If I don't like it, I just won't play. No biggie. I won't complain about it. I'm not the modder. I already unsubscribed to this thread. The only reason I am responding now is because you quoted me. I'm not complaining though but if I don't support the decision, what's the point of me tracking this thread anymore, SN or even being part of the Reforma discord if I have chosen to not support the consolidation. As mentioned, good luck to you guys. I am just one of a few that does not like the decision. The mods will go on with or without me. I'm no one to hold up the move.

I agree with @koolizz. If a poll was done here, it would speak for itself. There is a different audience on this forum vs who keeps track of Reforma/PaZz on Discord. Reforma doesn't really come here anymore so the decision was influenced my Discord only. At the end of the day, its the map modders decision to do as you guys please. But like koolizz said, some people just want the US enhancements. I don't mind Mexico by PaZz and Reforma but the option to not load the rest of Mexico could have been an option. Reforma is also doing a huge portion of West Texas in which I don't want to see. SCS hasn't even gone there yet but its being done by Reforma. Not all of SCS's new work needs enhancements imho. US expansion is no longer around so we can't get missed SCS roads anymore. If Reforma took more of a US expansion roll and just add missing roads, cool. Their goal seems too large of a project imo. How about just focus on redoing all of Mexico. SN and PaZz are solid. You guys are doing too much imho. SCS has upped their game for me so I'll just stick with them and ProMods. SN and PaZz became a great solution for the outdated base map. SCS has been influenced by such projects I'm sure and is now rebuilding it....let them upgrade it. Not everything they do is bad. Comparing the base map to SN or PaZz is unfair because the time frame in which the projects where done is years apart.

If anything goes wrong with Mexico, that is the entire mod hung up until a fix comes. I run 3 profiles in ATS. Profile 1 - original profile from June 2016 with light mods that don't typically break on SCS update. No maps, trucks or trailers mods. Profile 2 - virgin beta profile started with 1.32 and Profile 3 - heavy mods profile started when SN came. Everything in Profile 1 but with maps, truck and trailer mods along with anything else like traffic mods, car packs or whatever that I like is on Profile 3. When maps, trailers or trucks are not updated, I play Profile 1 til updated. At the end of the day, its a quality issue for me with Mexico. Not all of Mexico is quality for me. Not even close. Quality is one of the biggest immersion breakers for me. Its very frustrating. Yet I do not complain. I just don't use the map mod, simple as that. Same with trucks and trailer mods. I respect what modders do. I don't mod but I respect people's time and effort. I've donated to every modder generously that I appreciate and support if I am content with their mod. In a nutshell, if I'm not content, I can't support it. Sorry, but like I mentioned, good luck to you guys and to your fans. The project will go on.
Last edited by flight50 on 22 Feb 2021 14:12, edited 5 times in total.

User avatar
koolizz
Posts: 468
Joined: 05 Aug 2019 10:30

Re: [REL][WIP] PaZzMod V 1.4.01 | Imperial County, East Riverside County, La Paz County, Yuma, Mexicali, San Luis R.C.

#647 Post by koolizz » 22 Feb 2021 13:53

@Vinnie Terranova I don't think its necessary to call anyone that doesn't want Mexico, a completely different country, on the map a "Mexico hater" though. I disagree with your stance here, I'd argue "American Truck Simulator" does not directly refer to North America, but indeed to "America" the country. It's a bit different from Euro Truck since the US is a gigantic landmass and not like a single european country that is interconnected through its small size to other countries. Never was this game marketed by SCS to refer to other countries either on the north american continent than the US.

Basically, there are a myriad of good reasons why people might not want Mexico on the map of this game, I just mentioned a couple, no need to call anyone a hater. And it is likely the people who play Mexico have some sort of connection to Mexico, and most of the people who don't are probably more interested to drive in the US. Of course there are exceptions, just a general trend. Now Canada is a bit different due to the same language on road signs and more similarities to US than with Mexico. Doesn't mean Mexico is wrong or someone is hating, just that it doesn't make much sense in ATS for most of people because it refers to a place outside of US with a completely different language, regulations and different kinds of road network. If SCS would ever focus outside of US (I don't see they doing that honestly) it makes more sense to go with Canada. Then again, they know Promods is already up that alley for years to come.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 18573
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: [REL][WIP] PaZzMod V 1.4.01 | Imperial County, East Riverside County, La Paz County, Yuma, Mexicali, San Luis R.C.

#648 Post by flight50 » 22 Feb 2021 13:59

I agree with koolizz again in that if one doesn't want Mexico map mods, does not mean they are a hater. Bad choice of words there my friend. I'm definitely supporting SCS when they go to Mexico. So its no hate for the country, its a quality issue as I and others mentioned. We all know the game is called American Truck Simulator. It doesn't mean that people should be forced to play or load something they don't want though.

User avatar
Vinnie Terranova
Posts: 1717
Joined: 09 Nov 2017 10:24

Re: [REL][WIP] PaZzMod V 1.4.01 | Imperial County, East Riverside County, La Paz County, Yuma, Mexicali, San Luis R.C.

#649 Post by Vinnie Terranova » 22 Feb 2021 14:34

With "Mexico hater" I didn't mean literarely that some people are hating Mexico; I mean with "Mexico hater" just people who don't want to play with the Mexico maps enabled. I didn't know how to say this using a short term, other than "Mexico hater". Wrong choice of me. My apologies.

Let's go back to the pros and cons of the upcoming Mexico, SN and PaZzMod. Although I think it's better to start a new thread for a discussion about this new combo, so we can use the current thread for discussing the PaZzMod parts.

User avatar
koolizz
Posts: 468
Joined: 05 Aug 2019 10:30

Re: [REL][WIP] PaZzMod V 1.4.01 | Imperial County, East Riverside County, La Paz County, Yuma, Mexicali, San Luis R.C.

#650 Post by koolizz » 22 Feb 2021 14:50

Vinnie Terranova wrote:
22 Feb 2021 14:34
With "Mexico hater" I didn't mean literarely that some people are hating Mexico; I mean with "Mexico hater" just people who don't want to play with the Mexico maps enabled. I didn't know how to say this using a short term, other than "Mexico hater". Wrong choice of me. My apologies.

Let's go back to the pros and cons of the upcoming Mexico, SN and PaZzMod. Although I think it's better to start a new thread for a discussion about this new combo, so we can use the current thread for discussing the PaZzMod parts.
No worries :) It's a good idea to have a new thread, agreed. I am guessing we wait until Pazz officially announces this info, or until Eblem announces in the Sierra Nevada and Mexico threads, but maybe he did already? In any case there will probably be a thread up as soon as reconsolidated Reforma is released once 1.40 is out of beta.

Post Reply

Return to “Maps”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests