Hey, don't know if there's a "contact mods" button but I wanted to have a discussion on the topic of my rejected 1:44 Beldingford Manor run.

The stated reason for the rejection is: “Mods that alter intended game logic are not allowed. We could think about this if half of the missions would have this. Sorry we came to verdict that this will not be allowed.”

I want to preface that I hold nothing against the moderators and will ultimately accept whatever ruling, even if I ultimately disagree with it. We are all just having fun with two-decade-old games :)

That said, I think it's harsh to reduce this to "altered game logic = against the rules" when I did not modify patrol routes, target behaviour, level geometry, AI, or player movement. It’s important to make the distinction that this is different from something like modding the game to speed up the limos in A House of Cards or making Ivan arrive faster in Gunrunner’s Paradise. Those are mission events tied to the structure of the route. In Beldingford, once the required objectives are done, the two-minute gate does not add a gameplay challenge. It only prevents the leaderboard from reflecting the actual completion time.

I completely understand the point that this inherently makes the game “non-vanilla”. I won’t argue that - this is a modified game/level. The point of contention is the extent of this modification.

The mod is public on NexusMods and anyone is free to do the same thing with this level as I did. It changes a single timer value: the hidden 120-second exit gate after the objectives are complete.

The point is not just to grab a record, but to make competition on this level more meaningful. For two decades, the level has effectively had a 2:00 floor, even though some runs are clearly faster in execution than the displayed time.

As it stands, you’re able to have a run where you have a slow snipe on Winston, get stuck on half the doors, miss interaction prompts, do an ineffective route and still place first on the leaderboard even if others were faster – they just weren’t allowed to leave before an arbitrary timer ran out.

You might notice that there are, at the moment, nine runs all stuck at 2:00, and probably half of them are faster than the time shown on the site. There are more people on first place than below it.

Then on the second sentence of the rejection explanation. The stated reason is that there would be a discussion if half the missions were like this. To me, it makes even more sense to discuss this when there’s just a single level with this issue. If half the game had arbitrary time gates, it would mean that the developers probably had a reason to implement them and that this was the intended structure of the game. When Beldingford Manor is an isolated case, and given that the time-gate has no effect on the gameplay and is not strictly connected to game objectives (like the aforementioned limos and Ivan), it just adds credence to the argument that it shouldn’t exist. The time-gate doesn’t add a challenge, it just hides the actual completion time, which we have always known could be lower than the 2:00 floor.

A secondary point I wanted to touch upon is the concept of stat tracking tools. These tools do not modify game logic, that much is clear to me, and as such they do not break the rules (sidenote: I can’t find these rules, if they exist).

What they do, however, is provide you with information that the developers did not intend you to have. It’s just that the community made an informal decision as a whole to accept the use of these external tools because they make life easier, even if you were never meant to take advantage of what they provide to you.

I know this example doesn’t argue the core point of “game modification” but rather “developer intent” but I wanted to highlight that we’ve already established a level of flexibility with the rules where it improves competition.

Again, I respect whatever final decision you make. I just wanted to explain why I think this specific case deserves more discussion than a general “mod alters game logic” rejection.

Cheers.

Hey, thanks for writing this out, and for the respectful tone throughout.

That said, the decision has to stand, and I want to be clear about why rather than leave it at 'altered game logic.' The game rules state that using cheats explicitly including modifying or removing game files is not allowed. The mod changes a value in the game files, so regardless of whether it touches AI, geometry, or patrol routes, it falls under that rule. We don't draw a line between 'meaningful' and 'harmless' edits, because the moment we start deciding which file changes are acceptable, we lose the 'it's just the base game' standard, and every future submission turns into a 'well, is this edit okay?' argument.

On the stat-tracking tool: those don't modify or remove game files, so they don't fall under the rule. That's the distinction. I get the developer-intent angle, but we have to run with the game as the devs actually made it, quirks and all. We're not in a position to second guess which parts were 'meant' to be there so the standard stays on the original files, and the mod changes those.

The 2:00 floor remains, sorry. Appreciate you keeping it civil throughout, cheers.

Alright, I understand your reasoning. Thanks for responding.