Offtopic Anvil Discussion

[Gabrielle]

I like how these "guests" claim how awesome IA is.

[Baronius]

cmorgan, it's nice from you that you're trying to rescue the situation -- but it's too late... Certain persons already made fools of themselves, there is nothing that could undo this.

 

I like how these "guests" claim how awesome IA is.

Couldn't remain silent, "freedom of speech" urges you eh?

My dear Gabrielle! At least please take a look at what you've posted so far:

Never heard of it so it can't be that good.

WoW! TheBaron is ignorant as ever which is no surprise. How do you know these people never played this Second Coming of mods? You snooped around their computers? Are you inside their heads? I clearly stated I never played it, yet I gave no opinion. After reading the posts here and at BWL, I am sure that I won't play it. Not my thing.

 

Egos need to be stroked.

(BTW this is nonsense, as "it can't be that good" is already an opinion which you gave. In fact, it's prejudice. But yes, "freedom of speech" also allows all of these, so forget what I said )

Bend over pal.

I like how these "guests" claim how awesome IA is.

 

This is all you've contributed... Not particularly big deal... On the other hand, the people who you call ""guests"" actually say something. They don't just talk, they say something too. They detail their opinion in several sentences. Their post has an actual content, point. They actually spoke about the topic.

 

I just can't believe how some people such as Gabrielle can talk absolute empty stuff, and criticize other users' 30-sentence long, well-phrased posts! Then the intelligent users of this site (cmorgan, berelinde etc.) are trying to rescue the situation caused by others who made fools of themselves! I don't know if all this is sad or funny. Gabrielle: "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses". Please consider this. Please!

 

It's also a mystery to me why it's such a problem for some people that IA receives so positive comments. Before talking about "astro-turfed" accounts and "deleted" negative opinions, perhaps a bit thinking would be beneficial.

1. There is no such thing as "I liked IA a bit", or "IA wasn't too bad IMO". Someone can either LOVE Improved Anvil, or absolutely avoid it. And if someone really LOVES a mod, he or she will definitely come and say his or her thanks! Unlike those who like a certain mod "more or less", they found it "good but not above average", etc. These latter players usually remain silent.

2. Have you ever considered that those who don't like it at all don't play it and probably do not come to tell that they don't like it! On the other hand, those who like it will come and tell their compliments. Consequence: more compliments are posted than negative opinions. Consequently, can you see many negative opinions on the forum of any mods, e.g. here in G3? No, because players either come to report bugs, or to tell their compliments. (Or both.)

3. Did you examine the number of compliments about mods which existence you *accept*? I remember very many compliments about SimDing0's Questpack on more forums (Never played it, so I don't know if it's my taste or not, but fact is fact: many players do like it). And not from "astro-turfed" accounts.

4. And why do you exclude that perhaps it's really THAT good? Why is it impossible? Just because *you* and your supporters think it's NOT that good? As Gabrielle said: are you inside their heads? Inside players' heads?

 

Apparently none of the *four* points occured to persons such as TheBigg (see his initial post) before they posted their texts, which indeed reflects that the root of all this must be something different than the intention to inform players about IA. (Such as "envy", no need to hide this fact because it's crystally clear and spectacular.)

 

To cut a long story short, Improved Anvil is an existing mod, preferred and played by many players. Whether you acknowledge this fact or not, up to you. (This is especially advised to TheBigg, who has made a number of miserable attempts in the past to make a bad reputation to IA.)

[Gabrielle]

Wow.

[berelinde]

2. ...Consequently, can you see many negative opinions on the forum of any mods, e.g. here in G3? No, because players either come to report bugs, or to tell their compliments. (Or both.)

 

Sorry to contradict you Baronius, but I've got long stretches of negative comments in Gavin's forums, and I'm sure many other modders can "boast" of the same. Folks here speak their minds, for good or ill, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

 

There are several aspects of my own mod that folks just don't like, and I don't want to discourage them from saying so, even if I'm not always pleased by what they're saying. I might not always follow their recommendations, but not all the feedback is praise. Sometimes, however, I do make changes to accomodate players who are not satisfied with my treatment of one matter or another, because their ideas turn out to be better than mine. And that is as it should be.

 

Anyway, my point is to say that many modders do receive negative feedback as well, and some actually welcome it, even if it isn't always a fun read.

 

But I like the fact that many BWL forum users are visiting G3, for whatever reason. Send them over! And maybe they'll download something cool while they're here, or at least speak their minds on the various fora.

[Baronius]

I still believe that there aren't *many* negative opinions. Of course, "many" is relative I know, but my point was that it's really not surprising that IA has very few negative comments. Those who don't like it don't play it. And "negative" is relative either. IA gets constructive criticism and new ideas.

 

I don't see why BWL forum users shouldn't visit G3, or vice versa. Same applies to PPG, RPGD, SHS and so on. For example, I see that the release of Dungeon Crawl mod at PPG uses WoRM's BWL areas. We rely on each others' achievements.

 

You believe that entirely negative criticism is always deleted at BWL. I won't try to convince you. Someone either sees that it's not true, or he or she doesn't. If posts don't follow the expected style (e.g., they're very rude or completely off-topic), they're deleted. But this is related to the style and relevance of the post, not to the content. It's very unfair to accuse BWL of removing contradicting opinions. Any post -- regardless of its content -- is removed if it violates the rules. I don't want to convince anyone, I just told all this to clarify that the posts in IA forum were deleted that time because they greatly violated the rules, and their authors kept their style despite the constant administrator requests. (Everyone knew it, but maybe newer members are also reading this thread) Of course, it's easy to abuse this policy to accuse BWL of removing negative opinions. And there are people who do abuse it, indeed. But except the big anti-IA heroes (such as theBigg) and their supporters, I don't think anyone will lift his hand: "My post was deleted because I dared to contradict their opinion".

 

Good night.

[icelus]

Perhaps I've been gone too long, but didn't Improved Anvil start out as some kind of item upgrade mod? Like... a Cromwell upgrade?

[Cashews]

Perhaps I've been gone too long, but didn't Improved Anvil start out as some kind of item upgrade mod? Like... a Cromwell upgrade?

 

That's how it was advertised when I first heard of it.

[SimDing0]

Originally. But Sikret now wants it placed in EVERY category on the modlist. (I'm not joking about this.)

[berelinde]

How about a special category, all by itself?

[Baronius]

Originally. But Sikret now wants it placed in EVERY category on the modlist. (I'm not joking about this.)

Your words are no surprise again, SimDing0. I see 12 categories in the BG2 section (and there are many more in the whole modlist), and Sikret asked it to be added to 5. Spreading lies again, right?

 

On a side note, IA wouldn't be the only mod to be added to more categories. It's OK that a quest which adds 2 items won't be an item mod, but e.g. IA focuses on both Items or Quests with the very high significance. I doubt it's a good idea to force a mod into ONE category in any case. Nonetheless, the modlist isn't maintained too actively anyway (outdated descriptions, missing tools), but it's probably much time to check the IE News feed and/or BWL news feed all the time, so I understand it -- if an author doesn't submit an entry, the maintainers might not notice it. On the other hand, this harms to the comprehensiveness of the list too.

[cmorgan]

I respectfully disagree with practically everyone present on the classification issue

 

I would classify IA and a few similar mods with similar philosophies "Total Conversion" mods. The closest example outside of topics which seem to get us all angy at eachother, rather than just talking about modding and having fun, is Echon's "Fields of the Dead". While Echon's philosophy is more inclusive, with much greater compatibility among the select (small number) of mods for BG, FotD is really a complete overhaul of BG. It really cannot be classified as any one or two categories. In a more crowded environment, Echon would have one heck of a time keeping up with incompatibility issues, because he basically rebuilds the whole player experience (in a good way, in my opinion - it is the only reason I have ever really played BG1 in its original form, and the only reason I can see to support modders working on that engine rather than attempting to seduce them into the Tutu/BGT combined installer realm).

 

I think that one way of thinking about it is both author intent and practical application: what does the author say about the mod's focus, and how does it operate in conjunction with other mods?

 

FotD has a stated tenet of moving BG as close to the pnp version of AD&D 2E rulesets as can be done in a real-time CRPG. As such, it touches most of the BG install. So it is really operates as a "primary" mod, around which other mods fit. You choose what to use based on what works with FoTD, not the other way around.

 

IA has a stated purpose of rebuilding the whole BG2 experience. It also operates such that there are either real or percieved incompatibilities with a number of other mods, and for both philosophical and practical reasons the author has restriced support to those installs which use specific fixpacks, specific components of other mods, and specific install orders. The work done to be more inclusive has been extended to section of mods that the author felt enhanced his conception of what the expected player experience should be. Here, the focus is the same - IA is concieved as a "primary mod", and other mods are chosen based on compatibility with both the author vision of what the IA game should feel like and how it should be played.

 

So I think of it as a TC. And for those folks that see the author's vision as a valid and enjoyable one, operating as if it were a "true" TC, like the DragnLance Total Conversion (which I always wished were a completed project at the same level as many of the modern mods) means a playable (from a technical standpoint) game and technical support from the author. This places it in the same broad category as Classic Adventures and Return to Windspear and other mods which use the BG2 engine but fundamentally change the experience, such that many mods designed for BG2 are either not compatible, not needed, or simply not appropriate.

 

For me, I am hopelessly old fashioned. I still prefer to build one install of Tutu at a time, with a small, select number of mods, play until I feel I have had enough fun, then build another tightly tailored install. Then take the character on into BG2 and have fun there with a few "spices" sprinkled on top. I respect Mega-Install folks for troubleshooting huge intricate interlayerings of mods, but even my BGT install that I play around with occasionally (mostly so I can learn from Ascension64's code) never has more than a few select mods on it per playthrough. Too much sauce, and I can't taste the steak!!

 

(Hey - by the way; the two most popular "Total Conversion" mods out there are...

 

EasyTutu

 

and

 

BGT

 

'cause in these two, we are all actually modding mods...)

[Baronius]

Considering IA as a total conversion is a very limited approach. If it was a TC, it wouldn't be compatible with many mods. It's incompatible with a few tens of mods at maximum -- how many is this compared to the total number of mods that actually work with IA? It would've been much easier to develop IA if it was a Total Conversion, because most in-game files wouldn't have to be modified on content level.

 

The reason why certain people feel it closer to a TC is that it has used COPY for certain files. (You're an exception though cmorgan, because you had other arguments; so this isn't directed to you.) These certain users are misled that everything must be solved via "patching". What happens if you want to apply ALL of your changes on an item? Enchantment, price, type, equipped effects, effects etc.? Will you "patch" all bytes of it with pages of TP2 code? And what will the result be? Same as a simple COPY. But this was just an example.

[Caedwyr]

Another reason why you might have a harder time arguing that the mod belongs in multiple different categories (particularly kits and tweaks) is that it is an all-or-nothing install package. A player cannot choose to just install the Vagrant kit, or just install the item randomization, or just install the tweaks, or just install the item upgrades, or just install the improved encounters. If a player had different options of these (just to give an example) components on installation, I think there would be a stronger argument to have the mod listed under multiple categories. Since it is an all-or-nothing modification, I'd personally be inclined to catalog it under quest mods (like the other big mods) and probably tactical combat mods.

[Baronius]

A category should really be based on the mod's content, regardless whether the parts can be installed independently or not.

 

Nonetheless, if you define it the way you described (i.e. to be in a category requires a disjunct optional component), why not to make a new category with any relevant name?

 

E.g. a category "Complex mods" or better: "WhatNot mods" with description "Mods that don't fit to any other category". I'm sure there could be added more mods there, not just IA. But even if only IA -- does it hurt anyone if only IA is there? (Oh, yes, yeees. It does hurt. TheBigg, and many others who would be happy if no player ever found a link to IA's download link. They would be unable to sleep for days.) If PPG or G3 states they don't compete with anyone, then what prevents IA from being added to a new category? (Yes, even more players woulf find it and download it. And certain people don't want this.) Of course, sometimes it would be difficult to decide if a mod fits there or not, but still better than forcing it to one single category.

 

By the way, and certain people believe themselves too clever again. In one of the previous posts, I remember that someone called it bu*****t that parts are interrelated and thus can't be separated. How can someone be so primitive. Nonetheless, there are two reasons: (1) Indeed, tactical encounters and the whole mod is optimized and adjusted to the new items, fixes and rules. Players often don't admit what components or mods they have installed, because they want to keep playing with their unsupported mod combination AND receive support from the author. (Such a case actually occured to IA, yes.) Spending 5 hours trying to locate a non-existing bug isn't what an author wishes for. (2) Splitting something to more components requires removing the interrelations. (a) This is almost as much time as creating the mod -- *very much time* (b) It may introduce bugs (c.) why should an author spend 50 hours on something he has never agreed with?

 

For those who don't understand the above, i.e. why big or complex mods are more sensitive to compatibility and interrelations, I can recommend the relevant part(s) of my first post.

[icelus]

If PPG or G3 states they don't compete with anyone, then what prevents IA from being added to a new category? (Yes, even more players woulf find it and download it. And certain people don't want this.)

 

Isn't it obvious? Fear and envy. Duh.