262 replies to this topic

[NiGHTMARE]

Don't get me wrong, I fully support the "new TeamBG", it's just that most of the reasons given for it's re-conception aren't really valid. It's the old "nostalgia" versus "historical reality" thing rearing it's ugly head.

I suspect if the reason had been given as "we felt like starting a new IE modding site, and decided to call it 'TeamBG' as a bit of a marketing gimmick", there wouldn't have been quite so much negativity.

Edited by NiGHTMARE, 18 June 2006 - 10:39 AM.

[Baronius]

Reacting to your previous post NiGHMARE:
About your critics on TBG policy: that era which you mention was Theo's and Deano's administration who were tried to keep things up & running, but were unable to keep the spirit (since they weren't so close to the real modding and weren't as loyal to the priciple as e.g. Daxziz)... at the end they just used the chat for fun and not modding.
In older times, usually those people were banned who probably deserved it, because they thought they have right to do and say anything (stupid and unwise attitude). The probably misinterpreted the freedom of speech (just like many primitive users have done nowadays in IE modding forums). TeamBG dictated disciple (again, I'm talking of pre-Deano times) and respect, and supported those who were hard-working, talented and contructive.
Back to the topic, I wanted to react several more important points of your post as well, but then I decided not to spend my time for it. You are the child (representant) of the new modder generation, and thus see things from another aspect of view.

Edited by Baronius, 18 June 2006 - 10:50 AM.

[NiGHTMARE]

that era which you mention was Theo's and Deano's administration who were tried to keep things up & running, but were unable to keep the spirit (since they weren't so close to the real modding and weren't as loyal to the priciple as e.g. Daxziz)... at the end they just used the chat for fun and not modding.

No, I was most definitely referring to the KenTeamBG-era.

In older times, usually those people were banned who probably deserved it, because they thought they have right to do and say anything (stupid and unwise attitude).

Nope, usually they were banned because Ken didn't like them. Or because he was in a bad mood that day.

The probably misinterpreted the freedom of speech (just like many primitive users have done nowadays in IE modding forums). TeamBG dictated disciple (again, I'm talking of pre-Deano times) and respect, and supported those who were hard-working, talented and contructive.

It seems we have completely opposite views on these two eras, since I remember there being a noticeable increase in the friendliness and helpfulness of the staff, on-topic discussion, modding enthusiasm, etc after Ken left.

You are the child (representant) of the new modder generation, and thus see things from another aspect of view.

Err, come again? I joined the TeamBG forum several months before DSotSC was finished, I started my first IE mod something like five years ago, and was one of the first people to register at FWS. That's the "new modder generation"?

Incidentally, my first ever post at TeamBG was to innocently enquire whether the new areas in DSotSC would use new or modified graphics, or simply re-use existing areas... to which I was basically told "we're sick of discussing this mod, wait until it's finished".

[Grunker]

Igi, I have gained respect for you in your restraint from resorting to harsh rhetoric in this discussion.

Well said. My opinion is greatly affected by the fact that Igi, although the target of oddly formulated criticism, maintains a proper tone.

I agree with Ronin on the ridiculousness of this discussion: The battle between modding communities is the worst thing that ever happened to IE modding.

First of: Stop the pointless discussion of TeamBG's history or continue it elsewhere. The history of the site has nothing to do with the new and revived site that Igi is initiating, except for the tools that Igi brings back with him. The discussion doesn't bring anything relevant to argument about whether TeamBG shoud or should not be ressurected. Calling NiGHTMARE a 'child' isn't really fair, considering the amount of work he produced. Furthermore, whether a newcomer or an oldtimer, the valid points in this discussion has more to do with knowledge than memory.

I can't understand why it's so damned important for the communities to monopolize the IE modding going on in the rest of the world. SHS, PPG and G3 are all established communites who fills out their role really well. I believe that Igi's concerns are well placed; the first couple of years when a community is established it expands and grows fairly quick. After those years, when the community is well established, the growing seems to slow down, which is understandable: When the goal is reached, it is important to rest and make sure that the goal is maintained. This is why the established communities function so well. That and they have great powers behind them, willing to lift their share of the load.

As for the monopolizing of the communites, I saw it all happen to Blackwyrm Lair. While I don't like the community, and haven't registered there, I'm not about to go ranting on about how it should be shut down. If there are people willing to do work to maintain such a community; why shouldn't they be allowed to? I think it's outright disgusting to see "the big shots" (I.e. the respected modders from SHS, PPG, and G3) shooting down the lesser used communities, to maintain their superior status in IE-modding.

SHS is, and probably always will be, my favourite modding community, because it satisfies the needs I have concerning IE modding and socializing. For others, these roles are filled out by PPG, G3, Blackwyrm Lair, RPG Dungeon and so on and so forth. People have different needs, thus the many communities. If Igi's initiative will bring more people into IE modding, why don't we all simply rejoice and congratulate the responsible?

Funny thing is, it isn't even the administrators of said sites (PPG, G3, SHS etc.) who typically have problems with new communities; it's the modders who favor the aforementioned sites.

I'd like to see Sebastian's, Ascension's and a few others point of view on the technical side of things, as I'm not much into that. Still, I can't fathom how new modding-centers could be a problem.

Thumbs up from me, Igi, I hope TeamBG will grow to an extend close to the glory it once held. And when it does, I hope you'll treat the new and smaller communities a little better than certain members of this community does

- Grunker

Edited by Grunker, 19 June 2006 - 05:42 AM.

[Baronius]

Calling NiGHTMARE a 'child' isn't really fair, considering the amount of work he produced. Furthermore, whether a newcomer or an oldtimer, the valid points in this discussion has more to do with knowledge than memory.

As I've clarified in the brackets, by child I meant representant. It has nothing to do with how much he knows, and it wasn't intended to be disrespectful at all. (And since you brought it up, I think NiGHTMARE isn't just a good modder, I've always appreciated his unbiased, clear and logical remarks in several topics I've read. However, in this case, I could not agree with his statement about G3 being more modding-oriented than TBG.)
As I've told at the new TBG forum, I'm one of those who are not really fond of the "community-centric" (site-centric) thinking, so the reason why I've written so much about G3/TBG/other stuff in my previous post was NiGHTMARE's remark.

By the way, the reason why a lot of people dislike (or despise) the old TeamBG has often fully emotional origin. Certain (or many) individuals suffered from the bans or possible unfair moderator decisions (or e.g. they weren't clever enough to understand the use of tools because there weren't tons of well-written tutorials available for "newbies"), hence their negative feelings towards the old TBG -- and thus they don't restrain from making unfair or false statements regarding TBG's significance and achievements in IE research and IE modding.

As for the monopolizing of the communites, I saw it all happen to Blackwyrm Lair. While I don't like the community, and haven't registered there, I'm not about to go ranting on about how it should be shut down. If there are people willing to do work to maintain such a community; why shouldn't they be allowed to? I think it's outright disgusting to see "the big shots" (I.e. the respected modders from SHS, PPG, and G3) shooting down the lesser used communities, to maintain their superior status in IE-modding.

This is exactly the "community-centric" way of thinking that I mentioned on the new TBG forum too. You "don't like the community?" Are you sure you didn't want to write "I don't like the policies of BWL" or "I don't like the way it is administrated/it works/it functions"? Not liking a "community" is interesting because several G3, SHS and others sites' active modders are also active at BWL, and they are also part of BWL's "community" as well. This is what I try to express: "community" is not a site and its leaders and policies. A community consists of people. If you criticize/grade or just refer to a community, remember that you're referring to People.

SHS is, and probably always will be, my favourite modding community, because it satisfies the needs I have concerning IE modding and socializing. For others, these roles are filled out by PPG, G3, Blackwyrm Lair, RPG Dungeon and so on and so forth. People have different needs, thus the many communities.

Exactly. And people are different from many aspect. However, you're not right when you're implying that most people prefer one of the "communities" you've listed: in my opinion, most of the modders visit most if not all of these places, and often as active users.

First of: Stop the pointless discussion of TeamBG's history or continue it elsewhere. The history of the site has nothing to do with the new and revived site that Igi is initiating, except for the tools that Igi brings back with him. The discussion doesn't bring anything relevant to argument about whether TeamBG shoud or should not be ressurected.

Since you refer to me and NiGHTMARE at the end of this paragraph, I suppose that the rest of it is also directed at me (as well). First of all, the history of the site does have to do with the new TBG site. It could be called "[fancy any name] IE Modding Community" instead of TBG if it wasn't intended to keep certain (positive) traditions and features of the old TeamBG. Furthermore, on the other hand, I agree with you with the restriction that the negative features and failures of the old TeamBG should not be brought up in any context regarding the new TeamBG: it's a new site, and it is not responsible for the past. And it has the possibility to prove that it will not inherit the negative sides of the ancestor.

Edited by Baronius, 19 June 2006 - 06:56 AM.

[Grunker]

To save them the trouble, I will expand briefly on the tools people have raised objection to.

IDU and IDW are plain bad. The former has always been heavily broken is responsible for delaying my active participation in modding by half a year. People saying "look, IDU is broken" was the catalyst for a huge number of bans at TeamBG--most notably, Shadows over Soubar made the game practically unplayable on its initial release due to the author's use of IDU, and attempts to fix this with WeiDU were greeted in a particularly unfriendly manner. The latter was obsolete and equally broken when it was released (and thus voids any concerns that we aren't showing respect for older tools). Anyone who wants to discuss the merits of these tools is unlikely to have done much modding with them.

IEEP's provisions are primarily twofold: item creation, and IAP. While I discourage its use for item creation, since there are numerous superior tools around, I recognize that some people find the interface comfortable. While outdated, it is not hideously broken in this respect. IAP has two valid uses: distribution of invididual items, as seen in the days of the intriguingly-named "TeamBG Kicks Ass" filehosting site, a practice which has become all but extinct recently; and distribution of files within a modding team developing a non-WeiDU mod, of which DLTC has been the only example ever. In terms of actual mod distribution, there is basically no reason you would use it.

Alright. Valid points. But, would you please explain why a newbie modder, nervous and in search for the right tools, would download the ones that clearly says:

NB. This is a legacy tool. This tool is not recommended for general use - only download it if you have a specific reason.

?

As I've clarified in the brackets, by child I meant representant. It has nothing to do with how much he knows, and it wasn't intended to be disrespectful at all. (And since you brought it up, I think NiGHTMARE isn't just a good modder, I've always appreciated his unbiased, clear and logical remarks in several topics I've read. However, in this case, I could not agree with his statement about G3 being more modding-oriented than TBG.)
As I've told at the new TBG forum, I'm one of those who are not really fond of the "community-centric" (site-centric) thinking, so the reason why I've written so much about G3/TBG/other stuff in my previous post was NiGHTMARE's remark.

I think I partly misunderstood then, though I would still be more satisfied if the term ?child? was directed towards people such as myself.

By the way, the reason why lot of people dislike (or dispise) is often fully emotional. Certain (or many) individuals suffered from the bans or possible unfair moderator decisions, hence their negative feelings towards the old TBG -- and thus they don't restrain from making unfair or false statements regarding TBG's significance and achievements in IE research and IE moding.

I wasn?t around in those days ? but as far as I understand, the people who are resurrecting TeamBG was not involved in the transgressions made back then, and as I said before, history shouldn?t have anything to say in this matter. It is the ?now? that matters.

This is exactly the "community-centric" way of thinking that I mentioned on the new TBG forum too. You "don't like the community?" Are you sure you didn't want to say "I don't like the policies of BWL" or "I don't like the way it is administrated/it works/it functions"? Not liking a "community" is interesting because several G3, SHS and others sites' active modders are also active at BWL, and they are also part of BWL's "community" as well. This is what I try to express: "community" is not a site and its leaders and policies. A community consists of people. If you criticize/grade or just refer to a community, remember that you're referring to People.

A result of the fact that English is not my native language. Still, I think most people understood what I meant. I sure as hell don?t dislike an entire community, I don't even dislike the people that run it, I just critize their way of handling things from time to time. That goes for all communities.

I respect your site even though I don?t prefer the methods used there, as long as you respect my right not to

That discussion has no place here anyways, I and assure you I'm not spreading bad words about your site. As I said, more communities equals more workshops which in turn equals more mods and often more quality. As a player, I'm not about to go speaking against sites, just because they don't suit my style.

Exactly. And people are different from many aspect. However, you're not right when you're implying that most people prefer one of the "communities" you've listed: in my opinion, most of the modders visit most if not all of these places, and often as active users.

The ones listed were the ones that sprung into mind. Surely, you can?t blame for not listing every single modding community out there.

Since you refer to me and NiGHTMARE at the end of this paragraph, I suppose that the rest of it is also directed at me (as well). First of all, the history of the site does have to do with the new TBG site. It could be called "[fancy any name] IE Modding Community" instead of TBG if it wasn't intended to keep certain (positive) traditions and features of the old TeamBG. Furthermore, on the other hand, I agree with you with the change that the negative features and failures of the old TeamBG should not be brought up in any context regarding the new TeamBG: it's a new site.

Then we are agreed

Edited by Grunker, 19 June 2006 - 07:12 AM.

[Baronius]

EDIT: this was reaction to guest's post, not to Grunker's. (Cross-posting phenomenon.)

I don't see your point. Did I say I referred to you? And did you deny "TBG's significance and achievements in IE research and IE modding"? I didn't see it here.

But lot of people are emotionally influenced in their posts in the question of TBG and such (not just in this thread, generally as well). Or they're just misled/naive or too primitive (i.e. post just to spam, but this is rare).

Edited by Baronius, 19 June 2006 - 07:20 AM.

[Baronius]

Exactly. And people are different from many aspect. However, you're not right when you're implying that most people prefer one of the "communities" you've listed: in my opinion, most of the modders visit most if not all of these places, and often as active users.

The ones listed were the ones that sprung into mind. Surely, you can?t blame for not listing every single modding community out there.

No you misunderstood me. I wanted to express: most users visit more (or all of the) modding forums ("communities"). In my opinion, you were implying that SHS is preferred by one kind of person, G3 by another, BWL by another again and so on. (Not sure if you meant it in this way.) To sum up, in my opinion most of the modders and IE forum users don't refuse to visit or post on any of the modding sites (unlike you and several others e.g. in case of BWL -- certainly it's your decision, and I respect it. By the way -- off-topic -- suggestions for BWL are always welcome in any format.)

It seems we agree in more things than what we disagree, by the way.

Edited by Baronius, 19 June 2006 - 07:21 AM.

[Grunker]

I simply meant that the different sites handled things differently. I frequent G3 quite often too.

It seems we agree in more things than what we disagree, by the way. smile.gif

It does

[the bigg]

(or e.g. they weren't clever enough to understand the use of tools because there weren't tons of well-written tutorials available for "newbies")

Did you read 'making shit up for dummies' or are you a natural? Last time I checked, TBG tools didn't allow you to make cumulative editing of the same file from two different mods. They didn't allow batch editing of multiple files. They didn't preserve the WEIGHT in dialogues. They didn't work on non-MS Windows systems. And so forth.

[Grunker]

Hence:

NB. This is a legacy tool. This tool is not recommended for general use - only download it if you have a specific reason.

Or is there something I've missed?

[Baronius]

Same question from me, theBigg.

Edited by Baronius, 19 June 2006 - 07:53 AM.

[the bigg]

Or is there something I've missed?

Yes. You might have noticed my quote, in which B. was saying that people stating "IDU/IAP sucks" are in bad faith because they didn't try the tool / there weren't good tutorials.

Of course, you can get back to drooling for igi's hijacking of the TBG name for launching his new comunity after reading this post.

[Baronius]

Yes. You might have noticed my quote, in which B. was saying that people stating "IDU/IAP sucks" are in bad faith because they didn't try the tool / there weren't good tutorials.

I did not mention IDU/IAP. Furthermore, I didn't say anywhere that these tools are better than the current ones (you are listing a lot of stuff which was not offered by the old tools), I just said that they were the available tools that time, and they deserve respect. And I'm not going to repeat myself: in one of my previous post, I even provided an example for a case when an old tool may be needed. All in all, the new TBG site is correctly making the old tools available. (The disclaimer is correct and accurate in my opinion.)