262 replies to this topic

[Andyr]

Bickering over how people run their sites, which tools they prefer to use, semantics and the proper use of the english language is a bit "obsolete" in my opnion, but voila! Here are 6 pages of it. Always nice to see diversity being so lovingly welcomed into the community!

Did you read my post?

[Jolyth]

Bickering over how people run their sites, which tools they prefer to use, semantics and the proper use of the english language is a bit "obsolete" in my opnion, but voila! Here are 6 pages of it. Always nice to see diversity being so lovingly welcomed into the community!

Did you read my post?

Yes. Perhaps I can clarify, even though my response was not directed at you.

No, I am not a modder and although I would like to learn the art, I truly do not have the time to do so right now. Additionally, I never visited TeamBG and have no thoughts about it nor can I make a comparison to the old site and the new one, not that I would anyway.

That said, the opinions of modders and non-modders alike is important, so we should be open enough to listen to all sides here. Just because non-modders are posting that they are happy that TeamBG has returned is not a reason to condemn them. Additionally, there is no reason to quarrel over the new TeamBG's choice of modding tools. If you do not like the tools, do not use them. It is that simple. With so many options available, I am amazed at the amount of energy that has been put into a back and forth of "The tools I use are better than the ones you use so nyah!"

You have a choice to visit the site or not. You can use the tools or not. Why should the new TeamBG be like all the other sites? The wonder of the world we live in today is that we can do what we want, so let TeamBG do it.

[igi]

Just a quick note about the TeamBG site - it's currently down.

We're fixing the port 82 issue people have mentionned. When the site is back up the issue should be gone (hurrah)

[Andyr]

Bickering over how people run their sites, which tools they prefer to use, semantics and the proper use of the english language is a bit "obsolete" in my opnion, but voila! Here are 6 pages of it. Always nice to see diversity being so lovingly welcomed into the community!

Did you read my post?

Yes. Perhaps I can clarify, even though my response was not directed at you.

Oh, I thought the "obsolete" reference was a jibe at me. Apologies.

As people have explained, though, it's not really a case of bickering over which tools to use--IDU and IDW are not workable, and not making this clear is just going to cause hassle. It's not a matter of bickering over which is preferred; there really is only one viable choice when it comes to dialogue editing, and I think it is important that communities give out a clear message to that effect.

[MorningGlory]

Additionally, there is no reason to quarrel over the new TeamBG's choice of modding tools. If you do not like the tools, do not use them.

As has been said before countless times, it's not this simple. Shadows over Soubar was released and broke everybody's game because the author had been convinced that IDU was a workable tool. This was a horrific embarassment for modding in general, even though I was calmly sitting back and not using the tools I didn't like. This is a longstanding lesson: sitting back and not doing something you don't like is prone to large-scale embarassment because other people will always manage to do the things you're avoiding. So long as anyone is still defending the need for IDU's availability, this is a continuing risk. I ask again, as I did before MorningGlory chimed in with semantic crap, why did someone wake up in the morning and think "the world needs IDU back!"

Hey, there.... I take great umbrage with my crap being called 'semantic.' (Oh, silly me... Stigmatizing posters is probably the thing you do best... It adds so much to your street cred.)

[Jolyth]

Bickering over how people run their sites, which tools they prefer to use, semantics and the proper use of the english language is a bit "obsolete" in my opnion, but voila! Here are 6 pages of it. Always nice to see diversity being so lovingly welcomed into the community!

Did you read my post?

Yes. Perhaps I can clarify, even though my response was not directed at you.

Oh, I thought the "obsolete" reference was a jibe at me. Apologies.

None needed. I just picked one of the words that was being tossed around.

As people have explained, though, it's not really a case of bickering over which tools to use--IDU and IDW are not workable, and not making this clear is just going to cause hassle. It's not a matter of bickering over which is preferred; there really is only one viable choice when it comes to dialogue editing, and I think it is important that communities give out a clear message to that effect.

Ah! I understand now. Thanks for clearing that up. Yes, I can see your point and agree when you put it that way.

As has been said before countless times, it's not this simple. Shadows over Soubar was released and broke everybody's game because the author had been convinced that IDU was a workable tool. This was a horrific embarassment for modding in general, even though I was calmly sitting back and not using the tools I didn't like.

See, now this is a bit much imo. I do not see how the entire community should be embarrassed because one creator decided to use a tool that broke the game. That should be on the head of the creator alone and it is up to the other modders to prove/show it can be done better if they are so inclined. Rather scientific to me.

This is a longstanding lesson: sitting back and not doing something you don't like is prone to large-scale embarassment because other people will always manage to do the things you're avoiding.

Agreed.

So long as anyone is still defending the need for IDU's availability, this is a continuing risk. I ask again, as I did before MorningGlory chimed in with semantic crap, why did someone wake up in the morning and think "the world needs IDU back!"

Now Sim, there is no need for that.

[AnnabelleRose]

Wow...

Alot of maturity on this thread. Can we drop the whole "I don't like it so it MUST suck" bit? Igi worked hard on it, and I am quite happy to see TeamBG back. Bash it all you want, but the whole IE modding and the various communities were spawned by it.

I stopped reading anything after page three, as most posts are pure rubbish that includes nothing but flame wars, and a pissing contest.

I will not ramble on like most posts and make this simple:

1) If you don't like TeamBG and the tools listed there, don't join. I am sure everyone has more important things they can be doing with their time online.

2) Congrats, Igi. TeamBG being back makes me want to make a new mod and post it there. I always wanted to have a TeamBG mod, and be part of the group back then (see, it has allready spawned something good -- at least to the small few who enjoy my mods).

3) Think it is time to lock this thread. A good post/announcement, but it has been turned into pure flame by the huddled masses.

[AnnabelleRose]

I agree guys. The mature thing to do is encourage people to use shit tools.

Thank you for prooving point number three, Sim.

I guess my only mistake in all of this was I expect more from you. Without a doubt, you are one of the most talented modders around. I find myself getting dissapointed with you when I read posts like that.

For someone who seems to hate SHS, you make alot of posts here and always have time to flame anything you do not like.

Perhaps the tools there are outdated, and the newer ones are better. So what? If people enjoy using them and supporting them, why not let them?

This is my last post on this thread, so one last point. If the other sites and tools are so much better, why not post there. No matter what anyone says, people will make the descision on thier own what to use and not to use. I am sure a few people actually use and enjoy sooper scripts as an example.

I take a few days off, and this is what I come back to see, nice.

Think I will take a few more days off and do something much more constructive (working on a D20 netbook with my wife currently if anyone cares).

So have fun bashing/flaming/pissing everyone as you like.

Just know that crap like this is why the IE community is constatly loosing newbies. Sure they ask dumb questions, rarely read the readme files, and install mods that are completely incompatable. Thing is, we were all newbies once. Many of the cats with annoying questions wind up making mods. Sure the number that completes them is very small, but some of them do.

Now, next time you are bored with playing BG1 & BG2 wishing there were new mods, or the author of a mod you wanted to play left the groups before finishing it, ask yourself why?

Maybe they decided they would rather go play with adults somewhere else.

[Drew]

Perhaps the tools there are outdated, and the newer ones are better. So what? If people enjoy using them and supporting them, why not let them?

No. The tools in question aren't outdated. They don't work, and they never did work. This is the point that the modders who remember (and actually attempted to use) the tools are trying to make. They aren't obsolete or outdated. They are broken. They always were broken. There is a huge difference between obsolete and never worked at all. I don't know how many other ways there are to say this.....so I'll just say please, please, please, PRETTY PLEASE WITH SUGAR ON TOP stop talking about these tools as if they actually ever worked! Seriously.....they never did.

Edited by Drew, 20 June 2006 - 08:55 PM.

[Baronius]

You should have named your "tools in question", otherwise it is ambigious. IDU and IDW? Or all tools marked as Legacy? In the latter case, you're certainly wrong (as I've written in my previous post).

By the way, I reacted in this thread just because I felt that certain comments were more than unfair towards TeamBG, otherwise I wouldn't have reacted. I suggest to others as well to do modding or something more useful (like I did to JC, who had enough time to play the wise here while the package of Kelsey for German users is still broken despite my report that I made more than two months ago...) than arguing over ridiculous, actually unimportant, things.

[SConrad]

I've been on a mini-vacation (and still is, which is why I'm not bothering to be online as much as I normally am), but I just wanted to present my thought on the subject.

TeamBG.eu certainly has the right to exist. They also have the right to promote whatever they want regardless of what anyone says or takes issue with. igi has already said that proper warning notices will be included with the tools in question and IIRC that support will be available.

The harsh reality is that the ultimate success of TeamBG.eu is not in their name but in what they will offer and the acceptance of the modders that visit the site. This will be determined with time but in the meanwhile I'm keeping an open mind and hopeful they will accomplish what they set out to do without having to answer to others having no business in their affairs.

[the bigg]

It's nice to see that we have a pair equalities administratorship here at SHS.

Or are they just defending IDU, ISE and IDW because it's with such tools that TDD and SOS (the pinnacle of SHS' mod offering nowadays) were made?

[NiGHTMARE]

You honestly consider TDD and SoS to be superior to Refinements, bigg?

[the bigg]

You honestly consider TDD and SoS to be superior to Refinements, bigg?

If I count the sheer number of forum posts (or the current post-per-day ratio), hell yeah

Actually, only TBP has an higher post count than Refs, BGT-WeiDU and BP-BGT are still behind, although the BP-BGT one is going to reach Refs in count pretty soon

Edited by the bigg, 21 June 2006 - 08:21 AM.