81 replies to this topic

[Ithildur]

At least one person sees it honestly; not your fault obviously that the quality of most of the mega mods are pretty low.

 

My point is that for more experienced installers, it's actually more of a headache to use these tools when I have no interest in the 100s of bad mods, and I see posts like this from DavidW or Kulyok and get concerned that all these unauthorized hotfixes slapped on from various poorly documented sources may or may not be outdated/current/working properly. It means I have to sort through each one to check dates, etc. to at least try and determine that they're not going to be redundant or even overwrite more recent fixes written by the authors of the mods.

 

If nothing else, perhaps improvement in the documentation of the fixpack might help (i.e. _BWP fixes.text); it seems like it's simply not something anyone is bothering to update since Leomar stopped. I realize the disclaimer on top reads

 

Since Leomars' absence this file is no longer supported. Read Lollorians excellent reports instead at:
http://www.shsforums...he-big-fixpack/

 

but hunting down threads on these forums (which don't seem to be kept updated either btw) is not an ideal replacement for good documentation being included with the mod. Considering the bold claims that BWP (or some of it's adherents at least) often makes to be the ideal tool for megamod installations and such, I think it's not unreasonable to ask for something like this?

Edited by Ithildur, 19 September 2013 - 12:02 PM.

[DavidWallace]

Yeah, sure: modders fixing vanilla bugs - cool! Modders fixing other modders bugs - yay, gimme two! Modders fixing my bugs - doh, now suddenly it's an "issue". No, it's an "ISSUE" even.

You left out "modders incorrectly fixing bugs", "modders continuing to distribute fixes to already-fixed code that goes on to break something", and "modders adding extra content to other people's mods in the form of a bugfix".

Oh, and unspoken horrors of spreading old version too! Blergh

Get back to me when you've spent a hour and a half frustratedly trying to chase down a bug that you thought you'd fixed, only to find that indeed you had fixed it but someone was playing with an old version.

(most of them of subpar quality)

Well, let's see your high quality work then !

The problem lies in you, in the fact that you are an asshole

glad to see the standard of argument here is staying professional and mature

and have nothing to show for yourself !

I agree with Ithildur, and while I can't comment on whether my work is high quality, it's reasonably well received.

Seriously, of course most mods are subpar. How could it be otherwise, in an amateur hobby with mostly one-person modding teams and virtually no quality-control mechanism?

Edited by DavidWallace, 20 September 2013 - 12:01 AM.

[The Imp]

Yeah, sure: modders fixing vanilla bugs - cool! Modders fixing other modders bugs - yay, gimme two! Modders fixing my bugs - doh, now suddenly it's an "issue". No, it's an "ISSUE" even.

You left out "modders incorrectly fixing bugs", "modders continuing to distribute fixes to already-fixed code that goes on to break something", and "modders adding extra content to other people's mods in the form of a bugfix".

...

Seriously, of course most mods are subpar. How could it be otherwise, in an amateur hobby with mostly one-person modding teams and virtually no quality-control mechanism?

Well, let's see if I can turn your very words against you... let's take the above(last page issue I proved to be still needing the BWP fix), the fact is that the current weidu.exe mainetainer, also maintains the Rogue Rebalance, and by it's virtue should know most if not all the issues in the things... yes, Wisp, at least (I presume that) he knows why the fix is needed, but has not had the time to fix it in the mod, that shouldn't prevent others from knowingly using a fix that's 4~5 years old(originally from the Bigg in Refinements, 2008) for the issue.
PS: the failure actually came from a ...fix.tph -file, which would indicate that the original modder thought originally that he was doing the correct thing, but was not.

Yes, it's been said that the BWP's fixes should be sent to the authors as notes so they can fix them... I have no arguments against that, but the fact remains, I have things to do other than go around the BWFix archive and point it to people. Most know where it is.

Now what comes to the word subpar, it is=below an average level. Hmm, is your average level just a little too high for it to be an average, I wonder... seriously! After all, the 400 mods have a quite many clashes without the BWFixpacks fixes and all...

Get back to me when you've spent a hour and a half frustratedly trying to chase down a bug that you thought you'd fixed, only to find that indeed you had fixed it but someone was playing with an old version.

Erhm, you never learned to ask for a weidu.log or a --change-log from the file... I now wonder if you were really serious about wanting to find the real error. Or are you a subpar modder ..
And yes, the --change-log has had the version flags added to it too, as I requested it a while ago, just for this.

Edited by The Imp, 20 September 2013 - 01:30 AM.

[DavidWallace]

Well, let's see if I can turn your very words against you... let's take the above(last page issue I proved to be still needing the BWP fix), the fact is that the current weidu.exe mainetainer, also maintains the Rogue Rebalance, and by it's virtue should know most if not all the issues in the things... yes, Wisp, at least (I presume that) he knows why the fix is needed, but has not had the time to fix it in the mod, that shouldn't prevent others from knowingly using a fix that's 4~5 years old(originally from the Bigg in Refinements, 2008) for the issue.

Since my comment was specific to SCS/SCSII, issues with Rogue Rebalancing aren't relevant. (My general concern that there is basically no quality control on BWP fixes remains, but RR isn't my problem.)

Now what comes to the word subpar, it is=below an average level. Hmm, is your average level just a little too high for it to be an average, I wonder... seriously! After all, the 400 mods have a quite many clashes without the BWFixpacks fixes and all...

Notwithstanding what you get if you type it into google, that is not what the English word means. It means "falling below a given standard." It is entirely possible in contemporary English usage for, e.g., restaurant service generally to be subpar.

Get back to me when you've spent a hour and a half frustratedly trying to chase down a bug that you thought you'd fixed, only to find that indeed you had fixed it but someone was playing with an old version.

Erhm, you never learned to ask for a weidu.log or a --change-log from the file...And yes, the --change-log has had the version flags added to it too, as I requested it a while ago, just for this.

Change-logs are fine for nice simple things. They're not all that helpful for, e.g., persistent glitches in wizard rebuffing algorithms. I know perfectly well which component the problem is in, I just can't identify its cause.

I now wonder if you were really serious about wanting to find the real error. Or are you a subpar modder ..

Don't be ridiculous.

[Wisp]

(Fixes to RR are) still very much required, the rr# ... tph code:

I'd just like to point out that the relevant code only runs if the G3 Fixpack isn't already installed.

Edited by Wisp, 20 September 2013 - 05:52 AM.

[Ithildur]

Just to add, I do appreciate that there are guys putting in time and work into something like the mega/bwp efforts; personally it's not my prefered cup of tea since, again, getting a bloated install with hundreds of mods that are (I'll be nice) not my type of mods isn't what I'm looking for. What I was hoping for initially when I discovered the bwp tools was  a streamlined/automated way to smoothly install BGT plus a fairly reasonable number of reputable/established mods like SCS, UB, BG2Fixpack, BG2Tweakpack, RR etc. plus very small mods that don't alter the game significantly like Iron Horns.

 

What I found in reality was a nice idea in theory, but in practice the results actually ended up being more work than if I'd installed each mod separately on my own, due to issues like this where I'd find out mid-install that bwp inserted/patched files that would lead to problems with recently updated mods, or gave outdated information in their guide which meant having to reinstall, etc (happened a couple of years ago, more than once)

 

Primarily the issue comes down to 1. lack of good documentation and 2. the enormous task of keeping on top of updates and compatibility issues for hundreds of mods. I suspect that the latter has some impact on the former; i.e. at a certain point perhaps it feels like it's too much work so people simply stop updating for example the _bwfixes.txt file while continuing to toss stuff into the fixpack that may or may not cause problems.

 

BWP is in some ways to be complemented for having an ambitious scope, but in practice the downside is it ends up looking like a rather slapped together effort in pursuit of a goal that is somewhat questionable to begin with (I simply don't see the point in trying to play through hundreds of mods that don't fit well together and have little semblence of a coherent storyarc other than 'I get to go to new places, kill stuff and get new loot over and over again' ).But hey, that's just me, others seem to enjoy that and for them BWP is probably a good tool.

 

I'll tell you one reason why I prefer/trust mods like RR, G3 mods, and to a lesser extent PP mods; besides the issues of overall quality and support, these mods are generally quite well documented, either in the readme files or the forums (and often even the tp2 files are helpfully commented), especially concerning updates/version revisions. If BWP worked on this a bit more, especially with something like their Fixpack, I think it would be a significant improvement. It also makes a difference whether advocates/contributers to the project respond like Lolrian or Imp/Jarno; the former makes me think there's good people putting in hard work (al beit imperfect), the latter makes me want to not touch the project with a 10 foot pole.

Edited by Ithildur, 20 September 2013 - 07:40 AM.

[Lollorian]

I'm sorry, now are we still talking about distributing outdated fixes for SCS/SCSII/Stratagems here?

 

Let's have some objectivity in this thread for christ's sake.

 

1. There is a fix for SCS and a fix for Stratagems in the BWPFixpack v13.0.3 (latest)

 

SCS' fix

--- scs\wolf\wolf.tph    Sat Jul 07 11:44:45 2012
+++ C:\BWP Patchstudio\patched files\scs\wolf\wolf.tph    Tue Oct 09 13:10:42 2012
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@
 // protect the Melicamp wolf!
 
 COPY_EXISTING ~%tutu_var%wolfch.cre~ ~override~
-  WRITE_ASCII 0x258 ~%tutu_var%tasight~
+  WRITE_ASCIIE 0x258 ~%tutu_var%tasight~
 
 
 END

 

And Stratagems' fix:

--- stratagems\tactical_bg2\minor_bg2.tpa    Sat Feb 02 17:57:35 2013
+++ C:\BWP Patchstudio\patched files\stratagems\tactical_bg2\minor_bg2.tpa    Tue Sep 10 03:39:19 2013
@@ -313,6 +313,7 @@
 <<<<<<<< .../stratagems-inline/dw#dkmg2.baf
 
 IF
+  AreaCheck("AR0300")
   GlobalGT("DMWWDockMuggers","GLOBAL",2)
 THEN
   RESPONSE #100

 

2. The SCS fix is still valid for the currently distributed SCS v21. It is a legitimate fix for an error in the mod.

 

3. The stratagems fix is also valid for the currently distributed Stratagems v24.05. It is a compatibility fix for other mods that use SPMUGG.CRE (eg: Tactics)

 

4. Neither of them come under the category of:

a) "modders incorrectly fixing bugs"

b) "modders continuing to distribute fixes to already-fixed code that goes on to break something"

c) "modders adding extra content to other people's mods in the form of a bugfix"

 

5. As per points 2 & 3, neither of them are outdated.

 

6. SCS' fix was made after being reported

 

7. Stratagems' fix was made after being reported

 

I gotta be honest I assumed there was a point to the new discussion going on in this thread but it never occurred to me to actually open up the BWPFixpack and check what the fuss was about.

 

Long story short, the issues mentioned in this thread might have been prevalent at a time, but they certainly do not seem to be at the moment. So if people wanna keep calling others assholes and debating what subpar means, I'd suggest changing the title of the thread to something relevant.

[Lollorian]

On the topic of the BWP now.

 

What I was hoping for initially when I discovered the bwp tools was  a streamlined/automated way to smoothly install BGT plus a fairly reasonable number of reputable/established mods like SCS, UB, BG2Fixpack, BG2Tweakpack, RR etc. plus very small mods that don't alter the game significantly like Iron Horns.

Now I wonder why you think this is not the case. You mention lack of documentation. Enter the BWP PDF, page 16, under DOWNLOAD OF MODS, you'll find this line:

 

"Download and unpack all the mods you are interested in, into a separate folder that you name BiG World Project. The advantage of this is, that if you mess up the installation or want to start again because of an update or additional mod, you won’t need to individually unpack each Mod into the BGII - SoA folder again before installation. Some mods try to auto install immediately after being unpacked. Don’t worry: they can’t actually install as long as there is no dialog.tlk file present. Move all unpacked mods into your folder BGII - SoA."

 

Bolded and underlined for conspicuousness.

 

Nothing in the guide says that you need the entire 400+ mods to play your game. I agree Leonardo needs to advertise this point a bit more. The BWP Linklist is just that - a list of all mods that the BWP is capable of installing - not a you-need-these-mods-for-the-proper-BWP-experience.

 

Also, I will not speak for Jarno but I am not associated with the BWP at all - the fixes I post are not made for the BWP. They're made for myself but I figured the community could use them.

 

The actual 'BWP team' comprises of german members from this forum but mostly Leonardo Watson I think.

[DavidWallace]

At the risk of repeating myself, my objection is not to any specific fix but to the lack of any means of quality control to make sure that broken things do not get in and that non-current things are removed. As of my last complaint, the BW fixpack simply comprised every random fix posted by every random person and was not audited. I would be happy to learn that this is no longer the case and that BW fixpack is being actively curated.

[Lollorian]

Do reports like these count? v13 -> v13.0.2 -> v13.0.3

[DavidWallace]

Yes. If you (or anyone really) are making sure that

(a) fixes are actually correct;
(b) fixes are reported at the mod's own site
© fixes get removed once the mod is updated

then I have no objection to the BWP fixpack. This wasn't the case as of a couple of years ago, but it may well have changed (and I don't really follow the BWP, nor read German, so I'm not very able to tell). I'm very happy to take your word for it.

[Ithildur]

Completely missing my point, but I don't want to drift further off topic Lollorian. I'll just resign myself to the fact _bwfixes.txt file and similar documents will not be updated and I'll continue to have to dig through messy threads for the necessary info (or simply not bother with BWP in the future).

Edited by Ithildur, 20 September 2013 - 10:17 AM.

[Lollorian]

I'm very happy to take your word for it.

Thanks and I'm glad objectivity won in the end..

 

Completely missing my point, but I don't want to drift further off topic Lollorian. I'll just resign myself to the fact _bwfixes.txt file and similar documents will not be updated and I'll continue to have to dig through messy threads for the necessary info (or simply not bother with BWP in the future).

No, please do try to explain your point. Now that name calling and general off topicness is not an issue, and David's concerns seem to be addressed... that leaves yours now.

 

You're supposed to choose what you install and I personally believe people who install the full installs (recommended and - god forbid - expert) with the intention of playing through them are huge sadomasochists just asking for trouble (except maybe micbaldur, he seems to know the risks).

 

People who think the BWP picks mods for them, frankly speaking, have no right to complain about the shittiness of their game.

 

As for properly documenting the Fixes.txt, I've repeatedly said I'd personally keep it updated... IF someone updates it to the current status. So until someone does that, it's not a good reference.

 

And by similar documents, I assume you mean the aforementioned PDF? Just try posting a concern in the main BWP thread and see if you don't get an answer from Leonardo himself. Chances are your concerns would be addressed in the next issue of the PDF itself.

 

And finally, I don't even know where this unauthorized patches issue came from! Last time I checked, every patch in the BWPFixpack was a legitimate fix. Please feel free to point out any patch that supposedly fucks up a mod's workings.

[micbaldur]

 
You're supposed to choose what you install and I personally believe people who install the full installs (recommended and - god forbid - expert) with the intention of playing through them are huge sadomasochists just asking for trouble (except maybe micbaldur, he seems to know the risks).

Thanks Lollorian.

 

And no i don't forbid expert installs.

[DavidWallace]

While I understand some people aren't into megamod installations, modders should actually be happy about the mass compatibility testing. I also understand most modders want their mod(s) to run smoothly above all, but you never know what other mod people install.

I broadly agree with this, but the downside is that you tend to get errors caused by badly coded mods that mess up files. SCS is quite a delicate flower, bless it, and tends to choke on malformed files earlier in the install order.

[Ithildur]

No, please do try to explain your point.

 

If you insist...

 

You're totally misunderstanding where I'm coming from; perhaps it's my fault if I didn't make it clear, I do not and never have installed hundreds of mods; given my experience and personal tastes with such things I would be a masochist to do so. I'm well aware that you can choose which mods are installed using BWP.

 

That is not my main issue with these tools. Since it's unclear let me say it differently; my issue is experiencing several times that 'solutions' that BWP brings to the table, i.e. 'fixes' to files and outdated recommendations on installation details, have caused buggy or failed installations, and that I was dismayed at what I found (the poor documentation and objections by modders like David and Kulyok) when I attempted to track down necessary information to try and avoid such outdated/questionable files/fixes. That's my main issue, and I was trying to simply say perhaps better documentation practices (and avoiding practices David/Kulok have requested be avoided) would go a long ways towards installers avoiding those kinds of problems. i.e. 'Hey, the text file in BWPFixpack says fix xyz dated 1/1/12 addresses problem abc with SCS, but I see in SCS's documentation that has already been addressed in this version dated 7/7/13 . Fix xyz may be superfluous or even problematic, I'll go ahead and leave that out'.

 

Good documentation is just good practice it seems to me, and likely has an impact on why some projects are more trusted than others.

 

As for name calling, I see only one (or was it two? not really that important) that engaged in such, and 'twas not I sir.

Edited by Ithildur, 20 September 2013 - 03:42 PM.

[The Imp]

As for name calling, I see only one (or was it two? not really that important) that engaged in such, and 'twas not I sir.

Yeah, right, so if I take it personally when you claim that more than half of the mods I have tried to help out with are bad(as in subpar), while you have nothing to show for yourself... and don't even have the skills to find out if the one fix is needed that was... I kinda have something to say for you.

The point to DavidW from me was that if he keeps his standards as high as he does(assuming here), then why does he have complain for something as easy as knowing the version used in the game, after all he is a good modder by his standards. Yeah, he might have to go and admit he is a human after all and the par is under him, yes, but there are traps he must have hit as the life throws things at people. .. making him a mortal, as well as I. And ouh waw, he might wish to take another look and see if there is something under his par that might actually belong over it.

As the fact is, there are more people than there are mods in the community, and thus also a place for nearly each one of them in one Megamod install.

Edited by The Imp, 20 September 2013 - 06:22 PM.

[Kaeloree]

Everyone has different standards; let's not attack each other for having different opinions. Personally, I have fairly high standards most mods (including most of my own) don't meet--but that doesn't mean I'm devaluing the work modders put into it. It's just personal preference.