Compatibility of TS v6.11, and general problems, [Topic split by Vlad, move by Baronius] Options

[cmorgan]

Currently reviewing TS v6.11 code alongside DR code to look for what could be causing hassles. ETA on summary is 6 weeks unless I am sidetracked (plenty of stuff going on) - please feel free to drop off specific problems on G3 or PPG or SHS boards.

(IA compatibility is a completely different question, please see the readme in that mod for more information).

While each of us in the IE community are allowed their own opinions, I think a constructive way of addressing those questions would to be to go to the NPC mod makers in question, and ask the same question. My current Tutu and BG games run with a large mod loadout for testing, and they all work extremely well, including several BWL mods (TGCep1 and Herbs and potions, and Jastey's Slime Quest on Tutu). At SHS, there is a section of MegaModders who successfully handle various versions of BP/BGT/etc., incorporating TS and NEJ, etc, on the same installs as many other NPCs from PPG and G3, et al.

I understand the frustration of two opposing philosophies of modding, but I am afraid that the choice of words indicating that development of G3 mods makes them widely incompatible is neither accurate nor fair. Nor is the development process a short one; widespread testing among several platforms, with anywhere between a handful of beta testers and an entire set of 12 or so folks specifically providing testing and feedback (depending on the mod, of course). Cooperation among teams of coders and an open policy of producing joint public code and testing it, then writing up tutorials on it and updating it with feedback allows modders access to many helpers, making coding review a strong and vibrant process.

The way to get folks to be able to identify the specific incompatibilities and give information on tracking the difficulty down is to experience the problem, get a savegame, and write up what the specific dialogue/action was that was taken. Then the modders in question can attempt to isolate and fix whatever is causing the trouble (assuming they wish to be friendly enough to help eachother out).

[Tervadh]

I read the post jastey linked (well, most of it anyway... no offense, but I think the Communist Manifesto would be a shorter read ). You have some valid points. Alignment Corrections could certainly be an optional (non-fix) component. Rather, there are probably some invalid alignments that are definitely fixes and others changes that are more subjective. This may, in fact, have already been addressed.

All of the other things you mentioned can be (and probably are or have been) dealt with in the normal course of continuing development. As for methodologies, well, those will always differ between developers. That isn't a good enough reason to dismiss an entire mod, or, more abusively, an entire modding community. I doubt every modder who hosts a mod on a particular site shares the same development methodology. But as jastey suggests, this seems like more of a political debate than anything else.

One of the "consumed keys" used to break one of Improved Anvil's upgrades.

I don't see what the big deal is (or was) about this. Given this knowledge, either the Fixpack can leave the item as is, or IA can spawn its own key. Doubtless, you say "but there are other issues" but it's a finite list of issues and therefore, a list that can be addressed and resolved. [And later on, you even seem to suggest this has been fixed already (but somehow it "doesn't change things"...?).]

I haven't read the Fixpack's documentation in depth but what little I glimpsed at seemed to be fairly verbose. Documentation can always be improved though (something that developers sometimes pay little heed to, as they're too busy developing). Also something that's not a major issue and gets addressed in the natural development cycle.

One obvious question springs to my mind. Why not just install the Fixpack and develop your mod based on its adjusted dependencies, rather than develop your mod on an unfixed game and claim that the Fixpack 'breaks' your mod? I know you have probably got loads of arguments against this approach, but one could produce just as many for it as well.

As for your (rather vague) mod development guidelines, they're loaded with subjective terms like "precise" and "proper." You can argue for or against any mod fulfilling or failing those criteria, based on your personal biases. (And by your own admission, even you "haven't yet fully specified the exact details of their application".)

A lot of your other examples seem aimed at certain people, some of whom I'm not even familiar with. Nor am I arguing for or against any particular mod. I'm rather new to the modding community and would prefer not to get involved in that kind of mudslinging. It just seems a bit bizarre to me so I'm trying to understand it, but that probably won't happen.

I haven't examined the game text update, it is probably okay to be in the core mod (and has no fundemental, conceptual problems, so if it has any flaws, those will simply be fixed!).

Ironically, the game text update is considered one of the most problematic components even by the Fixpackers themselves (see various posts on G3 re: correcting it, etc.). From what I understand though, this was taken from Baldurdash almost without modification.

Any large program or mod will have bugs. If not, perhaps few people are using it. Maybe it's been around longer. Maybe, just maybe it was better designed, but the fact fewer bugs get reported (if that's true) isn't necessarily prima facie evidence of that. It would be nice if the BG2 Fixpack tested cross-compatibility with every single BG2 mod out there. This, of course, would be absurdly impractical, even if they had a huge staff of testers. And finally, as everyone seems to recognise here, you will always have potential for incompatibility. If I decide to change a minute detail, like a line in a script of a single creature, and modder X somewhere, perhaps years ago in some mega-mod, has already done this or done something opposing, well right away we have a conflict. We don't need to delete some key or other "dependency" to get that. Unfortunately, there's little way of knowing this until someone happens to hit the exact combination that will trip the conflict and then hopefully, either the modders can resolve the conflict or document it as unresolvable. But that shouldn't involve wholesale dismissal of the conflicting mod (or as I said, modding community comprised of many individuals with differing viewpoints).