UB bug still present in v16, [split by Baronius] Options

[Baronius]

The bug was known for v15 already. Wouldn't it be easier to fix it in UB itself?

[This topic was split from this]

[Baronius]

First of all, it's important to note that the severe technical problems of G3 Fixpack are used as an example here. G3 Fixpack has other problems as well -- e.g., conceptual ones such as "guessing developer intent" and adding quasi-tweaks, but they are beyond the scope of the present topic. Nonetheless I will probably mention/detail them after all, considering most technical issues follow from the conceptual ones, or closely related.

I'm deeply reluctant (as a newish observer of all this) to get into a deep debate, but I do feel you're exaggerating. [..]

I have never said that G3 Fixpack (or mods that make the same technical mistakes) actually break lots of mods etc. On the other hand, the technical mistakes cause very many problems, the practice confirms this.

It breaks/broke certain mods (such as Improved Anvil or Sheena NPC), let alone the global bugs that affect(ed) almost all mods that are installed together with it. There are several mod types that don't interact much with this type of technical problems, but complex mods (e.g., which have many dependencies and interrelations) are very sensitive to the arbitrary changes made on the original game. Needless to say the reasons, they are obvious.

The biggest trouble (beyond conceptual and developer attitude problems): on top of the fact G3 Fixpack already includes severe risks for certain mods types, it's continously changing, possibly affecting new game resources again and again. Iroumen perfectly summarized what I've shown in those diagrams of my long post in the present topic. And what is the consequence?

The consequence is some broken mods, and the constant "obligation" for authors of many mods (and not just complex mods) to keep their work "synchronized" with G3 Fixpack. If they don't do it, there will be incompatibilities.

G3 Fixpack forces modders to follow and support its own arbitrary changes (and forces players to install these changes). If modders don't want those arbitrary changes, they have to spend a lot of time to negate (!!) those changes. If they don't or can't, their mod will either be broken (e.g., think of dependencies -- yes, I'm still on-topic), or conceptually incompatible (because he/she didn't agree with a change).

DavidW, you didn't encounter severe problems for more reasons:
(1) You have no problems with WeiDU TP2, you're skilled in WeiDU and G3 Fixpack so you don't have to spend hours to learn the basics. If you work for a longer time on a code after all (e.g. because of a more complex problem to harmonize a mod with G3 Fixpack), you gladly do it because you agree with the principles of G3 Fixpack. Not everyone agrees, and not everyone has the skills and/or time to spend hours for such things.
(2) Many of the mods you (also) deal with aren't such mods that are too sensitive to arbitrary changes on the game. So in this case it's not hard to implement compatibility and "cure" dependency problems via "reactive" coding. With a few or a few tens of WeiDU LOC.

The problem is that many of you guys there at G3/PPG don't realize (or don't care, though you seem to care DavidW, so this isn't directed at you) that there are OTHER mods as well beside your usual mod types, and these other mods have different structure and complexity. Which means they couldn't be harmonized with G3 Fixpack without conceptual changes or enormous technical alterations even if their authors agreed with G3 Fixpack's arrogance. But it's easier (and reflects big weakness) to reject the responsibility with a comment such as "it's a poorly designed mod, otherwise it could be made compatible with G3 Fixpack". So instead of actually reconsidering the attitude and principles, the developers and supporters of G3 Fixpack enjoy the wide reputation of G3 Fixpack thanks to propaganda it gets (e.g., "the game will crash more..." , or the pinned topics in all gaming/modding forums, telling about "hundreds of fixes" and "Baldurdash is totally obsolete"). They abuse this reputation, and mislead new players, e.g. discourage them even from trying mods such as Improved Anvil, Never Ending Journey, or Tortured Souls (mods which authors don't share their viewpoints and don't follow what they want to dictate).

Furthermore, not all players like that all things are dictated to their fixpack installation, because they also realise the severe technical risks. And it's present all the time, as we can see. Incredible, players complain due to subjective changes -- AGAIN. It's a mystery why such stuff can't be put to a different mod, to a mod similar to Improved Anvil, Grey Clan or any non-fixpack mod. It's a mystery why G3 fixpack creators want to dictate a default installation to players and brand-new default conditions/environment to modders, offering them the "possibility" to *negate* those changes in various ways. I've brought this up many times I know -- it's a mystery for me, and I guess many others.

Let me quote a post by Caedwyr (highlights added by me):

Which ones? It's fairly easy to comment out the stuff you don't want to install and I know that some of the older fixes have been rewritten with code that will cause less issues with other mods/material.

Caedwyr admits that older fixes might have caused issues. It's OK, but he also admits that their current versions "will cause less issues with other mods/material". That is, he is well aware of the fact that G3 Fixpack code is a possible source of problems. Of course, I know that he would say that modders can post feedback and/or fix the problems in their own code -- but that is what I was talking about: it can be a lot of effort for beginners, and in case of certain mod types, it's not possible!

Shouldn't a fixpack work like this: it's installed after the official patch, and modders can develop their own mods peacefully, players can be sure they don't have to "comment out lines". A fixpack that doesn't have to touched, its documentation and code (both are hundreds of pages) doesn't have to be read by others, etc.

I know I've actually been writing about concepts and attitudes in the latest paragraphs above, but 80-90% of the severe technical issues directly follow from these conceptual problems.

It's a mystery why those arbitrary changes have to be forced into G3 Fixpack, and thus forced onto the installations of hundreds of players (with the support of "this is the only stable, and practically the only usable fixpack -- the only option for you" propaganda). I have some guesses but I don't want to share them.

Finally, three quotes (highlighting added by me):

A fuller description of this process can be found in the I *HATE* this fix! thread. You can very easily customize the fixpack to get exactly what you want since every component is modular and do not rely on other components. I personally have a few changes made on my local install of the fixpack as there are a few things I prefer to not change when I play the game (experience/item exploits mostly).

Alternatively, you may be able to make a case that Jaheira should have the older spell selection in her role as a Harper and that change would be removed from the fixpack. Its happened before.

So players have right to request/convince G3 FP developers to remove arbitrary tweaks that shouldn't be in a fixpack at all? No comment

My only concern with Fixpack is that it keeps introducing bugs: my last but one Fixpack version had "De'Arnise Guards are mute and do nothing" bug, and SoTM "Protection from Evil". Fortunately, it's been fixed in a timely manner, but the taste, so to say, lingered.

Of course, now kulyok would certainly say something like "it was back then, it was an old version, in fact a beta, now it has been improved and it doesn't keep introducing bugs anymore". This quote ("My only concern...") was just to reflect: it's obvious that the bugs started to come from the beginning, and G3 Fixpack's development principles haven't changed since then. It's also a mystery why a fixpack's beta can "start introducing bugs". Beta or not, it's meant to be a fixpack, so even in worst case, it may not fix all bugs it intends to fix, but to introduce new bugs?

One subject not covered above: Fixpack Fixpacks

What is a fixpack fixpack? It's a fixpack written to fix things that a fixpack breaks, of course. For example, I authored a fixpack that restores the THAC0 bonus to the Arrows of Fire that the BG2 Fixpack erroneously removes and then adds an equal THAC0 bonus to the Arrows of Ice. Whenever I install a new version of the BG2 Fixpack, I simply rerun my fixpack for the Fixpack instead of hunting down and commenting out sections of code in the new tp2.

(No comment for this one)


(Sources: Caedwyr, kulyok, Wounded Lion)