Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95a is out! (03/26/21)

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

Author Topic: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse - Updated 28/05/20  (Read 55258 times)

Harmful Mechanic

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • Ur-Quan Bastard
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse
« Reply #45 on: January 31, 2020, 07:06:59 PM »

You are correct. I think lists like these are damaging to the modding community and clearly favor the old guard. I never said take it down though. I just dont want it stickied. Also, the credibility of your defense is a little suspect considering your mod is literally the first one on the list.

I think lists like this are going to exist no matter what, and if they're public on a moderated forum, people can complain in specific terms about their contents. If you think not getting on someone's list is a downer, imagine what it's like when 4chan notices you, or when you get angry bug reports for someone else's mods. People either believe in what they're doing enough to persist, or they don't, and something like this is highly unlikely to be the first, second, third, fifth, or tenth thing that convinces them to give up. Lack of skills, lack of motivation, lack of focus, scope creep, poor documentation, real life intervening, lack of discipline, content sprawl, and the toxicity of internet gaming communities are all vastly more likely to kill mods than someone's written mod guide. Remember Orikson's mod guide? And the horrors of- wait, it's vanished pretty much without a trace and people don't even remember it.

I don't really feel obligated to defend this list because my mod is on it or prominent or even because it's mentioned favorably (my response to my entry was to quibble with it, hardly a ringing endorsement). I just think you're being paranoid and defensive, it makes you look ridiculous, and the reason is that you're lobbying for something (perfect neutrality) that can't exist; a perfectly neutral guide would look like the mod index, and we already have one of those. Captain Trek took the time to give his reasoning in detail for each of the entries, which is a not inconsiderable amount of work that's appreciated even where I think he's completely wrong, and that means the casual reader can see his reasoning and agree or disagree as they see fit.

If you enjoy making things just to make them, as you say, then would you mind taking down your donation link?

The donations I've been given so far over several years amount to about... two hours' worth of my time, out of the hundreds of hours I sunk into it. It's not remotely adequate compensation; it's a tip jar that sometimes buys me a beer. People are free not to donate, and I promise it has no effect whatsoever on the final product whether they do or don't. Accepting money for is not the same thing as being paid to work on something; I would do this whether I had a link up or not, I'd do it pretty much the same way, and I promise that your opinion on the subject, pro or con, is less than irrelevant. I don't even take into account whether someone donated when I respond to posts, because I don't track that at all. I've made several times over more money hiring out my skills to other Starsector modders directly.

This is either a mendacious or staggeringly clueless request.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2020, 07:11:55 PM by Harmful Mechanic »
Logged
People need societies, but they don't necessarily need nations.

Morrokain

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1683
  • Megalith Dreadnought - Archean Order
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse
« Reply #46 on: January 31, 2020, 09:03:57 PM »

I'd like to discuss this point, because i think we have very different notions of what a "bias" or an "opinion" may imply. As you mentioned in that post, the guide does estate that this is the opinion of someone, but for some reason this is seen as a bad thing by itself. If it was like this then pretty much every single post on the internet and every single piece of work and literature would be bad also, because they too follow a "bias", either cultural, political, etc.

The idea of "pure neutrality" is something that simply does not exist because we are not robots. As i said in my post before, i don't agree with 100% of what the guide says, and you what? that is perfect! because by the end of the day i am reading the opinion of someone who experienced all of these mods and has taken the time and courtesy of detailing them in a very through fashion.

Is it an opinion by the end of the day? yes, absolutely.
Does this immediately make it inherently bad? no, because the author of the post is not going around discrediting mods, even the "not recommended" list is trying to focus more on the issues that are brought on a technical level.

When i meant to look at this on a more "positive" fashion, what i actually meant is shifting the issue you propose of "this (the guide) specially denigrating mods", instead we should be asking "how can we make these mods have a place on this guide?" or "why aren't they listed?", a more constructive approach would be more beneficial as a whole.

I get what you are saying here, and to reiterate a third time: I'm not saying "take it down this is a monstrocity!!" or anything. The guide certainly is useful and the opinion, in and of itself, is not a problem to me. The cannonization of that opinion? That's very different. I'm very sorry, Captain Trek, I appreciate the work you have done, and I can only assume you would take suggestions against your opinion in a fair way so this is not truly about you. It is about what is fair to those who are new to the scene and what we can do to preserve the neutrality of the community. That is it. Sure, pure neutrality doesn't exist, but that by no way means we shouldn't try to keep things neutral on the publicly moderated forum. I'm really not sure why this isn't common sense...

I also understand that other independent opinions on social media, etc, are biased as well. That's not what concerns me though. What concerns me is the idea of stating an opinion that others may disagree with, and then making it seem as if its what everyone thinks by making it a sticky on the public modding forum. A sticky is an endorsement of the opinion on a seemingly authoritative level. That is my problem and my only problem with this whole thing. Bias simply existing isn't justification for more bias -even when that bias is otherwise helpful as in this case. It's not malicious bias, its just bias, and there is no room for that in a sticky. Even if people voice their issues, that doesn't mean changes will be made. It is solely up to Captain Trek. No person should have that kind of power even when they are well-meaning. It creates waay too many complications.

Also, I know why my mod is not included:

Quote
Note: There are two types of mods that I consider outside of the scope of this mod guide: The total-conversion mod Archean Order, which by-and-large is not compatible with most other mods, and IP mods (i.e. mods that add a faction from someone else's intellectual property into the game), whose use (or not) scales directly with how big a fan you are of the IP on which the mod is based. If you note that a mod of either of these two types was not included in my guide, rest assured this is entirely intentional.

That's the thing:

If you don't include everybody, and you are commenting on mod "quality" via listing pros and cons and vanilla comparisons, then you can't be made to have an authoritative voice. You have a voice already, and have used it, so leave it at that.

You are correct. I think lists like these are damaging to the modding community and clearly favor the old guard. I never said take it down though. I just dont want it stickied. Also, the credibility of your defense is a little suspect considering your mod is literally the first one on the list.

I think lists like this are going to exist no matter what, and if they're public on a moderated forum, people can complain in specific terms about their contents. If you think not getting on someone's list is a downer, imagine what it's like when 4chan notices you, or when you get angry bug reports for someone else's mods. People either believe in what they're doing enough to persist, or they don't, and something like this is highly unlikely to be the first, second, third, fifth, or tenth thing that convinces them to give up. Lack of skills, lack of motivation, lack of focus, scope creep, poor documentation, real life intervening, lack of discipline, content sprawl, and the toxicity of internet gaming communities are all vastly more likely to kill mods than someone's written mod guide. Remember Orikson's mod guide? And the horrors of- wait, it's vanished pretty much without a trace and people don't even remember it.

I don't really feel obligated to defend this list because my mod is on it or prominent or even because it's mentioned favorably (my response to my entry was to quibble with it, hardly a ringing endorsement). I just think you're being paranoid and defensive, it makes you look ridiculous, and the reason is that you're lobbying for something (perfect neutrality) that can't exist; a perfectly neutral guide would look like the mod index, and we already have one of those. Captain Trek took the time to give his reasoning in detail for each of the entries, which is a not inconsiderable amount of work that's appreciated even where I think he's completely wrong, and that means the casual reader can see his reasoning and agree or disagree as they see fit.

If you enjoy making things just to make them, as you say, then would you mind taking down your donation link?

The donations I've been given so far over several years amount to about... two hours' worth of my time, out of the hundreds of hours I sunk into it. It's not remotely adequate compensation; it's a tip jar that sometimes buys me a beer. People are free not to donate, and I promise it has no effect whatsoever on the final product whether they do or don't. Accepting money for is not the same thing as being paid to work on something; I would do this whether I had a link up or not, I'd do it pretty much the same way, and I promise that your opinion on the subject, pro or con, is less than irrelevant. I don't even take into account whether someone donated when I respond to posts, because I don't track that at all. I've made several times over more money hiring out my skills to other Starsector modders directly.

This is either a mendacious or staggeringly clueless request.

I really don't care how many actual donations you have received or even that you have a donation link. I was making a point that your stalwart defense seems self-interested. You can hedge and deny all you want, but that is truthfully how it appears, so you shouldn't be the one to do it, frankly. I actually believe you in your stated intentions, but your willful ignorance of the overall issue is unsettling to put it lightly. As someone of your modding experience who has had issues with anything modifying your content in the past, I really am astounded you feel the need to defend this so thoroughly under the pretense of "someone put effort forth and so it should be appreciated" when you have gone against that very concept, hard, in the past.

I have given Captain Trek credit, acknowledged his work, recommended his guide, and explained my reasoning in a clear and respectful way. I'll admit that "denigration" was perhaps a poor choice of wording and in poor taste, but that wasn't my intention, really. I wanted to show how a guide that uses vanilla experiences as its stand-alone judgement spectrum is biased. Its not bad to be biased, its bad to be biased when under a semblance of authority (see above). This is not about me or my mod, it's about fairness to those modders, like me, who are just starting out and will be shut out by a stickied guide like this. My mod is already far more popular than I ever thought it would be, and popularity was never the intention. I made it for me.

If you think I am being paranoid and defensive, you are also correct. That is not a bad thing, though, because I have seen the effects these kinds of things have upon modding communities. I'm not pulling that from nowhere...
« Last Edit: January 31, 2020, 09:06:10 PM by Morrokain »
Logged

Harmful Mechanic

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • Ur-Quan Bastard
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse
« Reply #47 on: January 31, 2020, 10:23:38 PM »

I was making a point that your stalwart defense seems self-interested.

That's rich, coming from the guy complaining because his mod isn't on the list. People tend to assume others will behave the same way, and from the same motivations, that they themselves actually behave. Everything you accuse me of could equally well be leveled at you.

You can hedge and deny all you want, but that is truthfully how it appears, so you shouldn't be the one to do it, frankly.

I'm not the only one doing it. And I also know it doesn't matter if I do or not.

I actually believe you in your stated intentions, but your willful ignorance of the overall issue is unsettling to put it lightly. As someone of your modding experience who has had issues with anything modifying your content in the past, I really am astounded you feel the need to defend this so thoroughly under the pretense of "someone put effort forth and so it should be appreciated" when you have gone against that very concept, hard, in the past.

What I'm against is people taking my assets without asking (and frankly TrashMan could have saved himself a lot of trouble by complying with Alex's, not my, directives). I'm pretty generous with things like system code that is just me finding the best method I know of and applying it. I give away a lot of advice and kitbashes (ask Vayra), I try to explain my reasoning, and I assume everyone, even the teenage boys, is mature enough to know that what I say is just, like, my opinion, man.

You seem to be arguing that no one should be doing anything that discourages anyone else, but you, yourself, are far more directly discouraging people. I think that modding is inherently a high-barrier-to-entry (in terms of the skillset it requires and the utter paucity of reliable rewards) kind of activity, and I'm generally not interested in either encouraging or discouraging people, but to the extent that I want to encourage people, I a) offer free resources to the entire forum, b) think modding has intrinsic value no matter the quality of what you produce, and c) try to reserve my opinions about most of the mods I don't like.

I wanted to show how a guide that uses vanilla experiences as its stand-alone judgement spectrum is biased.

Most mods are for vanilla Starsector. That means any guide or overview of Starsector mods is going to mostly focus on vanilla Starsector, which is also the one stable reference point we all have.

This is not about me or my mod, it's about fairness to those modders, like me, who are just starting out and will be shut out by a stickied guide like this.

It's very much about you, and your mod. It's obvious where your concerns come from.

My mod is already far more popular than I ever thought it would be, and popularity was never the intention. I made it for me.

So why do you care if it's included, or not, in this list? It seems odd that you, personally, profess to only care on behalf of some nebulous other people who may or may not actually exist. Do you feel discouraged? Do you want to give up? I promise you every modder you think of as 'old guard' (I'm one of the newer ones and believe me, you're the only person who thinks of me as such) has been subjected to far more abuse and approbation than you have been or ever will be. Any other new modders also will be if they stick around long enough, which is why people who do tend to be... somewhat peculiar.

It's clear from the would-be modders I've talked to that very few potential modders give up because of the reception they expect to get, and more give up at an earlier stage of not knowing where to start; lacking art, code, or writing skills, lacking focus or vision, lacking dedication, you name it. There's stuff we can do about that, but shutting down a guide like this isn't that. You need to find a positive contribution to make, some resource you can make available.

If you think I am being paranoid and defensive, you are also correct. That is not a bad thing, though, because I have seen the effects these kinds of things have upon modding communities. I'm not pulling that from nowhere...

Paranoia is a negative quality when no one is actually out to get you. Defensiveness is a negative quality when nothing needed defending, and you're actually trying to disguise that you're on the attack.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2020, 10:36:55 PM by Harmful Mechanic »
Logged
People need societies, but they don't necessarily need nations.

Captain Trek

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 62
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse
« Reply #48 on: January 31, 2020, 10:38:25 PM »

Also, having a "Not Recommended" category is not great... It doesn't matter if this is due to technical reasons or not. You are assuming the user even stops to read the description to find out why. Not being on the list in and of itself will discourage users from trying out the mod, you don't have to explicitly give names on top of it.
The point is to warn people about mods that are likely to give them problems. If the issues get fixed, the mod moves out of that section.

Imagine, for a moment, a new and inexperienced modder wants to make a mod. He/she does and releases it. Less people will even give the mod a chance because its not on the "curated list" of community mods. A new mod shouldn't have to fight for a chance in this way- that should happen naturally if the work is quality, and even if its not at first the feedback from people trying it out when searching through mods makes it better.
Like I've said before, a brand new mod already isn't on the index and already doesn't have people talking about it when newcomers ask people to recommend them mods. I have the up-and-comers section specifically as a way to facilitate drawing people's attention to new talent.

You may think "I will stay on top of this and make sure all mods are mentioned, described, etc, etc" but there is no guarantee that you will even be around on the forums forever. So, once the list is "finalized" when you leave, any new mods while you aren't around will not get the chance they deserve.
Were I ever to stop working on the guide it'd just have to be allowed to fade into obscurity naturally, like what Soren was talking about having happened with somebody else's guide. Even if it was pinned, in that circumstance you'd just have to unpin it again.

And I did say something to the OP, btw, when I didn't see my mod included. I also was in no way mean about it. Honestly hurt was probably the better word, but you are right noone on the internet is here to make anyone feel better.
If it makes you feel any better, I'd be quite willing to expand the guide to include TCs and IP mods if somebody with the appropriate amount of experience with either or both of those things can provide the necessary write-ups.

Also, the credibility of your defense is a little suspect considering your mod is literally the first one on the list.
If that's genuinely how you feel, then my decision to list the mods under each sub-heading alphabetically was absolutely the correct one. I've already had accusations of bias and/or that certain mods being in certain positions will in some way have some kind of deleterious effect just from that, so you can imagine how much worse this would be if I used literally any other metric by which to order the mods.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2020, 10:40:04 PM by Captain Trek »
Logged

Morrokain

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1683
  • Megalith Dreadnought - Archean Order
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse
« Reply #49 on: January 31, 2020, 10:57:54 PM »

I was making a point that your stalwart defense seems self-interested.

That's rich, coming from the guy complaining because his mod isn't on the list. People tend to assume others will behave the same way, and from the same motivations, that they themselves actually behave. Everything you accuse me of could equally well be leveled at you.

Er, how am I complaining? I suggested my mod be added to the list, he said no it's outside of scope, and I said fair enough?

You can hedge and deny all you want, but that is truthfully how it appears, so you shouldn't be the one to do it, frankly.

I'm not the only one doing it. And I also know it doesn't matter if I do or not.

Then, stop and let others who have better credibility in this regard speak?

I actually believe you in your stated intentions, but your willful ignorance of the overall issue is unsettling to put it lightly. As someone of your modding experience who has had issues with anything modifying your content in the past, I really am astounded you feel the need to defend this so thoroughly under the pretense of "someone put effort forth and so it should be appreciated" when you have gone against that very concept, hard, in the past.

What I'm against is people taking my assets without asking (and frankly TrashMan could have saved himself a lot of trouble by complying with Alex's, not my, directives). I'm pretty generous with things like system code that is just me finding the best method I know of and applying it. I give away a lot of advice and kitbashes (ask Vayra), I try to explain my reasoning, and I assume everyone, even the teenage boys, is mature enough to know that what I say is just, like, my opinion, man.

You seem to be arguing that no one should be doing anything that discourages anyone else, but you, yourself, are far more directly discouraging people. I think that modding is inherently a high-barrier-to-entry (in terms of the skillset it requires and the utter paucity of reliable rewards) kind of activity, and I'm generally not interested in either encouraging or discouraging people, but to the extent that I want to encourage people, I a) offer free resources to the entire forum, b) think modding has intrinsic value no matter the quality of what you produce, and c) try to reserve my opinions about most of the mods I don't like.

I'm not discouraging. I'm moderating. There is a very big difference. I would be discouraging if I said that this guide was not good. I'm not saying that at all and I've clarified that many times. I'm saying it shouldn't be made authoritative because it entails opinion that could hurt new modders ability to be relevant. You have literally done nothing to even try and dispute this claim. No opinionated guide before has ever been made sticky, and for good reason.

I wanted to show how a guide that uses vanilla experiences as its stand-alone judgement spectrum is biased.

Most mods are for vanilla Starsector. That means any guide or overview of Starsector mods is going to mostly focus on vanilla Starsector, which is also the one stable reference point we all have.

So? How does that do anything to discuss the effect this guide would have upon being stickied?

This is not about me or my mod, it's about fairness to those modders, like me, who are just starting out and will be shut out by a stickied guide like this.

It's very much about you, and your mod. It's obvious where your concerns come from.

You aren't paying attention, then, and are only hurting your own reputation at this point.

My mod is already far more popular than I ever thought it would be, and popularity was never the intention. I made it for me.

So why do you care if it's included, or not, in this list? It seems odd that you, personally, profess to only care on behalf of some nebulous other people who may or may not actually exist. Do you feel discouraged? Do you want to give up? I promise you every modder you think of a 'old guard' (I'm one of the newer ones and believe me, you're the only person who thinks of me as such) has been subjected to far more abuse and approbation than you have been or ever will be. Any other new modders also will be if they stick around long enough, which is why people who do tend to be... somewhat peculiar.

It's clear from the would-be modders I've talked to that very few potential modders give up because of the reception they expect to get, and more give up at an earlier stage of not knowing where to start; lacking art, code, or writing skills, lacking focus or vision, lacking dedication, you name it. There's stuff we can do about that, but shutting down a guide like this isn't that. You need to find a positive contribution to make, some resource you can make available.
Wow, man. This is overly harsh by any estimation. I don't feel like giving up because of a guide that doesn't include me... that would be crazy. I am fighting for new modders that will exist upon final release of this game.

You make a good point upon technical skill and the lack thereof can shut down modding aspirations, but it can just as easily be shut down from "well my mod won't get noticed anyway, better to just keep it personal" and this has stopped people I know personally from modding in certain scenes.

This does nothing to solve the issue of stickying this guide. I'm not "shutting it down", I'm saying it shouldn't be cannon to avoid that kind of mentality.

If you think I am being paranoid and defensive, you are also correct. That is not a bad thing, though, because I have seen the effects these kinds of things have upon modding communities. I'm not pulling that from nowhere...

Paranoia is a negative quality when no one is actually out to get you. Defensiveness is a negative quality when nothing needed defending, and you're actually trying to disguise that you're on the attack.

I'm not on the "attack." You are on the attack because I dare question anything that could hurt the modding community. I want to work with Captain Trek, not discourage him. I don't think anyone is "out to get me" I just am concerned that a guide of this nature will kill future modding attempts. I'm not trying to be antagonistic here...
« Last Edit: January 31, 2020, 11:00:52 PM by Morrokain »
Logged

e

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse
« Reply #50 on: January 31, 2020, 11:17:58 PM »

I get what you are saying here, and to reiterate a third time: I'm not saying "take it down this is a monstrocity!!" or anything.

I didn't mean to imply that from your comments and i apologize if i came across like that. To me this isn't about calling names or making accusations, it's about a project that someone spent a very long time on and is putting online with the sole intent of serving as a guide of sorts.

Sure, pure neutrality doesn't exist, but that by no way means we shouldn't try to keep things neutral on the publicly moderated forum. I'm really not sure why this isn't common sense...

You'll try to achieve pure neutrality and, i'm sorry to say, you'll fail to do so. It's not something regarding you specifically, but the idea of "pure neutrality" is a myth.

What's common sense to me is for example: "i read this guide and i take a look at the mods that seem cool or interesting and that way i can generate my own opinion about them" at least that's how i do it. I'd also like to think that we are not sheep and just take the words of a stranger on the internet for granted just because they are on a guide or on a youtube video, but that's just my bias taking over. But then again... i guess i've got no right to talk about this, since i got to know the game through a youtuber, so i guess i am a biased sheep after all.

Bias simply existing isn't justification for more bias -even when that bias is otherwise helpful as in this case.

It's not a justification, i agree, but it is something that cannot be avoided, whether we like it or not, and to be fair, the guide, while biased and opinion based, gives a very broad description to most things and it does it's best to "not pick favorites". I can really tell that the author wants us to form our own opinion about it, even if we don't agree with him by the end of it.

A sticky is an endorsement of the opinion on a seemingly authoritative level. That is my problem and my only problem with this whole thing.

I'd rather leave the technicalities to staff members if they see fit to sticky a thread like this or not. I'm indifferent about this one point as i'm neither "for" or "against" the thread being sticky'd, simply because that is not my choice to make.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2020, 11:22:42 PM by DarkOmegaMK2 »
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2371
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse
« Reply #51 on: February 01, 2020, 12:39:22 AM »

Ah, bulverism...

My two cents are that there are some objectives things to be said and I'm not going to read the entire guide again, just to point out which parts are these. He does give enough facts to present a solid foundation, on which his conclusions can be challenged or agreed with. With that, I feel it is good enough.

In regards to pinning it somewhere, I'm somewhat in a similar position as Captain Trek with my guides. I thought that, them being not official, they shouldn't really be pinned. Instead, I carry a link to them in my signature wherever I go. Enough to give it exposition, without me being be all, end all authority.
Perhaps a compromise would be to give it a spot in the List of useful threads.

One more thing: this guide is a bit misleading in the bit about Nex. It gives you new problems to deal with and new tools to deal with those problems. It doesn't make much sense to try and play Nex as if it wasn't there. Especially if you leave followers diplomacy active, but refuse to use agents.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2020, 01:02:28 AM by SCC »
Logged

Dark.Revenant

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2659
    • View Profile
    • Sc2Mafia
    • Email
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse
« Reply #52 on: February 01, 2020, 01:39:27 AM »

Captain Trek's guide doubles as a rapid-fire review of a ton of mods, and as such is an opinion piece.  That should be an open-and-shut disqualification for being a pinned thread.  I don't see what the big deal is.
Logged

Captain Trek

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 62
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse
« Reply #53 on: February 01, 2020, 01:59:52 AM »

Have you decided what you're going to do about the ship spawning weirdness to do with LE and VS that turned up with SWP, D.R?
Logged

Mr. Nobody

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 236
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse - Updated 02/02/20
« Reply #54 on: February 01, 2020, 03:43:39 PM »

Can the OP be improved by dropping all personal opinions and leaving only a quick explanation of the overall lore, mechanics, playstyle plus the pros and cons of adding it (ie: is stuff overtuned? undertuned? hasn't been updated in a while? etc)?
Yes
Is this whole series of walls of texts and tirades about stuff useful in the least and not just additional forum drama/verbing-of-a-female-dog?
IMO no (HAH! HYPOCRITICAL HUMOR! GET IT? BECAUSE I SAID IT CAN BE IMPROVED BY REMOVING PERSONAL OPINIONS AND HERE I SAY "IMO" AND THAT MEANS "IN MY OPINION"! TOP COMEDY RIGHT HERE!)

Those have been my 2 cents, feel free to tip my nonexistent patreon jar
Logged
On the left half of the Bell curve

Harmful Mechanic

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1161
  • Ur-Quan Bastard
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse
« Reply #55 on: February 01, 2020, 06:28:51 PM »

I'm pretty tapped out on this nonsense, but I did want to reply to one last point:

In regards to pinning it somewhere, I'm somewhat in a similar position as Captain Trek with my guides. I thought that, them being not official, they shouldn't really be pinned. Instead, I carry a link to them in my signature wherever I go. Enough to give it exposition, without me being be all, end all authority.
Perhaps a compromise would be to give it a spot in the List of useful threads.

There's really no way to do this that isn't going to be misrepresented as 'authoritative' by somebody, if they really want to do so, because it's not about what you say or do, it's about finding a short enough Levenshtein distance between what you did or said, and the thing they want to accuse you of. Linking in your signature, your post count, anything you may or may not have done, your join date - as you pointed out re: bulverism, if someone believes you're in the wrong firmly enough, they'll find or manufacture a reason to fit.

So I think it's best to ignore any nebulous, supercilious concerns about vague influences and authority. 'The lurkers support me in email' and other unverifiable arguments have been a feature of the internet for decades, they're neither going away nor becoming serious any time soon.
Logged
People need societies, but they don't necessarily need nations.

Morrokain

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1683
  • Megalith Dreadnought - Archean Order
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse - Updated 02/02/20
« Reply #56 on: February 01, 2020, 09:41:02 PM »

*Attempts to take giant godzilla foot out of mouth*

Ok, so I took a break from the forums for a bit to think things over, got some second opinions to help solidify my thoughts, then came back and reread this discussion.

@Harmful Mechanic:
I sincerely apologize for the tone and the overly-defensive (even personal at times) arguments attempting to prove my point. I was apparently more hurt about this than I thought and partially took it out on you. :-[

I haven't changed my mind or my thoughts regarding a sticky of this thread, but Mr Nobody is correct, the meandering and lengthy walls of text going round and round don't help- they are just needless drama. Dark Revenant managed to succinctly get my point across in one sentence. Bravo. I honestly feel like a complete fool in retrospect. I am too bombastic and take too long to get at what I mean, and I really need to be more precise in my wording and intent. Anyway, I wanted to say that there are no hard feelings on my end and apologize for being out of line.

It's not a justification, i agree, but it is something that cannot be avoided, whether we like it or not, and to be fair, the guide, while biased and opinion based, gives a very broad description to most things and it does it's best to "not pick favorites". I can really tell that the author wants us to form our own opinion about it, even if we don't agree with him by the end of it.

I wanted to briefly say that I agree here. Captain Trek's intentions weren't ever really in question to me and I'm deeply sorry if I gave that impression.

If it makes you feel any better, I'd be quite willing to expand the guide to include TCs and IP mods if somebody with the appropriate amount of experience with either or both of those things can provide the necessary write-ups.

I can do that if you would like. I'll use the other entries in the guide as a reference, but did you have any specific criteria?
Logged

Tartiflette

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3165
  • Toss a coin to your Modder, O' valley of plenty
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse - Updated 02/02/20
« Reply #57 on: February 02, 2020, 02:12:19 AM »

There is constant demand for beginner mod lists, and such list will always be opinion-based. That's the nature of the beast.

As I already mentioned to Captain Trek, I think his mistake was to try to include most mods and to try to justify himself too much, that gives off the impression that his guide is both comprehensive and authoritative.

99% of the time when someone asks "what mod should I install" they just want a list of good mods. Any more justification only matter to two groups: experienced players that played modded for a long time, and mod authors. New players don't have the experience and context required to compare mods. Thus most of this guide does not matter to the target audience, for whom the assumption is that the author know what they are talking about.

That's why I suggested to split the thread between just the intro to modded gameplay part, with the two mod lists (with a timestamp so that it has a clear "expiration" date) that would be deliberately not representative of the whole modiverse, and a discovery/rapid-fire preview of every mods that would be targeted at people that already when through a couple of modded play-throughs and want to spice things further but then know what they are looking for.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2020, 10:12:36 AM by Tartiflette »
Logged
 

Sinosauropteryx

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse - Updated 02/02/20
« Reply #58 on: February 03, 2020, 07:36:21 AM »

This is fantastically written - a joy to read, in fact - and very well-researched. I like that you detail each faction's play-feel, not just of their fleets, but their interactions with other factions too. They're observations I don't think many mod authors themselves could have reasonably given for their own work. I'm excited to read the blurb about my own mod when it comes out, as this is the kind of review-style feedback that is hard to find. You have found an untapped market for something that (I would guess) is in high demand.

It's extremely useful for a player, too. I would probably never have tried Roiders or GMDS without reading these synopses. (Also I'd still be calling it "Gryptype" and not "Grytpype")

I really like what you've done here, kudos for this herculean effort.
Logged

Captain Trek

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 62
    • View Profile
Re: [0.9.1a] Captain Trek's Guide to the Modiverse - Updated 08/02/20
« Reply #59 on: February 07, 2020, 10:26:48 PM »

08/02/20:

Updated with write-ups for Galaxy Tigers, Transponder Reminders, and Grand Sector.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6