Jump to content

On the advantages of having absolute editorial control in mods


SimDing0

Recommended Posts

I have read through this whole discussion about strong editorship vs. coeditorship and this is what I think: SimDing0 and others, you are advocating the presence of a central editor in modding endeavours. SD0, you originally based this on your observation that due to the absence of such a model, some parts of BG1NPC are sub par quality wise. However, to me, the more or less impartial observer, it appears that despite multiple requests to come forward with concrete examples of parts of BG1NPC that lack quality, which were not changed upon your bringing this to the attention of the respective individuals responsible, you have yet failed to do so. Therefore, even though you may no longer be interested in improving BG1NPC, this rather weakens your whole argument in favour of strong editorship. Failing to provide examples that strengthen your case equals missing the opportunity to show us its practical relevance. After all, painting an attractive picture of strong editorship is fine, but when coeditorial projects cannot be said to lack quality, personal preferences aside, then whats all the fuzz about?

Link to comment

Sim did bring up something in the main thread this post is a split from, a rather dubious Jaheira line. And then a discussion ensued as two BG1NPC project members struggled to remember who even wrote it in the first place. Which I think makes our point nicely, actually.

Link to comment

If you'd like further examples of strong-edited projects, I point to... basically anything substantial at PPG. (And before anybody says "Yeah, but that's just a one-NPC mod!", please look at the author lists, particularly of Flirt and Banter Packs.)

 

Again, nobody is guaranteeing that everybody will like each of the mods in question, but it's rather less likely that within the mod itself you will suddenly get blindsided by real head-scratcher moments. Hopefully, that's the same feeling you'll get between the different mods.

 

To wit, I have seen plenty of people say "I don't play with the Aerie flirt pack because I hate Aerie" or even "I don't play with the flirt packs because Compton is a tremendous perv and should be locked up."

 

However, I have never seen anybody say, "The others are okay, but whatever you do, don't play with the Viconia flirt pack. It's totally random. I have no idea what it's doing next to the other three, or why they even bothered."

Link to comment
Sim did bring up something in the main thread this post is a split from, a rather dubious Jaheira line. And then a discussion ensued as two BG1NPC project members struggled to remember who even wrote it in the first place. Which I think makes our point nicely, actually.

 

The dungeon line, wasn't it? I'm not sure, but if I recall correctly, he was told to report this to the respective editor. I think Domi offered to bring him into contact with that person. But there's got to be more than that one line?

Link to comment
However, to me, the more or less impartial observer

I'd be curious to know what makes you any more impartial than me in terms of mod assessment.

 

The dungeon line, wasn't it? I'm not sure, but if I recall correctly, he was told to report this to the respective editor. I think Domi offered to bring him into contact with that person. But there's got to be more than that one line?

The "Silvanus' armpit" line is, I believe, the one to which he was referring. Bons brought it up, but yes, I argued the case.

Link to comment
Sim did bring up something in the main thread this post is a split from, a rather dubious Jaheira line. And then a discussion ensued as two BG1NPC project members struggled to remember who even wrote it in the first place. Which I think makes our point nicely, actually.

 

Actually, it doesn't. It made our point in that if specific piece of argumented criticism would be provided, we would react adequately by evaluating whether a change is merited or not.

 

The "strong editorship vs. coeditorship" question doesn't even come into the example you brought up above. You would still bring up NPC characterization related issues to the specific Czar.

 

Unless of course you mean that a strong editorship would mean that this editor could change the texts of the original author even against his wishes - in which case all you would need was to get a 'loyal' strong editor and then whine to him/her until you could have your desired chages implemented.

Link to comment

I'm not trying to impress you. I am sure that no one is impressed by the sage advice of how an overall-completed mod who is only undergoing some last cosmetic changes and minor additions, has been run improperly from its beginning. Where were you and Mr. Compton with your 'sage advice', 'the interest of player's community in general' and 'best insterests at heart' when this project only started?

 

And besides it depends on the personality of the editor and the writers in question. There will be editors who will stiffle the creativity out of the minions. There will be minions who will feel that is the case, even when it might not be so. Sounds like a horrible system for a mod of such scope where you have almost 20 writers (had at the start of it) and this 'strong' editor would still have to find an individual way of communication with each of the writers.

Link to comment
Where were you and Mr. Compton with your 'sage advice', 'the interest of player's community in general' and 'best insterests at heart' when this project only started?

Funnily enough, both Mr. Compton and I were in exactly the same place, telling Blucher that it wasn't a good idea, when the project was started. But this isn't about BG1NPC anyway, right? It's about advising future generations of modders.

 

And besides it depends on the personality of the editor and the writers in question. There will be editors who will stiffle the creativity out of the minions. There will be minions who will feel that is the case, even when it might not be so. Sounds like a horrible system for a mod of such scope where you have almost 20 writers (had at the start of it) and this 'strong' editor would still have to find an individual way of communication with each of the writers.

You're continuing to use derogatory words such as "minion", which, as stated above, is inaccurate. I suggest you rephrase, since your current wording implies a lack of understanding of an editorial structure.

 

Yes, obviously you can find an awful editor if you look hard enough: nobody's denying that. You can also find extremely good ones.

 

And I've never had problems communicating with 20 people. It's also worth bearing in mind that the communication aspect would be no more substantial with a "strong editor" than with a "weak editor". Both have to find ways to talk to all the writers.

Link to comment
But this isn't about BG1NPC anyway, right?

 

Of course it is, suggesting anything else is pure hypocrisy.

 

It's about advising future generations of modders.

 

But of course. But if it is so, then it's a futile undertaking. The same structure isn't going to work for everyone, plain and simple.

Link to comment
So, is it preferable to have a mod which some (potentially most) people find excellent yet others dislike, or a mod which everybody finds limited flaw in?
The latter becuase if no ones is completely satified you always know you're on the right path :undecided:
Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...