Chade on 31/12/2009 at 00:12
He's a programmer, so I imagine he knows how to use the term properly. I doubt he thought the exact words he chose were that important, or would spark this sort of debate.
I think you are (deservedly) passionate about your mod and want it to be described in the most accurate way possible, but people loosly connected to the world thief will not want to put in that much effort. And rightly so! What sort of world would it be if you couldn't casually chat with others without carefully pondering the full impact of every single word used.
Calling TDM a port is not as far off the mark as you are making it sound. No, it's not a port, but the gameplay and world is very similar.
Remember that you are speaking in a forum where, for instance, likening thief to splinter cell would be considered heresy. Most saner gaming communities, however, will focus less on the small differences between titles and more on the overarching fact that both are shadow based stealth games. These people aren't going to sit down with the dark mod and think "wow, the lockpicking mechanic is totally different to thief!", they'll think, "wow, this game lets you pick locks, just like thief!".
jtr7 on 31/12/2009 at 00:22
It's neither a port nor an [im]port of T3. Both notions are not only mistaken but will create great confusion for anyone who reads that blog and doesn't know better. It's been quite bad enough dealing with the blatant bias against the project and the already firmly established confused thinking that TDM is a game when it's not.
And Chade, lines like this are weird in what you say is a "compliment":
Quote:
Well, it's still a framework for fans to create their own custom maps, and that's the one big problem with the mod.
Not only was the mod not described accurately at all, but a prime fundamental purpose is considered a "big problem". It's less complimentary than a full-on mixed bag. The stuff Marcel got right was minor compared to the stuff he got wrong or made negative.
Chade on 31/12/2009 at 00:47
Well, if your two problems are that 1) people think TDM is a self contained game, and 2) people have a bias against TDM, then ...
Tackling issue 1, you're taking his sentence a bit out of context aren't you? He accurately observes that the initial crop of missions could be improved. Later he explicitly states that better missions will be made over time:
Quote:
And what we still have to wait for:
* good missions or even campaigns
* some render glitches in the traning mission to be fixed
I really hope that there're fans out there who produce maps that can compete against Thief 3's original locations.
Tackling issue 2, he doesn't say anything negative about the mod, unless you think that calling it a "T3 port" would create a bad impression. Now, if the reader is a hardcore thief fan who is heavily involved in the whole T1/2 vs T3 thing, that might be true. But hardcore thief fans aren't getting their TDM news from some random guy's blog, and I get the impression that most other people who play T3 like it.
I doubt he was "damaging" TDM's reputation.
The whole T3 thing is incorrect and it's good that it was fixed, but I doubt his post would contribute to the problems you worry about.
SubJeff on 31/12/2009 at 01:01
Got to agree with jtr here. If you're not going to get it exactly right then don't bother tbh, especially that nonsense about TMD's biggest problem. Wtf. The ship's biggest problem was that it didn't sink and could actually sail from place to place.
Springheel on 31/12/2009 at 01:37
Not that this should turn into a debate, but I think Chade's right...it's a casual blog, by someone who probably has never even played T1/2. It's not a research project.
I'd rather have people making relatively positive comments about TDM and getting a few facts wrong than not talking about it at all. But that's just me. :)
Chade on 31/12/2009 at 01:54
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
If you're not going to get it exactly right then don't bother tbh
Personally I think this is an unrealistic standard for normal conversation. Seriously, are you actually disciplined enough to avoid commenting on any subject in which you don't happen to be an expert? If so, kudos to you: but you're the only guy I've ever met who can pull it off.
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
especially that nonsense about TMD's biggest problem. Wtf. The ship's biggest problem was that it didn't sink and could actually sail from place to place.
I didn't actually interpret the sentence like that. I mean, ok, so that's explicitly what he says ... small problem with my argument there :p. But it doesn't fit with the rest of the post. I think a more accurate interpretation is "the dark mod is a framework for fans to create fm's, so there are few fm's available at this stage, which is currently the biggest problem with the mod".
crap, I've started picket fence quoting ... sorry Springheel :o
SubJeff on 31/12/2009 at 02:25
For normal conversation, yes, but not for an internationally published "article", especially when it is commenting on some work someones else has done.
And yes, yes that is explicitly what he says and given the context I see no reason to cut him any slack. Get it right, or take it down.
Chade on 31/12/2009 at 02:48
*shrugs*
Can't say much to that. Personally I don't expect or assume that people's personal blogs will be carefully researched. It would be different if he really did have some sort of large following, but I see no reason to assume he does (there are no comments on any of the other stories).
I disagree with you about the context. His next sentences talk about the dearth of missions at the moment, and he later indicates that more fan missions are "something to look forward to". Seems pretty clear that he thinks the dark mod will be great once more fan missions are released, which is incompatible with believing a "framework" is irrevocably flawed.
New Horizon on 31/12/2009 at 06:10
If I find ANY TDM article that gives misinformation, whether it is kind or cruel, I will give the author the correct information and ask them to update it. I don't want the wrong information floating around out there, that matters to me. We've had enough confusion as it is, and rumors of a T3 to D3 port wouldn't help...regardless of how few people read it. It's the principle of the matter that is important in my eyes. If one of the authors of the Mod you have written about contacts you and says, "that's not what we are", thank them for clarifying and change it. It shouldn't be that big of a deal. This article was rather difficult to interpret exactly where the author was coming from.
Long story short...I gave him the correct information, he changed it begrudgingly, now all is well. I really don't see any room for debate on the matter. I don't want the mod described as a port of anything. That is that.
Melan on 31/12/2009 at 09:22
In any event, I doubt anyone would have read that blog post unless clearing had found it first. On the main page, only that post has comments.
