Better Than Wolves Forum

http://vazkii.us/uncategorized/sins-of- ... conundrum/

Good on him :). Comments are full of nuggets like this:

“What players want is most of the times not what is good for them… ”
Who the fuck-
THAT DOESNT MATTER. What a person choses is up to them, and no one can (or should) tell them they should go one way or another.
For fucking example, Vazkii is literally male, but prefers being called a female.
“You have no choice, since I know whats best for you”
Fuck you, you dont know me.

I’d rather my mod not be played than be played in a butchered state.

Hehe...respect.

Quickly skimming through the post itself to get the gist of it, I knew that it was only a matter of time before my name was invoked in the comments. Turns out it already had been ;)

In all seriousness though, every time I read through a bunch of self-entitled whining from players about how someone chooses to provide them with free content, a part of my motivation to make games dies. Sometimes it's amusing, but most times these days I just find it rather depressing.

Yeah, we were already debating putting his mod in our modpack, so when I checked his site, I saw that post. There's a lot of work involved getting it in there, but after reading that, I'm going to do my best to try and get it in there in the state that it deserves.

Ton of respect for realizing that's what needed to be done and handling it that way.

FlowerChild wrote:In all seriousness though, every time I read through a bunch of self-entitled whining from players about how someone chooses to provide them with free content, a part of my motivation to make games dies. Sometimes it's amusing, but most times these days I just find it rather depressing.

I see it rather as a shining example of a creator that stands up for himself and that inspires me :). The comments are obviously just a very polarized view of the two kinds of people that feel like they need to comment on an article like that. Most players of that mod will just play it and adapt and will never even see that post.


What makes me sad about that post is rather this:

Many packs have taken the liberty of setting this config over to -1, including even the Botania Mod of the Month modpack by the FTB team.

That's just so respectless beyond words. You make a mod spotlight pack and you disable certain features? Talk about entitlement and ivory towers.

Gilberreke wrote:

Many packs have taken the liberty of setting this config over to -1, including even the Botania Mod of the Month modpack by the FTB team.

That's just so respectless beyond words. You make a mod spotlight pack and you disable certain features? Talk about entitlement and ivory towers.

Yeah, I saw that bit as well. As you certainly know by now though, I've always had very little respect for the whole concept of mod packs ;)

The modern MC modding scene, when I go anywhere near it (and I try to avoid that whenever possible), seems to be doing exactly what I anticipated would happen years ago in the early days of BTW's development: the individual mod authors seem to be almost entirely lost in the mix with the mod-pack creators being largely viewed as the people making it all happen. Within that worldview, authors messing with the flexibility of the pack creators is naturally considered to be a cardinal sin.

One aspect of that I hadn't anticipated though, and which I do find rather amusing, is that mod-pack creators performing actual game-design and setting things up to function a very specific way without a wide range of options seems to have been accepted by players, while it's still considered a no-no for modders to do exactly the same thing. I think I'm still trying to sort out the dynamic that's lead to that one :)

Gilberreke wrote:I see it rather as a shining example of a creator that stands up for himself and that inspires me :)

Yeah, I can hear that. A smile definitely crossed my face when I realized what the guy was saying. I've recently been feeling like quite a dinosaur when it comes to my views on creative integrity and such, wondering why I ever put myself through so much hell over it, so it was nice to see someone else taking a stand on something like that.

Simultaneously though, I also wince at the thought of the nightmare he's likely to experience due to it and wonder how long it will be before he caves or quits.

FlowerChild wrote:One aspect of that I hadn't anticipated though, and which I do find rather amusing, is that mod-pack creators performing actual game-design and setting things up to function a very specific way without a wide range of options seems to have been accepted by players, while it's still considered a no-no for modders to do exactly the same thing. I think I'm still trying to sort out the dynamic that's lead to that one :)

It's quite easy. Modders doing it stops pack makers from doing it. Packs have been the most important thing in MC for a long, long time and anything that stands in the way is bad news. This is of course silly as you need mods to make packs of them, but that's the state we're in :)

I'd like to mention one caveat though: servers. Lots of people only want to play Minecraft with other people, they never ever create a single player world. Servers owners face an interesting dilemma, because they have to cater to that specific audience. They want to provide more content than just a single mod (to appeal to fans of each separate mod), but notice that when throwing a bunch of stuff together, fun goes completely out of the window (at least, the good ones realize that ;) ). The next point is distribution: even asking the user to install a single mod is problematic and WILL take up the biggest chunk of your time, let alone a small ecosystem of a few mods (big packs are simply not possible without a distribution method, period). Good, curated packs for mature launchers are a godsend for a server owner.

So why not run a server with a single mod and find a way to distribute that through a launcher? Most mods are simply not interesting enough to play by themselves (probably because they are being made by people expecting you to have 500 other mods). The only ones that are, are the ones that go for the total overhaul thing, like BTW and TerraFirmaCraft.

I'd never even realized that the passive flowers dying after a day was a thing. However, it would make things more interesting - I'll admit that I spammed the passive flower that generates mana from water in the last time I used that mod, even though it would've been trivial to replace them with the one that burns fuel for mana by pulling excess from my tree farm.

That being said, that will have an interesting impact on packs that use Botania. I hope that they'll keep using it, but I'm afraid that new packs might decide that one change is enough not to include the mod.

And of course there's the one guy in the comments that says he's going to fork the github and 'mod in the -1.' But to be hopeful about the whole thing I hope that most users that enjoy the mod won't even notice this, and the pack builders will just accept this as it is.

FlowerChild wrote: One aspect of that I hadn't anticipated though, and which I do find rather amusing, is that mod-pack creators performing actual game-design and setting things up to function a very specific way without a wide range of options seems to have been accepted by players, while it's still considered a no-no for modders to do exactly the same thing. I think I'm still trying to sort out the dynamic that's lead to that one :)

To take a metaphor from software engineering I think mod developers are being viewed by the community as library developers while the modpack creators are designing the end product that should be providing the overall experience. Typically library developers although they may express some opinion on how their product should be used are expected to provide options to accommodate different scenarios that the consumer might be going for.

Honestly I think his post is extremely well thought out and outlines a lot of what I believe is good game design. I haven't even heard of the mod or the author, but after reading this I immediately have respect for the author. I especially appreciate the way he refuted the "don't like it, don't use it" saying, as I personally hate that sentiment.

I didn't read any of the comments, however, because I vehemently despise any form of self-entitlement (which is rampant in the MC modding community), and I didn't feel like getting pissed off.

Katalliaan wrote:I'd never even realized that the passive flowers dying after a day was a thing. However, it would make things more interesting - I'll admit that I spammed the passive flower that generates mana from water in the last time I used that mod, even though it would've been trivial to replace them with the one that burns fuel for mana by pulling excess from my tree farm.

That being said, that will have an interesting impact on packs that use Botania. I hope that they'll keep using it, but I'm afraid that new packs might decide that one change is enough not to include the mod.

It's how it works in the Regrowth hardcore questing pack, much more interesting that way.

I seriously doubt modpacks will exclude it. It matters but it's hardly a massive change. I noticed the shift playing regrowth and then just went on to the endoflame sooner. It matters but it's no hardcore spawn setting.

Botania is a great mod, it can actually be a fun experience all by itself, which is rare in the modding world outside BTW, like Thaumcraft in that way although not as extensive.

He also has a "no GUIs" rule, which makes for a good experience I think, and his effects are quite impressive.

Wow! People are just the worst! "You cant change something that benefits me becouse" is a really shitty atitute and as dawnrider said, the guys in that thread are as self-entitled as it gets.

When HC spawn config went the way of the dodo i remember a backlash from this community, but I recall the way it happened and the way it was handled was not half as bad as that. Perhaps becouse we were already separated from the "mainstream"(toxic) minecraft community and the forum was always well kept by the banhammer.

Which begs the question, when did this terrible backlash did happend here? I know it happened but it was before my time in the forum. Was it the forge debacle, or something sooner? The reason i ask is not to necro old wounds but to understand a little of the community, that i might add, is among of the more well mannered i've encountered. At some point, im sure it was not like this and im curious to know when it began.

Wafflewaffle wrote:Which begs the question, when did this terrible backlash did happend here? I know it happened but it was before my time in the forum. Was it the forge debacle, or something sooner? The reason i ask is not to necro old wounds but to understand a little of the community, that i might add, is among of the more well mannered i've encountered. At some point, im sure it was not like this and im curious to know when it began.

As someone who's been here almost since the beginning of the forums (I lurked for a few months before joining), I don't really think there has ever been a huge issue (at least on these forums). The banhammer has always been wielded firmly (thank you FC), and though there have definitely been conflicts (which I really don't want to dig up), it hasn't gotten as bad as this because of the banhammer.

The biggest issue of that kind in relation to the mod was what inspired the creation of the forums, namely masses of people demanding that I allow the inclusion of BTW in a modpack in response to the Yogscast video on it. That was all over on MCF.

But yes, the liberal application of the banhammer has kept it from ever really being a big issue here ;)

I mean, there's be tons of uproar over FC not having configs over this and that in the past.

Beds were definitely the BIGGEST I think, although I swear there was another that was even more of a shitfest, but it's escaping my memory atm.... (posting at nearly 2AM seems unwise, now that I consider it)

Miss_Kat wrote: Beds were definitely the BIGGEST I think, although I swear there was another that was even more of a shitfest, but it's escaping my memory atm.... (posting at nearly 2AM seems unwise, now that I consider it)

Buckets maybe? That's the only one I can think of that might have been close, especially since I think it's the first big one that I decided to make non-optional.

I remember a point where BTW stopped becoming a mix of new tech blocks and miscellaneous changes (sorry if that seems like rather an understatement) into where it became a true survival experience with the addition of hardcore modes. It's like it found it's place in the world, so to speak.

That paradigm shift in the mod I reckon took a lot of the heat off in terms of people wanting new config options to disable certain modes, or people wanting to include the mod in some way in their modpacks. It just goes against BTWs balance now.

Botania seems cool. Author seems cool. I might actually install forge (yikes) to see what the fuss is about.

FlowerChild wrote: Buckets maybe? That's the only one I can think of that might have been close, especially since I think it's the first big one that I decided to make non-optional.

Yes, buckets! That's what I was thinking of. I remembered there was some config that made the game more difficult that you decided to include in the mod wholesale that pissed the unwashed masses off. That was it.

Do you mind if I ramble a bit?

Weeks later and the community is still whining against Vazkii... and I'm still laughing. And still facepalming, since stupid arguments like the one Gilberreke quoted are sadly too common in the modded MC community.

“What players want is most of the times not what is good for them… ”
Who the fuck-
THAT DOESNT MATTER. What a person choses is up to them, and no one can (or should) tell them they should go one way or another.

What does happen if we use the same logic for doctors?
Doc: "Pat, you need to stop smoking. It's bad for you."
Pat: "THAT DOESN'T MATTER! It's my right to decide if I should or shouldn't smoke! No one should tell me what to do! Now lend me some cigs, please."
Doc: "Are you crazy? Of course I won't."
Pat: "I have the right to smoke if I want to! Lend me those fucking cigarettes!"

If Pat doesn't want to stop smoking, that's their life, their right, their decision. However, this doesn't make smoking the "right thing to do", and more importantly: Doc is 100% in their right to deny Pat some cigs.

Going back to the Minecraft community. If you want a different gaming experience and decide to mess with the configs of a mod to achieve that, you're completely in your right. However, if the modder decides to remove a config option that they believe that yields less fun, it's akin to the doc denying cigarettes to Pat - the modder has this right, and they're probably right too. (Assuming the modder is a better designer than the player, that is.)

But there's something the example above doesn't cover, "artistic expression". Someone making a game (even a simple Minecraft mod) is engaging in an artistic activity. And while an art appreciator (player) has the right to say "I think this piece of art would be better if you did X", the one expressing oneself still isn't the player/appreciator but the guy making the game/artist. I think this is related but not quite the same as FC calls "creative integrity".

FlowerChild wrote: I've recently been feeling like quite a dinosaur when it comes to my views on creative integrity and such, wondering why I ever put myself through so much hell over it, so it was nice to see someone else taking a stand on something like that.

Worth mentioning this "someone else" is probably young. I wouldn't be surprised if Vazkii is 20 or so years old, I remember seeing some comments about college.

So the news are actually better - the young gens are doing it too. Maybe the "dino feel" is unjustified? :)

chaoticneutral wrote: Worth mentioning this "someone else" is probably young. I wouldn't be surprised if Vazkii is 20 or so years old, I remember seeing some comments about college.

17, actually. 18 next week.
Yes, I made an account for this.
Also how do I make my username not be my email? :V

Oh hey Vazkii, you probably want to PM Sargunster to get that fixed? I think?

Vazkii wrote:Also how do I make my username not be my email? :V

Fixed :)

chaoticneutral wrote:So the news are actually better - the young gens are doing it too. Maybe the "dino feel" is unjustified? :)

Yeah, fair enough. Maybe I'm more an endangered species rather than a fully extinct one ;)

To be honest if I ever poured my life's energy over a creation with a clear dream for it, I would rather it wasn't experienced at all than it was experienced in another way than I intended. It's like saying something and people understanding something else. You start to hate the time you decided to open your mouth.

I think it's important to realize that people were always like that, we just recently gave them a direct line to creators.

Vazkii wrote:17, actually. 18 next week.

A 10% error is 110% acceptable! :)

Gilberreke wrote:I think it's important to realize that people were always like that, we just recently gave them a direct line to creators.

True that. But man, that "direct line" makes a whole lot of difference...

FlowerChild wrote:Yeah, fair enough. Maybe I'm more an endangered species rather than a fully extinct one ;)

I'm calling WWF to see if they can solve your case :D

Gilberreke wrote:I think it's important to realize that people were always like that, we just recently gave them a direct line to creators.

You know, that's pretty true. I remember every game I played as a kid there was a million changes I wished I could make, that all would have been just awful. If every developer had little versions of me harping on them to add X, remove Y, most of my beloved childhood games would have ended up significantly worse.