RPGWatch Forums

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   VtM-Bloodlines - Alternative Unofficial Patch (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1677)

Dhruin April 17th, 2007 19:57

VtM-Bloodlines - Alternative Unofficial Patch
 
An alternative Vampire: Bloodlines unofficial patch has been released by Tessera. Based partly on Wesp's well known Bloodlines patches, this work removes the modification aspects (such as re-balancing, skin and weapon changes and so forth) and concentrates purely on bug fixes to provide an experience Tessera believes is closer to Troika's original intent. Hit the link for the details and this thread at RPG Codex may also be of interest in understanding the thrust of this mod.
More information.

Guhndahb April 17th, 2007 19:57

Kudos to Roqua and Dhruin for their comments in that Codex thread. I have respect for both projects, but I don't like the anti-Wesp comments that have been made. Giving players two different unofficial gameplay options is a good thing. Claiming one to be the "right" one is not. The worst thing about these unnecessary battles is it often causes the good people doing the work enough grief to not want to keep at it.

But, like a wimp, I'm not going to post over there as the Codex people scare me and always have. :D I like the non-hostile, everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion, environment here much better. ;)

Role-Player April 17th, 2007 21:07

There haven't been any noteworthy comments made against Wesp, and the issue isn't that of which path is the "right" one; simply put, Wesp's work is not a patch but rather a suite of gameplay modifications which also offer bug fixes. Calling Acrimonious' work as a "true patch" carries no moral high ground or antagonistic attitude against Wesp's work - it merely points out that this patch is a patch that simply fixes bugs in the game, and is not masquerading itself as anything more than a patch: it remains true to its namesake.

Asbjoern April 18th, 2007 21:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Role-Player (Post 25967)
There haven't been any noteworthy comments made against Wesp, and the issue isn't that of which path is the "right" one; simply put, Wesp's work is not a patch but rather a suite of gameplay modifications which also offer bug fixes. Calling Acrimonious' work as a "true patch" carries no moral high ground or antagonistic attitude against Wesp's work - it merely points out that this patch is a patch that simply fixes bugs in the game, and is not masquerading itself as anything more than a patch: it remains true to its namesake.

Well, I wouldn't say that the newspost at RPGCodex doesn't clearly state which patch is the "right" one. I'll quote:
Quote:

the fan efforts of the Bloodlines community have mostly been unsactioned modifications and arbitrary changes to the game with some bug fixes thrown in
Quote:

the existence of a true Bloodlines patch
A patch is not only about fixing bugs. Patches correct unfinished games and that includes bugs, rebalancing ect.
So it wouldn't be correct to say that this new patch remains more true to its name than the Wesps.
Though it depends upon if the balancing of Bloodlines was faulty from the beginning or not.

Though I don't use any Bloodlines patches mostly because I didn't want somebody changing my gaming experience (like you) with other than bug fixes, so this new patch is warmly welcomed though not necessary for newer systems.

Avantenor April 18th, 2007 21:49

That's a pretty bad decision, to call a patch "true", because it implicates that all other patches are untrue. Combined with animosity against creators of the other patch … I don't think he (Tessera) chose this name accidently. He could simply have called it Fixpack or something like that. He must have been aware that this would end in bad blood. ;)

Anyway, this patch surely is needed. You can like the changes wesp did - or not. Now you have the possibility to get all the bugfixes without the changes made to the game. But that accusations… very frivolous.

roqua April 18th, 2007 22:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guhndahb (Post 25954)
Kudos to Roqua and Dhruin for their comments in that Codex thread. I have respect for both projects, but I don't like the anti-Wesp comments that have been made. Giving players two different unofficial gameplay options is a good thing. Claiming one to be the "right" one is not. The worst thing about these unnecessary battles is it often causes the good people doing the work enough grief to not want to keep at it.

But, like a wimp, I'm not going to post over there as the Codex people scare me and always have. :D I like the non-hostile, everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion, environment here much better. ;)

Thank you, I usually don't get compliments on my sharing. Usually I got called mean, hurtful names.

But yeah, more choices for everyone is good. I played the game without a patch when it first came out. So the next time through a few chances are good. I haven't played it since those background template things were added so I guess I'll play again soon.

Role-Player April 18th, 2007 22:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asbjoern (Post 26108)
Well, I wouldn't say that the newspost at RPGCodex doesn't clearly state which patch is the "right" one.

The news post, and subsequent posts of mine in the comments thread, were made with two things in mind. First, the patch author refers to it as a true patch and that's pretty much the established nomenclature, just as much as Wesp usually refers to his works as unofficial patches. Also, the intention wasn't to claim each one is right but rather, to point out that one of the patches more closely follows its namesake than the other - Acrimonious' work is made with the intention of fixing or restoring content, whereas Wesp's work is made with the same intention as well as to provide other changes based on input or community requests - which may not address problems at all.

Which one is the "right" one is entirely up to the end user who decides to use them. But one of them does a lot more than simple patching and I believe I needed to point out the differences. After all, there wouldn't be much of a point in bringing up another patch to the community if it didn't do anything different or if it didn't focus on anything else.


Quote:

A patch is not only about fixing bugs. Patches correct unfinished games and that includes bugs, rebalancing ect.
But surely you can see the difference between a modification designed to fix problems with a computer game and a modification designed to change game mechanics to better suit a modder's tastes? After all, changing weapon names so they more closely resemble their real life counterparts isn't a fix to compatibility or stability issues. Changing quest structure and reward because some people want more XP out of a particular event - which was what prompted several changes in quests - isn't fixing a bug, it borders on being a partial conversion.

Role-Player April 18th, 2007 22:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avantenor (Post 26109)
That's a pretty bad decision, to call a patch "true", because it implicates that all other patches are untrue.

Then perhaps you should take this concern to the author of the patch, since that is what he calls it. I merely pointed out what were the main differences between both patches, ie., bug fixes vs bug fixes + game modifications. I certainly didn't accuse Wesp of anything his works don't provide; I'm not exactly lying by pointing out there's both bug fixes and other changes that don't fit into the concept of a patch.

Avantenor April 18th, 2007 22:16

That was not against you. As I understood, it was Tessera's decision to call it that way. Anyway, after reading his postings I don't have the feeling he would accept my concerns so I stop thinking of it and care for more important things.

Role-Player April 18th, 2007 22:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avantenor (Post 26117)
That was not against you.

I know :) Sorry if I gave that impression in my reply.

Quote:

As I understood, it was Tessera's decision to call it that way. Anyway, after reading his postings I don't have the feeling he would accept my concerns so I stop thinking of it and care for more important things.
I think the important thing is that people now have the choice they should have been given a long time ago, and that a patch that tries to only fix things is a welcome addition to purists.

Avantenor April 18th, 2007 22:28

*undersign*

Asbjoern April 18th, 2007 22:37

I'm sure Tessera didn't use his/her social sensitivity or rhetoric capabilities when naming this new patch, because when reading his/her posts he/she actaully seems to believe his/her patch is more true than the Wesps.
But I wouldn't state the newspost as being either fair or objective in its coverage of the new patch, and you can have a lot of different opinions towards the Wesp patches but I still think they are to be respected just aswell as the maker of them are to be. Perhaps this is more adressed to Tessera. So not to rip up any wounds because I can undersign your last post too Role-Player. :)

And by the way. I just use the official/true patches and it runs without any significant problems (bought it on Steam).

And goodnight to everyone. It's getting late here in Denmark.

Dhruin April 19th, 2007 00:13

I don't care what he calls it - I won't use the term "true" patch here because that implies to me that it was created with Troika's assistance, approval or input. That's not trying to put down your choice, RP - I accept that people will see this differently.

Role-Player April 19th, 2007 02:40

Of course, Dhruin; I understand your position :)

Avantenor April 19th, 2007 08:06

Does anybody know if this patch affects any text issues? Can I use it with a localized bloodlines?

Wesp5 April 24th, 2007 09:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avantenor (Post 26183)
Does anybody know if this patch affects any text issues? Can I use it with a localized bloodlines?

The unofficial patch will work with any localized bloodlines version but will turn it into the english one. I think there are french, czech and german versions of this either completed or in the works. As for the naming of the patches, I never choose to call my patch "unoffical patch". That name was taken by Dan Upright and I just continued his work with his permission under the known name. When looking at patch histories though, you will recognize that it is quite normal to rebalance things, include new content or do similar in a patch and this is what Troika themselves did e.g. in their TOEE patches. I still understand that some people would like a more basic patch but a name like bug-fixes-only would have been more neutral and it would have been even better if they had included the original readme of the work they based their derivative patch on :(.

Wesp5, creator of the unofficial Bloodlines patch.

Wesp5 April 24th, 2007 09:59

Oops, double posting. Can someone remove #16 please?

Dhruin April 24th, 2007 13:29

Thanks for dropping by, Wesp.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 13:25.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch