Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins
The word "compatible" to normal Joe Public does not mean "changes all aspects of TMO and oh yeah, the game won't crash when you use them in combination." To Joe Public it means (and should actually be) "makes the change claimed in the mod title but otherwise I'm playing TMO."
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins
mods should confine themselves to their announced function? (...) "compatible" should mean more than "the game doesn't crash when you use the two mods together? (...) combining the two mods changes fundamental gameplay settings?
Even the implied meaning that Ducimus thought RSRDC AI and gameplay settings were better than TMO's and somehow Ducimus would abandon hundreds of hours testing and tweaking to thank Lurker for improving the mod seems a bit bizarre.
|
For me this discussion is very interesting, because I'm still trying to decide with which mods I'll stick, and you seem to have a detailed opinion on RSRDC.
I don't quite understand, though, the implication you assert to Lurker's answer ("they would tell you that all the changes and additions that I made to TMO and RFB were with their blessing and support"). I wonder how you infer from the words "blessing and support" the assumption that this implies any acknowledge of improvement given by Ducimus. "Blessing and support" could just be a simple "you want to create a mod that changes settings done by TMO? Sure, go ahead (= blessing), if you need help just ask (= support)", nothing more. When I create an aircraft for X-Plane and somebody does a modification for it, I might not like the goal or the result of his mod, but still help him, because, well, why not? Go and have fun! It does not make the original product any worse. If Ducimus likes or dislikes the changes must not necessarily be part of his "blessing and support"; he may just be relaxed about what other mods do when applied on top of his mod, because in the end it's up to the players to decide is something is enjoyable or not. (Of course I don't know Ducimus. So this is just a guess from my side, in order to point to another possible interpretation).
In addition, I wonder if maybe some of the additional changes RSRDC seems to make are indeed necessary to achieve the main goal. I don't have a deep knowledge about these mods (that's why I'm reading posts like yours), but isn't it possible that removing things like deadlier aircraft or making other changes to AI and gameplay is necessary for a mod that wants to implement historically accurate ship routes and engagements? Maybe without such changes too many other variables would interfere with the very goal of RSRDC (regardless if one agrees with that goal or not). Maybe when a player engages a historically accurate shipping route TMO's deadlier aircraft would just disturb the experience, or make it ahistorical, so they got removed. Just guessing, of course; as I said, I'm not deep into these mods so far. I just feel that your posts argue for one perspective very strongly, without reflecting possible reasons behind the things you criticize. So my understanding of RSRDC - TMO compatibility is, after reading your posts and thinking about it, that "compatible" in this case means "To create the intended effects, RSRDC changes TMO as much as necessary, but as less as possible". Of course I don't know if my assumption is true. Maybe RSRDC really makes changes totally unrelated to its main goal.
In a more user-centric view, my understanding of compatibility would base on the answer to this question: "Do the combined mods offer a consistent and stable gameplay experience". This is a question I always ask myself when addings mods to my SH games. Not just if the game does not crash, but if it is consistent. So if TMO and RSRDC create a consistent gameplay experience from the player's point of view, I'd say they're compatible (regardless if some players don't like this experience, because they don't like the scripted routes and prefer more randomly generated engagements. It can still be consistent.)
This is the hard question and I'd like to know if anybody could give me a detailed answer. Do TMO and RSRDC (and possibly also OTC) offer a consistent experience, or are there contradictions in terms of gameplay and content, technical glitches or real bugs? And if the routes in RSRDC are indeed scripted, isn't the replay value greatly reduced? (On the other hand, I just read
a post that even in pure TMO ships follow scripted routes, just that these routes are not historically)...
Edit: And I want to add: If I'm interested in learning about the history and events and strategies and routes of the real history of American submarine war, is RSRDC a good way to do so?