Has anyone tried Improved Anvil v6?

Remove all ads!

Yes, people are sensitive when they feel they are affected by some sort of generalization. This is normal, people like to feel unique, thinking that their decisions and thinking is always reasonable etc. However, some things are true in most cases, some generalizations indeed apply correctly (every culture and region has such "stereotypes", obviously several "stereotypes" are true to me too regarding my culture).

So whether you like it or not, some things are true. Whether people like to accept them or not. I still believe that the high number of posts against Improved Anvil is not because of immature guys, it is because of the customer-centric expectations I detailed. And that approach is generally true to many of the Infinity Engine game players because of the culture they come from. Yes, the truth can be disguised under statements such as "Sikret and Baronius are authoritative", "Improved Anvil is presented as the only way to make a good mod" etc. These statements all originate from the same source: players are disappointed that they're not considered as customers. They may not realize it, because it is planted so deeply in their culture. It is an "automatic" thing that is built into the everyday actions and mentality of a culture. I do NOT say this is true to EVERY member of a culture, but such things are TYPICAL.

What you say in your humble suggestion about avoiding controversy and generalizing why people act in certain ways, is a communication matter. Indeed, if something has a diplomatic objective, or cooperation is a priority, then it's better to avoid things that stir up people's emotions or pride. But I don't care about this, if telling the painful truth is at stake (yes, usually there is no globally objective "truth", but what I say is what I believe to be the truth -- otherwise I would not be a credible person; how could we convince anyone if even we don't believe in what we say?!).

Moreover, some of them BWL problems may also be related to communication issues between cultures. For example, some communication methods and behavior patterns are accepted in one culture (e.g. West) and not so welcome on another, while it's vice versa for another particular method or pattern. I noticed this, and sometimes I experience (=> this is NOT a generalization; notice I use "sometimes") that Americans think that their communication standards are the only one; if someone uses a different one, they cannot adjust to it even if the discussion would need it. I.e. (in these certain, non-generalized cases) they always expected the OTHER person to adjust to their style, and they never tried to adjust theirs to the other side a bit. (For example, the owner of Gibberlings3 was such an example. An Improved Anvil tester who left the team, leaked out the mod, and throws a lot of mud to BWL and Sikret is another example.) I.e. anything that is different from their style/methods is inherently wrong. Again I repeat, this is what I FELT in some cases, not that I think *generally*. (Unlike the customer-centrism stuff, which is a general thing.)

So yeah, avoiding hurting others' pride is a good thing; but sometimes (especially when it's about a game, not a diplomatic negotiation) I just do not intend to talk according to the taste of the others (because I feel they expect only me to adjust to them, and they don't want to adjust even a BIT to my standards). Similarly, Sikret does not intend to change on Improved Anvil or its PR just because the current approach "rejects" many players.

 

Okay, I’m pretty sure I shouldn’t even continue at this point, but how about one more from me.

Let's look at your primary generalization in this thread, that people who have a strong reaction or opinion against Improved Anvil are weak. There's no way, without extensive investigation, you could possibly know if the vast majority of people who have strong opinions against IA have these opinions because they are weak. The possible reasons for someone to hold such opinions are virtually endless. So in this case it is actually you who is spreading unfounded information. It might be true for some, but not for all, and not necessarily even for most. This is your opinion, and you state it like it's a fact. This has nothing to do with cultures or regions, but a man with an opinion that he is misapplying in front of the world.

Yes, people are sensitive about having untruthful things said about them, you as much as anyone. So it would be a good start to practice what you preach and be careful to avoid generalizations that make you also a spreader of the sorts of untruths you are so sensitive to yourself.

I think this really gets to the heart of the matter, and is a big reason why so many people are turned off by you. The issue is, when you share an opinion like it’s a fact, especially a controversial one that is undoubtedly wrong in many cases, you actually lose credibility. Perhaps the most gullible of people will be persuaded by your enthusiasm, but in a public web forum opinions are subject to scrutiny, and will be picked apart.

The most memorable example I can give you to demonstrate that this approach does not establish credibility would be something that occured after the initial US attack on Iraq after 9-11. The Iraqi Information Minister Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf appeared before the world stage regularly telling people that Iraq had the situation well in hand. He spoke fervently and I’m sure many believed him, but the man was anything but credible. The world stood back in disbelief as this man made a mockery of himself and his country. Credible? I think not. While I don’t mean to directly compare you to him, you are espousing an approach to sharing your opinion that looks very similar to what we saw al-Sahaf doing. It doesn’t work on a public web forum setting, or in many other settings. It just doesn't.

What I am realizing is that you, Baronius, actually are the controversy machine, or at least a major part of it. So my attempt to help you to get away from that controversy was probably rather naive on my part. I've always given you the benefit of the doubt on this, but if I didn't know better, I'd say that you actually thrive the controversy.

I can't deny you the right to stir things up, but I can choose not to participate. And I think that is what I will do henceforth where this particular conversation is concerned.

On a happier note - Happy holidays to you and yours!

 

I said that only to Blades of Vanatar and implied that the case might be similar in many cases; I haven't written anywhere that the emotionally impulsive posts about Improved Anvil are ALL from WEAK players! Look:

I said that the text from Blades of Vanatar is typical in a certain way (yes, I know people don't like when their posts are generalized, but as I said, we humans all follow such stereotypes, just it hurts sometimes to hear about it because we even don't like to admit it to ourselves!).

The wider generalization was about something else: the customer-centric approach and the related expectations, read my last post again. To put it brief, most of the IMPULSIVE anti-IA posts root in the fact the post's author is disappointed that his/her wishes are not taken into account. As I said, this is usually an automatic behavioral pattern, so the individual is not even aware of it.

I know, but you must understand that it's correct for me (and not just for me) in that way, because while it might disturb many people, it represents an approach and that is followed by a (yes, more limited, but in certain way more 'elite') group of other people. I do not need the total cooperation or persuasion of the people in question on hobby-related "public web forums" and gaming related sites, modding etc. It is not a corporate negotiation where finding a common agreement is a desired objective and sometimes you need to refrain yourself; this is where you can tell whatever you believe to be correct (and your practical results confirm your credibility in it) because YOU choose who you want to cooperate with.

To summarize: as you said, while I might lose some credibility in the eyes of many people by my strict approach in certain IE/BG2 matters, but at the same moment, I keep the trust of others; a more limited group, but my post is already long-winded so I don't want to detail who they're exactly etc.
And by the way, I think those who expected me to be "humble" and not present my opinion "as a fact" are exactly those who shouldn't tell me anything. Because some of them often argued with me in technical matters in which they had much less knowledge than me. And they didn't let themselves convinced with logical arguments: they kept talking as if they knew it better even when it was OBVIOUS they don't even have the necessary qualifications/degrees to be familiar with that particular technical field. Of course, this doesn't mean they cannot talk, but *they* should be more humble then, not me! It's absurd. Marceror, in my culture, do you know what is very impolite? When you talk self-confidently in a matter which you are not familiar with deeply enough. It is considered arrogance. So when my words sound harsh of presenting "truth", I usually reply or react to SELF-CONFIDENT incorrect posts. And what does authorize me (or in IA cases, what does authorize Sikret) to do that? Because Sikret knows better his mod than anyone else, and yes, others can have OPINION about it, but not a crazily self-confident superclever one, especially about the TECHNICAL internal design of a mod! They can talk self-confidently about how they dislike this or that feature of the mod, how they don't like a quest etc. but not about deep matters in which they are complete greenhorns! If you don't even know highschool maths or a particular field you will talk about, you don't go to talk SELF-CONFIDENTLY with a professor of mathematics! In my culture, there is a saying, I try to translate it to English: "What matters is not what one says, but who says it". Which means that while the content and logical arguments of the text/talk are considered, people who are assumed to be more credible/competent due to their competence or position will get an advantage. And in Improved Anvil case, Sikret is more credible (but not perfect and unfallible, of course) in the eyes of intelligent people. Maybe not for the mob who believes the lies how Sikret mods badly or how Improved Anvil is full with bugs etc., but for the more intelligent people.

As you can see, you bring an example from your country (or something related to it), and that is OK, of course. (By the way, in your example, I *think* -- no offense -- that you don't get the main point that the minister DIDN'T NEED to be credible; it was a dictature and there, such a talk doesn't have as big practical significance as in a democracy.) I just say that your culture fixes greatly your expectations/view on the matter, and you automatically feel everything that contradicts your standards as unacceptable or undesirable. I often noticed that people from Western countries think that the ONLY communication and arguing standards can be theirs only (I'm not sure from where this comes, so I do not generalize, but maybe it's sometimes from the approach "Hey we rule the world, you must talk in our style or we will force it on you"). Just read your own words:

Don't you feel the self-confidence in your lines? You think I'm a "controversy machine" and that you had "attempt to help on me"? Where is the humble behavior you were talking about here? I think *this* is the (in my culture very arrogant) overly SELF-CONFIDENT talk, thinking that only your communication standards can work EVERYWHERE globally on the world.
Yes, if I listened to your words and represented a more diplomatic side on certain matters in IE gaming/modding etc., I would have more supporters. But I do not need to meet anyone's expectations (more precisely: I can filter and decide) in a HOBBY field. If I negotiate with the US ambassador, then sure, I do need to be more diplomatic and less "controversial". But in my hobby, I present my viewpoint in the way I need, and prefer that a limited group of players/users considers me credible, instead of losing their trust just to favour the general expectations of a much much bigger but -- for me-- less important group of players.

First you tell me that I'm a controversy machine and implied that you had an "attempt to help me", then you imply quitting the discussion: isn't there a bit too much self-confidence and pride here? Don't you feel that it's actually YOU who can't imagine that something different from your standards can still work? Where is your suggested humble approach here about not presenting one's viewpoint as the "only truth"?

Most of the online users who criticize my style and "give me advice" have their viewpoint based on one thing: the *majority* is always the most important. In the "mass product" approach, indeed it is.

In hobby cases and in other particular cases, convincing the *majority* is not the must. There are other aspects. I do not care what the majority of my readers expects. I care to be objective (according to my best intent) and accurate even if it disturbs or irritates many readers; and yes there is a group of readers who prefer this and I have a very good online relationship with them.



Happy holidays to you and your family too!

 

Baronius, I'm bowing out because I firmly believe if I continued the dialogue with you we would largely talk in circles and mainly just be repeating a lot of what's already been said. I think the essential points have already been raised. For me, it's better to leave it here.

 

The basis of my comment regarding your too much self-confidence and pride (the same thing you seem to criticize in me) wasn't primarily that you intended to leave; it was that you mentioned "attempt to help". So anyone not acting/talking according to your standards needs "help" it seems... Typical self-centrism.

You know, if needed, I can adjust myself to your culture & communication standards (yes, on IE/BG2 scene, I do not do it in cases such as this, instead I usually communicate in the way that is normal in my culture -- on the other hand, when I don't feel arrogance or high horse from the other side, I gladly adjust my style; but the other side must show a little bit too). But if needed, you would not be able to do the same and try to communicate in the style of another culture (at least you seemed prove so). ("You" as Marceror, not "you" as all Americans.) You're simply unable to, because to me it seems that you are convinced that actually your style is generally correct and not culture-specific. (I talk from experience; you are not the first person on BWL/SP who have difficulties *TRULY* understanding cultural differences; however, fortunately, there are some notable really positive examples as well at BWL and at other places too -- people who I can communicate with normally, without me forcing myself or he/she forcing himself & herself; all what is needed is just the INTENTION to accept cultural versatility; to have a bit cultural sensitiveness instead of expecting everyone to follow our own standards . . .)

 

I now offically declare myself to be superior to Marceror, becuse while he said:

...I realized from the get-go that there was no point in me jumping into the fray.

 

thx

 

That actually wasn't a compliment...

 

we talked with marceror in pm he's a nice person i think

 

Yes, he's definitely a positive force on SP.

 

I declare nearly everyone to be superior to Marceror!

He exists primarily to serve as a personal ATM to his wife and kids, and ensure that said ATM is fully stocked at all times.

 

There is no "trojan" in there buddy. Nice try thou

This is the full version of Improved Anvil v6. "Outdated" lol. What else could you say to bring donations in now?

You closed down the forums to milk more money out of your 5 Premium Members, because nobody signed up since I leaked it out. Sooner or later they will wake up, and those precious 30$ will not be coming in anymore next year.

You made a rather bad decision there that time, now you face the consequences. Improved Anvil v6 would not be out at this time if you didn't jump to conclusions

 

Close thread imo Bonarius just farted on this thread with this statement :

 

I suggest "isleepwithgoats" that he listens to the advice of the administrator instead of using profane speech.

To return to the on-topic discussion, once BWL will be back, I suggest the "Players Said" section of the BWL web site as well. It includes quotes from several Improved Anvil players as well, including from Sorcerer's Place (the quotes are practically positive, but from independent players)

 

With all due respect, I would think those quotes should be taken with a grain of salt. Not because I think they would be made up, but because we have no way of knowing how representative they are of all commemts made.

And "farted" is not exactly an example of profanity.

 

Nonetheless, everyone can decide what intellectual level is reflected by such style of talk.

About the quotes, they do not need to be representative. They are not a statistics, they just show some opinions, positive opinions. That is what they are for.

About their credibility, and seeing them in the context of "other comments": they can be read in their original contexts, because their sources are specified (so e.g. the whole forum topic can be found where the positive comment is quoted from).
http://web.archive.org/web/20080203191626/http://www.blackwyrmlair.net/quotes.php#anvil

I do know btw why some people prefer to "criticize" or "not recommend" Improved Anvil: they do not like Sikret's approach and rules, so they are personally irritated and try to overcome their problem by convincing others not to play Improved Anvil It is so funny to see their envy or irritation when they see Improved Anvil is actually successful despite of them trying "prove" it's not

 

Irritated? Envy? Dude, it's just a game. Get over yourself already.

 

Yes, it's just a game. So why the big protest, controversy and pages of walls of text in certain forums I think someone is still irritated and envious here after all, just too proud to admit it