Ping

You claim that a work of art should not be changed or amended once it has been published. This is fair enough, but Lucas has not actually changed very much of anything once it was published - with the sole exception of the special edition re-release of the original trilogy, where he added scenes and touched it up here and there. So he didn't change his published artworks; but this is of course not what you are referring to. You claim that the prequels, the Rebels series that replaced the Clone Wars and all that are changing the way we perceive the story in a bad way. Now, clearly you are not advocating never making any prequels/sequels to anything, since that would be absurd, and since it is inevitable for a prequel/sequel to change our perception of the original, the original artwork is necessarily going to be changed whenever some piece of the story is added to it. So your original issue has to be amended from "don't change anything about the artwork you have already published" to "don't change it in a bad way", where 'bad way' refers to something about hurting the integrity of the story, making it into something that it originally wasn't. Now this is where things get a bit tricky. We surely all agree that Lucas didn't one day wake up and go 'well, I guess it's time to destroy everything that was good about SW and rob its integrity'. So what he wanted to do was to expand the story in a way that he thought was appropriate, i.e. in a way that maybe even fit his vision for what SW originally was supposed to be like. Others saw the result and disagreed that it had expanded the story in a way that was appropriate because it conflicted with the way they thought about SW. Who is right? It depends on whether or not we include the intention of the artist into our evaluation of the artwork and whether or not Lucas' vision for SW did change over the course of the years. If we do accept that the intention of the artist should be taken into account, then Lucas is right and what you perceive to be an attack on SW's integrity merely expresses your misunderstanding of what it was originally supposed to be. But even if we do accept that the intention has to be taken into account and we say that Lucas' intention changed over the years in important ways, i.e. where he originally thought of SW as a spacedrama but then thought of it as a show for kids, we'd have to argue that this somehow constitutes a bad change, which I don't think it has to. If we don't take the intention into account, then maybe Lucas was wrong, but not taking it into account creates really terrible problems for art crticism that I'm not sure we should buy into. But there is a second way it could have been 'changed in a bad way'. If we accept for now that what Lucas did to whatever original artwork, in terms of adding to the story or changing its direction, does not constitute changing it in a bad way, it could be that what does constitute changing it in a bad way is the way he put those changes into effect, i.e. his cinematography. It could be, after all, that the idea for an expansion to artwork x was a good one, but the artwork y that resulted out of that idea sucked as a movie, regardless of its merit as a sequel. I think we are in a far better position to judge this case than we are with the previous one and I think Lucas did fail here. Having movies in a series that genuinely sucked does hurt the series' credit and so hurts the original artwork by mere association. But this isn't about the integrity of the plot and more about whether or not his movies sucked, which means it's hard to draw anything normative out of that except for "don't make movies that suck."

TFFA and Duel because it epitomizes the one feature that makes JKA stand out from other games so much.

In the hope of clarity, there are two points made so far against this project: The first is that we do like to think of ourselves as people who have everything figured out, so when someone comes along and says "you're all acting on bad ideas but I can help fix that", it does seem patronizing and 'controlling'. So although writing a guide on how not to be a dick might be a perfectly fine idea, the way this was introduced in the first three paragraphs just rubs people the wrong way. Starting in the second paragraph by saying that we're all wrong and then saying in the third paragraph that you know it all thanks to your education and are now going to help us remedy our ignorance does remind me a bit of Jehova's Witnesses. This is highly ironic, since the purpose of the entire thing was to teach how to share thoughts without offending others. The second point is that the entire thing is not necessary since whether or not you're going to become a skilled modder (or whathaveyou) depends largely on your own ability to deal with criticism, not so much on your ability to hand it out. In order to improve your craft, you need to correct mistakes, ones that others will have to point out. The modder who recognizes and works on correcting his own mistakes is going to improve in skill, whereas the one that doesn't is not going to improve. The point here is that if your work has flaw xyz and someone makes a statement with the content that your work has flaw xyz, then key to improving as a modder is to recognize and fix flaws xyz. Whether or not the statement is couched in positive or negative language should be irrelevant - if it's legit criticism, i.e. includes pointing out xyz, then this is all that matters. If a modder brushes aside a statement that includes pointing out xyz then he fails to take criticism seriously and so fails to recognize flaw xyz and therefore is going to continue sucking as a modder. On the first point I tend to side with Cerez because I do believe we're all really wrong and really confused on basically everything, so I think it's great if someone wants to open a discussion to get clear on some idea or another (or at least get a bit clearer on it). I don't care about the patronizing tone because I think it's perfectly justified. I do however think that saying something that amounts to "I got it all figured out" is not a very good way to approach this, but I'm willing to look past that. On the second point I do agree with @@Sithani and co. People should be given the opportunity to grow a spine. If someone gives negative feedback that is not devoid of content, then brushing it aside is a failure on your part (and there comes a point where you recognize that some people that are trying to give feedback have no idea what they are talking about, but getting there requires going through a bunch of feedback of varying quality on your own); and really, recognizing that one sucks really hard is a good first step in anyone's quest for improvement. Although I do think we should be nice to each other and that people tend to be very disregarding of feedback if they even so much as smell that you're saying something hurtful, I don't think it's necessary to be China on this topic, censoring people for saying mean things. It's what got us into all that drama last time.

Make sure to cite sources and give reasons as to why we should accept them.

I'm pretty sure that there is no such thing for JKA. It would be incredibly useful though. Can you use JK2MF to figure out who used a modified client through demos as well?

You are judging people for playing a certain way by saying that they are "boring to be around", "no fun to talk to", "in a hurry to win a duel" and not out to "enjoy it". This is just ridiculous and to be honest rather offensive. Well, if you read his post, it specifically addressed "poke/wiggle players" and how they are somehow inferior human beings for playing a certain way. I agree with you 100% that it is completely uncalled for.

@@Bacon don't judge.

Scripts are borderline, but there are some ways to detect blatant cheats like cvar unlockers, aimbots and various other hacks. I'm very unknowledgeable on that though, so just gonna invoke @. The guys over at the ESL were having some success with that too.

I don't really see the point of allowing upvotes, except that it might cut down on lauding oneliners, which it doesn't seem to. I'd much rather see an admin system where a red line is displayed below a comment saying that the person was warned or banned for said comment. That would make admining more apparent and please the crowd when it calls for blood. On the other hand, since genuine intervention is barely ever needed here, I'm not sure how often we'd see that in action. Ping was warned for this post.

No worries, still need a recent build for OSX if anyone were so nice to package it.

Need: Most recent OSX build download link. http://builds.openjk.org only lists Linux and Windows builds.

You should add your clan's story to our wiki, by the way!

Send "the final duel" to that featured picture thing we have here on the forums. It's a good screenshot.

How dare you, I'll sue you for your ignorant selfish abuse!

Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

On behalf of the entire JKHub team I am very happy to tell you that I was just appointed First JKHub Collector of Donations. Feel free to email the phat dollarz to uniqor at web de. The team thanks you for your generosity.

Him creating and uploading a superior version of a hilt is a fantastic opportunity to learn what makes his work better and thus improve your own craft. It is also a great opportunity to throw a hissy fit and point fingers at people for being mean.

I have found this place to be perfectly supportive of everything I do and suggest, so I wouldn't have it any other way.

Make a screenshot. If the line is still there, it's your card. If it's not, it's your screen.

More US on the casual, more EU on the competitive side. Rough estimate.

Actually, a well advertised base PUG server might. It would have to be located somewhere in Europe though, but who knows, I'm not really familiar with the US scene.

Why not set it to Hardcore Damages where every single swing instantly kills you, it's the best approximation of what you will find playing good players.

It looks terrible judging from the video he posted, sorry to be so blunt.

The game gets a distinctive flair if you use the realistic weapons mod on the Master difficulty. You can die very quickly if not careful, since the weapons are so powerful. The gunplay becomes somewhat thrilling because of that: cover, surprise attacks, tactics etc suddenly gain in importance. I found it quite satisfying, although the underground areas and the very end of the game could get a bit too harsh at times.

I used STALKER Complete on my most recent playthrough of SoC and it's visually quite something. To make the gameplay at least somewhat interesting, I set the difficulty to Master and used the Realistic Weapons mod which you can find here: http://stalker.filefront.com/file/PLRs_Realistic_Weapons;88736