What is path of building creators waiting for ?

"

BaumisMagicalWorld wrote:

"

eversorgod wrote:

You seem confused, how could they not be a POB dev if they are developing/contributing to POB?

It's all explained here: reddit

They were working on POB to create a feature, hence they are a developer/contributor to POB. Which is exactly what I said

"

BaumisMagicalWorld wrote:

"

eversorgod wrote:

They were working on POB to create a feature, hence they are a developer/contributor to POB. Which is exactly what I said

You have that backwards. PoB is open source. They were working on a feature for PoB, specifically designed around the use of third party websites.

Coding a feature doesn't make you part of the main dev team, as the main dev team still has to approve it in the first place. So, no, they are not a PoB dev.

You seem to be arguing semantics due to your original incorrect point

Coding a feature makes you a developer for the program you are developing a feature for, its a credit, it doesn't matter if you're there for that purpose only and then no longer actively partaking.
If thats all they do then its still accurate to say they were a developer/contributor to POB, especially as we are talking about a current event not a past one.

I said they were a contributor/developer, and thats exactly what they are/were, so I don't see how this is a sticking point rather than the actual criticisms or defence, if anything it would be more damming if you're suggesting POB let some side gig come in, change a bunch of stuff, screw over the community into a rage right before the league with the sole aim of promoting their site.

They've corrected the problem, its a problem that shouldn't have happened, they had months to discuss it with the community of the COMMUNITY FORK, its not something to just shift under the rug, but I accept their apologies and action to remove this until they actually bother to do it correctly

"

BaumisMagicalWorld wrote:

"

eversorgod wrote:

Coding a feature makes you a developer for the program you are developing a feature for

Except not. That's not how any of this works. In particular not when the feature is using a program as its source material and main distributor, building on its foundation rather than actively developing for the program itself.

If I send a Premiere bug fix code snippet to Adobe and they approve it, they don't have to give me credit and it does not automatically make me an Adobe dev.

And all of that doesn't mean I'm saying the archives dude was acting in bad faith.

Let's just not pretend that one guy using his personal website to integrate it as a feature into an open source tool is somehow now a main contributor.

The fact that the majority seem to want it off by default should tell you that this feature is unwanted and not a positive contribution in its current form.

You're using more semantics and incorrect logic

They developed a key, main front feature that changes everyones experience of an app, thats a big deal, not some off sourcing bug fix.
They collaborated with the main developer as stated in the very post you linked, I don't think you understand what open source is or what the POB community fork is, you can't just rock up change stuff and release it via official channels without cooperation, validation and permission.

This was a planned feature, discussed multiple times over 5 months, they iterated and created boundaries for what was or wasn't acceptable and then the update was released via the main official channels for EVERYONES client.
You're making it sound like some dude made a small mod and listed it on his website and the good old devs of the game had no idea he did it, like come on dude.


You seem incapable of reading whats said to you or even understanding what POB is from a development front, so I'll leave it there as this is a waste of both our times.

"

eversorgod wrote:

"

ArtCrusade wrote:

"

eversorgod wrote:

They didn't have a problem releasing the features nobody asked for right before the league with the paid for promotion and spying build stuff, so its only fair to receive criticism for the things they haven't released, still.

That goes for the wiki too, which still isn't updated


Nobodies owed anything, doesn't mean its not frustrating

Huh.

Do you think they just started working on PoB after the patch notes dropped, and decided to add that feature instead of the new gems?

Genuinely baffled.

Can you answer the question?

"

alhazred70 wrote:

I've read some dumb stuff on this forum over the years but the idea that GGG owes the playerbase a meta gaming tool to simulate a build might just take the cake.

The entitlement isn't just some guy asking for the free work being done on PoB to be performed faster.

Considering their in-game information is faulty for many of their own creations (dots and minions), and incomplete for even more, not to mention having no QoL when selecting passive points (not even the bare minimum "+x% dps")....I wouldn't really consider some sort of PoB-like in-game tool to be entitlement. I would consider it par/bare minimum for the genre, and an area that GGG has always lagged way behind in. We don't need a simulator that rises to the level of PoB, but we certainly need a LOT more available info. Especially for things like buff calculations, minions, dots, etc.

It's also not a "demand", as if its owed. It is a request and a suggestion to GGG to provide a tool like that in-game, so that IF AND WHEN PoB shuts down...the game isn't left holding the bag. It is so popular and rather necessary because of the faults within the game.

@eversor: if you make a change to a wikipedia page (which ANYONE can do), but that contribution is immediately removed by the wikipedia moderators, does that make you a wikipedia developer?

No....no, it does not.

Open source code literally means that anyone can play with it, but if the actual DEVELOPERS deem it dangerous, malicious, or any other number of things and decide to not include it in THEIR product, you do not get to claim a developer credit lol.

What a ridiculous assertment.

I regularly change the rules of card and board games because its interesting to mess around with. Where are my developer credits on the back of the box and from the company?!?!?!

If anything, you can be considered a "user" of the base-code program. But certainly not a developer. A "user" of D2 is able to program mods on the game, but they don't become D2 developers.

"

jsuslak313 wrote:

If anything, you can be considered a "user" of the base-code program. But certainly not a developer. A "user" of D2 is able to program mods on the game, but they don't become D2 developers.

Or a contributor.

"

Scarletsword wrote:

Go ahead, learn to code LUA and add the gems yourself.

https://github.com/PathOfBuildingCommunity/PathOfBuilding

What's taking you so long?

Lua is scripting not coding.

That is lesson #1. *hits with bamboo stick*

^not really even that.....you are only a contributer if whatever you did is accepted. Which in this case...it wasn't.

Contributer is a bit less defined because it depends on what you are looking at: designing a mod for D2 makes you a contributer to the mod community, but it does NOT make you a D2 contributer. You contributed nothing to Blizzard's Diablo 2.

even filterblade is slackin ;)

gimme my filter! *shakes fist*

lol

*all good. took a few ctrl-f5s