And just exactly are the benefits of following Half Life Revisionism, I may ask? You can make all the ideas for BM(S) in the world, but what are the chances that the BM(S) Team will heed what you say? Ask all the people that wanted to drive vehicles in BM(S), or those that wanted mirrors to be implemented, or even those that wanted the human grunts to wear PCVs. These people followed an ideology that failed to take into account what BM(S)'s main objective is; to recreate the original content of HL1 on the Source engine and organize them in a way that's both faithful to the source material and make it fit with HL2 so that both BM(S) and HL2 flow seamlessly. Thus, these Revisionists set themselves up for disappointment when the BM(S) Team took Purist stances by declaring BM(S) will have no drivable vehicles, or when it became clear the PCVs would not appear on the grunts.
Of course even I know that in some fields such as map design, Revisionism will be quite dominant. However this is so only because map design was limited compared to what can be achieved today. Because other core gameplay factors do not rely so heavily on visuals, they would not seem dated if translated onto the Source engine. As most people will download BM(S) to have their HL1 experience translated to the improved Source engine, they would be disheartened if one element was modified so that BM(S) didn't resemble HL1.
But fear not, my fellow comrades. Even if the vilest of Revisionist filth makes its way onto these beloved forums, there is no assurance that the BM(S) Team would decide to heed it. Indeed, many ideas that are posted can be for naught if much of the gameplay factors have been decided upon by now. So what use is free thought in a community where technically free speech doesn’t exist as any thread can be locked at will? What happens when all the time and effort spent to make a suggestion is wasted because the BM(S) Team has already decided the course of the future? Furthermore, just what signs are there that the BM(S) is seriously considering changing the core elements of HL1 such as how weapons operate and how enemies attack? My friends, comrades, brothers....... there are none.
It is a shame how Revisionists blindly assume that following the Purist ideology means that one can not support any progress at all. Therefore they claim false triumphs of their ideology over mentions of any BM(S) feature or element that is not the same as it was in HL1. The reality is that Purists are well aware of the fact that one of BM(S)'s goals is to make HL1 flow with HL2 without any anomalies in various fields. Following this doctrine, the BM(S) Team is justified in inserting elements that are derived from HL2 such as multiple NPC variations and inserting notes. This rule even justifies deviations in level design, as what looks good in the HL1 engine may not look good on the Source engine. As for the so-called Revisionist victory with a Co-op mode, it must be emphasized that BM(S)'s energy is mostly bent towards the singleplayer portion which mirrors the priorities of VALVe when they were creating HL1. As HL was not memorable for its multiplayer mode, a certain level of impurity can be accepted in that area. It must be added though that with the exception of Co-op, all other new multiplayer ideas have been rejected time and time again.
Another falsehood originating from the followers of Revisionism is that they are different from Unpurists, and that their ideas are destined to be seen as improvements. Revisionists operate under the pretense that they can improve BM(S) for the better without being unfaithful to HL1. However the dark truth is that Revisionism has to be very much intertwined with Unpurism in order to make a noteworthy difference. Revisionists also assume that whatever they suggest will be an automatic improvement over the original, and therefore will be accepted by all who play BM(S). That my comrades is nothing more but their delusions, for there are people who will play BM(S) and reject a sign of Revisionist thinking should they find it disagreeable. Even now on these very forums, Revisionists debate amongst themselves on what should be improved and how so. In the vast majority of these debates, no clear decision is ever reached unless a BM(S) Developer intervenes. Finally, Revisionist thinking is ignorant of the fact that the capabilities of the Source engine are to be used wisely. BM(S) players will be disappointed if they think the Source engine is being abused to the point where BM(S) does not resemble HL1. Only now at the end do we understand how following the Purist way of thinking prevents any sort of conflict on how to proceed with how a game element or feature is supposed to work. Anything that didn't work in HL1 can be improved by using the already-mentioned doctrine that the BM(S) Team is justified to follow.
Indeed at first glance, there is no apparent purpose for the Ideas Forum if none of the Developers ever bother to consider what is posted in there. Then again, nearly all mods have a forum to post ideas in. This is so because it serves as a way for a mod to cement its fanbase. By allowing for fans to post their suggestions, it will assure that they will return to the forum they posted at for further discussion. For mods such as BM(S), this means they will have the services a loyal community they can rely on in the event that they are required. Already with BM(S), we see this in the Purist-acceptable form of Community Projects and Media Updates. In the future, this will manifest itself in the form of betatesting. Aside for those things though, fans are expected to follow the mod until the time comes for its release when they'll be then expected to download it. To improve the chances of this happening, the BM(S) Team has come up with the grand illusion of a location where ideas can be discussed freely. As long as this illusion is maintained, it doesn't matter if the ideas posted there will actually be inserted into BM(S) or not.
As for the Revisionist belief that the game they want will be for everyone, that is clearly a false statement. Unlike Purists, those that have the Revisionist mindset lack the benefit of a clearly defined guideline system which enables them to determine which ideas are good and which are not. Due to this lack of unification, Revisionists actually make suggestions that instead of being meant for everyone's enjoyment are really meant to shape BM(S) in their own personal image. Purists have long ago realized that Revisionists do not follow a true ideology; it is well known that Revisionists merely seek to impose their own personal views in order to influence BM(S) in a way that will benefit themselves. This disunity amongst the followers of Revisionism is most obvious in threads where multiple ideas are suggested by different Revisionists, all in their own quest to see BM(S) the way they want to see it. In contrast, Purists are generally consistent as a whole in what they want in BM(S). Because of this, any feature or element that remains Purist is automatically assured to be accepted by a good amount of people. On the other hand, anything with a Revisionist slant in it is not guaranteed to be accepted by all Revisionists. By learning to recognize how Revisionists operate only for their own ends, one can break through their web of propaganda and question if they really have the benefit of everyone in mind.
Those forumers and team members who follow Purism know that Revisionism is inextricably bound to unreasoning impulses, and today we clearly see its true nature. Revisionism has always been aware of its irrelevance, and like a cornered n00b it will not go down without a bloody fight. Revisionism would inflict a major injury on BM(S). Revisionism creates its own flamers, and bids us rise up against them. Revisionism tells us that the unknown is a false opportunity, rather than the threat it really is. Revisionism slyly and covertly compels us away from the elements that made HL1 the Game of the Year as considered by many.
Revisionism therefore must be expunged. It must be fought tooth and nail beginning with the basest of forumer urges: the urge to post new and original ideas. We should thank the Purist ideology for giving us respite from this overpowering force. Following Purism allows one to throw a switch and exercise the forum's demons in a single post. Purism has given us the strength we've never could have summoned to overcome this compulsion. Purism has given us purpose; it has turned our eyes toward the stars. Let me assure you that the idea suppressing field will be shut off on the day that we have mastered ourselves, the day we can prove we no longer need it. And that day of transformation I have it on good authority comrades, is close at hand.
Thus comrades, do not fear the Purist ideology. By following it, one will be assured that BM(S) to be just as enjoyable as HL1 if not even better. Why settle for an unholy faith that will either bring embarrassment upon the name of HL1 or will produce threads which go unnoticed by the BM(S) Team and find themselves locked anyways? Believe in Purism..... it's safer there.