Jump to content

Jumps-Down-Stairs

Members
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jumps-Down-Stairs

  • Rank
    Clanfriend
  1. Is the separate textures bsa a special case, or can each category of file be stored in a separate archive, like the base game resources are? What will it find automatically, and what needs to be added to the ini file?
  2. I don't want to make this about me or my problems, and mean-spirited armchair psychoanalysis is both unwelcome and unnecessary. I just want to disrupt the echo chamber of "Yay, this is awesome!", and show that no, this isn't better for everybody. I don't expect it to change anything. I probably wouldn't have even bothered replying were it not for the attitude of "anyone who doesn't play the same way I do is wrong". Elder Scrolls games give the player a lot of choice, both in the official content, and in that they provide an editor and encourage you to define the experience yourself. To say that everyone should use the same mods is to attempt to deny them that choice which is so pivotal to the game. Had the content been there from the start, I believe it would have been paced better, spread out more, rather than all dropped in your lap shortly after starting a new character. But because it's DLC, they built it expecting it to be a late addition to existing characters, or something the player would make a new character just to experience, and thus designed it with minimal lag time between installation and the content starting up. You don't see your argument for using the DLC as an argument against using SKSE? I don't know what other people's objections to SKSE are, I can only voice my own: It uses code injection, rather than the plugin system. It requires you to use its own launcher, rather than the official one. You're no longer playing the Skyrim the developers intended to create, you're playing SKSE Skyrim. I don't know how to directly communicate the underlying reason for my objections. I think my reasons for playing are different than most people, but since I'm not sure what other people's reasons are, I can only guess. It seems like most people just want whatever will be the most "fun", by some unexplainable criteria, and don't really care how that's accomplished. So to them, the more mods, the more content, the better. It's more to do, more options, and they don't really care how well it fits into the existing game. I either want to experience the author's original vision, or something of my own choice or creation. My goal isn't so much to "have fun" as it is to gain a complete understanding of the game. I use the unofficial patches because I think they better represent what Bethesda intended the game to be than what they actually produced. The same can't be said of a script extender, which alters the parameters of what's possible within the game's engine. Even if it's better, it's not what I wanted to play. And the code injection makes me uncomfortable for philosophical reasons. Eternity, on 25 Jul 2015 - 09:11 AM, said: Benefits for players is that there are some bugs that can't be fixed because the other dlc+patches overwrite it. Some of them can be fixed cleaning DLC but iirc there was some that cannot be fixed at all without having all DLC as masters. CRF users will also benefit from it as it opens the gates to legendary version of CRF. And those could also be fixed by an additional patch file that has all the DLC as masters, rather than unifying the patches. Same with CRF. There's a maintenance tradeoff, which only Arthmoor is in a position to evaluate or make a decision about, but it's still another way those things could be dealt with. It's misleading to claim that unifying the patches is the only way. Thanks. That's probably the most viable solution. I'll have to do some digging to figure out Hearthfire. Except I wouldn't have the DLC, were it not for your dire announcement last year that this was going to happen eventually. My objection isn't so much the content of the DLC as it is the pacing of how it's presented to the player. Yes, it's better than Oblivion, but it's still too aggressive. I have the means to address that, and it will have to do. Once again, I didn't expect complaining to change anything. I just wanted to make it clear that it wasn't universally supported, lest anyone think the only objections to it were just not having the DLC.
  3. The beginning of the end, huh? I acquired all the DLC during a Steam Sale some time ago, but have yet to play with them. I have little interest in the content they add, and would likely not have bought them were it not for the threat of the USLEEP. I take offense at your unsubstantiated claim that there is "no valid gameplay argument against installing them", when they trigger so many events and random attacks early in the game. If I were to play with them, I'd prefer to add them incrementally, when I'm ready for them, rather than being bombarded with them on a new character. No, "Timing is Everything" is not an option, because it requires SkyUI, which requires SKSE, which I absolutely refuse to use. I've been tempted to try building my own interface mod, like I did for Oblivion, but it would require finding and learning tools and languages that are now considered obsolete, and thus difficult to acquire or find information about. I suppose I can try porting any new changes in USLEEP back to the separate patches, or making a replacement for Timing is Everything that isn't dependent on SkyUI/SKSE. Probably a ton of work, no matter which option I pick. I've already spent far more time in the CK trying to make Skyrim something I can bear to play than I actually have playing the game. Maybe I'm just not the target audience, or maybe it's just more of a time investment than I can fit into my life. And that pretty much kills the idea of backporting fixes to the individual patches. I still don't understand how anybody expects to benefit from this, other than Arthmoor. I don't begrudge him for doing so, he's given so much to the community, and has the right to do whatever he wants with the project anyway. But why would anyone else want it to happen? I still see zero direct benefit to players, only loss of options.
  4. Is it possible that he wrote his message from the other side of the wall? I haven't done the quest, and don't know what kind of abilities the skeleton key is implied to grant, but being able to reach through solid objects or interact with things through walls would be mighty useful to a thief. He may not have thought about it showing up backwards from the other side.
  5. I think that essentially was their strategy: put it out there as if it had always been there, as if it was the norm, and expect people to just go along with it. That's why they approached authors in private, before launching the storefront. They wanted to launch with content already available to set expectations for quality and pricing, rather than publicly ponder the idea for months, and have it be shouted down before it ever had a chance. It may seem that it turned out that way anyway, because the result was the same, but I think they were trying to head it off with a strong showing. Too bad they botched that so badly because they were in such a hurry. I'm not saying it was a good strategy, but I still think that it was a deliberate strategy. They just didn't have any idea what was buried under the surface of the community. Bethesda's clueless about their own community, and Valve's too young, it's communities too young, to know how to deal with the complex, ingrained history of Elder Scrolls modding.
  6. It is good to hear that they are still going to pay the authors who participated, though whether they did it out of goodwill or obligation, I'm in no position to discern. I don't think it's reasonable to expect Valve or Bethesda to have expected the groundless fear and insanity that the paid workshop produced. They clearly wanted to make a strong showing right out of the gate, with a bunch of high-quality mods available to set the tone for the market, rather than have it sit empty, or full of junk. The question is why they launched so early, why they didn't wait until those high-quality mods were available, so they could make that good first impression. This seems strange for Valve, which is known to wait until they're satisfied with something before releasing it, but fits Bethesda's method of operation perfectly. Once again, it's baffling the kind of loyalty the "community" expects from its members, particularly those who have contributed the most, and gotten the least in return. Especially considering how the community has treated those members since. Valve could have asked them to sign an NDA, but instead just asked them not to discuss it publicly, and trusted them. But it seems the community values loyalty and majority rule over integrity and rights.
  7. Even though I'm disappointed in the outcome, I think there were legitimate problems with their implementation. They were neither ready nor interested in policing the curated workshop, and I find it strange that the term "curated" is even being used in relation to it, when Valve and Bethesda have both said that's exactly the approach they didn't want to take: they wanted to leave the choice of what mods and which modders were successful in the hands of the community, rather than Valve or Bethesda doing the picking. For once, they try to include the community, and the community appears to have wanted the complete opposite. I've seen several suggestions that Bethesda should have instead approached individual modders and either hired them or bought the rights to their work and reproduced it in-house, or otherwise elevated it to semi-official DLC. Isn't fighting uncredited reuploads / derivatives / etc of your work already enough of a pain, without any financial incentive to spur it on? Would you have wanted to fight that fight in the context of paid mods without Bethesda's or Valve's help? I truly doubt they were going to offer much, so it would have boiled down to depending on the community to police it for you -- and look how trustworthy they have proven. Maybe they should have delayed or restricted the launch of this feature so that it could be improved, once it became apparent that it wasn't going to work out as nicely as it has for Valve's own games. It's hard to say whether they pulled it too early, or too late. I don't think, as a company, they care much for formalities, or public relations -- they run a very flat internal organization, and develop in a very agile, flexible way. So I don't think they are really aware of just how much the modders they invited into this deal have risked and lost, and I think you should try to make that clear to them. They probably don't think they hurt anyone -- nothing gained, nothing lost, just a business proposal that fell through -- and to some degree, they didn't; the community is directly responsible for all the damage done. But they asked you guys to march at the front, and left you stranded when it didn't work out. I don't know what kind of agreement was made, but I don't think they'll understand how you've been hurt unless you tell them.
  8. Which is why copyright doesn't protect ideas, only implementations. Ideas aren't worth anything without the work required to make them into something people can benefit from. If someone independently does the work to make a mod that is similar to some other mod, there shouldn't be a problem. Let the best implementation win. People will weigh the price of a particular implementation in their own valuation of which one is the "best". Some will prefer a free implementation, others will be willing to pay. But trying to stake out some mental territory, and claiming that nobody else can try to make something similar, only hurts the community. Protecting ideas, rather than expressions, inappropriately rewards people just for being "first", rather than "best".
  9. I can't speak for "the team", but it looks very subjective to me. How can anyone say whether the pieces were intended to match perfectly, or have some variation? Maybe it's supposed to make it look more realistic, or just to break it up visually. Calling it a bug appeals to some vague, unstated notion of order, which the real world doesn't really follow.
  10. There wasn't any question about how the lists were set up, or what the consequences of them were. You haven't adequately explained why it might conceivably be a bug, aside from some vague notion that the linear progression of rewards is disrupted. The lists for each equipment slot are consistent with each other, and it doubtlessly took no small amount of tedious effort to construct them. They were deliberately made that way, and it's not hard to guess why, given a little history. The previous game in the Elder Scrolls series, Oblivion, was routinely criticized for leveling too closely with the player: creatures replaced with stronger ones, items being replaced with better quality items, until you regularly encountered absurdities like bandits wearing full outfits of supposedly rare armor. You should not be regularly finding Dragon or Daedric equipment, no matter what level you are. The materials are rare, and the skill required to assemble them equally so. The "Best" sublists are used sparingly throughout the game, mainly on Dummy items, giving the developers more control over where they would appear, rather than as random items in chests. Other games may have taught you to expect a continuous, linear progression in power and rewards, but that has no bearing on what the Elder Scrolls developers have or should have done. Creating a self-consistent, believable world sometimes takes precedence.
  11. The team might not have noticed if they're developing on top of cleaned masters. I don't think edits to NPCs such as Hert were intentionally forwarded to the UDGP for their own sake, but were lucky side-effects of needing to fix the vampire faces/eyes in Dawnguard. That raises a good policy question though: should the unofficial patches assume that Bethesda's masters have been cleaned, or should fixes in the USKP be forwarded specifically to counteract itms in the DLC?
  12. The previous 9 posts above yours are all discussing this. Except it's not "broken", it's cut content that's been restored. Start with post #157.
  13. Have you created linked references between the plaques and the activators? I believe the USKP script follows those links to determine which plaque belongs to which activator. The vanilla script uses them too, so I wouldn't think it would work (properly) without them... I believe the plaque needs a linked ref with the "WRackActivator" keyword to the activator, and the activator needs a linked ref with the "WRackTrigger" keyword to the plaque. The only other way I'm aware of changing the display name of an activator is through quest aliases. That might be overkill unless you're already using a quest for whatever you're doing.
  14. The relevant bug is indeed quite old, and the comments are a mess because it was ported over from one of the previous bug trackers. But it's about Redbelly Mine. Shor's Stone is a town, and there are two mines nearby: Redbelly and Northwind. There are numerous reasons to believe Redbelly was supposed to be an iron mine, as various dialogue, quests, and external literature all refer to it as such. Northwind was previously an iron mine, but the USKP changed it to ebony in order to balance out the change to Redbelly. Seeing as Northwind is close to Shor's Stone, it should satisfy the lore conflict you raise.
  15. I wasn't actually suggesting its use for that particular problem, just pointing out that SKSE isn't necessary just to determine whether another plugin is loaded or not. I will again suggest a separate, single plugin that has requires all the DLC, and includes all the cross-DLC conflict fixes. This should make them possible to fix without cumbersome workarounds, or merging everything into a Legendary edition, shouldn't it? This is exactly why I think the unofficial patches should not be merged into a single file.

Support us on Patreon!

×
×
  • Create New...