Unofficial Patches - "Legendary Edition" or Separate Files?

[Arthmoor]

This is a question we get on a fairly regular basis, so I think the time has come to consider our options for the future.

First off, yes, I know I've been staunchly opposed to unifying the Unofficial Patch under a single all-in-one file to cover everything. Recent events have begun to strain the current model we're operating under though. Some fixes, like certain perks, can't currently be handled by our existing setup without generating a small fix file to cover these.

Currently, the perk fixes are being handled here: http://afkmods.iguanadons.net/index.php?/files/file/1212-dg-and-db-axe-perk-compatibility-fix/

Another issue just reported involves incorrect dragon skeletons when a dragon dies: http://afkmods.iguanadons.net/index.php?/tracdown/issue/16721-dragonborn-serpentine-dragons-inappropriate-mesh-when-dying/ - In order to address this, the DragonActorScript would need editing, and such an edit can't currently deal with DG dragons while preserving the DB dragons and the Miraak support code.

A third issue is one that's been brought up before, but so far hasn't been formally reported - It's not possible currently to support adoptions on Solstheim because it would necessitate code that alters two DLCs. Technically it can be considered a bug that you can't even move your spouse to Raven Rock. It's pretty easy to see why Bethesda didn't even try.

In general, any inter-DLC issues that come up can't currently be managed.

Then there's the general difficulty in maintaining the separate packages as they are now. Each one requires a clean environment from which to work, which right now is only truly possible by having multiple Skyrim install folders that get switched between as each patch runs its cycle. Conflict resolution with this setup is made difficult because such conflicts can only be checked with every file in the same folder, and it's not wise to dirty up each folder with stuff from another.

One major downside to all this is that removing the existing DLC patches from a running game could very well break things. There would be no other good way to go about this though (thank God we're using BSAs!) that wouldn't potentially cause some problems.

Something that will need to be kept in mind. This changeover would mean the end of continued development on the current separate files. It is not feasible to manage the project in two entirely different branches.

This would not affect the High Resolution patch. That would remain separate since it isn't dependent on certain DLCs existing or not and the content isn't something everyone can run.

So briefly:

Pros:
No more need for multiple development folders.
No more unresolvable conflicts.
One unified patch that only takes up one ESP slot.

Cons:
Not everyone has every DLC yet.
A significant amount of work to properly merge everything into one unified ESP.
Support on the existing separate patches would be frozen except for hotfix issues.
Extremely likely that the game could get confused when ripping out the unsupported DLC patches when a change like this is made.

Again, as I once said, "hell no, never" - well. It's starting to become enough of a hassle to consider it.

But, as these patches are largely for the sake of the community, I think it should be put to a poll. So please cast your vote, and post your thoughts on why we should or should not do this.

[TheVampireDante]

The Skyrim DLC are either cheap enough on their own to get them one at a time over a period, or via steam sale (lendary version of the game) that getting all the DLC really comes down to whether someone wants them or not.

 

Since the patches are designed for use by the majority, and the majority seems to aim at owning all DLC - I'd say go with the unified patch.

 

Could leave the individual versions as misc uploads at their last release version on the page with clear notice that they are outdated, and only for use by people that do not own all DLC (thus requiring separate patches).

[Lisnpuppy]

I said no for the exact same reason Dante said yes. The game and the DLC is cheap....however not everyone will want to have them or have them. Though small issues would remain I would prefer to keep them as is....even though I own all the DLCs.

 

And leaving the old up with a note of non-support and closing comments perhaps would work I think there would, as always be many folks that don't *cough* see that.

 

I completely understand the desire to have just one all consuming patch but again...I would prefer it remain as it is now. It wouldn't stop me from using this fine, very fine, OMG this is a godsend work of you and your fellows, Arthmoor....but I'd hate for folks being left in the cold that don't have the DLC or are just getting into Skyrim and maybe don't have everything.

 

edit: I would also be very curious in how people would switch. Would it need a clean install?

[Ball11]

I agree with both cons and pros. No everyone has DLC and these fixes are a must have I would say, So putting into one file may get other users annoyed but it should only be a small group that don't have all DLC as Skyrim has been out for over 2 years and the legendary has been out for a year also, and been on sale on steam for £5 for all DLC so most people should have all DLC and some people may not.

 

I half agree with making it all in one, but 3 esp isn't really that much, merging can be done anyway with armor and weapon mods and others to reduce load order a bit.

 

Not merging will also benfit older mods that require that ESP for USP or UDGP or UHFP or UDBP and merging them may make the esp unusable. But not a lot of mods reference the patches mostly big overhauls really need to anyway, those are still updated. E.G EEO,Requiem etc. People that don't know much about editing in tes5edit may find it annoying if that does happen to them with a old mod they use, and not sure how to carry changes over from merged USP to the old mod they use to get it working again.

 

I would say no saves lots of issues but I am not botherd if it does go to a merged version I can easily carry changes over as all I have referencing USP is Requiem patches and EEO. I think it's easier to manage what patch is editng what and will be easier to edit if changes arise, but you guys will know what you are doing anyway :smile:

 

Edit: I agree with what Dante and Lisnpuppy say, not everyone wants all DLC anyway, but I guess you could leave these as current ones and have old version like Lisnpuppy said and make it for users that don't have all DLC and keep the new one for all DLC updated. I am fine with what you go for just my opinions

[postal001]

I say whatever is easier for the mod creators will work.

[raulfin]

I'd have to say yes. Most players have all the DLC by now. If it will let you get at some things that were not possible before then I'm all for it. I would have to disagree about keeping the separate files up as unsupported though as many larger mods would almost be forced to maintain USKP separate and merged versions of the mods, since most of the larger mods only require DB & DG, few use HF stuff.

[mezz1945]

how long would it take to accomplish your plan?

[Arthmoor]

Couple of weeks I'd guess, perhaps more depending on how time availability works out. It's not something I'd trust to an automated merge process so the work would be getting done manually.

[Veltoss]

I'd have to say that the pros outweigh the cons. The DLC is cheap enough to get at this point, and anyone who doesn't have them for whatever reason could still use the older (current) versions of the separate patches, they just wouldn't have any added once the patches are unified.

 

And can anyone say they wouldn't like fewer esps to manage? :tongue:

[AaronOfMpls]

I voted no. I usually play without Dawnguard, so a unified patch could be a problem for me.

 

That said, I do use Mod Organizer, so any problems would be minimal for me. I could have some MO profiles use the existing separate patches (and put my existing saves in those) and other profiles that use the unified one.