MrTastix

In response to post #29063224. That's another very real problem with paid modding that I don't think many modders are responsible enough to handle on their own. Modders are modders. Most aren't businessmen or lawyers and don't take into account the concerns of the law or consumer complaints when making their creations. It's not that they don't care, its that they don't know. Few people, modders or not, actively think about the law unless they're willingly breaking it. Creators in general just want to make their crap without hassle and legal issues are yet another hassle. Paid modding is just a huge can of worms. The moment you demand payment is the moment people are legally entitled to complain and ask for refunds if it doesn't work the way it should. Consider that most modders can't even do the most basic of developmental procedures: Document their work. Good documentation (and I don't just mean in installing something but in fully explaining what it does) is rare enough in video games let alone in modding. If you cannot even be bothered to tell me how your invention works then why would I have faith that you'll help me when it doesn't?

> An average score of 9.23 out of 10 for recommending to a friend, now that is certainly a good thing to hear. Whilst I'm sure the Nexus thinks this is a commendable statistic, it has less weight when you factor in how much competition they have. I recommend the Nexus because the only other option is the Workshop, which is unregulated and most of the good mods can be found here anyway. When you hold the majority market share don't be surprised people recommend your service. Are you shocked that Google is the most popular search engine as well? It's not that surprising.

In response to post #27772820. #27773245, #27785260, #27787150, #27827605, #27828245, #27828875, #27833980, #27837490, #27840175, #27841035, #27848505, #27850734, #27856114, #27933514 are all replies on the same post. How can you derive that from a survey regarding the Nexus websites? Studies that are designed to analyze the male/female ratio of gamers do not look on one website to do so, they look in all areas related to gaming. Furthermore, neither these studies nor the Nexus' survey factor in the vast majority of gamers who choose not to partake at all. It's still highly possible that 45% of gamers are, indeed, female, at least by today's standards. Drawing a conclusion on the state of gaming with a survey focused on website is unreliable and illogical.

As far as I'm concerned the market will decide. That's what a free market is for. I believe authors should be allowed to ask for payment. If I was doing voice over work or concept illustrations for a mod I'd certainly be looking at payment, and many people would argue I deserve that, so why shouldn't a programmer? In terms of copyright infringement I don't see it much different to YouTube or Twitch, two platforms we use to broadcast other peoples creations but make money off all the same. It's not the game we're making money from, it's our display of it. For mods, it's the addition to the game we've created that is worth the price. I don't think paid-for mods would stifle the community anymore than triple A games from big name publishers ruin the indie industry. There'd still be hundreds of would-be modders who don't want to charge big bucks for their creations, who either find development fun or want to start a portfolio and feel video games are a great way to do it. In many cases the only difference between a modding team and a game dev team is what they're creating, the work involved is just as real, yet we'd have no problem paying for the latter. Why is paying for the former strange? The biggest hurdle will always be intellectual property and copyright laws, however. You might be able to pay for the work involved but charging for an addon itself is a whole new can of worms.

Auckland, New Zealand --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Proxy detected: none----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Diagnosing http://filedelivery.nexusmods.com/1/2/256MB-1-0-1.rar?ttl=2147483647&setec=94cadea35b83be28c03f37ee675c2373--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Keep-Alive: timeout=10, max=100Connection: Keep-AliveX-HW: 1415687841.dop003.la2.t,1415687841.cds007.la2.cContent-Disposition: attachment; filename="256MB-1-0-1.rar"Accept-Ranges: bytesContent-Length: 268435456Cache-Control: max-age=30919347Content-Type: application/octet-stream; charset=binaryDate: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:37:21 GMTETag: "1413035840"Last-Modified: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 13:57:20 GMTStatus Description: OK.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Average speed: 99.1 KB/s for 594.6 KB. Total: 594.6 KB.Average speed: 50.5 KB/s for 5.7 KB. Total: 600.3 KB.Average speed: 87.0 KB/s for 370.7 KB. Total: 971.0 KB.Average speed: 94.8 KB/s for 308.0 KB. Total: 1.2 MB.Average speed: 63.3 KB/s for 95.5 KB. Total: 1.3 MB.Average speed: 69.0 KB/s for 223.8 KB. Total: 1.6 MB.Average speed: 55.4 KB/s for 125.5 KB. Total: 1.7 MB.Average speed: 49.6 KB/s for 131.2 KB. Total: 1.8 MB.Average speed: 65.7 KB/s for 245.2 KB. Total: 2.1 MB.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Expected size was: 256.0 MB.Downloaded 2.2 MB in 47 seconds.Calculated speed: 47.4 KB/s.Maximum instant speed reached: 198.2 KB/s----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Proxy detected: none----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Diagnosing http://filedelivery.nexusmods.com/1/2/256MB-1-0-1.rar?ttl=2147483647&setec=94cadea35b83be28c03f37ee675c2373--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Keep-Alive: timeout=10, max=100Connection: Keep-AliveX-HW: 1415687912.dop006.la2.t,1415687912.cds007.la2.cContent-Disposition: attachment; filename="256MB-1-0-1.rar"Accept-Ranges: bytesContent-Length: 268435456Cache-Control: max-age=30919276Content-Type: application/octet-stream; charset=binaryDate: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:38:32 GMTETag: "1413035840"Last-Modified: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 13:57:20 GMTStatus Description: OK.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Average speed: 99.1 KB/s for 594.6 KB. Total: 594.6 KB.Average speed: 91.4 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 845.5 KB.Average speed: 87.5 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 1.1 MB.Average speed: 106.5 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 1.4 MB.Average speed: 95.1 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 1.7 MB.Average speed: 89.4 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 1.9 MB.Average speed: 66.5 KB/s for 131.2 KB. Total: 2.1 MB.Average speed: 53.2 KB/s for 119.8 KB. Total: 2.2 MB.Average speed: 89.3 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 2.5 MB.Average speed: 100.5 KB/s for 335.1 KB. Total: 2.9 MB.Average speed: 119.9 KB/s for 417.8 KB. Total: 3.3 MB.Average speed: 101.8 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 3.5 MB.Average speed: 113.6 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 3.9 MB.Average speed: 119.5 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 4.3 MB.Average speed: 122.5 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 4.6 MB.Average speed: 124.0 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 5.0 MB.Average speed: 103.8 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 5.2 MB.Average speed: 102.8 KB/s for 305.1 KB. Total: 5.5 MB.Average speed: 84.2 KB/s for 196.8 KB. Total: 5.7 MB.Average speed: 84.9 KB/s for 256.6 KB. Total: 6.0 MB.Average speed: 83.3 KB/s for 245.2 KB. Total: 6.2 MB.Average speed: 42.4 KB/s for 4.3 KB. Total: 6.2 MB.Average speed: 93.7 KB/s for 434.9 KB. Total: 6.6 MB.Average speed: 88.7 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 6.9 MB.Average speed: 130.8 KB/s for 519.0 KB. Total: 7.4 MB.Average speed: 125.3 KB/s for 359.3 KB. Total: 7.7 MB.Average speed: 128.2 KB/s for 393.5 KB. Total: 8.1 MB.Average speed: 124.0 KB/s for 359.3 KB. Total: 8.5 MB.Average speed: 125.0 KB/s for 377.8 KB. Total: 8.9 MB.Average speed: 104.1 KB/s for 249.5 KB. Total: 9.1 MB.Average speed: 81.7 KB/s for 178.2 KB. Total: 9.3 MB.Average speed: 94.8 KB/s for 323.7 KB. Total: 9.6 MB.Average speed: 89.2 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 9.8 MB.Average speed: 65.5 KB/s for 125.5 KB. Total: 10.0 MB.Average speed: 74.6 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 10.2 MB.Average speed: 101.0 KB/s for 382.1 KB. Total: 10.6 MB.Average speed: 112.3 KB/s for 370.7 KB. Total: 10.9 MB.Average speed: 118.9 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 11.3 MB.Average speed: 164.0 KB/s for 627.3 KB. Total: 11.9 MB.Average speed: 123.8 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 12.2 MB.Average speed: 124.6 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 12.5 MB.Average speed: 83.2 KB/s for 125.5 KB. Total: 12.6 MB.Average speed: 104.4 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 13.0 MB.Average speed: 94.2 KB/s for 252.4 KB. Total: 13.3 MB.Average speed: 88.7 KB/s for 249.5 KB. Total: 13.5 MB.Average speed: 107.1 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 13.9 MB.Average speed: 116.3 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 14.2 MB.Average speed: 120.9 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 14.6 MB.Average speed: 144.1 KB/s for 501.9 KB. Total: 15.1 MB.Average speed: 113.9 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 15.3 MB.Average speed: 119.7 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 15.7 MB.Average speed: 122.6 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 16.1 MB.Average speed: 103.1 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 16.3 MB.Average speed: 114.3 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 16.7 MB.Average speed: 119.9 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 17.1 MB.Average speed: 102.7 KB/s for 256.6 KB. Total: 17.3 MB.Average speed: 108.4 KB/s for 342.2 KB. Total: 17.6 MB.Average speed: 100.8 KB/s for 279.5 KB. Total: 17.9 MB.Average speed: 92.2 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 18.2 MB.Average speed: 87.9 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 18.4 MB.Average speed: 149.2 KB/s for 631.6 KB. Total: 19.0 MB.Average speed: 140.4 KB/s for 394.9 KB. Total: 19.4 MB.Average speed: 129.4 KB/s for 355.0 KB. Total: 19.8 MB.Average speed: 106.3 KB/s for 249.5 KB. Total: 20.0 MB.Average speed: 96.9 KB/s for 262.3 KB. Total: 20.3 MB.Average speed: 109.3 KB/s for 365.0 KB. Total: 20.6 MB.Average speed: 96.5 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 20.9 MB.Average speed: 90.0 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 21.1 MB.Average speed: 96.8 KB/s for 310.8 KB. Total: 21.4 MB.Average speed: 81.2 KB/s for 196.8 KB. Total: 21.6 MB.Average speed: 81.5 KB/s for 245.2 KB. Total: 21.8 MB.Average speed: 103.5 KB/s for 376.4 KB. Total: 22.2 MB.Average speed: 93.6 KB/s for 250.9 KB. Total: 22.5 MB.Average speed: 89.6 KB/s for 256.6 KB. Total: 22.7 MB.Average speed: 85.6 KB/s for 245.2 KB. Total: 22.9 MB.Average speed: 43.5 KB/s for 4.3 KB. Total: 22.9 MB.Average speed: 83.8 KB/s for 372.1 KB. Total: 23.3 MB.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Expected size was: 256.0 MB.Downloaded 23.6 MB in 377 seconds.Calculated speed: 64.0 KB/s.Maximum instant speed reached: 210.5 KB/s-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.speedtest.net/result/3900111486.png I can do the whole test if necessary, but given that I have a ~10Mb/s I should be reaching speeds of at least 1MB/s, not 64-125KB/s. I figured it might be a temporary issue as even with the new CDN I wasn't downloading this slow.

Saying it's not a roleplaying mod is incredibly disingenuous when it's described exactly as such. The description enjoys enforcing the fact that it's a realistic roleplaying experience where "hardcore" is a common misconception but the truth is that Requiem is about as realistic as balls on a sheep. It's not a sheep if it has balls. Requiem aims to bring back the experience of games such as Baldur's Gate back on the table, but it the one thing that it fails at is build diversity, a feature found in every single D&D campaign ever made, a feature that is incredibly important to any sort of roleplaying game, particularly one based off on D&D. Say what you will about Requiem's difficulty, at the end of the day I can't reliably play from start to finish as a full mage character, one that utilizes things such as Illusion, Alteration and maybe a bit of Destruction. I can do this one I have gotten a few other important skills up, most notably Archery, Sneak and an Armor skill, but you cannot play a "pure" mage until you've played something else (either a armour-clad barbarian or an evasive bandit), which defeats the point of being "pure". I get that the game is hard, but there's such a thing as "overtuned". Every Overhaul mod has one thing in common, which is that it gets easier as time goes by and the hardest part is the start. Requiem is fantastic at mid-high levels because it scales out beautifully around this part to give you a great balance, where other combat mods like Skyrim Redone's or ASIS are generally lackluster at end-game as you amass too much power. The problem is just how exponential the gain is. Skyrim Redone's problem is that it starts off challenging and ends up being as faceroll as the original game, whereas Requiem's issue is that it starts off so insanely difficult that you'll likely lose that sanity before you get to anywhere near the point of being on an even footing with a simple bandit. Having the game be hard even at end-game is good and welcomed by numerous players, but having it be so hard at the start of the game whereupon you are pigeon-holed into a certain build is not. Even Dark Souls, a game that is renown for it's difficulty, can be beaten with sheer skill at the low levels. Requiem cannot, because Skyrim is just like any other RPG: A numbers game. A numbers game whereupon Requiem makes me want to run away from enemies more than actually engage them. I don't see how that's fun at all.

Old topic is old and I apologize but I have to reinforce yps' comment. I enjoy the new search results page but replace the hidden search with the old function would be absolutely lovely and easier to access.

It should be noted that you can maintain good user relations whilst still relying on shareholders, it's just much harder and doesn't happen often, generally because shareholders are far too stubborn. Same applies to utilizing ad revenue. It's a matter of self-control and knowing where priorities should lie. My belief is that the customer should always be first priority where possible since, quite simply, no customers eventually means no shareholders. This should be obvious, but somehow it isn't. Who wants to invest in a product nobody is interested in? It's never that simple, of course, I just believe it can be so much simpler and easier but people seem to enjoy complicating things far more. I would also argue that you can be a fine businessman without actually being one. Knowing how the industry works is different to juicing people for all their worth like a corrupt businessman. They're not mutually inclusive.

I would like to think that the Nexus also adheres to Fair Use laws, if you're wanting to be truly "fair" (which is really hard to do in regards to copyright since the laws are so ambiguous to begin with). I can easily argue that every image of in-game content from Dragon Age, The Witcher, Fallout or of The Elder Scrolls games that was not created by the image's author (which would mean anything from their characters models to the environment they're standing in) is copyright to Bethesda and that the entire Nexus Network infringes on their copyright by allowing such images to be displayed. This is a technicality that many fan-sites seem to conveniently forget about. A really good example would be the ZAM Network's database websites which use various copyrighted content from the various game owners and they do so for commercial use (ZAM isn't just out to provide a service, they also want to make money, and the Nexus is no different*). It's unlikely that Bethesda - or any game company - is going to ask you to take down the images but if they wanted to they could and would be well within their rights to do so. Let's take another example: YouTube. How many videos on YouTube have 100% original content? I haven't seen any. Even something as simple as a Let's Play video infringes on someone's copyright. The key point here is that many of them are used in fair use. Most videos or screenshots made are in tribute of a game (especially mods) rather than to make money off of them**, therefore they could be classified as being created under fair use. I don't see why StevoSegalovic couldn't merely claim the same if so many others do. Asking permission is obviously the first direct step you should take when using other peoples content, but if it's not possible to get in contact with a copyright owner than so long as you give credit to the original author of whatever content you used and you're not blatantly ripping it off to make money from it then I see no real issue with it. Modders and fansites have done it for years, continue to do it and will do it long past my death and will get away with it for various reasons (not the least being sites like these promote the game by supporting it with an active community and further replayability, therefore it's in Bethesda's best interests to keep the Nexus running, rather than shutting it down for arguably "petty" reasons). * I'm not saying that what the Nexus is doing is "wrong". Far from it. I strongly believe the number one priority for any business should be to make money. Providing a good service is all well and dandy but you don't tend to get very far when you've got no money. Without "premium" services or adverts none of these great websites would survive, so it's only natural they want to make some money to counteract the costs of management. ** This usually differs from a websites motive (which usually is for commercial gain). Gaming networks like the Nexus, Curse's branch of websites or the ZAM network, whilst profiting of other peoples work also tend to be a great benefit to the original content owner anyway, as said above. It's free publicity, if nothing else, and that alone usually leads to more sales to the original owner (I know lots of people who buy Bethesda's games on PC because of the mods).

As others have said: Depends on the mods. Some mods conflict, others don't. The biggest problem you'll face when having a lot of mods is troubleshooting when conflicts do arise (and they're inevitable if you keep adding more like me). I tend to spend more time downloading and troubleshooting mods than I do actually playing the game. Though that doesn't worry me too much, since I love checking out new mods as much as I enjoy actually playing them (don't ask why, I don't know).

Wait... what? Wouldn't it make sense that the creator of a game engine would be the owner of said game engine? If not them then at least their publishers? In either case it wouldn't be the players. I agree with everything else you said, though: Using someone else's tools doesn't mean they own the rights to what you created.

Copyright law is arguably the most iffy and ambiguously confusing subject in law.

TL;DR: I have no problem with the negative nancies so long as they don't go around insulting people. There will always be the ignorant posters who wish to rant and moan without putting forth any constructive comments but these people shouldn't be outright banned just because they have problems with something. Everyone has problems with something, banning someone because of them is a pathetic knee-jerk reaction. It is better to ignore them and carry on rather than feed their hatred with replies. "Common courtesy" and "ranting" should be properly defined in the context the OP is questioning. Common forum etiquette generally dictates not to harass or grief fellow forum members for any reason. Being rude, ignorant or not using common sense tends to go against common courtesy rules and is usually a bannable offensive on most forums I've been parley too. Ranting, on the other hand, is completely different. Expressing negative opinions about a game, a mod or any other topic is a matter of personal opinion and should not be against the rules. Punishing someone because you do not agree with them is a pathetic knee-jerk reaction. You'll always get negative people in a group environment - those people who can only see the bad in everything - but so long as they're not outright insulting somebody for their views then it should never be against the rules. No member of any society should be bashed for their opinions, as those who complain are just important as those who don't. Afterall, if nobody complained, how could we ever hope to improve? Like I said though, common courtesy and simple ranting are two, very distinct subjects. I rant all the time without aiming insults at any particular person and that's the key thing people should keep in mind. Criticism should never be shunned so long as it's constructive. Merely stating you dislike something for no reason isn't constructive and is completely non-conducive to any topic. It is, simply put, a waste of time. I don't consider such responses insulting but I also don't believe they coincide with "common courtesy", either. Likewise, it should be obvious that if a person is ranting but insulting somebody at the same time, this wouldn't be classified as courteous at all.

Unless you happen to be cheating in one of their games. In that case, they'll ban you without a second thought. As a tip for the future: Don't warn nor tell people when or if you plan to report them. Just report them and move on. Nothing good ever comes from reporting them. You may think you're "helping" by telling them what they did is wrong but these people already know that and most of them really don't care.

" "