FrankFamily

I'm saying "no it's not" to the part I highlighted, i.e. "Sure, it's an 'official' mod, but, a mod none-the-less.", in which you indeed contradicted your first sentence, which I agree with, the difference is who publishes. Which makes Creation Club not mods. I don't think it's as simple as "something that modifies the game is a mod" or "if you download it it's a dlc", things have more complicated meaning than that. Because nobody calls official patches "mods" and nobody calls expansions like Far Harbour or Dawnguard "mods" and mods in the Nexus are not dlcs because you download them. It's about being consistent. And people absolutely do not use them interchangeably. Intentional or not, calling them "mods" does nothing but contribute to the confusion.

No, it is not. Because precisely the difference between a mod and a dlc, by every single definition I have ever seen, is who provides it, as you said at the begining. Or, in other words, if it's official or not. And that's the definition widely used and understood except in this niche of people which insist on calling CC mods. The size is not a factor, because it makes no sense for it to be. I would remind everyone again of CDPR's so called "Free DLC's" for TW3 which are quite tiny and which I haven't seen anyone have a problem with the naming. Interestingly sometimes their big DLCs are called "Expansion packs" instead to differentiate them which is perfecly fine. There's also Morrowind, which had some small "Plugins" and then the "Expansions" both official. The plugins were small, not called mods. And you could also look at massive mods which are still mods. Call the pip-boy skins microtransactions if it makes you more comfortable than calling them dlcs but calling them mods is just incorrect. Everyone calls the Atom Shop in FO76 microtransactions, again, not mods. This has nothing to do with it being good or bad or worth the money or the official support being better than unofficial supports or with my or anyone's opinion of it. It's simply about using language that actually makes sense and is consistent and people understand what you are refering to. Calling them "mods" ignores fundamental differences for no reason because there's increadibly better terms for it, like "Small DLCs", there, no confusion whatsoever. Everyone is going to understand it as official content provided by the publisher that's smaller than what you'd expect as a "DLC", particulary a DLC from Bethesda, which you expect to be an "Expansion". Or if you want to add some negative connotation then go for "Microtransactions". Everyone is going to understand what it is. If you call them mods they actually won't. If you call them mods you create a plethora of misunderstanding like I have personally seen in reddit on ridiculous amounts. Most people in this community don't have the slightest idea of what they are talking about when it comes to Creation Club. You get people describing Creation Club as if it was the so-called "paid mods 1.0", saying things like existing mods being put behing a paywall, or talking of the percentage the modder gets, asuming there's no involvement by Bethesda, and all sorts of misinformation being thrown about it, that all stems from the fact that people have been using inaccurate language to describe it. And so people that don't do any research at all before opening their big mouth are confused, get the wrong impression and continue the cycle of spreading misinformation. Of course, and this is with my tin-foil hat on, perhaps the people who insist on callling it mods want precisely that, to have misinformed people that can be easily manipulated into thinking negatively about it to push their agenda of hatred. That would be pretty reprehensible, wouldn't it?

It's a means to sell content. That they have cherry picked from a pool of people that are already familiar with your tools because they use them in their free time and therefore require close to zero training to produce content you can use is logical I guess. I don't see the relation of that to monetization of mods.

The source of the definitions of "mod" and "DLC" is whatever google gave me, which is indeed probably from wikipedia, they are really wide-spread definitions anyway. You are free to properly source a better definition but I'd doubt any wouldn't classify a mod as third-party fan-made content and a DLC as published by whatever company publishes the game or has some sort of bussiness arrangement with said company. As for the second matter, I think it's important to have the full quote. From https://creationclub.bethesda.net/en: It does not say it's solely created by community creators, quite the opposite in fact. Which really makes the argument for calling it mods very weak. I think it's clear that if there was no community creator involvement at all people wouldn't call them mods. Same as people don't call Fallout 76's atom shop content mods, they call it microtransactions. But then they go and call Creation Club mods because a portion of it was made by people that in their free time have made mods, which is, honestly, nonsense. And, in any case, as Shadowheard point outs, does it actually matter if they are community creators? They've been contracted by Bethesda to create that content. So, beyond what the marketing says, I think they aren't acting as community creators / modders when they are making that content, they are acting as simply contractors.

Research should be correct and use precise unbiased language. Unless you want to do a paid-mods internet discussion, which is fine but you really need to decide which you wish to do and act accordingly. The definition of the word "mod" one can find on the internet very quickly, and which coincides with how most people use it, is: "A mod (short for "modification") is an alteration by players or fans of a video game that changes one or more aspects of a video game, such as how it looks or behaves." (bolded the relevant piece of information). Then, what's actually a "player/fan"? We should define that a bit. Certainly not just someone that plays the game because developers do just that, does that make official updates to the game "mods"? Of course it doesn't, because the update is developed by people that are being paid by the company that owns the game to make it and/or it's being published by them. It's, as globally understood, "official" content. DLC's are also not considered mods for the same reason. DLC stands for "downloadable content" and one definition is: "Downloadable content is additional content created for an already released video game, distributed through the Internet by the game's publisher." Note it makes no mention of size of the content. As an example of small DLC content we could look at the free DLCs released by CDPR for The Witcher 3. Some being a horse armor set. They are free, they are small and they are DLCs, not mods because they are published by CDPR. On the other end of the spectrum you could look at Skyblivion. It's massive, it's a mod. Because it's made and will eventually be published by fans, it's not official. So, finally arriving at the point. How is it that you are including Betheada's Creation Club as an example of mod monetization? Do you know who publishes creation club content? Bethesda (the game'a developer) does. Do you know who develops the content? Bethesda's employees and its contractors. We have already established how facts like the employees/contractors playing the game, liking the game or even also publishing mods of their own in their free time, doesn't mean they operate as "fans/players" when they develop the specific content for which they have been contracted to develop by the publisher/developer of the game itself. TLDR: Bethesda's Creation Club, leaving memes and internet rants where they belong, is not actually "mods", it is DLCs. And therefore it is an incorrect example of "mod monetization". I must say, no offense intented but not correctly identifying the subject of your research is not a great start and likely taints any filled survey. Addendum: If you want actual examples of "mod monetization" you should look into the Patreon pages some modders run, or, more indirectly, this site.

A you kidding me? What about the authors of the mods that get included in such a package? Don't you think they deserve infinitely more recognition then some dude who spends maybe half a day piling mods together that took weeks or even months to make? That's just insulting. Don't be silly... obviously xxxKnobGobxxx_69 making s*** videos on YT is far worthier than MAs are. From the perspective of the user who isn't seeing the complete picture, quite possibly, yes. They only see the last link in the chain, so naturally that's where they will put the worth of what they received. Users have had to search for mods and install mods and so understand the effort and time required to make a good setup, naturally, they will value if that is made easier by modpacks and youtubers sharing lists. They haven't had to make mods since they've always been given to them, so not only they have absolutely no clue of the effort or time involved (so how could the author expect them to value the mods fairly?) but it's also not "saving" them anything. Therefore, less, or even zero, perceived value. At least that's one way to look at it.

You try casting it as that type, if it isn't it will be None, I think you need to cast to MiscObject first, at least the wiki says key extends MiscObject and then that extends form. So, something like this: If (whatever as MiscObject) as Key ;It should be a key

Can you upload the nif somewhere to give it a look?

Wow, you've understood nothing I've written. I must be explaining myself poorly. Dictionary definitions are irrelevant to this discussion precisely common language and interpretation of it is different than dictionaries. What matters when the Nexus says "Ad-free" is (A): What the nexus means by that and (B): what most people interpret from it. As said, what a dictionary says about it is irrelevant. (A) matters because that's what you are going to get and (B) matters because if it doesnt match (A) then the Nexus should change how they are communicating to clarify it for most people. The thing is, your understanding of language is not the common understanding as far as I can tell. I'm fairly sure a majority of people understand "Ad" to be the same the thing that the Nexus meant, third party advertisement and it obviously doesnt include them trying to get you to buy their premium membership or use their mod managers or the mods themselves, even if by the strict definition of a dictionary it would include all those. Apparently only a few, you included, supposedly understood "Ad" to include the premium membership annoying window because it bothers you. And then you here are trying to support it applying definitions when its convenient.

Ok, let's follow those definitions, completely. If you are supporter then you must have an ad-free experience, that is not be presented with any advertisement at all, advertisement is "the action of calling something to the attention of the public". Mods are being advertised on the site and must therefore be removed for supporters, right?. Supporters should see no mods in the Nexus then, just a blank front page? Obviously not, because dictionary definitions are useless and irrelevant in this discussion. You want "Ad-free" to include the promotion of premium membership but still be advertised mods when you use the site. That's fine, but as arbitrary as any other interpretation, and, more importantly, it seems to be a different interpretation than the Nexus and some other people have, myself included, when I paid supporter my understanding of what I was buying was clear and seems to match perfectly what I've got. I certainly didn't expect it to remove any promotion of premium membership for the site, full page or not full page. The logical way to remove that is to buy a premium membership. And I also didn't expect it would remove banners for their own mod manager. Maybe the time to seek clarification of definitions was before buying, instead of making assumptions then and demands now, just a thought.

Like in the other thread, I think its generally understood that when a site refers to ads they mean advertisement of third-party services and products, not promotion of their own service in the form of premium memberships. To be clear, I dont like the slow download/fast download thing at all. But saying that "ad-free" is now not accurate or, as another user did, that they are breaching contracts is a bit of a stretch in my opinion.

There might be a better method but you could just script the damage, I had to do a similar thing once and it's what I did. Start a loop when it's equipped and on each update damage the player by certain amount and maybe play some visual effect like burning or whatever, just make sure to stop the effect when the damage ends. Relevant documentation: https://www.creationkit.com/index.php?title=Play_-_EffectShader https://www.creationkit.com/index.php?title=Stop_-_EffectShader https://www.creationkit.com/index.php?title=DamageActorValue_-_Actor https://www.creationkit.com/index.php?title=RegisterForSingleUpdate_-_Form https://www.creationkit.com/index.php?title=OnUpdate_-_Form

To me, personally, the DP system is way better than direct donations. I've done some numbers for my period of feb2019-oct2019: > I've received 4 times as much through DP than direct donations, both because the "pie" to share is larger and because the percentage I've got of that pie (going from the numbers provided by Dark0ne above for that period) is twice as large for DP, that's naturally going to change for other authors. I suppose my mods are not very game-changing so while people use them they are not as likely to donate to me personally as to other authors. > Since each payment is for a month and therefore, bigger, the average cut paypal gets drops by 30% percent. A lot of the individual donations I get are 5 dollars or lower and in those Paypal is a bit extreme, getting as much as 20% of the transaction and everything counts. > DP is a lot more stable, individual donations vary a lot month to month, so it's harder to predict. Stability is always good. For example I've found that direct donations are heavily affected by releases I make while downloads and therefore DPs remain at a similar level even I haven't released anything in a while. So, conclusion, even if DPs were to eventually eat all the individual donations and all users that now donate to individual authors donated to the mod author patreon fund instead, I don't think that would be bad for authors. Presumably the DP pool would grow if more people donate the to that, in addition to possible increases of the amount the Nexus puts in it and there's still the 2º and 3º points I've mentioned. Receiving the money monthly is simply better. And, of course, what is happening is that it isn't replacing, it's in addition to direct donations. I, personally, haven't noticed a significant drop in those from before DPs were implemented.

Weird stuff with textures when altering zoom: first thing to check is that all your texture have mipmaps, whatever software you are using to save dds files there should be an option for that.

First thing I thought was that maybe 2.7 was the boost clock, it's common to advertise that instead of the base clock. And this would confirm that theory: https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/128990/intel-pentium-silver-n5000-processor-4m-cache-up-to-2-70-ghz.html

You have WornHasKeyword which should trigger for both armor and weapons, you can use it to check for the weapon material keywords.

I guess the reason is probably that the feature is meant to speed up porting of existing oldrim mods and most people supporting both are going to make LE first and then port it to SSE so the mod pages might as well follow that, there's less need of the inverse. Might have more luck posting on the nexus feedback subforum though: https://forums.nexusmods.com/index.php?/forum/380-nexus-feedback-and-talk/

Gaming performance? Most likely you are better off going for the gpu upgrade. One way to look at this is how much of a bottleneck you would have if you upgraded one or other: https://pc-builds.com/calculator/Core_i3-4150/GeForce_GTX_960/0Ak0Oelu/8/ https://pc-builds.com/calculator/Core_i7-4790/GeForce_GTX_750_Ti/0zU0Jplu/8/ According to this you would have massive bottlenecking if you upgrade cpu and stay on that gpu. Still bottleneck with the gpu upgrade but way less significant. The site also does upgrade recommendations, maybe it's useful. Edit, wait actually the fps seem much higher in with the CPU upgrade, yeah maybe the cpu you have is really the problem.

First of all, the syntax for your event is wrong, it's just "Event OnWhatever()", not "OnEvent OnWhatever()" Check here for correct syntax: http://www.creationkit.com/index.php?title=Category:Papyrus I think this would be way simpler if you explain what you seek to accomplish with this script. I've read through it and I honestly have no idea. A large amount of code seems redundant. Consider if you actually need multiple scripts. That said, here's an example of comunication between two scripts that may help: Scriptname MyEventScript extends activemagiceffect MySuperScript Property ScriptThatHandlesStuff Auto; This is a startgame-enabled quest with the script MySuperScript attached. You want a quest because you can make a reference to it. Event OnEffectStart(Actor akTarget, Actor akCaster) Int DataToPass = whatever ;obtain some data Int ReturnValue = ScriptThatHandlesStuff.MyFunction(DataToPass) ;call my function passing the data we collected and save to an integer what is returned Int Whatever = ReturnValue + 847 ; do stuff with what was returned EndEvent ------------------------ ScriptName MySuperScript extends Quest Int Function MyFunction(Int data); function that takes an integer (data) and returns another int. StuffToReturn = data * 847 ;do some stuff with data Return StuffToReturn ; this is what the other script receives EndFunction You cannot make this with two activemagiceffect scripts because you can't obtain a reference to it on the fly. Again though, consider if you actually need two scripts.

Well, copyright expires 70 years after the author's death (iirc & ianal), so I guess that's a valid answer.

I think the script is correct, I don't see anything wrong with it anyway. You don't need to make an array with "new" if you have it defined as a property, that should work fine. I'd check if your array is properly filled with the armor forms. I'd also check that the effect is running on your intended target with a debug message right after OnEffectStart. You can also print the array itself, it will show the first elements so you can check if it's correctly filled. Basically put debug statements everywhere to see what is running and where the problem is.

Even if it "worked" just copying the branch (which i haven't tested). It's not going to animate with the armor/bow for obvious reasons, that's what the skin is for. So, i guess, for the case of a bow only if want to add something to a part of the bow that doesn't bend at all, which is really only going to be where the hand is; or you actually want the object to float ignoring the bow; then it might work. Or you could skin it properly, which is a tried and tested method and not actually complicated. I can give directions for 3dsmax, I haven't used blender in years unfortunately. Tutorials about armor largely apply, it's really the same process.

Bows are skinned, like armor, which you cannot do in nifskope so use blender or maybe outfit studio.

You do see how your (and everyone's) perception of what is good is entirely subjective, right? And also, the fact that you could write a novel about what's wrong with Skyrim from a design perspective doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with it from a design perspective. Not without your credentials as an expert in game design at very least, and even then it would probably be your opinion and should be taken with a grain of salt. Not to bash your opinion at all by the way. I actually agree with a lot of what you said and I'd have liked very much if it had meaningful decisions for instance or having to commit to a particular class and having limitations as a consequence. I think limitations make for really fun gameplay and stories. Many people are using "this is good" as a synonym of "this I like" and they are not the same thing. We first need to actually define what is a "good" game, preferably in an objective manner. And since a game is a product to be sold for profit it isn't very stupid to simply consider a good game a game that sold well, that's its purpose. For the same reason perhaps Justin Bieber's songs are actually good, I don't like them but, again, those are very different. Perhaps we should use the opinions of critics and game journalists to determine what is good. Perhaps the opinions of many people, steam reviews?. If the game had been done in the manner that I (or you or anyone else) personally would have liked it the most, would it have been a good game? Certainly in my opinion but would it have sold as well? Would it have provided the same amount of entertainment to the same amount of people or less? None of that is immediately obvious and sure, it would be nice to think I absolutely know how they should have made the game but it would also be quite naive. After all, we are just random people in the internet thinking how something should have been done after the fact having had years to reflect on its issues and without having to actually test our theories and no money being risked or boundaries. The people who actually made it did not have those luxuries. And the same applies to future games. If ES6 was done in the way i think it should be done would it be good? maybe not. So, I guess, all I'm saying is: let's not fall into putting our subjective opinions as something other than subjective opinions.

I don't think there's any problem with referencing a property multiple times in a function, this must be something else. What variable gives the error now that "temperatureBurst" doesn't exist? Also, the code tag for some reason adds alternating white background to the lines which makes it very uncomfortable to read.