MarchinBunny

It's best to ignore them to be perfectly honest. There was a point where I was about to respond to them as well, but I ended up just deleting what I was going to say because to be frank, it's a waste of time. He only ever wants to cause trouble, and never seems to offer any sort of meaningful discussion. You can easily tell this simply because his comments never actually include anything related to the topic and is just always him pointing fingers or throwing shade at someone else he doesn't agree with. Also, his claim "Nope, they left all the negative posts towards mod authors intact, and removed the others." isn't even true. Even his own comments are still around. Suppose I should also point out, there are no negative posts about mod authors either as far as I am aware.

Topographic Programms for example, 3D Design Software for Architecture etc. etc. It's unlikely any software is unhackable. Whether or not a hack exists though is going to depend on how useful said application is within a certain space (mainly for personal use). For example, those apps might not have been hacked simply due to those who typically would use them, have no reason to pirate them. The only people I could see pirating them would be college students, but most colleges that teach architecture typically provides the software on the computer that you would be using. And if you wanted to buy it yourself, most colleges have programs that allow you to get it at discount. Back when I was attending college, I took an architecture class that used Revit. No idea on whether it's been hacked or not, but if it hasn't ... I could only assume that would be the reason. I can't ever see using that kind of program for personal use.

As I said before, they have never striked me as the type to be that hard in terms of dealing with mod authors. They do something some don't like, and then all of a sudden now we should expect the worst from them? Maybe... but I personally don't think so. If you don't like it, and had time to remove your mods, you can't complain and act like this is being done against your will or as if they are taking your rights away. First of all, they literally have gone over how this works. I am not even going to bother arguing here about this since you can literally learn about it here, and spoiler alert ... you are wrong. https://www.nexusmods.com/news/14568 First of all, to me it sounds like you don't even know what collections are. All they are is a group of mods, not something that modifies your mod specifically. Sure, you can have multiple mods together and they could interact with your mod. But collections are not what allows that to happen, that can be done regardless of collections by literally anyone as long as they can install those mods together. So sorry, but I don't see your point here. Anyone could even include your mod in just a list and do the exact same thing. It sounds like a ridiculous complaint. Don't want anyone ever doing anything naughty with companions you release? Then you should probably just not release them. And you have control on whether or not you post your work here. You can't complain if you post it here while knowing what it means. That isn't your rights being taken, that is YOU giving nexus permission. Don't want that stuff to happen, then don't post it here. It's common freaking sense. Just don't post it. Like if it concerns you that much that your mod could possibly be grouped with other mods you don't like, you probably shouldn't release them at all. No, it's not short sighted because it's entirely preventable. Don't post your work on a site that has a ToS you don't agree with.

I am fairly certain they will allow others to pull out if they were inactive at the time, came back and then learned of it. Nexus never strikes me as unreasonable when it comes to mod authors. But with that said, they did do some things in the wrong order, but ya ... not a whole lot one can do about events that have already passed XD.

The issue is, when you give permission to someone or service to be able to use your content indefinitely, that still counts as you giving permission for them to be able to do that. So while you are right, it's only because permission was given. Your best bet to avoid things like this is to just be very careful where you post your content, making sure you read the ToS. This is something all creators should do.

Who does not understand here has been obvious since the beginning of the discussion. You can argue your point of view further as much as you want, it will not change the facts. As soon as a mod author has uploaded his work, he can no longer decide how his work is used by Nexus. He cannot even determine which version of his mod is used by collections. So in theory he has kept his rights, but he cannot apply them in any way. That's the reality. No more and no less. Take us all a favor and keep your wisdom in the future for you. Most of your explanations are simply worthless. That is how copyright law works. If you give permission to someone to use your work (whether that be through using a service like Nexus, or outright giving permission directly), than that means they can use it. And it's not taking away any of your own rights. The only way your own rights can be taken away is if you give someone else the copyright in its entirety. Don't care if you think my explanations are worthless. They are true nonetheless.

..or move to another machine.....or upload to distribute the game.... DRM free does not mean freely steal the game (or provide the means to, as in this case). One of the main issues is I don't use GOG, so I have no idea exactly what methods they use to try and prevent you from copy and pasting a game freely to wherever you want. But just based on the idea that the games are DRM free, that to me suggests they don't do anything to really prevent it. So I would imagine most if not all games from GOG can just be copied and pasted. Am I wrong about that? Pretty certain you don't even need GOG to run the games you install based on what I am reading. If this is a case where a game creates a registry entry to identify a "cd key" of some sort (kinda old school, do they still do that?), then to me that suggests someone wouldn't need to go through downloading this mod if their intention was to pirate it, all they would need is the key and installer, which as far as I am aware, both are available through GOG without the use of the mod. If this is a case where the registry for some reason holds the file path, then that mod doesn't even need to exist, anyone can access the registry and change this just as they can a cd key. To me it just sounds like it's meant to make it more convenient to move the game rather than "pirate" it.

I would say it depends. Are those registry entries meant to be some sort of sage guard against piracy? If it's a mod breaking DRM, then I would see that as suspect (but pretty sure all GOG games are DRM free). But if the registry entries being avoided, are not necessarily meant to be DRM and is just the way the game installs itself, then I don't see a problem. Such a thing would be just to be able to move to another folder, as not being able to move your game to another drive is a major pain.

Not really true, or rather you are explaining it poorly. You are not giving up any rights away, you still have all your own rights to your own work. What you are doing is giving them permission to use your work, for the purpose of use on this site, that's it. It's not as if they can just take your work and do anything they want with it. The ToS is strictly for usage on this site and you already know what they want to use it for, in this case collections. Claiming your rights are being taken away, is overly dramatic and total nonsense. We get it, you don't like it. But if you want to discuss these things, then discuss them in a way that doesn't over exaggerate the reality of what is actually occuring. Giving up all rights to your work, would suggest you no longer have the ability to distribute your own work. Like as if it's no longer owned by you. Like as if you gave away the copyright. When in reality, all that is happening is you are granting them permission to use the content you willingly chose to upload. Don't want to give them permission? Then don't upload it. And if someone doesn't read the ToS, they only have themselves to blame. If you care about your work that much, then you SHOULD be reading the ToS of where you upload that work.

The internet in my opinion is a big a part of the problem. Before the internet existed, those who tried to spread conspiracies had to do so publicly to some degree, and it was pretty difficult for anyone interested to show that interest due to how that would affect their public image. Plus, with a smaller population, and information typically being restricted fairly locally outside of TV and Radio ... things just didn't spread like they do today. Though that did have it's own problems where the media was able to control information pretty much entirely and they have not been known to be above spreading false info either (though it was far more controlled than say ... the internet). Today we live in a world where false info is spread on a pretty consistent bases, and now it's also far easier for people to communicate across the world about their conspiracies with like minded people while staying anonymous. Basically the internet is one of the greatest tools invented for spreading information but is also one of the worst invented because it's just as easy to spread misinformation. Most people are terrible at sifting through the crap, and will typically only ever listen and search for those who confirm already existing beliefs, and shut out anyone who tries to combat their views. You have ignore, block, shadow ban, etc ... and these days most people use it to filter out anything they don't want to hear. It's become an echo chamber. See, I personally have had to deal with a conspiracy theorist all the time because my Mom just believes anything she sees or hears on the internet as long as it aligns with the idea that the world is coming to an end. It's honestly frustrating and stressful to have to deal with. She seriously once sent me a video of some guy claiming covid was caused by 5g. I then had to point out how the equipment in the video was an old cable television box. But of course, I don't know what I am talking about in her mind. I am just a telecom trade degree grad, but sure lol. Honestly, I hate misinformation. Kindly name any Liberal who has been censored or banned on Twitter, YouTube, Google or Facebook. The cancel culture is a liberal creature. Nice try but the left most closely resembles Nazi Germany of the 1930's. The left's modus operandi is indoctrination of the youth before they have the ability to realize that they are being used in a much larger game. Doxing, boycotts and racial stereotyping are left wing tactics that Goebbels would approve of. ANTIFA are your Brown Shirt SA street thugs. You lot decry Voter ID but are perfectly willing to mandate Vaccination ID's. Liberal hypocrisy seeming has no bounds or shame for that matter.. Something very important to learn is not everyone on the left is the same, just as not everyone on the right is the same. It's impossible to group all views into strictly a two party system. So I wish people would stop doing this whole ... the left does this or the right does that. Both sides look terrible when you compare them by their worst members. Edit: BTW, this is a response to both of you.

I defend it because I disagree with you, and don't think it's "hopelessly" wrong. I just think a lot of you don't actually understand what would be required for a collection system to work well enough. I always keep pointing to minecraft as an example, but I already know you all don't want to hear it. All you want to hear is agreement. As far as I am aware, no one has provided an alternative way in doing this that doesn't have problems. The reason the archiving system works best is because a curator needs access to older versions of mods in order to maintain the collection properly. Without having those older versions, it means anytime something goes wrong with a single mod, they would either have to wait for it to get fixed (while in the meantime the collection is no longer working) or they would have to remove the mod from the collection till it's fixed. Mind you, depending on the mod and collection, removing it might not be an option. Now consider for newer games where mod creation is occurring constantly, and updates are released daily. How would anyone physically be able to keep up? We are not just talking about updating the mods in the collection and releasing it. No, curating a collection properly entails testing it too. And having to do that every single day in a list that may contain 100s of mods, just isn't feasible if you want the system to work well. Plus again, the moment one mod runs into an issue, then what? It's not a good collection system if they keep breaking every day. Have you never gone through a process of maintaining a collection? No? Well I have. If you honestly think I am wrong, then explain how you would avoid these problems without an archiving system. I will, and I am sure I am not the only one. If Nexus actually felt like no one was going to continue, they would have backtracked already. The reason they have not is because it's nowhere near as big of an issue as you seem to think it is. There are still mods being uploaded every single day. Also, not sure why you are bringing up the Cathedral view, nothing Nexus is doing is really what I would call a Cathedral, quite far from it. Well, only time will tell. Personally, I don't see the problem.

Oh ya, honestly BGS gets way more flack than they deserve when it comes to bugs. I think my only complaint has ever been the crashes, but that as far as I can tell from their most recent games seem to be a thing of the past. Don't think I crashed even once playing Special Edition or Fallout 4. Without the archiving system, there is no way it would work 100% of the time. The archiving system is needed if you want a collection system that functions well enough. With newer games, many mods tend to be updated daily, and without an archiving system, the collection would break every time that happened, till the curator goes through and updates the list. And if one mod introduces an incompatibility with another mod, or bug ... there would be very little the curator could do about it, until it's either fixed or they remove the mod from the collection. Being able to go back a version for mods, is imperative for a good collection system.

They kept answering the questions that were being asked, it just so happens the answers were already given in the announcement lol. As for forcing, no one is forcing anyone to go along with the cathedral way of modding. I not once suggested it should ever be forced. So I agree with you on that.

I would say my favorite old games are Sonic 2, Sonic 3, Sonic & Knuckles, Sonic Adventure 2 (Mainly for the Chao Garden) Super Mario Bros., Super Mario Bros. 3, Super Mario 64, Mario Kart 64, Mario Party Banjo-Kazooie Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time Diddy Kong Racing Conker's Bad Fur Day Half-Life StarCraft GTA: Vice City Now if I had to pick one, it would probably have to go with Legend of Zelda OoT. Honestly, the N64 days for me was the peak of gaming, it's when I played them constantly and every week played a new game from Blockbuster. Goldeneye 007, Buck Bumble, Pilot Wings, Gex 64: Enter the Gecko, Space Station Silicon Valley, Star Fox 64, Pokemon Snap, Pokemon Stadium, Yoshi's Story, Wave Race 64, Blast Corps, Snowboard kids ... There are just so freaking many games I played on that system, it's pretty insane when I think about it.

Except I did comment on the topic at hand, you just didn't read it all. It's at the bottom. See, here is another priceless example that it isn't me bringing these threads off topic, it's you all doing it and then trying to blame someone else for it. >.> ... Ya ... what a hypocrite.

The staff not participating is a bold faced lie. I have seen them come in an explain things a few times, and then I have seen you all ignore literally everything they said while also some even going as far as insulting them. Sure it might not be a back and forth like you want from them, but that is likely because they know it's just going to go in circles, because it does. And that is still called a dialogue, even if they are firm on their choice and only responded once or twice. You blame literally everything on anyone who disagrees with you instead of actually being honest and just going back and looking to see who brought the subject up. But sure, it was me even though it was WileCoyote68 who brought it up. This is why the staff didn't bother going back and forth with you all like you wanted, cause this is about the level of conversation they would get from it. This is also likely why you all are not as convincing as you think you are, and instead it just comes off as if you are ... for lack of better word ... throwing a tantrum. The amount of disrespect some of you throw around is just beyond communication and is what makes things go in circles. Indeed, because humans have their habits and views that are developed by their environment. It's difficult to really change how someone thinks, or to get them to try anything different. I personally, think it would work fine in modding if it was just given a fair shot.

That would be like me saying "I don't know anyone apart from control freaks, and drama queens who think what is happening is bad". If I were to say that legitimately, as if I really believed it instead of as an example, wouldn't that bother you? If so, realize that is the kind of argument you just made. It's belittling other people's views by placing a label on them so it's easier to ignore their arguments and act as if they are less important. It's essentially an ad hominem combined with a bit of condescension. It's also an oxymoron because it's equivalent to saying "I don't know anyone who disagrees with me except for those who disagree with me".

I agree, but ... well, in the case of recent events, there has been plenty of dialogue, and doesn't seem to be suppressed in a doctorial manner. Everyone had quite a long time to discuss things. Just because Nexus didn't change their mind doesn't mean there wasn't dialogue.

Wow! You realize HeyYou also has disagreed with me on many things, right? Acting like they are me just because you disagree with them is on a whole other level of silly. But in this particular case, I agree with HeyYou, since using older versions of games is actually fairly common practice across the board. For example, BGS games in particular .. any time they added crap to the creation club, it would cause issues if your game updated. Then you would have to wait for the SKSE version to update too, and maybe even some mods. Which is why, there were mods even made to make a backup incase steam updated the game, you can replace the exe with the backup and bring the game back down a version. Course the other method would be to use steam's console, and you can download pretty much any of the previous versions of a game. Last but not least, Nexus isn't just a site for BGS games and they want it to all work with every game that is supported by Vortex. There are tons of reasons why someone may hold back on updating their game. Bugs, performance issues, mods not being updated yet, etc. I also think being able to sort mods by what version of the game they are for would be useful as it would also aid in the ability to sort out any mods that have not been updated or checked for the latest version. Plus in cases for games where it's more common practice to use older versions of the game, I think this would just be extremely useful.

I was just pointing out there seems to be a miscommunication going on here between people. On one end of the conversation we have people discussing statistics and how BGS games would be perfectly fine even without modding as most who play them don't actually mod (this was brought up due to a user claiming the games would be dead without modding), while on the other end we have those who seems to be arguing that, for them ... the game would be dead. Which is fine, but is entirely unrelated to the actual context of why it was brought up. How one personally feels doesn't change the statistics that exist. It's a fact that many people love BGS games, even without mods, and many still even play it today, even without mods. It's why Skyrim for example is able to be resold over and over again. People love it. Right, the argument was never that modding doesn't add longevity, the entire argument was just against the one comment about the games being long dead without modding. Which just isn't true based on the numbers.

The point would be that if the site goes under, you still remain entirely in control. Given that most here prefer that control. As for those who don't want to do things that way, they don't have to. It's already been said time and time again, just don't use the platform you disagree with, it's not complicated. Edit: Although this entire discussion really doesn't matter much since I doubt Nexus is even going the route of a Cathedral view anyway. Great argument! :3 Edit: Also, hope you have a good day as well. Thank you.

I don't really think it would lead to many legal problems if it was done the right way. There are many ways to go about a cathedral view. For example, you can limit the licensing to a single site. So it would be a cathedral on that site, but anywhere else, it would be upheld all the same like any other copyrighted work. Meaning the mod author still retains pretty much full control over the work itself outside of the cathedral. Now if we are talking about using other's work that isn't a part of the cathedral in a mod you want to include in the cathedral, obviously you would need to get permission for that. Which personally, I think is way more palatable when you know the licensing is limited to a single site. Whereas if there wasn't that limit, I suspect many would just say no. As far as I am aware, it hasn't even been tried fully. So I doubt it's been proven not to work. I also don't think it's fair to compare it to communism, because communism is a similar system (would even argue a few step further) but in place where money is a part of it, which I already explained when money is involved ... things become way more complicated and don't think cathedrals work well in that situation. Making mods is a unique situation though where you can't make money off of it directly. The most you can do is put up a patreon and hope some are willing to support the work you do through donations, or get donations through a site like Nexus. The only way you can ever say it's proven not to work is if this system was given it's fair chance within the modding community. Until then, it's just an assumption. Going to be honest, hiding the mods does absolutely nothing. Those who redistributed it already have a copy of it anyway, how else do you think they uploaded it in the first place? The only thing that hiding your mod does is prevents everyone from downloading your mod for that time period ... for pretty much no reason. At least I can't think of a single scenario where it makes sense. If you are afraid they may recruit more people to download your mod to reupload it to the site, they could do that with the copy they already have. If your concern is that some random person unrelated to the uploader would also upload it to that site, then you are being overly cautious. The chances of that occurring are really low, and to be frank can happen as soon as you put the mod back up anyway. If your concern was they would upload your other mods, if they were planning to they likely already have downloaded those mods too. Maybe I am missing something and you can explain exactly what hiding your mods prevents in such situations. Cause to me it just comes off as a self perceived benefit that actually doesn't do anything at all, it's just something you convinced yourself does something like a placebo.

I am pretty big on the cathedral view, mainly because I entirely agree with Wrye. However, I think it's honestly a bit of a fantasy, one of those kinds of things that is too good to be true, idealistic. I find the main reason it would never actually work is because it practically requires everyone to be on the same page in terms of usage. The simple truth is most people like to keep things they make under their control, at least as much as they legally can. The reason I never understood the whole "I want to maintain control over my mod" sort of thing is because I don't see a whole lot of benefit that comes out of that. It makes sense when money is involved and a copyright needs to be maintained, but when there isn't any money involved ... you would think the only thing that is important at that point is just receiving credit. But there have been a lot of people in the past who take away their creations ... and to be honest ... I don't get it. There are very few cases where I would see the need to remove something or require a certain level of control that I shared freely. Keep in mind, I am talking modding specifically where mods are free. I don't think the cathedral view would work when you start putting monetization into the equation because then it's a huge benefit to maintain more of that control. Now personally, I don't think Wrye's view is exaggerated by bias. In fact, we actually have a pretty good baseline for the idea of the cathedral view and how well it works, because the largest one that exists is the human race itself or the world. It may not seem that way when thinking about it at a micro scale, where everyone tries to maintain control, but when you start looking at things at a macro scale, the larger picture ... you realize almost everything that exists today is built upon past contributions by those who came before. Basically control becomes less relevant at a larger scale since humans don't exactly have an infinite amount of life and so they at some point have no choice in the matter. Even the copyright system has that timer. And the reason it exists is for the very reason that we want to be able to build upon other's creations at least eventually. The only reason it doesn't work at a micro scale is money. When someone creates something, they want it to be able to be theirs and theirs alone for the purpose of being able to earn something from it. Which brings me back to mods, you can't really earn money from them, so I think the cathedral view would work perfectly if people were willing to give it a chance. But we already know most are not willing and never will be. That's life ... all well. Edit: Leeloominai pointed out something important that I felt I should bring up. They pointed out that credit is often not given even in cases where people are fairly open with their works but just ask for credit. And I can for sure see why that can dissuade someone from seeing the cathedral view as doable. However, I think if it were to really be brought up and was discussed among those who may have used the work without credit or done it an unnoticeable way, I am fairly sure it can be worked out. At least, I don't see a reason it couldn't be. If they are unwilling to make an effort, then at that point I would say report them. As long as the site also views things in this way and wants to maintain things, it should work to fix that.

To me it just seems like no one is on the same page. Like there was a misunderstanding somewhere and now everyone is going back and forth about different subjects without realizing it.

Skyrim has sold time and time again even on consoles where modding didn't exist for quite some time (it even sold well on the switch as far as I am aware where there isn't any modding). Tons of BGS games tend to sell really well on console. While I do think modding brings longevity, I don't think it's the only thing that should get credit for that. A big part of it is Bethesda, they are the ones who create games that even make us want to mod for them. They make the tools, the foundation we build on. No one would spend a lot of time modding a game they didn't like at least somewhat. So personally, I think BGS deserves credit. Skyrim in my opinion is an amazing game even without mods (at least from my own experience). Course I do think mod authors do add a lot to these games, and equally deserve praise. So I agree with you on everything else and will even say ... well said.