SummonTheDaedra

In response to post #64825596. #64883616, #64883776 are all replies on the same post. And the old wheel works just fine for me, I don't see a problem either way, those who like Vortex will use it, those who see NMM as doing the job just fine will use NMM, just like with anything else, people end up using what fits them better, whether it is Android vs iOS, McDonalds vs Burger King or Vortex vs NMM. I never said Vortex should not have been developed, my point was that from my perspective and use case, where NMM does everything perfectly for me, I don't see much incentive to use Vortex hence the reinventing the wheel from my perspective. I have no problem with others switching to Vortex, everyone is entitled to their opinion and their choice of mod managers or anything else in life.

I tried it and I didn't like it, interface is confusing compared to NMM and I found that Vortex has a strange way of doing certain things, like when you want to overwrite one mod with another because you want to use one mod for meshes and another for textures, NMM works as intended and is simple and effective. It felt like Vortex is trying to reinvent the wheel.

In response to post #55257103. #55257298, #55258328, #55258513, #55258928, #55259153, #55259388, #55259853, #55305193, #55330208, #55334878, #55338158, #55338403, #55338453, #55339968, #55342353, #55357393, #55364788, #55364973, #55368353, #55368878 are all replies on the same post. There is plenty of people who dont like the new design in the comments, I dont have the statistics but reading comments on this article shows a lot of people dont like it. A poll on the Nexus "which design do you like-old one or the new one?" would give some real numbers and percentages with votes from actual users, no buttocks involved. But the real question is would a poll change anything even if majority of users voted for the old design? Probably not. As for the amount of money needed to maintain two layouts I dont know how much it is, but Nexus has so many users, perhaps a portion of them would be willing to pay some amount of money per year to keep the old design, perhaps not, but if nobody asks them we will never know.

In response to post #55257103. #55257298, #55258328, #55258513, #55258928, #55259153, #55259388, #55259853, #55305193, #55330208, #55334878, #55338158, #55338403, #55338453, #55339968, #55342353, #55357393, #55364788, #55364973 are all replies on the same post. Purely cosmetic reasons? Making half of your users angry at your design is hardly just cosmetic reasons plus a giant like Google can maintain two layouts with extreme ease, that is nothing for a giant like that, they are maintaining far more complicated things than one website layout. And for example they are maintaining two layouts for their search engine, the usual one and the one when you turn off javascript. And that is not the only example of some website maintaining two layouts, most dont care for user feedback, but some do. The fact Metro UI is still present does not invalidate my comment at all, they defaulted to classic start menu after users raged against new interface, users got what they wanted and that is the point I was making with that example.

In response to post #55257103. #55257298, #55258328, #55258513, #55258928, #55259153, #55259388, #55259853, #55305193, #55330208, #55334878, #55338158, #55338403, #55338453, #55339968, #55342353 are all replies on the same post. @slippyguy Microsoft backed out on the Metro UI after severe user backlash, first in 8.1 they introduced the option of getting the normal desktop and in 10 they returned "classic" start menu that can be expanded to Metro-like UI if the user wants to. And we are talking about a whole operating system, not just one website. While most websites like to force new designs on their users the example of Windows shows users can influence decisions if they really want to, but when it comes to websites most people will just be grumpy for a while and continue using the services of the website effectively falling in line with a sigh "thats life", sharp decline in the number of users and supporters of a website would force the owners of a website to reconsider their decisions, but that rarely happens as most people are not willing to sacrifice something (using services of a website) to achieve their goals. Some are, but not enough of them to make a difference. That is why small websites or services that dont have hundreds of thousands or millions of users are lot more careful about changing things, big websites can afford to annoy a portion of their users because their user base is large enough plus they know most of those that are not satisfied will still fall in line and continue using their website or their services because there is little to no alternative to what they provide.

In response to post #55257103. #55257298, #55258328, #55258513, #55258928, #55259153, #55259388, #55259853, #55305193, #55330208, #55334878, #55338158, #55338403 are all replies on the same post. @slippyguy Youtube still has old design available for those who want it and it has been around for quite a while now which hopefully means the old design is here to stay as an option. I agree that for most websites the old design is discarded and new one literally forced upon their users, even though the old design was clean, looking good and perfectly functional, that often happens to websites of various news agencies.

In response to post #55257103. #55257298, #55258328, #55258513, #55258928, #55259153, #55259388, #55259853, #55305193, #55330208, #55334878, #55338158 are all replies on the same post. I read the other issue as well, but since I am not familiar with the details I didnt comment on it, however I dont know why ever redesign of a major website/portal I seen lately includes HUGE elements on the screen, less readability than the old design and similar gimmicks. What happened to the clean, readable and efficient design? I guess that is not "modern" enough any more. Take Youtube redesign for example, it made things bigger which means less content on the screen and less readability, same goes for menus on Youtube that suddenly arent clean and easily readable by a casual glance, new Youtube merely takes up more screen space, it isnt prettier and it doesnt add any new special functionality, thank God that Youtube can be restored to the old version. Why tech companies behind certain websites continually reinvent the wheel with their redesigns is beyond me, seems the only purpose of some redesigns is to make it new for the sake of the new and that developers can earn their paychecks.

In response to post #55257103. #55257298, #55258328, #55258513, #55258928, #55259153, #55259388, #55259853, #55305193 are all replies on the same post. Too costly? Why and how much? I dislike the new design so much I would pay to keep the old design.

I hope you will give us the option to keep the old design, I find it much more readable and more pleasant to use.

I dont like it at all, old website is much more readable and easier to navigate, I hope you wont remove the old website completely.

I dont think you need that, open console in Skyrim and type "spf nameofyourchoosing" (without quotations), it will save spf file in your Skyrim folder, in the Creation Kit you can import the spf file when you open the NPC under Character tab (where face data is located), that is it although preview in Creation Kit is usually uglier than it looks in the game. When you save your work click on the NPC in Actors list and press Ctrl+F4 to export facegendata, you will need that data otherwise you may end up with black face bug. You can also use the spf command to make faces for NPCs in the race selection menu at the beginning of the game, pick your race and gender, edit the appearance until you are satisfied and open console and type spf nameofyourchoosing as previously mentioned, then import it in Creation Kit. Very handy for creating NPCs with non generic look. http://www.creationkit.com/Dark_Face_Bug