Arthmoor

You have a name for it now: "Loremageddon" :P

When I reported this it was only possible to get it to happen when the game lighting AND the sky were turned on at the same time. Turn either one off, the pixelation goes away. It's highly annoying.

In response to post #37187105. #37191940 is also a reply to the same post. Same. Mod site has been serving normal pages again since last night while the forum is now serving secure pages.

This is a known issue we reported during closed beta but got no reply for. I'd suggest anyone seeing this go to their forums and report it again or it'll never get fixed.

Sure: Going just by what the game expects, UFO4P is active and will load with the game. The scrap patch is not active and won't be loaded with the game.

The "on/off" flag in plugins.txt is whether or not the mod has a * in front of its name. loadorder.txt is irrelevant for Fallout 4. That's only for mod managers, and the file will be entirely redundant now that they've changed the main system. Especially once the mod managers get updated to correct for the new system.

In response to post #37057295. #37061100, #37061710, #37063060, #37065860, #37066500, #37092085 are all replies on the same post. In case you guys missed it in the bug tracker: http://forums.nexusmods.com/index.php?/tracker/issue-56755-linked-images-in-mod-descriptions-and-file-comments-are-not-working/

There's also plenty of us old timers who didn't know about that either since it's not well publicized :P

In response to post #37115805. While I don't know about this Mama Murphy thing, I do know ErosLogos is not wrong to conclude mods of some sort must be contributing to the cell reset bug. No such bug exists in the vanilla game without mods. Even official DLCs don't cause it. Further, it's not the kind of bug the unofficial patches can fix even if we want to. That kind of thing is an engine issue that Bethesda needs to deal with themselves. So if you haven't reported it to them yet, do your part, report it to them.

You clearly have zero understanding of how copyright works. Under copyright law, the owner of a work is allowed to govern who gets to make copies, distribute them, make derivative works from them, perform the works, etc. Derivative works created with the permission of the rights holder gain copyright on the portions the secondary author contributes to the work. Bethesda has granted us the right to create derivative works for Skyrim. Part of the license granting us that right says that they can license mods back from you to use as they see fit, and that you are not allowed (currently) to use said mods for commercial gain. You retain copyright in the additional material you have provided. That's it. If you want the gory details of the applicable copyright law Skyrim is governed by, see this: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf

That seems pretty explicit to me. At least you're even reading the right one :tongue: Anyway, if you read that carefully, it grants Bethesda a license to use your work. It DOES NOT grant them OWNERSHIP of your work. I realize that's not always a clear distinction, but it's legally important, because it means the copyright on the work remains with the author. Not with them. Even then, their position as stated here has never been properly tested in a court case. So they may not even legally have as much as they are asserting they have. What it boils down to is basically "we can use your work if we want, you can't sue us if you object". At no point does this cause you to forfeit enforcing your rights against other parties. Bethesda has reinforced that they believe mod authors own their work through actions they have taken on our behalf. Valve has confirmed this by providing authors ready access to a DMCA takedown form to expedite removal of stolen content. Both companies have extensive legal teams and would not have put themselves in the position of validating author copyright if we did not actually have it.

You are wrong - this position has been debunked and discredited countless times over the years. Yeah I don't care what some Nexus drama queen says, I'm going by the EULA, which is, y'know, actually enforcable. You should try reading said EULA first then before trying to cite it as a source. You clearly don't even know what it says.

You are wrong - this position has been debunked and discredited countless times over the years.

Then why did you? When you say "they don't post because they don't like the vitriol" and NONE of them have said anything like that, you're making statements that speak for people.

To be fair, a lot of Mod Authors don't post on the General Mod Author Discussion forums because they don't like the vitriol of the people who regularly post there. I think that the continued misrepresentation of a vocal minority of extreme individuals as speaking for the majority is one of the most unpleasant aspects of this entire situation. You must be seeing a completely different forum than the one I'm seeing. Also making accusations like this that the general public has no way to prove or disprove is a pretty sleazy tactic.

Oh dear, some hairy ape pulled up to the side of the road, wound down his window and shouted "you look kinda funny boy..". All this to the theme music of (dueling banjos) Deliverance. ... not everything revolves around reddit. For example, I only just started myself last year for the dungeon contest. It is NOT a positive place when all is said and done. Not everything revolves around Nexusmods either. The Subreddit and LL are both places equally valid as well. The site where the discussion is hold or was held doesn't really matter, what matters is what has been delivered in content. Those links were provided to show that the Mod Picker team hasn't been silent throughout the progress they made. They publicly announced where they are and were (and are) open to discussions. Just because it's Reddit doesn't influence the point made there. Saying it does is the cheapest attempt at invalidating an argument. The overwhelming majority of people are here though and here is where most of them are likely to get their information. I am reasonably active on that subreddit and even I didn't see any of those 4 posts when they were first made. They're all less that 3 months old too. I've looked at the discussion threads now and frankly they're no better than anywhere else. Actual discussion was pretty useless because it turned into mostly back and forth banter each time. I don't think it's unreasonable to point out that posting stuff where most of the community does not venture or may not see it due to the way the discussion platform works (stuff gets buried there FAST) is invalid and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that once they finally showed up here that only then do Nexus mod authors become aware of it. Consider also, the non-author forums here on Nexus have a pretty high burial rate as well and stuff that's not even a week old can be several pages down by the time someone swings by for a casual look. Which I think is why their initial post in these forums basically went nowhere. It fell off the front page and was quickly buried below that. The team has admitted they made a mistake in not engaging mod authors sooner. Now that that's been rectified, they can work through all the legitimate concerns authors have.

I just want to add that my own reservations are more or less the same as Reneer's.

In response to post #35698967. Yep. I removed Java ages ago, never installed Silverlight, and after getting nailed with an exploit in Flash a few weeks ago, finally decided to ditch that completely too. I have yet to encounter the supposed "degraded web experience" people claim comes from not having those things installed and my browser is definitely much happier not having that crap around.

Nope. It's more like we've now seen what the Youtube community passes off as "reviews" and consider such things to be damaging to the community as a whole. There are very few Youtubers who are fair with what they post and I'd wager most of us can count them on one hand. As long as this is opt-in and authors don't have to participate in it if they don't want, then go for it. It won't take long for those who think it's just "thin skinned modders" crying about "constructive criticism" to realize that's never been the case.

Why do you say that? Constructive criticism should be considered a boon. Except that as Oubliette says, most criticism isn't constructive even if the person posting it insists otherwise. That said, if an author wishes to enable reviews on their mods, I say go for it. Assuming such a thing isn't ridiculously difficult to implement.

In response to post #35668992. #35669322, #35670387, #35670777 are all replies on the same post. Maybe you're reading it wrong? :P

Mod authors already can specify a message to show when they hide a mod. It also tells you that it was the author who hid it, rather than a moderator putting the file under review. It sounds like what you encountered was a file under review if it eventually turned into a deleted entry. For obvious reasons, a deleted entry can't tell you why it was deleted.

In response to post #35635062. Simple solution to Flash ads: Uninstall Flash. You'll probably be pleasantly surprised at how little of the web is still using that.

In response to post #35630357. #35630877, #35634887, #35635242, #35636402 are all replies on the same post. the concept of buying anything online in total anonymity is quite amusing to me. Can't see any way for that to actually mesh with the reality that the information is there, and more people than you realize know it.

What the heck did I just read? :blink: