ozoak

The user reported it here as what they thought was a bad design choice. They were informed that it should work - by Nexus staff. The user confirmed their assertion that it's not. At this point the user is absolutely correct, it's not their job to work it out and Nexus are aware that it's impacting this user. The rest is strawman nonsense. The user could have posted a thread elsewhere, but at the same time at no point has the user or anyone asked Nexus to go above and beyond.

You might be mixing up "investigate cause" and "correct issue". Nexus updated their site, if it's now broken for users (at least two in this thread have noted it doesn't filter to the game even though it appears it should), then Nexus could investigate to distinguish between user level cause, the browser extensions or settings like you say, or the site being the cause. If it turns out it's the browser/user then yeah, that's on the user to resolve (though good customer service would point them in the right direction). If it's the site itself, then Nexus have something to resolve. If Nexus don't at least look at the issue, then they wont know if they have something to fix on their end, will they. And that would be in their best interest, even if it does turn out to be a browser extension lets say it's a popular one, it would benefit Nexus to at least know that so they could list it as a known incompatibility.

(did someone go through with a broom and delete pages and pages of posts? I'm sure the page count hasn't changed since I looked at this last night, and yet I just had to read several new pages of posts. Not that it matters, I suppose.) 1. Information Density *across the board* Assume visitors to the site are more intelligent, not less. We can handle complex pages with more information, not fewer. Big bright & shiny doesn't automatically equate to better, unless you're trying to distract a toddler or a magpie. If I'm on a 1080p display and go to a games page I can see precisely 2 mods - the top trending ones - without having to scroll. Scroll a little and I can see another 4 trending mods, but I have to scroll down an entire page height before I can read the full description of just the first 4 'New' mods. Each page-dn reveals, in full, just another 4 mods. Even if there was a mods section anchor link near the top of the page, starting the mods section you can see just 4 full mods and another 4 with 3/4 of the information presented. At 2560x1440 I get to see the top-6 trending mods (lucky me) and still have to scroll down a full page to get the first 4 + 3/4's of the next 4. At either resolution the absolute best appears to be 8 fully visible on screen at once. If I had a 4k display would I be blessed with being able to see 8 + 3/4s of another 4? ooo However as responses have indicated this isn't going to change back. The dumbing down of information is an incredibly disappointing trend in Modern UI design, even worse considering our displays have only increased in size. 2. Search used to be faster That's it, it's not complicated. Search was faster. I'll grant that full search is likely the same speed, except we're seeing the results render in rather than waiting for a results page to load, but there is a human perception difference between the two things; waiting for a results page to load is a single wait experience: we're waiting for a page watching a page render in information to placeholder cells is a wait experience multiplied by the number of things we see loading: we're waiting for 5-10 objects to load Quick Search is not as fast. Again, it's an observation. Now, if some metric shows that data is actually loading faster but that users perceive it as slower, that should inform a UX team that something is wrong. 3. Quick Search obfuscates the page In the past I would use quick search while reading a mods description. It's reasonably common for an author to put details into their mods for other mods they use but which are not hard requirements for their mod. Comments along the lines of "Other mods used you see in my screenshots are ...", or "This mod is a variant of a great mod by blah blah author..." I would often use the quick search function to find those mods. And those three are before going into any of the general observations around issues with the new site (such as the varying height of the top-level menu drop-down across the available top-level menu options).

Someone yesterday cited about 800 users participating in forum feedback about the site changes. Yes, less than 1000, but not insignificant. And while the value of people posting something simple along the lines of "I don't like it" or a more base "it sucks" is quite low, an argument could be made that it is of no less value than someone simply picking a 1 or a 2 out of 5 value on a poll without providing any explanation for the score given (and we have to assume that happens, because, well, it's common in polling for people to skip right over the freeform feedback fields). I know myself I have a lot of questions, the answers to which are largely irrelevant without the company entertaining the notion of rolling back, but hopefully would be food for thought for them internally to assess whether they approached this correctly. Based on the numbers contributed towards scoring the various sections it seems somewhere between 1200 and 2100 users responded to polling. The things that I think Nexus should reflect on that might have inadvertently (and we hope not intentionally) skewed the results, are along the lines of: * opt-in to beta appeared to have three status possibilities: undetermined (people who see the offer of Beta and just ignore it), opted-in (people who see the offer and accept it), rejected (people who see the offer, click it and then back out) Q. What volume of users "rejected" the beta? This volume should be given a notional weight towards a low-acceptance of the new site design. Q. What if more people rejected the site than people actually responded to the poll? * polling was only conducted on users who opted into the beta. This itself presents an issue as far as deriving any full population wide statistical result from the poll, as it's only polling people who liked it well enough to continue participating in the beta. Q. Did we poll the right people to get a reliable understanding of sentiment towards the new design? It probably would have been better to run the polling quite literally any other way. * randomly select users with high-activity profiles and opt them into the beta, then collect feedback/polling * roll the new design out to all users as a 48 hour trial, then collect feedback/polling There's more, but you get the idea. I personally concede that after the fact (the site has gone live without broader testing) these things are moot, but part of me would hope they are at least discussed among the Nexus team. It's up to them where the site goes, if anywhere, so bellyaching wont achieve anything but continuing to give them food for thought ... maybe? I'll take my optimism hat off now

According to that forum post responses were: "Game listing pages scored 4.4/5 (113 responses) Mod listing pages scored 4.3/5 (756 responses) Game home pages scored 4.0/5 (1,219 responses)" 800 users posting here is more users than responded to polling on the Game Listing Pages or the Mod Listing Pages. I don't think anyone is suggesting to "completely disregard all of the data", but this thread is demonstrating a high turnout compared to poll responders and should in that context be taken with as much weight, if not more.

I'd hazard a guess that this is pretty common for regular users. I tend to mod a game I'm playing, and in doing so either have a bookmark to that games nexus page, or I simply type into the address bar "nexus" and the browser autofills and suggests the page for the game I'm most recently involved with. I basically only ever go to the main site page when I'm curious about answering a "how many mods does Abc game have these days?".

Send the survey to every users inbox and be done with it <- would have been a workable strategy. Clearly a lot of regular users of the site did not see the surveys appear for them. And, again, I assume they only appeared to people who *opted in* to the beta, meaning anyone who already hated it and didn't continue to opt-in didn't see them. How does that assumption bear up? Look, myself and many others (probably) work in environments where we see change happen. Personally I'm familiar with a process of change being rolled through inhouse staff, they're expected to participate in the pre-release testing and feedback, but they are involved in a feedback loop which regular end users are not: they get coached by the devs making changes on best ways to use the changed environment, push back with their own suggestions, get to ask questions and receive feedback while having changed explained as they trickle in, and finally have the whole thing presented and explained after months of weaning them *on* to it. Experience has shown me that a lot of the time this results in the staff being very accepting of change. Like the proverbial frog boiled alive, the change happens slow and they accept it. The stage we appear to be in now is "rejection of end-user UX feedback because we've already invested in the changes". I too have experienced this at work, and it is a horrible stage to deal with if you're end-user facing, so in part I empathise with any Nexus employee trying to talk to users here. At the same time it's an inevitable conclusion to a poorly conceived and handled change. You want your users saying "wow, that's cool", not "who thought this was a good idea", good will currency evaporates awfully quickly in that case. And hey, maybe the reality is the feedback has genuinely been taken on board. But the impression I get from the reaction to what's being given as responses, is that it feels shallow. Again, I empathise with someone not being able to say much, but maybe it's better just to not say anything.

So the design is ... awful. Information density is a massive step back, and to what? Accommodate the instanced visits from people who get Nexusmods page results while doing searches on their phones? No-one on a phone is, or ever was, 'browsing' nexusmods seriously. It is *less* responsive than before. This conversation is hard to follow, but I gather some polling was randomly offered to users for a period of time when visiting the site, the polling was in pop-ups which are often blocked by privacy or adblocking browser tools, there were limited polling slots, and the results of the polling outside of a small insight (below) became immediately private once poll-slots were exhausted. https://forums.nexusmods.com/topic/13510484-mod-browsing-overhaul-rollout/#comment-130496079 "Game listing pages scored 4.4/5 (113 responses) Mod listing pages scored 4.3/5 (756 responses) Game home pages scored 4.0/5 (1,219 responses)" If the above numbers are to be believed, is that a maximum possible total of 2088 individuals responded to the polls? There are according to the main page nearing 61 million users (60,994,488). I assume that's registered users, not including the randoms who stumble to the site through search results. Admins of this site cannot possibly be surprised that users are rejecting the conclusions drawn from that sampling. I have to imagine that the polling was offered to people who opted into the Beta site, because otherwise how would a person know their answer to whatever questions were asked. I would have thought more relevant stats than a poll would have been, for a start: * how many people opted in to the Beta? * what was the Beta retention rate? ie: how many people stayed in the Beta * what was the engagement level of people opted in to Beta? ie: what was their usage level A certain amount of, perhaps justified, hubris might come in to play. I mean after all, even if everyone hated it, where are they going to go with such a deep pool of mods available. I would imagine the best way to actually gauge user feedback, if these threads are not moving the needle, would be to re-poll users with more appropriate methods and participant qualification. If the expectation is to have vocal users believe that they are a vocal minority, it might be best to adequately demonstrate that, not just hand wave it away with results from what I understand a lot of people feel was a terribly flawed poll.

True. At least that keeps the file tab there.

I came here looking for discussion on this page navigation change. I found one thread that appeared quite toxic, so I wont wade in to that one, but this looks to have been civil, if just the one reply :smile: No problem with the additional prompting etc, but was or could there be a page design played with that kept the 'premium reminder' content big and front and centre without requiring page navigation each time? I'm glad it's worked to increase revenue available to pay mod authors, but particularly on mods that have multiple file components to download it is frustrating (and painfully slow* if your internet is crappy as well). * the page transitions, not the file download

My curiosity is piqued. After all these years I'm not sure I've come across any that include their own plugins/dll's, certainly none I still use. Now I've got a mission: find these mods, see if I'm missing out :smile:

I would have thought the mods themselves would mostly be ok? [i'm going to massively oversimplify, even if I hit the mark, but...] For the most part aren't the SKSE64 updates just adjusting the pointer values, and the actual scripts/functionality of SKSE64 would be the same so mods relying on SKSE don't need to call scripts any differently? (I'm sure there are some exceptions)

You may come across mods that don't work, I guess. I've been using it for many months now and it's very stable. There may be some that don't - I'd suggest checking each mod for any red-flag discussion talking about it not working correctly (I *think* one I can recall is Wet And Cold, had some issues? but might not have necessarily been SKSE related).

I was covering 1 reason given that I disagreed with, and I acknowledged there are some valid and reasonable arguments against them [modpacks]. I don't remember telling anyone that they were naive. Nor implying anyone wasn't worth hearing an opinion from. Certainly not derisively laughing at anyone, having a go at anyone personally, commenting on their traits or sarcastically denigrating their worth. Of course this attracts the typical dismissive and derogatory responses. These are the reasons that 'regular' people don't bother with this "community" very much, the reason the place grabs monikers like "Noxiousmods". I'm unfollowing the topic, so go ahead and claim whatever victory you want and continue to ignore rational debate with people of a different mind. p.s. @Thandal in case you take that as referring to your post, it was not. You disagree, state a point and do it respectfully. Others seem incapable of such things.

Well, this is quite the circular argument isn't it. As has also been pointed out before, not all mods requiring updates will make a set of mods, be that a 'pack', 'collection' or just all the mods currently in use invalid or cause wailing. Will some collections of mods be broken by a single mod within the pack being updated? Yeah, probably. Will all collections of mods be broken by a single mod within the pack being updated? No, not likely. And here's the thing. If someone installs a 'collection' and it's got some awful bug in it due to one mod, they can identify which mod it is causing the problem (and individually update it), or they'll lack the skills to identify which mod it is (in which case they'll wail at the 'collection' maker, not the individual mod maker), or they'll simply remove the 'collection' and either try to build their own (based on the mods they saw in the collection) or try a new 'collection'. All of which will be exactly the same as it is with individual mods. I can accept a few arguments against mod packs/collections as being 100% valid, but the whole "A user who uses one is going to come across a mod that gets updated and breaks their pack, and then they'll b&amp;@*&#036; at the individual mod author" argument is not amongst them.