Tantalus010

If I disable HTTPS Everywhere, then I can no longer sign in to Nexus sites. I enter my password, but the site acts as though I just hit the refresh button. If I re-enable HTTPS Everywhere, I can login again, but then can't download anything. It's a catch-22. I can't use the site either way. Edit: Found a work around. Had to sign out of my Nexus account with HTTPS Everywhere enabled, then disable HTTPS Everywhere, reload the page after taking the 's' out of https in the address bar, and then it would let me log in. I think maybe I confused the Nexus by trying to sign in when it thought I already was.

In response to post #39676305. #39691020 is also a reply to the same post. You shouldn't need a new script unless you want your companion to have some custom behavior. If you're fine with the default companion behavior, then just use the default companion script. As for what a proper script looks like, well, load up a normal companion in the CK, look through their attached scripts until you find the script you want, and study it. As Wiley said, google Papyrus wiki for any bits you don't understand.

In response to post #39684690. #39684860 is also a reply to the same post. Uhh, the Nexus (in one form or another) has been around since well before Skyrim. It was around even before Oblivion.

In response to post #39675940. #39677215, #39679030, #39680875, #39683735, #39684460, #39688180, #39690275, #39694390, #39705550 are all replies on the same post. You REALLY don't want Bethesda in charge of the Nexus, which is what would have to happen in order for Robin and his team to be the official source for mods for Bethesda games. I promise you they absolutely would NOT allow the Nexus to be the official source for mods and remain independently operated, and if they controlled it, there would be many undesirable changes.

In response to post #39585685. #39589650 is also a reply to the same post. It's not pure conjecture nor is it paranoia. Here you go. http://www.gamespot.com/articles/bethesda-talks-skyrims-paid-mods-controversy/1100-6428952/

In response to post #39491315. #39496050, #39497250, #39531815, #39534800, #39535005, #39554390, #39554680, #39556240, #39557575, #39559140 are all replies on the same post. @Toxic and Tinker - It is possible that a pirate could remove the dependency, but I don't see that happening often. They'd have to know both Papyrus and which functions are unique to the script extenders to do it. Papyrus is easy to learn in a few hours if you're smart and have had some prior coding experience, but it still takes a few hours, and then you have to research the script extenders on top of that. There are no flags in the editor that tell you which functions are native and which are part of a script extender (at least, there weren't with Oblivion and OBSE). The pirate won't know just by looking at the script what functions require the SE. If they just remove the script entirely, the game will crash when the esp calls a script that doesn't exist.

In response to post #39561535. #39561945, #39563550 are all replies on the same post. @mmaniacBG - I half agree with you. I'd certainly add Bethesda to my list of game company boycotts and I imagine many others would as well, but I think you overestimate the impact it would have. Bethesda themselves have stated that we (the modding community) account for only 14% of all Fallout 4 users. According to them, the vast majority plays their games without mods. It would suck to lose us, but with console mods, they stand to make much more money. If paid console mods are a success, I can easily see them at some future time deciding that PC players need to pay for mods, too.

In response to post #39560020. Making the Nexus "official" would require a lot of legalese and would essentially end up with Bethesda owning the Nexus. I don't want that. As you said, they're in it to make money - why would they allow that money to go to the Nexus if they didn't own it? Besides, Robin built this site from nothing, and miraculously, he doesn't want to make money off of it. Bethesda deserves to use it no more than they deserve to make money off of other peoples' mods.

In response to post #39561535. It doesn't matter. Bethesda could shut down the Nexus at any time they please with a single letter. All they have to do is make the decision, and I suspect that decision is coming eventually anyway. They clearly want to monetize mods and allowing the Nexus to exist would entirely cut them off from the PC market unless they convince mod authors to only post their mods to Bethesda.net, and we saw how well that went over with the Steam Workshop. Might as well let them know just how badly they f***ed up.

In response to post #39537345. Bethesda isn't intentionally trying to ruin modding; they're trying to make money off of it. That said, I agree that console mods are a bad idea for numerous reasons - lack of easy tech support for the mods, cross-platform issues, and an all-around increased workload on mod authors are just a few. Until this whole piracy issue reared its ugly head, I hadn't even thought of it being a problem. I figured Bethesda would know better. Guess not.

In response to post #39503480. #39530505, #39533100 are all replies on the same post. Sadly, I think you're right. With the way Bethesda.net was set up, it's clear it was meant to reach as many users as possible with no thought given to the mod authors. They're laying the groundwork for a new revenue stream, plain and simple. Normally, I wouldn't hold that against them, as they are a company and as such, their sole purpose is to make money, but given that they said that "we hear you," when they initially took down paid modding for Skyrim, and the recent announcement that modding would be coming to consoles for Skyrim over Bethesda.net, I can now only think, "no, you didn't."

In response to post #39510315. #39511175, #39511945, #39512040, #39518785, #39531445, #39531585 are all replies on the same post. @jonboy - Just to respond to your responses to the OP: 1. Actually, right now, they physically can't contribute to the modding community, so I don't see how they can expand it. In order to make mods, you have to have the tools on PC. It's like a school: the mod authors are the teachers and the mod users are the students. By adding consoles as a modding platform, we've increased the number of students, but the number of teachers has remained the same. It's not a helpful arrangement if you're primarily interested in quality. And, if you're hoping/betting that more than one or two out of every ten thousand of those console users will be so amazed by mods that they'll rush out and buy a PC so that they too can be mod authors, I wouldn't. If the lack of mods on consoles didn't convince them to take the plunge, suddenly giving them the mods on console won't do it either. Besides, I would imagine most console gamers don't game on PC because consoles are cheaper and easier to use. Modding won't change either of those things. 2. Fair point, but I still agree with the OP that PC gaming has been largely dumbed down since the introduction of consoles. Any benefit in budget they provide, I think, is outweighed by the cost in quality of games. Take Bethesda, for instance - even today, Morrowind is still hailed by many as Bethesda's best game. That's why modding teams keep trying to recreate it (first with Oblivion's engine, then with Skyrim's). Yes, their more modern games appeal to a larger audience and make Bethesda more money, but Oblivion and Skyrim have been steps backwards in many respects, just the same as FO4 has been a large step backward compared to FO3 and insanely backward compared to FO2 (which was made by Black Isle, not Bethesda). 3. Yeah, I don't know what the OP is trying to say here either, but whatever his point was, it's moot. Robin has never been in this for money, so he doesn't care about revenue. He could've sold the Nexus for a small fortune at any time in the last five years if he really wanted to.

In response to post #39491315. #39496050, #39497250, #39531815, #39534800 are all replies on the same post. @jonboy - what if the original mod author wants to change it in the future? Even if you have a good answer for that question, a feature like what you're proposing would require a pretty thorough rewrite of how the CK works. By default, the tools implicitly trust the user and grant full read/write access to the esp or esm. I think requiring script extenders in mods is a good temporary solution until Bethesda gets their s#*! together and fixes Bethesda.net's frankly unprofessional problems.

In response to post #36925540. #36931230 is also a reply to the same post. Mods weren't actually disabled by the beta; that's why Bethesda asked that we not use mods during the beta. The beta just uses the new format, so it only *looks* like mods are disabled until you go through your plugins.txt file and add the asterisks in front of all your non-official esp's and esm's. For their part, Bethesda didn't tell us how to enable mods in the new format, probably hoping they'd get cleaner tests for a while if nobody knew how to enable mods. The console definitely was intentionally disabled by the beta. I'm hoping (and assuming) it will be back for the official release, but as far as I know, Bethesda hasn't officially said why they disabled the console for the beta or whether or not it will still be disabled in the official release. They're not the greatest at communication.

In response to post #36116560. #36118880, #36153445 are all replies on the same post. Yeah, there's no reason for Bethesda to block retexture mods that don't have an .esp because those can't affect gameplay.