Can we have a "Broken" button to mark mods that don't work anymore?

[HeyYou]

Just wait until collections become REALLY popular, and are using older, outdated versions that authors can no longer delete...... That should add some interest to life.....

 

That said, I also think this is a really bad idea. (broken button) We have already seen that the 'community' has a significant population of bad actors, and will leave negative feedback on a mod for multiple reasons, none of which have anything to do with whether it works or not. How many folks do you think would start marking EVERY mod dealing the LGBTQ+ issues at their first opportunity? And that is only ONE hot-button issue..... Nope, this would be abused immediately, and to no good purpose.

[Zorkaz]

The only less harmful way this could be done is via a tag. A lot of users might tag it as "outdated". But the mod author could block this function forever too given the person is active

[Arthmoor]

 

But this leads me to another idea. Requiring users to download a certain Fallout 4 version at least

 

totally agree.

 

the number of posts i've read from tinfoil hat wearing cranks who refuse to update their game for no good reason are legion, and if a mod doesn't work because they're on a version of the game that isn;t relevant any more, its in no way their problem - its always the fault of the mod author.

 

in the real world - if you're running out of support software - then you're pretty much on your own. keep it updated and relevant....

 

The weirdest part about this is that you can almost always be certain it's someone installing mods to a BGS game that's complaining about old versions of things. Pretty much every other modding community I've been involved with (even just as a user) they embrace game updates and almost immediately update their mods. Mods that don't get updated to fit get left behind swiftly. None of this hanging on to something that's 3 years old and will never be updated and then expecting everyone else to stop updating too.

[ScytheBearer]

clear itself if the mod-maker uploads a new version.

That's kind of a big no-no. People often use outdated versions or have issues from completely unrelated mods and blame it on another. (Fallout 4 - Settlement Mods have this going on a lot).

 

So I wouldn't have to upload a new version just because some randos claim "Mod doesn't appear-Help! (Because I have a 5 year old version)" or "Only this mod must break my game (Because I use Sim Settlements 2 and five hundred other mods)"

 

But this leads me to another idea. Requiring users to download a certain Fallout 4 version at least

 

 

If only t'were possible, but alas, requiring a minimum version of any game is far beyond the pale. Want proof, just look at Skyrim SE. Several authors updated their mods to take advantage of new elements included in Version 1.6 of that game. But there exists a host of users who refuse to move on to the new version, and these authors are flagellated, abused, denigrated, and accused of bestiality, simply because they updated their mods and didn't supply a back-leveled version compatible with the unsupported game version. These folks would like nothing more than access to another avenue to harass, harangue and hate on these authors.

[Guest deleted34304850]

 

 

But this leads me to another idea. Requiring users to download a certain Fallout 4 version at least

 

totally agree.

 

the number of posts i've read from tinfoil hat wearing cranks who refuse to update their game for no good reason are legion, and if a mod doesn't work because they're on a version of the game that isn;t relevant any more, its in no way their problem - its always the fault of the mod author.

 

in the real world - if you're running out of support software - then you're pretty much on your own. keep it updated and relevant....

 

The weirdest part about this is that you can almost always be certain it's someone installing mods to a BGS game that's complaining about old versions of things. Pretty much every other modding community I've been involved with (even just as a user) they embrace game updates and almost immediately update their mods. Mods that don't get updated to fit get left behind swiftly. None of this hanging on to something that's 3 years old and will never be updated and then expecting everyone else to stop updating too.

 

yeah, i remember in my wow days, as soon as a new version hit the ptr, all the mod developers would be releasing new versions - no-one wanted, or needed old versions that wouldn't work with the new release.

the number of people i've seen who are still running windows 7 in these forums is both concerning and hilarious. no mod maker or game developer should be forced to throttle their product to cater for these lunatics, but for anything related to BGS this seems to be the expected norm.

if i was a mod maker (i don't have the time, nor the patience to deal with the audience of ungrateful idiots), then you could bet I would adhere to the standards offered by the unoficial patch team because it makes absolute and total sense. how you deal with the sheer number of cranks and put up with the hate is beyond me, you deserve a medal.

[StormWolf01]

The nexus actually Used to have a down-voting system, way, way, waaaaay back. And it was removed for abuse, and modder harassment.

So what's being said about that is VERY true.

 

On the flipside of things, yes. It does suck, to have a mod around that is broken, and never gets fixed. However, along the lines of what 1ae was saying, it's up to YOU to do due diligence as to what you download onto YOUR computer, and add into YOUR game. I will also go ahead and add in, look at the release date of the mod files when you go to download. How OLD is that file? Is there any comments about it not working, since that date?

 

Also along the same lines as HeyYou was saying: Maybe a new version has a feature that you actually... don't want. Or maybe the new feature is not compatible with your PC. (I'm looking at You there, AMD!)

[xrayy]

i agree that a "broken" button is a very bad idea and to 99% an invitation for inexperienced or incompetent downvotes. i also agree that reading descriptions, posts and mod authors activity is essential for mod selection but ignored still too often - especially by new members. reading comprehension and taking a little time for a mod description seems more and more out of fashion in times of "fast food" mod collections.

the goal should not be to be a king of the number of installed mods but the king of a stable setup. and here the mess begins...

most mods are not per se bad but everybody should know that even the smallest mod could cause trouble or an unexpected result for an individual setup if the description is ignored.

if a setup is already a badly or with pure ignorance maintained conglomeration of mods and a setup and overclocking stability mess not the mod author is to blame first.

it even happened to me that i blamed a mod for a problem eventually not causing it. so reading, testing and filtering the source is at first my responsibility and not the mod authors or any others one.

 

modding putting in a too tight frame of rules (including mod collections rules for all with still existing mod deletion issues or just to allow special or most recent game versions only and so on) is a very bad idea in long term and it will harm the mod community and split it into meaningless pieces going their own way. so my hope is such actions and ideas will not be too often a long term issue in this free(?) modding community.

[HeyYou]

i agree that a "broken" button is a very bad idea and to 99% an invitation for inexperienced or incompetent downvotes. i also agree that reading descriptions, posts and mod authors activity is essential for mod selection but ignored still too often - especially by new members. reading comprehension and taking a little time for a mod description seems more and more out of fashion in times of "fast food" mod collections.

the goal should not be to be a king of the number of installed mods but the king of a stable setup. and here the mess begins...

most mods are not per se bad but everybody should know that even the smallest mod could cause trouble or an unexpected result for an individual setup if the description is ignored.

if a setup is already a badly or with pure ignorance maintained conglomeration of mods and a setup and overclocking stability mess not the mod author is to blame first.

it even happened to me that i blamed a mod for a problem eventually not causing it. so reading, testing and filtering the source is at first my responsibility and not the mod authors or any others one.

 

modding putting in a too tight frame of rules (including mod collections rules for all with still existing mod deletion issues or just to allow special or most recent game versions only and so on) is a very bad idea in long term and it will harm the mod community and split it into meaningless pieces going their own way. so my hope is such actions and ideas will not be too often a long term issue in this free(?) modding community.

Folks not reading mod descriptions, and thus borking their games, has been a problem since Morrowind. :) It isn't new, it just seems more prevalent today, as there are a LOT more games that allowed modification by the end user.

[Sonja]

While I like this idea in theory, I agree with everyone that rejects it, for all the reasons they cite. It's really not that difficult to browse through a mod's comment and bug section to determine if it's still working. Although plenty of users who post in the bug and comment sections are extremely unreliable and the authors of their own problems (because they're apparently semi-illiterate and refuse to RTFM), usually enough more knowledgeable/ conscientious people have posted accurate statements about the mod. Also, if it's a complex mod that makes fundamental changes to the game, and it hasn't been updated in years, regardless of what the comments say, it's typically a good rule of thumb to avoid it; besides, chances are that somebody has made something similar, and more up-to-date. Most mesh and texture mods will be fine, and very simple plug-ins (such as a basic house mod) should also work..... anything beyond that, though... just use common sense, it isn't especially complicated to figure out.

[ScytheBearer]

While I like this idea in theory, I agree with everyone that rejects it, for all the reasons they cite. It's really not that difficult to browse through a mod's comment and bug section to determine if it's still working. Although plenty of users who post in the bug and comment sections are extremely unreliable and the authors of their own problems (because they're apparently semi-illiterate and refuse to RTFM), usually enough more knowledgeable/ conscientious people have posted accurate statements about the mod. Also, if it's a complex mod that makes fundamental changes to the game, and it hasn't been updated in years, regardless of what the comments say, it's typically a good rule of thumb to avoid it; besides, chances are that somebody has made something similar, and more up-to-date. Most mesh and texture mods will be fine, and very simple plug-ins (such as a basic house mod) should also work..... anything beyond that, though... just use common sense, it isn't especially complicated to figure out.

 

I often hear the comments about mods which haven't been "updated in years", so its a "good idea to avoid them". It ruffles my feathers.

 

Some mods were well made in the first place, don't break, and have been doing a yeoman's job for years. They haven't been updated because they don't need to be updated, especially when the underlying game hasn't changed either. Telling people to avoid mods which have been stable for years is ludicrous.