Mod Browsing Overhaul Discussion

[DefenestratedKoala]

It even randomly sorts new mods... I like to browse by latest, but it's literally putting it in a random order. Worst I saw was "2 hours ago" next to "1 week ago" next to "3 days ago" next to "1 hour ago". This is a bad change. Please give us options.

[HollownessDevoured]

1 minute ago, jmharris said:

I must admit that I have never asked the design team directly whether they thought the interface might make people ill. That's not quite my wheelhouse. I do know for certain that they will be digesting this feedback! I cannot currently state what action will be taken in regard to that.

I specifically told devs over a year ago, the high contrast causes me actual eye pain, headaches and eye bleed. I was dismissed. Feel free to read or re-read that feedback post which also included very helpful feedback (it included some suggestions that were taken by devs) aka I wasn't just complaining (it was constructive and detailed) and I wasn't rude or being a troublemaker.

It also included the devs/mods saying I was lying about #FFF on black (near #000), and basically dismissed me as being over dramatic but another user confirmed there was some actual #FFF white text in an inspect element screenshot—but my point is/was the high contrast was just too much for some of us. Long story short, I begged for a contrast compromise, and that when the profiles/forum high contrast moved to the rest of the site more people will complain and there would be more of a backlash—and a compromise was not at all considered or taken into consideration.

[HadToRegister]

Make a Nexus Mobile APP for Mobile users then. The entire point of Nexus MODS, is MODS.
Unless, that new Mod Manager from Nexus is going to be named the Nexus APP, from what I remember from that locked thread.

There seems to be unnecessary confusion of terms brought about by this site itself, because it can't seem to decide what it wants to do.
On the one hand, it's planning on abandoning Vortex, for a new Mod Manager that is called the Nexus APP or something like that, rather than making an actual MOBILE APP for browsing the site, that has the ridiculous Mobile Interface for those users, while keeping the trusty interface for PC, that doesn't look like the love child of Fisher-Price and Disney.

IMO, The Nexus really has no point on Mobile, unless maybe for mods for something like Fallout Shelter, but this site started for modding Morrowind on PC, back in 2003, and then Oblivion, and slowly branched out.
I really don't understand the point of using this site with mobile.

 

[jmharris]

8 minutes ago, DefenestratedKoala said:

I like to browse by latest, but it's literally putting it in a random order. Worst I saw was "2 hours ago" next to "1 week ago" next to "3 days ago" next to "1 hour ago".

That does sound bizarre. If it's reproducible for you, can you share the steps?

[WndMll]

Just now, jmharris said:

That does sound bizarre. If it's reproducible for you, can you share the steps?

Sort by date published on any mod page, no extra steps needed. I see it too.

Edited Saturday at 12:06 AM by WndMll

[jmharris]

8 minutes ago, HollownessDevoured said:

I specifically told devs over a year ago, the high contrast causes me actual eye pain, headaches and eye bleed. I was dismissed.

I accept that you feel a compromise was not all considered. That generally isn't what I see from the discussions my colleagues have and the work they do. I get that might not assuage your feeling here, but perhaps it's something.

We are trying (really!) to be clear on our mission here- from post 1 in this thread: "Improved Accessibility", "We believe modding should be for everyone", "Visually accessible colours"- so your requests are consistent with our goals.

Clearly we aren't meeting your expectations here. We'll keep trying.

[m661]

29 minutes ago, jmharris said:

I must admit that I have never asked the design team directly whether they thought the interface might make people ill. That's not quite my wheelhouse. I do know for certain that they will be digesting this feedback! I cannot currently state what action will be taken in regard to that.

Might I suggest that the team takes a look at Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG2.1)
https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/quickref/?versions=2.1&showtechniques=141#principle1

There are industry guidelines for a reason and while getting all marks is virtually impossible there are pointers that can help with the majority of the accessibility cases.
These things can not be a afterthought. For us European businesses this is becoming mandatory to a degree in June 2025 under the European Accessibility Act (EAA)
https://accessible-eu-centre.ec.europa.eu/content-corner/digital-library/en-3015492021-accessibility-requirements-ict-products-and-services_en

And this will also apply to some business not in the EU but servicing EU customers ass well as Canadian and Australia under EN 301 549
Whether this service falls under it I can not say you will have to hire a consultant, lawyer to look into if England and Wales where the company is registered are subject to the same requirements.
Knowing how previous laws where setup I am going to guess it will be. All I know for certain businesses are exempt if  If you have fewer than 10 employees and annual revenue below two million Euros.

[DefenestratedKoala]

11 minutes ago, jmharris said:

That does sound bizarre. If it's reproducible for you, can you share the steps?

Go to any game, choose mods, then sort by date published. It's very obvious on Skyrim, Kingdom Come Deliverance 2, and Starfield.

[kat1004]

2 minutes ago, jmharris said:

I accept that you feel a compromise was not all considered. That generally isn't what I see from the discussions my colleagues have and the work they do. I get that might not assuage your feeling here, but perhaps it's something.

We are trying (really!) to be clear on our mission here- from post 1 in this thread: "Improved Accessibility", "We believe modding should be for everyone", "Visually accessible colours"- so your requests are consistent with our goals.

Clearly we aren't meeting your expectations here. We'll keep trying.

The fact that the site is now high-contrast is a serious issue. There's a reason high-contrast has always been a client-side option built into operating systems - it's not accessible in the slightest for the majority of people due to eye strain. If people need high-contrast, they don't just need it for one site. They need it for the majority of their computer-using experience. Which is why it's specifically built into the operating system as an accessibility option.

Building high-contrast directly into a website causes more issues than it cures. Improving accessibility would be reverting the color scheme to the previous layout's color scheme, which was relatively decent. Neither too dark nor too light, and even if it was still ugly, it didn't cause migraines. It didn't cause eye strain. It wasn't inaccessible to people with health issues.

[jmharris]

2 minutes ago, m661 said:

Might I suggest that the team takes a look at Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG2.1)

Per post 1 in the thread: "By following standards like WCAG we’re creating a site that isn’t just inclusive but also easier and more enjoyable for everyone."

So if we're not, it's a bug (or at least a problem!) and we would expect to address that (in due course, based on prioritisation and capacity).