New Nexus Mods design launched

[Ashes2Asherz]

In response to post #54732313.

TLymond wrote:

maybe because more and more people are looking for mods on other sites other than the nexus and they thought this would win back those users? People just want a download link to the mods and don't care so much how cool the website looks

 

Yeah, from all those other sites with 13+ million members (an over 30% increase in the past year) and over 237,000 files for over 470 games.

People are just flocking to them.

470 games and only about 10% of those games have more than a 100 mods available for them.. Most have under 10 mods available.. Many have Zero mods available... As for my game Skyrim which is also the Nexus most popular game, most of the newer popular modders don't publish on the Nexus.. Team Tal, Ravendier, Dint.. as well as some old modders Halo, Pero, Robo etc... So yes people are looking elsewhere for mods because many modders don't want to publish on the nexus anymore...

Also your stats don't tally in how many people are inactive on the site.. Edited October 26, 2017 by Ashes2Asherz

[Dark0ne]

In response to post #54731743. #54732078 is also a reply to the same post.

LenKagetsu wrote:

A side note, some people mentioned before that they liked the term Hot Files instead of Trendy and I agree with them on that. Trendy is just an annoying term to me.

It also reeks of "pander to the social media crowd". I'm abandoning ship because every site I've seen do this in the past five years invariably went straight down the tubes afterwards.

 

I feel the administration is not coming clean as to why this obviously mobile-pandering design is being forced on a demographic entirely of PC users. I'd like an answer to this question; "Are you doing this because sponsors or search engines twisted your arm?"

Ashes2Asherz wrote: maybe because more and more people are looking for mods on other sites other than the nexus and they thought this would win back those users? People just want a download link to the mods and don't care so much how cool the website looks

18% of our traffic comes from mobile. That number has grown at an enormous rate over the past few years as people digest their content on more platforms. That's why we've considered mobile as part of our redesign process as well as desktop, as are most other modern sites on the internet. It's not a conspiracy, it's adapting to changing user habits.

Saying "modding is for PC so the websites should only be for PC" would be like saying "console gamers only play on consoles and TVs, so websites for console games should only be for TV". Makes no sense, does it? This site isn't just about downloading mods. It's finding them, viewing screenshots, discussing them with others and partaking in the community.

More and more users are turning to multiple different platforms to browse the internet on. We need to accommodate everyone as much as possible. Just because you might not want to browse the site on your phone or tablet doesn't mean there aren't millions of others out there who do. Edited October 26, 2017 by Dark0ne

[pacfish]

In response to post #54710603.

NexBeth wrote:

 

In response to post #54677498. #54680143, #54686903, #54687293, #54688648, #54688928, #54689253, #54689373, #54689458, #54689713, #54689868, #54689943, #54690023, #54690088, #54690318, #54690618, #54690843, #54691443, #54691698, #54692043, #54692763, #54693868 are all replies on the same post.

menathradiel wrote: Have had a look at the new design and have to say: Why did you bork my description page? Why are you forcing every image to display on a new line even when in bbcode and wysiwyg editors they are not? It looks absolutely horrible, and makes me look like I put no thought or effort into my mod page. If I put two images on the same line, I do that for a reason. Yes, it's nice that the video is bigger, but you have every single one of my NPC pictures on a separate line, and they do not need it - this would be why I didn't do what you've essentially forced me to do.

Take a look at my nexus page for my mod on the old layout, and then the new layout, and then explain to me why you've made it look so excruciatingly bad on the new one, and why I can't fix it?

Battlestar1965 wrote: I did look at the two versions of your mod page. And i have to agree with you. It looks horrible now.Clearly, the designers had only mobile phone users in mind when doing this pointless redesign.

menathradiel wrote: ikr. Ugh. I'm probably going to have to spend time redoing the images to get it to display properly again.

fredlaus wrote: mena, I feel sorry for you and all others experiencing this travesty.
It is not only the images but the layout that is totally wrong - seems to have been made for the wrong site.
Decisions need to be taken I guess - it is extremely difficult to run two wagons at the same time - especially if you like to win the race.

Elianora wrote: Stop using images as text and write a text description. Image text description won't show up in Google searches so it impairs the way users may find your mod while searching the net, and people won't be able to Ctrl + F search through your description to find the information they need. People with reading and vision disabilities will have difficulty scaling or altering your description to their needs (colour / text size / etc.) because images don't scale or clear well.

Image descriptions are awful. Sure they may "look pretty" in some way, but they make it extremely hard to understand your mod's documentation.

menathradiel wrote: @Elianora: I have a text description. If you had bothered to even look at my mod page you would know this. I use images to supplement it - and btw, I do it for people like me, people on the autistic spectrum who need visual images because text is not enough. So I would kindly ask that you stop assuming things about me when you know absolutely nothing.

Dark0ne wrote: There are serious issues with image descriptions that Elianora has already brought up.

On top of that, if you refuse for whatever reason to do away with the image descriptions, it would be a lot better (for both you, and user experience in terms of loading times) to have it as one big image (or a few big images) organised however you like within the image itself, rather than a spliced up assortment of many, many smaller images that you then have to rely on the page formatting to organise.

Elianora wrote: I didn't say or assume ANYTHING about you. I said a thing about description images and mod pages and explained why they're terrible in the grand scheme of things. Stop overreacting and treating everything said as a personal insult and making this about you. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

pacfish wrote: To add to reasons: Google Translate doesn't work with images.

aufisch wrote: Menathradiel. I understand the need for more visual descriptions. I see that you included images of various locations including their names written on it. Couldn't you achieve the same by creating a largely text based description with much less images, and then just upload all these additional images to the image section, especially since you already have the images labelled with text overlays (so it is clear what they are)?

You can always refer to the image section in your description so the reader knows where to find more information.

ScrollTron1c wrote: Just a suggestion, merge your images exactly like you want them displayed - example

This only won't work if you additionally wanted each image linked to larger original images.

menathradiel wrote: @Elianora You are hilarious. When complaining about images you cite those with sight problems, but when it comes to people who need visuals... You might as well have said to shut up and stop complaining because this disability doesn't factor in your world view.

You are a hypocrite.

Elianora wrote: Oh so now it's about me, not about a mod description being accessible to as many users as possible. Alright. I see you're just looking for reasons to pick fights and be angry, so I'm walking away, I have mods to make, and stuff.

HomicidalGrouse wrote: Alright, I'm going to reiterate Eli's point using different words, because I don't think you understood it.

She wasn't telling you not to use images in your description. She was telling you that you shouldn't use text that is in the form of images in your description.

There's a huge difference, and the reasons for this difference are important. The first being the inability for search engines to parse text that is in the form of images. Another being the inability of translators to translate text in the form of images. Another is the inability of screen-readers to be able to read text that is in the form of images.

I'm having a really hard time understanding why text in the form of text and text in the form of images are somehow more or less readable for someone who has autism, as you claimed. The issue is not the layout or the use of actual images. The issue is the use of images as a way of displaying text.

Believe it or not, everyone here is actually trying to help you.

menathradiel wrote: @Dark0ne: "if you refuse for whatever reason to do away with the image descriptions"

Yes, I'll make all my mod description text only. Never mind those who need visual images, just so long as your new site works, eh?

You can explain to me all day what a thing is, I will not understand until I see it, and I include the seeing in my description. Never realised that this is a bad thing to do until you decided it was. My mod has been on this site for five years, with not a whisper, but now suddenly it's bad to have pictures. Not just bad, according to Elianora, I'm literally discriminating against people with sight problems by using pictures. A problem only now, not before. A problem, I'm willing to bet, only because I disagreed.

pacfish wrote: It's not autism .... oh god why. Autism does not prevent a person from reading though they might be angry with the points mentioned below but that's an entirely different story and I would hope someone would be there to calm them down and try to explain that it's like a "meme" and show them that it's okay.

It's blindness and screen resolution. When scaling the image up, it loses quality and thus can be harder to read. As it sits right now on my screen, the characters (letters) don't show all the normal pixels. The e's for example are missing the lower left hand corner of the curve and thus look weird and can produce unexpected results when trying to read them.
Yes blind people play games too. My friend plays on xbox on a 52 inch screen and sits about 20 inches from it, can't help but to say he'll burn his eyes out but I don't think he really cares since he literally can't see anything otherwise. He also plays for the story.

pacfish wrote: No, I hate the new site too... And I know I've used mods in the past that have a description setup just like yours, I was younger and the world was less offended by things back then.

Use images! They really do help. But don't include PLAIN text in them. Make the text bold and colorful so it stands out with a purpose. There is a REASON behind why this is the way it is. Give it some weight and meaning besides just explaining. A good example of okay text, maybe not the best color choice, would be the very first image in the description, another good example of text but may not the right font would be the Tilted Rigging (can't read the word Tilted and spell check was the word I chose to go with). The Old Windmill Inn is perfect aside from the text that is attached at the bottom.

menathradiel wrote: @pacfish

I would have preferred not to use images with text, but the only other format is tables, and they don't work here. I tried, a lot, to make the text not tied to the image by using tables but it always ended up totally borked. So I did the only thing I could.

menathradiel wrote: "Oh so now it's about me, not about a mod description being accessible to as many users as possible. Alright. I see you're just looking for reasons to pick fights and be angry, so I'm walking away, I have mods to make, and stuff."

I can't win the debate (because I have no argument that makes sense) so I'm going to flounce away and call you prejudiced in the hope it catches on. *skipping merrily*

pacfish wrote: Applaud you for hacking the problem, though find a better hack.
Maybe a google spreadsheet?
Tables in web design are terrible in general. Pain in the arse to use they are (at least back in 2008). Do tables work better with the dynamic design? Probably not... Since Dark is part of the discussion

SUGGESTION FOR NEW SITE: fix tables!

edit: best not to insight a riot and not post anything at all. No reason to fight on the internet, in mud pit with bikinis is much better.

menathradiel wrote: @pacfish
Can I load a google spreadsheet here? Even if I can, will it load for anyone else but me?

It's unreasonable to expect people to install something just so something else will work as it should, especially if that thing is a few pictures on a desc page.

pacfish wrote: That's the whole point of hacking. Do I think you could load google docs here? I don't know.
But I do know that they are visible if you choose to share them.
It was merely a suggestion as to how to attack the problem of poor formatting of tables. Beauty in hacking is that you come up with your own solution.

Not at all. I install windows because most of bethsda's games don't run well in a Linux environment. And I paid for windows... just for something as simple to play a game.
I install a different browser because Edge's cross site scripting is a "feature" just to do something as simple as view a webpage
I install an archive program to do something as simple as unzip archives because people upload their files in different formats and windows only natively supports .zip
I install steam because some of the games I play have DRM and that's just silly. (Probably will get in trouble for this but ... the pirates never had an issue with the Creation Club update and never will, their games also still works and was uninterrupted by the update, and any mods out there that don't rely on CC work just fine. Stating a fact of history shouldn't condone any actions from moderators/admins since punishing the person who stated the fact is saying you want to live in ignorance and forget the past).
I install SKSE to do something as simple as provide functionality to a game that Bethsda can't do right for the 5th time now.
I install MO Beta and live with the problems it has because it's original creator deserted us in favor of a real job that pays bills and puts food on the table.
I just suggested to Dark that he use JS to mine crypto currency instead of having ads on the website... and that's as simple as maintaining site availability and turning a profit (it's a .com)
So you see, asking someone to install something just to do something as simple as an image is more complicated than you think... There's a really bad meme from the 2000's about audio problems on linux where Google would suggest audio problems on windows. But you would have to install something just to get something as simple as an image to display (including a display of some kind)

We could compare notes on why your OS is difficult, but actually what this comes down to is you telling me that I should expect people to install something to make the internet work. If I want more than one image per line then I should not expect this site to work like any other, instead I should ask people to install an additional prog to make bbcode code here work as it does elsewhere.

I'm not going to do that. If it comes to it I will take my money, and my mod, elsewhere.

 

I'm confused. I thought the OP on this issue had to do with complaining about mis-alignment of images on mod description pages in the redesigned webpage. Reading through this a few times, it seem the issue got narrowed to posting text images and the ills of doing this for whatever reason. However, regardless of text images and their ills, is the overall issue of images on description pages being mis-aligned on the new webpage not going to be addressed, or did I misread and misunderstood everything utterly?

 

If images are still ok, I'd like to know how to do it because the working preview in the BBcode editor does not at all look like the end result (unfortunately).

This... These types of replies from the forum are still broken on the actual website.

No there is a problem with images on the website. Several mod authors have already reported about it. Originally Eli commented on a design choice menathradiel made that was constructive criticism. But the new site layout does ruin some formatting that was made on the old site. Look through the github bug reports.
After conversations were had and tension died down, it did 100% become about the formatting of menathradiel's mod description. But as I stated, there are other mod authors who have done this for the same reason menathradiel did.

Finding a solution that works to easily organize data so the user can understand what the author is putting forth is important. I think the site (new and old) needs better support for that type of layout. Just as it needs to fix quoting conversations from the forum and how it is presented on the site. On the bright side, this would be a case where I would prefer the conversation not to be brought back to the top,

since there have already been people who have been hotheaded in their reply even though it was over 6 hours old at that point.

[Ashes2Asherz]

In response to post #54731743. #54732078, #54732618 are all replies on the same post.

LenKagetsu wrote:

A side note, some people mentioned before that they liked the term Hot Files instead of Trendy and I agree with them on that. Trendy is just an annoying term to me.

It also reeks of "pander to the social media crowd". I'm abandoning ship because every site I've seen do this in the past five years invariably went straight down the tubes afterwards.

 

I feel the administration is not coming clean as to why this obviously mobile-pandering design is being forced on a demographic entirely of PC users. I'd like an answer to this question; "Are you doing this because sponsors or search engines twisted your arm?"

Ashes2Asherz wrote: maybe because more and more people are looking for mods on other sites other than the nexus and they thought this would win back those users? People just want a download link to the mods and don't care so much how cool the website looks

Dark0ne wrote: 18% of our traffic comes from mobile. That number has grown at an enormous rate over the past few years as people digest their content on more platforms. That's why we've considered mobile as part of our redesign process as well as desktop, as are most other modern sites on the internet. It's not a conspiracy, it's adapting to changing user habits.

Saying "modding is for PC so the websites should only be for PC" would be like saying "console gamers only play on consoles and TVs, so websites for console games should only be for TV". Makes no sense, does it? This site isn't just about downloading mods. It's finding them, viewing screenshots, discussing them with others and partaking in the community.

More and more users are turning to multiple different platforms to browse the internet on. We need to accommodate everyone as much as possible. Just because you might not want to browse the site on your phone or tablet doesn't mean there aren't millions of others out there who do.

yea mobile traffic is only going to grow and viewing the old site on mobile is frustrating.. So change is needed.. but the old layout is still nicer

[Rex7Dragon95]

In response to post #54732143. #54732223, #54732823 are all replies on the same post.

AliasNick wrote: People don't like change. And it shows right here. (And are simply mean too, I can't believe what I just read in the comments. It's not even constructive.)

Keep up the good work. This newest design/UI *is* the way to go. It's refreshing, easier to navigate and feels like a modern platform.

Love the news for Vortex. I can't wait to see how it'll be like! (:

Ashes2Asherz wrote: if people on this site weren't open to change then they would be playing the vanilla games rather than modded games.. just saying..

Ashes2Asherz wrote: lol they are paid mods

@Ashes2Asherz
but you also need to remember that those same people keep calling the creation club content paid mods when its really just official mini DLC's even though there crap mini DLC's,
so there's your problem. :/ Edited October 27, 2017 by Rex7Dragon95

[Ashes2Asherz]

In response to post #54732143. #54732223, #54732768 are all replies on the same post.

AliasNick wrote: People don't like change. And it shows right here. (And are simply mean too, I can't believe what I just read in the comments. It's not even constructive.)

Keep up the good work. This newest design/UI *is* the way to go. It's refreshing, easier to navigate and feels like a modern platform.

Love the news for Vortex. I can't wait to see how it'll be like! (:

Ashes2Asherz wrote: if people on this site weren't open to change then they would be playing the vanilla games rather than modded games.. just saying..

Rex7Dragon95 wrote: @Ashes2Asherz
but you also need to remember that those same pope keep calling the creation club content paid mod when its really just official mini DLC's even though there crap mini DLC's,
so there's your problem. :/

lol they are paid mods

[Dark0ne]

In response to post #54732313. #54732453 is also a reply to the same post.

TLymond wrote:

maybe because more and more people are looking for mods on other sites other than the nexus and they thought this would win back those users? People just want a download link to the mods and don't care so much how cool the website looks

 

Yeah, from all those other sites with 13+ million members (an over 30% increase in the past year) and over 237,000 files for over 470 games.

People are just flocking to them.

Ashes2Asherz wrote: 470 games and only about 10% of those games have more than a 100 mods available for them.. Most have under 10 mods available.. Many have Zero mods available... As for my game Skyrim which is also the Nexus most popular game, most of the newer popular modders don't publish on the Nexus.. Team Tal, Ravendier, Dint.. as well as some old modders Halo, Pero, Robo etc... So yes people are looking elsewhere for mods because many modders don't want to publish on the nexus anymore...

Also your stats don't tally in how many people are inactive on the site..

113 games have 100 files or more on Nexus Mods. That's 24% of the games we serve. Edited October 27, 2017 by Dark0ne

[pacfish]

In response to post #54731743. #54732078, #54732618, #54732748 are all replies on the same post.

LenKagetsu wrote:

A side note, some people mentioned before that they liked the term Hot Files instead of Trendy and I agree with them on that. Trendy is just an annoying term to me.

It also reeks of "pander to the social media crowd". I'm abandoning ship because every site I've seen do this in the past five years invariably went straight down the tubes afterwards.

 

I feel the administration is not coming clean as to why this obviously mobile-pandering design is being forced on a demographic entirely of PC users. I'd like an answer to this question; "Are you doing this because sponsors or search engines twisted your arm?"

Ashes2Asherz wrote: maybe because more and more people are looking for mods on other sites other than the nexus and they thought this would win back those users? People just want a download link to the mods and don't care so much how cool the website looks

Dark0ne wrote: 18% of our traffic comes from mobile. That number has grown at an enormous rate over the past few years as people digest their content on more platforms. That's why we've considered mobile as part of our redesign process as well as desktop, as are most other modern sites on the internet. It's not a conspiracy, it's adapting to changing user habits.

Saying "modding is for PC so the websites should only be for PC" would be like saying "console gamers only play on consoles and TVs, so websites for console games should only be for TV". Makes no sense, does it? This site isn't just about downloading mods. It's finding them, viewing screenshots, discussing them with others and partaking in the community.

More and more users are turning to multiple different platforms to browse the internet on. We need to accommodate everyone as much as possible. Just because you might not want to browse the site on your phone or tablet doesn't mean there aren't millions of others out there who do.

Ashes2Asherz wrote: yea mobile traffic is only going to grow and viewing the old site on mobile is frustrating.. So change is needed.. but the old layout is still nicer

Why wasn't this information made available in the original statement? Things make a lot more sense now.
Though I rather have a second monitor than browse the internet on my phone.

The site no longer support netscape 4.0

Do you know what that 18% is doing?

[AliasNick]

In response to post #54732143. #54732223, #54732768, #54732823 are all replies on the same post.

AliasNick wrote: People don't like change. And it shows right here. (And are simply mean too, I can't believe what I just read in the comments. It's not even constructive.)

Keep up the good work. This newest design/UI *is* the way to go. It's refreshing, easier to navigate and feels like a modern platform.

Love the news for Vortex. I can't wait to see how it'll be like! (:

Ashes2Asherz wrote: if people on this site weren't open to change then they would be playing the vanilla games rather than modded games.. just saying..

Rex7Dragon95 wrote: @Ashes2Asherz
but you also need to remember that those same people keep calling the creation club content paid mods when its really just official mini DLC's even though there crap mini DLC's,
so there's your problem. :/

Ashes2Asherz wrote: lol they are paid mods

Fair point (actually made me laugh). The fact they want to mod their game their own way is fine and pretty much shows they wanted things to change in the first place I admit. But the Nexus website is the central point that everyone uses, not just them. The website was outdated, thus, a new experience was needed. The new design is the way forward. We may not like 100% of what it is (including myself). Compromises must be made and constructive conversations are essential for the benefit of all users. Throwing demotivational bullshit at the devs is anti-productive imo.

[Dark0ne]

In response to post #54731743. #54732078, #54732618, #54732748, #54732903 are all replies on the same post.

LenKagetsu wrote:

A side note, some people mentioned before that they liked the term Hot Files instead of Trendy and I agree with them on that. Trendy is just an annoying term to me.

It also reeks of "pander to the social media crowd". I'm abandoning ship because every site I've seen do this in the past five years invariably went straight down the tubes afterwards.

 

I feel the administration is not coming clean as to why this obviously mobile-pandering design is being forced on a demographic entirely of PC users. I'd like an answer to this question; "Are you doing this because sponsors or search engines twisted your arm?"

Ashes2Asherz wrote: maybe because more and more people are looking for mods on other sites other than the nexus and they thought this would win back those users? People just want a download link to the mods and don't care so much how cool the website looks

Dark0ne wrote: 18% of our traffic comes from mobile. That number has grown at an enormous rate over the past few years as people digest their content on more platforms. That's why we've considered mobile as part of our redesign process as well as desktop, as are most other modern sites on the internet. It's not a conspiracy, it's adapting to changing user habits.

Saying "modding is for PC so the websites should only be for PC" would be like saying "console gamers only play on consoles and TVs, so websites for console games should only be for TV". Makes no sense, does it? This site isn't just about downloading mods. It's finding them, viewing screenshots, discussing them with others and partaking in the community.

More and more users are turning to multiple different platforms to browse the internet on. We need to accommodate everyone as much as possible. Just because you might not want to browse the site on your phone or tablet doesn't mean there aren't millions of others out there who do.

Ashes2Asherz wrote: yea mobile traffic is only going to grow and viewing the old site on mobile is frustrating.. So change is needed.. but the old layout is still nicer

pacfish wrote: Why wasn't this information made available in the original statement? Things make a lot more sense now.
Though I rather have a second monitor than browse the internet on my phone.

The site no longer support netscape 4.0

Do you know what that 18% is doing?

Why wasn't this information made available in the original statement? Things make a lot more sense now.

The rise of mobile browsing habits is nothing new. You only need to sit on the bus/tube/train or walk the streets of any town or city to see almost all of us are glued to our phones these days!