Abandoned Mods

[daventry]

I completely understand, but some Mods have tiny Glitches or Bugs that needs to be Fixed and im not talking about adding set pieces to the Mod, thats a Big No No, im talking about Fixing Tiny Things like these Two Mods.

Conjure Rideable Ethereal Horse Spell: Theres no Crosshair when riding the Ethereal Horse and the Player freeze in mid-air when swinging a Sword
http://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/9534

PJ Spell Eraser: The Mod does the Job, but the Spell that i Deleted, leaves its Effect behind and Bug out Other Spells.

http://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/15348

Edited April 22, 2013 by daventry

[acidzebra]

I will repeat

 

If those permissions are left as the default, you are free to fix or alter whatever mod to your heart's content for personal use, but you can't plonk it on the nexus (or anywhere), end of story.

 

The type of changes (big, small, fix, whatever) are completely irrelevant to the permissions.

Edited December 18, 2012 by acidzebra

[daventry]

That sounds reasonable and there are a Few Mods like those two specifically that i would like a Private Patch for while you Contact the OP and tell them heres the Fix that you dident upload to the Nexus so they can Fix their Mod. Edited December 18, 2012 by daventry

[Mujuro]

I'd agree that the best approach is to get explicit permissions, but understand the difficulty when the authors may not be on Nexus. That said, if you're able to "fix" without incorporating the authors' assets into your own mod, that MAY be an option, but I'd check with the Nexus staff/moderators first (e.g., doing a true patch via de-isolation, where the original mod would still be a download + install requirement). I guess it boils down to how Nexus defines "modifying" a file, as with a true patch, the authors' original works remain 100% intact and continue to be a requirement.

[Grimoa]

What acidzebra said.

 

Mod authors are in no way obliged to support their mods. Mod users are not entitled to updates.

I can understand the feeling if a favourite mod ceases to work with a new Skyrim patch (or whatever) but especially if you enjoyed the mod you should find it in you to respect its creator's whishes. (And in all other cases: What acidzebra said.)

 

Mujuro's suggestions seems ok aswell, but it might not work in every case.

[daventry]

Then the only way for the Mod to work, is for someone to Recreate the Mod.

 

So who is Really gonna do that just because the Existing Mod has a Tiny Glitch that can be Fixed, but the Author is Gone from the Forum and decided to abandon the Game while getting on with his Life.

 

Im pretty sure the Author will just say Thank You and ive seen this among Modders that are still around who says Thanks for fixing the Bug.

Edited December 18, 2012 by daventry

[nobadeeftw]

Traditionally when a mod author abandoned a mod, they would surrender it to the community. Only in rare circumstances will you see a mod author with a bad attitude that says, "Screw you guys, I'm going home and I'm taking my toys with me". It always bothered me when people made a fuss over someone revitalizing a dead mod; even more so, when it's the original mod author who is the one complaining. It's one thing to complain if you actually care about your mod; but, if you are knowingly neglecting your own content, your authority over it is void.

 

Who really owns a mod anyways? Is it the mod author or the company who allows it to be made? Blizzard already answered that question for it's users by changing it's policies, does Bethesda need to spell it out too?

[acidzebra]

a) it's not your content. You didn't create it. And that, to you as a consumer, is all that matters.

b) appeal to tradition is (1) a fallacy, (2) not supported in any way by anything resembling a fact and (3) directly contradicted by the mod permission section right here on the nexus.

c) Blizzard said "you will not be modding diablo", so that has zero bearing on this. And Bethesda HAS a pretty clear policy on CK use (and again, the owner of the content is not you), and looking at what happened on the steam site with the unauthorized open cities copy, DOES care.

 

It's one thing to complain if you actually care about your mod; but, if you are knowingly neglecting your own content, your authority over it is void.

 

If I decide to go on hiatus, it's still my mod. If I decide to never update it again, it's still my mod. That I personally decide to relinquish my rights in the event that I go AWOL, doesn't mean any mod automatically becomes community property, and people like you make me rethink my community-friendly stance.

Edited December 18, 2012 by acidzebra

[Arthmoor]

a) it's not your content. You didn't create it. And that, to you as a consumer, is all that matters.

b) appeal to tradition is (1) a fallacy, (2) not supported in any way by anything resembling a fact and (3) directly contradicted by the mod permission section right here on the nexus.

c) Blizzard said "you will not be modding diablo", so that has zero bearing on this. And Bethesda HAS a pretty clear policy on CK use (and again, the owner of the content is not you), and looking at what happened on the steam site with the unauthorized open cities copy, DOES care.

 

It's one thing to complain if you actually care about your mod; but, if you are knowingly neglecting your own content, your authority over it is void.

 

If I decide to go on hiatus, it's still my mod. If I decide to never update it again, it's still my mod. That I personally decide to relinquish my rights in the event that I go AWOL, doesn't mean any mod automatically becomes community property, and people like you make me rethink my community-friendly stance.

Pretty much all of this. Including that last part. All of this is the sort of poison that will eventually cripple a healthy community. I've been there, done that, and don't care to repeat it. It results in chronic stagnation at best, and will outright kill a community at worst.

[gsmanners]

We appreciate the hard work all our modders do (especially you, Arthmoor). Even strictly permissive modders like myself appreciate getting credit, so taking over someone's work without permission is just inviting fury of the original author.