Jump to content


Photo

Unofficial Skyrim Legendary Edition Patch [USLEEP]

unofficial patch legendary dlc

  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#16 oqhansoloqo

oqhansoloqo

    High King

  • Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,398 posts

Posted 22 July 2015 - 09:05 PM

If after some time still no response, maybe you could try sending Arthmoor a PM - I've talked with him about a few things in the past that way.


  • 1

#17 Departed_1

Departed_1

    Jarl

  • Mod Authors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 738 posts

Posted 22 July 2015 - 10:48 PM

Arthmoor's response:

We need to make a clean break point here. Leaving the unified mod with the same name we've been running all along is going to lead to more problems that it's worth in the long term. We're already going to be dropping the 3 DLC patches as it is, so it doesn't seem like much more of an issue to drop the main filename as well and create a clear designation about which mod is which.

From the technical perspective, the USKP is forming the base the other files are going to merge into. The form IDs will remain the same for the USKP portion. Any added forms from the DLC patches will necessarily have those changed by the process. There's no avoiding it. Fortunately the number of unique IDs in each DLC patch is quite low. They're 99.9% edits to forms from the DLCs themselves, which should not present any real problems.

 

This confirms that the formIDs will remain the same for the records from USKP, so that should make the process of converting the scripts from mods like mine fairly simple.  Unfortunately, his response is rather vague about what type of problems they're concerned about in making the decision to rename the file, which is the point I was most curious about. 

 

If I had to guess, I'd say this re-designation is being done to simplify support and reduce the number of dumb user errors, which is certainly understandable from the perspective of the USKP team.  However, I still would have preferred to see compatibility for older mods and increased flexibility for mod authors take priority over idiot users who can't be bothered to read the mod requirements.

 

Regardless of the form it takes, I'm still happy that they're finally moving to a unified patch.


  • 2

#18 TeflonBilly

TeflonBilly

    Prisoner

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 23 July 2015 - 07:10 PM

Arthmoor's response:

This confirms that the formIDs will remain the same for the records from USKP, so that should make the process of converting the scripts from mods like mine fairly simple.  Unfortunately, his response is rather vague about what type of problems they're concerned about in making the decision to rename the file, which is the point I was most curious about. 

 

If I had to guess, I'd say this re-designation is being done to simplify support and reduce the number of dumb user errors, which is certainly understandable from the perspective of the USKP team.  However, I still would have preferred to see compatibility for older mods and increased flexibility for mod authors take priority over idiot users who can't be bothered to read the mod requirements.

 

Regardless of the form it takes, I'm still happy that they're finally moving to a unified patch.

Respectfully, but I would request that you move to an alternate method of a "checking" for other mod installations. Checking by explicit ESP name totally scuppers anyone that might try to merge mods together using Mator the Eternal's Merge Plugins TES5Edit script. It's one of the reasons that I won't be able to merge down more than a dozen weather mods into a single simple ESP because Minty Lightning for some reason was coded to explicitly call of it's own ESP by file name. 


  • 0

#19 Departed_1

Departed_1

    Jarl

  • Mod Authors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 738 posts

Posted 23 July 2015 - 08:02 PM

Respectfully, but I would request that you move to an alternate method of a "checking" for other mod installations. Checking by explicit ESP name totally scuppers anyone that might try to merge mods together using Mator the Eternal's Merge Plugins TES5Edit script. It's one of the reasons that I won't be able to merge down more than a dozen weather mods into a single simple ESP because Minty Lightning for some reason was coded to explicitly call of it's own ESP by file name. 

What method do you suggest?


  • 0

#20 cryosaur

cryosaur

    Prisoner

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 24 July 2015 - 10:41 AM

Respectfully, but I would request that you move to an alternate method of a "checking" for other mod installations. Checking by explicit ESP name totally scuppers anyone that might try to merge mods together using Mator the Eternal's Merge Plugins TES5Edit script. It's one of the reasons that I won't be able to merge down more than a dozen weather mods into a single simple ESP because Minty Lightning for some reason was coded to explicitly call of it's own ESP by file name. 

If you're savvy enough to merge plugins, it should be no sweat for you to edit the scripts, replace all instances of the old esp name(s) with the new one, and recompile.


  • 0

#21 DoubleYou

DoubleYou

    Wiki Stepper

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,500 posts

Posted 24 July 2015 - 04:13 PM

I see little reason for merging plugins. But maybe that's because I never go over the limit :;):



#22 TechAngel85

TechAngel85

    Akatosh

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,281 posts

Posted 24 July 2015 - 05:56 PM

From a maintenance perspective, would you rather work with one file or four files?

#23 keithinhanoi

keithinhanoi

    Jarl

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 569 posts

Posted 25 July 2015 - 09:52 AM

Its funny because Kesta, Mator and I were having a discussion on Keep Game.GetFormFromFile or Game.GetModByName in scripts.

 

Its possible to redirect the forms and name to the merged plugin and will be a feature down the line :D

He is currently working on Script Fragments and is nearly done.

 

Keith, check out mators asana, there is a bunch of newish info.

 

Yeah, Mator PM'ed me to see if I could help with testing. I really wish I could, but with my big move back to the US in five weeks, I simply don't have the time. The only thing I've alloted time to is one last update to AOS, including any new relevant UP v2.1.3 fixes (now released out of beta,) but when I saw the USLEEP announcement, it caught my attention as I'm sure AOS users will be asking about it soon enough. I'm half glad I won't be around to see the bazillion "Is your mod compatible with USLEEP!?!!!" on every Nexus mod comment thread.

 

--------------

 

Another thing that worries me - and I've voiced my concerns - is the recommendation of switching from the separate UP patch plugins to the new unified one even on an in-progress game. Obviously the UP team's goal will be for that to work in the sandbox of a load order which only consists of Skyrim LE + the UP plugins.

 

Where things can get hairy is load orders with "sensitive" quest-adding mods that don't seem to respond well to their plugins' load order slots being shifted. I've seen things get messed up in my game after adding a new plugin into my load order of an in-progress game, and the problems were due to a plugin lower / later in the load order being shifted one slot down in the LO. The mod's scripts no longer saw their corresponding data stored in my save file, because the load order index of the reference ID no longer matched. This was despite that mod never being disabled / removed from my load order. Because of that experience, I now go through great pains to make sure all the plugins in my load order never change their index position.

 

I know it's well outside the UP team's concerns, but when loading an old save based on the separate UP plugins, certainly the effects of changes further down one's load order caused by the deletion of up to three of the UP plugins is something to consider with caution.


  • 0

#24 Greg

Greg

    Dragonborn

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,566 posts

Posted 25 July 2015 - 04:21 PM

This reminds me of RESTful web services. There are no contracts or data types and if I change something that breaks your code, it's your fault for not doing it "right".



#25 EssArrBee

EssArrBee

    Incompatibilism Manager

  • STEP Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,721 posts

Posted 25 July 2015 - 07:18 PM

Hey kryp, are you planning to do an update to any mods or just wait till the new USLP comes in November? 



#26 Departed_1

Departed_1

    Jarl

  • Mod Authors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 738 posts

Posted 25 July 2015 - 07:35 PM

Well, I have updates planned for a number of mods, but I haven't had time lately to work on them.  I'll probably prioritize updates for the mods that won't be affected by USLP and wait for the others until after USLP comes out.


  • 0

#27 oqhansoloqo

oqhansoloqo

    High King

  • Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,398 posts

Posted 25 July 2015 - 09:15 PM

One could argue that any updated file is a new file.  I see this as more of an update to the USKP to include support for the DLCs than as a completely new file.  If the edits themselves or the FormIDs were changing, then I definitely agree and would feel that it should be treated as a new file with a new name.  But given that the majority of the thousands of edits and non-DLC records shared between USLEEP and USKP will be identical, I think it should be treated as an update rather than a brand new file.

 

I'm just don't see where the confusion would come from.  A quick glance at the metadata or the file's masters would determine which version you were dealing with.  Almost every mod that I know of that has started out as individual files then gone on to release legendary version, has kept its original name.  The ones that don't are generally more of a pain to deal with because anyone who is creating compatibility patches has to decides whether to update and/or support two different versions.  In many cases, existing compatibility patches remain valid and functional if the mod doesn't change it's name.  Though, again, if there is a huge restructuring or change to the record edits or FormIDs within the file, then it should probably change names since that restructuring will likely invalidate any patches regardless.

 

But it isn't necessarily a different beast with regards to a specific mod.  Take a house mod that alters Proudspire and has been forced to use USKP as a master only because of the single cookpot record that it adds.  Chances are that one record will remain identical between USLEEP and USKP.  If the file name wasn't changed, then that house mod would still function perfectly regardless of whether a player is using the older USKP or the newer legendary version.  However, by changing the name, the author of that house mod now has the following options:

1) do nothing and allow their mod to become outdated and unusable for the growing majority of players

2) change the mod to support the new file name and drop support for the non-legendary version

3) update the mod for the legendary version and then continue supporting two versions of their file instead of one

 

Obviously if that mod author is no longer around, then #1 is going to happen by default.  Some mod authors will choose #2 for simplicity and to ease their own work load.  Others will try to support both versions because there are still people who don't have all DLCs and, quite frankly, because there is nothing about their house mod that requires the DLCs other than the Unofficial patch.

 

I think that forcing mod authors to update their mods and to indirectly make their mods dependent on all three DLC, when the mod wouldn't otherwise need to be dependent on any of the DLCs is simply the wrong choice.  Referring back to the comments on community standards and unspoken contracts, I feel like this decision could be seen as a breach of that assumed contract. 

 

-----------------------

 

Also, just to be clear, I don't think for a second that this is going to be a devastating compatibility disaster for the community.  As a mod author, I see it as a minor annoyance more than anything. There will be a handful of mods that this have some issues due to this since their authors aren't around anymore, and a probably several dozen others that will be affected and will simply adapt to the new file.  The convenience of having a unified unofficial patch more than makes up for any small headaches created by it's implementation.  If I seem to be arguing the point more strongly than seems warranted, it's mainly because I'm finding this discussion of compatibility and community standards to be rather interesting and enjoyable.  ::P:

I totally agree with your opinions about all of that.  I don't think you are arguing your points more than warranted.  You have created many mods relying on the UPs and use scripts in some of them.  You also realize that there are many mod authors no longer around that have perfectly good mods, some of which will be incompatible with the naming change of the plugin names transitioning from USKP to USLEEP.  Lots of people around here tend to support the opinions and decisions of the mod authors who create them out of respect and without much question, even when those opinions are sometimes flawed.  While they should be respected, sometimes people need a little convincing to make better decisions about things.

EDIT: I think the UP team is making a bad decision here and they should go for compatibility with existing mods over catering to the fraction of modders that don't read changelogs or mod descriptions and notices.


  • 0

#28 Neovalen

Neovalen

    Talos

  • Mod Authors
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,675 posts

Posted 26 July 2015 - 12:33 AM

I totally agree with your opinions about all of that. I don't think you are arguing your points more than warranted. You have created many mods relying on the UPs and use scripts in some of them. You also realize that there are many mod authors no longer around that have perfectly good mods, some of which will be incompatible with the naming change of the plugin names transitioning from USKP to USLEEP. Lots of people around here tend to support the opinions and decisions of the mod authors who create them out of respect and without much question, even when those opinions are sometimes flawed. While they should be respected, sometimes people need a little convincing to make better decisions about things.

EDIT: I think the UP team is making a bad decision here and they should go for compatibility with existing mods over catering to the fraction of modders that don't read changelogs or mod descriptions and notices.

To be entirely fair it's a pretty big fraction.
  • 1

#29 TechAngel85

TechAngel85

    Akatosh

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,281 posts

Posted 26 July 2015 - 12:56 AM

I wouldn't call it a fraction, I'd call it a majority.



#30 EssArrBee

EssArrBee

    Incompatibilism Manager

  • STEP Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,721 posts

Posted 26 July 2015 - 02:10 AM

I wouldn't call it a fraction, I'd call it a majority.

Well, 99/100 is still a fraction.  ::P:




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users