keithinhanoi

On the positive side, I notice there's a third mod which hasn't been updated in a long time which has been added to Skyrim Workshop as a paid mod Under Review: Better Vanilla Hairs by kebrus. (The other two are SkyUI and SMIM, though those are not yet listed on the workshop.) Kebrus makes it very clear that the reason he has considering continuing work on the mod, which was left "abandoned" in an unfinished state back in 2013, is because of the recent turn of events. He's made it clear that this is an experiment to see people's response with a suggested price of $0.99 US, but it's "Pay what you like" pricing with a lowest price of FREE (something Gabe N added after his Reddit "Ask anything you want session", if I understand things correctly.) Kebrus explains things a bit more in a comments thread sticky on the Nexus page for his mod. This is a mod I've personally had in my load order since the time it came out, and it would be really nice to see it completed. But what is it worth to people, and how many people who originally downloaded the mod would still be using it now, like myself?

Okay, for consideration, here's a small case study of my own personal situation in how the introduction of paid mods is throwing a monkey wrench in my desire to give back to the community by way of my time and skills. As you know, I've been helping LoRd Korn, author of AOS (Audio Overhaul for Skyrim) for over a year now - building a FOMOD all-in-installer, updating and building new compatibility patches, and more recently, making fairly significant changes to the under-the-hood functionality of the mod. I'm near the end of putting together a fairly comprehensive update to the mod, and now, two of the mods for which I've made compatibility patches have been updated with Skyrim Workshop exclusive versions. Without naming names, one of the mods I use personally, and the other I do not. In neither case am I interested in purchasing the mod on Steam, because I completely disagree with their terms and the way the curated workshop was released, as I've mentioned, and for the mod I don't use myself, it seems unfair that I pay for it just to support - in my uncompensated free time - the users of a mod I didn't make myself. I've just been doing this as a way to give back to the community in some small way, you know? What's the result? Even for people who can do the hoop jumping between the Skyrim Launcher method of mod management and NMM or MO, etc., they are still completely on their own when it comes to compatibility. Now I'm all for everyone and their cousin learning how to use TES5Edit, but it's just not happening. Since I am volunteering tech support for AOS, what are my options? Until a paid mod needing an AOS patch becomes available free on Nexus, not much. I will have to refer the users to the paid mod's author, I suppose. If that author refuses to make compatibility patches (each of which has to be published as a separate Steam Workshop item, by the way,) then I guess I will potentially have to deal with unhappy AOS users. I sincerely hope it doesn't come to that, but who knows?

Ad popup? It's nagware, or perhaps nagmod, to coin a new term. Your link is to a html snapshot of the comments thread for that mod, which is now unavailable on Steam Workshop. I'm seeing this all over the place - posts that I read and when I go back they've been edited, or worse the thread or the whole mod is gone. Very volatile, and confusing.

And from that same Reddit thread of Chesko "failed experiment" post, someone dropped a link to a 2006 article about the release of $2.50 Oblivion horse armor DLC blowing up in Bethesda's face. I didn't get back into gaming until 2012 (Half Life 2), so it's very interesting to read about this, 9 years later! For Saerileth: Okay, so - thankfully - you were correct. Here's what Laast had to say about that: It's clear to me that he is taking the sale of his new mod very very seriously, and personally I feel he deserves a lot of respect for that. But it does highlight how different selling a mod is compared with sharing one for free.

Here I go again, quoting myself - this time to show I was off the mark. The Dark One had this to say regarding Nexus' presence on the Skyrim Workshop "Service Provider" list: See his full post via permalink here. So, forget my somewhat conspiracy theory-driven conjecture, I guess. I'm glad this information is at least somewhere, but since it is not in one place, there is such an immense amount of misinformation being spread, and I'm sure will be for some time.

... and I forgot to say that I've been working on that post for the last 8 hours on and off. And it continues: Another Nexus News update from the Dark One, with some very interesting points and information. There are now 58 paid Skyrim mods on the Steam Workshop which are Under Review (and by the way, the Steam Community itself is responsible for reviewing and flagging these mods since the Skyrim Workshop is "user curated".) Some of them are clearly "joke" mods or intentional anti-paywall-mod commentary, but a good number seem to have been posted in earnest. I now see that the minimum asking price can be just $0.25 US, in the US-based Steam Workshop, at least, so that's kind of good for the whole "economy of scale" thing I explained (until you get to the 25% / 75% split part, of course.) Oh, and the reason Frozenswaidon has pulled main downloads from Nexus is that he apparently has put them up to be Skyrim Workshop exclusives, here and here. Yes, I think what you're saying could be true, which is why I asked Laast for clarification on that statement. When I find out, I'll post back here.

Some observations (and speculation!) from things that happened while I was sleeping: It's really strange that the s**tstorm has been inproportionally targeting just some of the group of mod authors who decided to offer a paid mod at the start of Valves new paid workshop mod program. This ranges from personal/family death threats and/or threats of violence, indiscriminate spamming of some mod authors' various internet accounts, deletion and supression of mod authors' positive/optimistic/informational posts, and creation of fake accounts under the authors' alias to post misinformation on the one side, to a dull roar of rude posts and actual mature discussion on the other. All of it completely and utterly inexcusable, but why are people seemingly ganging up on certain authors? It's not just because they are well-known / respected, because a few who are "old hands" seem not to be experiencing as much of the brunt of it all from what I can tell. A real mystery to me. Chesko's Reddit post helps towards confirming a suspicion I have. He mentions that Nexus is listed as a "Service Provider" which can be selected to receive a percentage of Valve's revenue from the sales of Skyrim Workshop mods. Chesko also mentions that he had a month and a half to prepare for the introduction of the new workshop. Connecting the dots tells me that the Robin Scott / the Dark One was very likely already well aware of Valve's/Bethesda's plans when he posted his blog entry about the idea of paid modding. If true, then is appears this post may have been an attempt to get people mentally prepared for the inevitable. Chesko questions this profit sharing relationship between Valve and Nexus Mods (keep in mind to become a Service Provider at the start, you had to be approached by Valve/Bethesda, since everything was secret, under a NDA.) in light of Dark One's more recent blog post reaffirming that there are no plans to add a mod payment system to Nexus. The ugly side of the agreement between the mod authors who agree to publish paid mods and Valve / Bethesda is being revealed, piece by piece. Chesko's Reddit post mentions that Valve will no completed remove a mod from the Workshop after it has been publish for sale, and Valve's lawyer contacted Chesko, confirming that they will not remove his content unless "legally compelled to do so" - although they will make the mod(s) invisible to everyone except paid users. I have also already pointed out a statement by Shezrie implying Valve doesn't permit publishing of paid mods which already exist elsewhere, and this morning I note that on the comments thread for Pure Weather, Laast - who has a completely new overhaul mod for sale on Steam Workshop - said "I can't give a mod for free here on Nexus, and asking for money for the same mod on Steam. Hope you'll understand." I've asked for clarification on this, but my guess - from what Chesko, Shezrie and Laast have said - is that Valve's agreement for paid mod publishers includes an exclusivity clause. In other words, a paid mod on Steam Workshop cannot be available in its exact form anywhere else. A different version is fine, or one with a different feature set, but not an exact duplicate. Some of the things said by the SkyUI author's also seem to support this. Of course, the best way to find out is to "pretend" to publish a mod on SW to see exactly what the legal agreement terms are. To my knowledge no one has shared this text anywhere. If any of you have seen it, please post with a link!That said, the Steam Subscriber Agreement is easily accessed here, and with regards to Chesko's comment about being upset with Valve not completely removing his content, there is this clause from section 6-B: I'll also note: and ...which basically says to me that once you have published and user generated content (paid or free), Valve can use elements of it to make derivative works which is then Valve's to do with as they please - most importantly to "grant licenses" which in other words means sell your work. In Chesko's case, Valve is well within their rights to use derivatives of the two mods he has now "pulled" from the Workshop, and sell them without any need for 25% of revenues going to Chesko. Not that they will, but they can do this. A mod author doesn't even need to pull their mod off the Workshop for this to happen. Valve could take elements from a bunch of mods and combine them into derivative DLC content from which they will solely own and receive profits for - with some portion going to Bethesda, of course. I suggest people think about that for a minute or two. Besides that, I see the system as currently established as completely flawed from an economic standpoint. People have made arguments about custom armor / weapon mods not being worth even $0.99 US, and perhaps quest-based or overhaul mods being worth more, as Saerileth has mentioned, and I agree that this is a flawed comparison. The problem is most people seem to be basing these comparisons or judgments of relative value on what they've paid for games and/or official DLC content. And a lot of people, myself included, paid a discount price on the DLCs, and even Skyrim itself. You have to think back to what the original retail pricing of the game and DLCs is, and more importantly, consider economy of scale. The original retail price points of games and DLCs is based on sales projections - in the tens or hundreds of thousands, or even millions of units. Even the timing and percentage of discount pricing is such that it normally comes after the window of time of maximum potential profit has passed - often just a month or two after a game is released. Now, think about the scale of economy for sales of user generated content - and especially in the context of Skyrim modding. We all talk about how Skyrim modding is going strong - and yes, it is - but the user base isn't remotely what what is was in 2012 or 2013. So there are far far fewer potential "customers" now as compared to before. Even if everyone was really supportive and happy about the introduction of paid mods, I'd guess that you're still only looking at a potential customer base in the hundreds or thousands range for most individual mods, if you're fortunate. So, it's completely unfair to make comparisons between the pricing of user generated content mods and official DLC content or even the games themselves. Now, let's look at the two sides of this potential transaction - with the author as seller, and the mod user as buyer - with a hypothetical situation. I will assume that most mod authors will set the price according to how much time s/he has put into it and/or what s/he hopes to get, monetarily, out of its sales. For my example, say I've got a custom modeled and textured armor & weapons set, and I spent 200 hours on it. Because I'm moving back there later this year, I'll pseudo-randomly pick Oregon, USA's generous state minimum wage of $9.25, and using that hourly rate, the author may consider a minimal payback for her/his work of $1850. But really, since those 200 hours was potential free time spent outside of her/his real job, s/he'd like more, and sets a goal of $3000 in total revenues from her/his mod. Then to calculate the suggested price per buyer, this mod author looks at the number of endorsements one of her/his previously released mods from about 6 months ago, and sees 600 endorsements out of 9000 unique downloads. So based on those statistics, s/he sees that with the 25% cut that Steam content publishes receive, s/he would need to set the suggested price at $19.99, which is clearly way too high. So after giving it some thought, the author goes with a price of $4.99, which seems far more attractive, though to achieve that goal of $3000, 2,400 people would have to purchase the mod, with the author giving little thought to the fact that if that actually happened, Valve and Bethesda would receive gross revenue of $9000. Now, the buyer's perspective. For many people who see the mod appear for sale on the Steam Workshop, they think "there are thousands of full games on Steam for $5, or less. Some really good games. Many are old games on sale, yes, but still, $5! The armor and weapon set looks really sweet, but there's so many other things that $5 would be better spent on" (like a Starbucks coffee, says the cynic in me!) So they pass. Others think "If I paid $5 for each of the 300 mods I already use that would cost me $1500! I can't even afford $1 per mod, let alone $5!" However, a small group of people, possibly including some portion of of the 600 who endorsed that other mod by the author, really love her/his work, and maybe because s/he also still offers some mods for free, decide to buy this new one. 300 people. In the end, the author pockets $960 (whoops - we forgot about taxes, and also that the suggested price was $4.99, and some people bought it at the minimum of $1.99!, and finally that Valve only pays out in increments of $100, so there's $60 the author won't receive!) Completely bitter over the whole thing after realizing that Valve / Bethesda pocketed well over $2500, much closer to the $3000 she had hoped to make, the mod author swears off modding and never returns. Okay, yes, a totally invented scenario, but completely possible I believe, and highlights that this system does not easily allow for the idealistic scenario of a modding hobby turned profession ever coming true for most people. In my opinion, for the paid mod scheme for Skyrim (or any other Bethesda games) to have any chance of success, alternative arrangements need to considered. True micro-payment pricing, going below $0.49, to address the issues with economy of scale for example. "But at 25%, how will the author ever make anything?" you may ask. Well, the revenue split is clearly going to make it very difficult, but you are sure to get a lot more people to buy your mod at $0.49 each than at $4.99. More than ten times as many? I'm not sure with the Skyrim mod user base clearly on the decline. I've also seen revenue generated from download ad clicks suggested, but that won't ever be implemented on Steam as far I can tell, and things get murky when I imagine it being set up on Nexus because Valve and Bethesda aren't going to accept being cut out of a revenue stream scheme they've just introduced. Other ideas I've read include some kind of subscription-based revenue scheme, or offering mod author "packs" or author workshop access for a single payment. Oh - and also, true "Pay what you like" pricing that offers a $0.00 option. How about that? Really, I think Valve and/or Nexus have to get pretty darned inventive before we can declare it something everyone agrees to and is happy with. As it stands now, though, it seems for most authors it will never make them as money as they were led to believe, setting aside all of the sticky tricky concerns regarding permissions for the use of or dependency on other people's work. All of this said, I have absolutely no problem with people hoping to get some monetary return for all of their work, and especially in light of the complete and utter failure of the donation system / method, I support their pursuit using other avenues. I just don't support Valve's scheme and its terms.

I'm sorry Octopuss - I had meant to reply to this but I hope you understand when I say that I'm feeling like I've had all the wind knocked out of my lungs due to the events of the last 24 hours. There are quite a few goodies in store for the v2.3 update, 95% of it are improvements to functionality, compatibility and patch updates, and then a couple sound edits from LoRd KoRn. I'll post a full list when I can breathe again.

I've already given up on Golden Potato. Now I'm looking to get Beth in my game...

Interesting. In one post by Shezrie in the comments thread of her new Shezrie's Bleakden Town mod ($2.99 US default / $1.99 minimum exclusively on SW), she says that Valve allow "previous mods" to be published as paid on the SW: In the meanwhile, due to the abusive posts we've been seeing on the comments thread for any mod creator who's selling a mod on SW, she's made Old Hroldan Town hidden on Nexus and Steam until things calm down. Comments locked on her other mods, from what I can tell. Also - I notice with irony that the Steam page announcing paid Skyrim mods is still displaying art from the Chesko fishing mod that he pulled over Fore's protest.

There are so many posts on so many forums and comments threads everywhere, that I can't give a link, but I've read the reason why donation links given in any paid user content mods are not allowed is straight from the agreements that the Steam Workshop user has to click "agree" to in order to put mods up for sale. It basically states that the only place where the mod can be sold is on the Steam Workshop. If Valve doesn't want mod makers linking to free versions of their mods elsewhere, or even on the SW, that would mean some of those people in the initial group of paid mods will have to pull them, notably Chesko, and isoku (assuming he releases the new versions of iNeed and W&C on Nexus.) More likely - as I think I mentioned here (or elsewhere.... losing my mind here) - Valve will ask Nexus and/or individual users to remove the donation button, at least for mods which are available as paid mods on SW.

I'll make this a new post. I just almost can't keep up with it all.... If you want to see a list of Paid Skyrim Workshop mods that have been submitted and are currently under review, look no further than here. [sarcasm] Personally, I cannot wait for approval of Golden Potato, an incredible bargain at $9.99. [/sarcasm] I laughed so hard I cried. In fact, I'm still crying. ...and I'm counting the days until Nexus is asked / told by Valve to remove the donation system - not that people ever used it much (full disclosure: I have donated to exactly four people, and just finally paid for 3 months of premium access at Nexus.)

Okay, I've just found out that regarding the question of proceeds going to the authors of tools or possibly other mods upon which a paid user content mod relies on or was built with the help of, there's an option to select from a list of "Service Providers" who will receive a percentage of Valve's revenue (not the mod author's!) The list, which you can view here, is very short at the moment - just Blender, and curiously, MCM (Mod Configuration Menu). EDIT: I misunderstood what I read on that web page, and actually there are three others on the list of Service Providers, under the heading of "Communities": Nexus Mods, AFK Mods, and Polycount. The NIFScope team - well, jonwd7 - was approached by Valve asking if they wanted to be on the list, and it didn't happen in time for the launch. Read more about this and other interesting information at the AFKMods forum thread on the SW offering paid mods. The same web page also addresses - in a very general way - my question about what happens when someone offers a paid user content mod on SW which uses content with a license prohibiting monetized distribution: So I guess that takes care of any mutually conflicting licence agreements - it's the user's fault, kick them out, and make them pay for their transgressions. It still strikes me as a really big grey area when I start considering real world scenarios, however.

Not often that I quote myself, but I see that TechAngel has answered the first of my questions in a post in the comments thread for isoku's article on Nexus explaining why he opted to join the initial group of SW's paid Skyrim mods: Thanks, Tech, but this still leaves my second question, and also the other question about hooks in W&C to other (currently non SW paid user content) mods. Of course, by the legalese of the CK's EULA, Bethesda is saying all your mods are belong to us, so the point of my rhetorical questions is moot, I suppose. Nevertheless, the EULA has absolutely no bearing on the decisions people make to help each other make mods or provide free assets / resources for doing so... or not. That said, there is also the untested waters of challenging Bethesda's claim to use of "the New Materials" (as they call mods) in cases where the mods themselves are making use of other's intellectual property. Or even mods which have been produced without CK, and never published on the Steam Workshop. Can Bethesda still claim overriding domain of those intangibles? What about mods which have (re)textures based on images bought / acquired from a source with a user agreement that prohibits any form of monetized distribution, even if in a heavily modified state? Does Bethesda now both "own" those textures and simultaneously put itself in a situation of legal contradiction if that mod is released as paid user content?

I've been reading a good number of posts here and there from mod authors stating that they are planning / considering pulling their mods due to concerns that someone may try to steal their work by posting it on Steam as paid mod. For example, nivea, author of Winter Is Coming - Cloaks and many other Oblivion & FO mods, said s/he is considering not to offer her/his mods freely anymore. Also, many mod authors, like @fore (as has been mentioned) and nivea, are throwing up their "my mod / resources can't be used in your paid user content" warnings. But what about people who haven't said anything one way or the either? An example, from Wet & Cold v2.0's list of credits (only available on isoku's web page and not on the Steam Workshop entry): Of the above list, only volvaga0 is listed as an author of Wet & Cold v2.0 on Steam Workshop. Chesko and Arthmoor both have paid user content up, so let's assume they're okay with whatever intangibles they provided being included in this paid mod. Interestingly, this credits list is shorter than the one for W&C v1.422 on Nexus, and looking at the changelog for W&C v2.0 it seems that some assets from other modders were removed to "streamline the mod", but it still raises some questions: Were all the others beside volvaga0, Chesko, and Arthmoor in the above list contacted before Wet and Cold v2.0 was posted as a paid mod to check whether they agreed to their work / intangibles being used in a mod for which isoku could receive money? (Regardless of the answer to the above question) Will any of these people besides volvaga0 receive some portion of the 25% of payout over $100 that isoku receives? The Dark One has already asked these things - from a theoretical perspective - in his Nexus news post a month ago, but now it's reality, and strangely they remain unanswered: Valve thought of this, and so they allow a paid mod uploader to add Contributors, as explained on the Steam Workshop's web page explaining paid user content. However, I don't see any evidence that there's an vetting process for mods uploaded as paid content. Valve's approach is not pro-active, but rather user-dependent - after the fact, by way of a DCMA Takedown Notice form that anyone can use. This form is a bit forboding, as it makes it clear that people can be liable for damages if they "knowingly" make a false infringement claim. But I wonder who actually handles the burden of proof? Further to that, if someone takes ("steals") a mod freely available on Nexus and then uploads it as paid user content on the Steam Workshop, will DCMA Takedown requests be ignored if the original mod author hasn't included a clear written copyright notice? And how is it handled if a mod author has used the work / resources of others with permission - but that permission was only given while the mod using those resources was given freely, and no permission was secured again before the mod was uploaded as paid user content. And then, even after securing permissions, if a user has opted to use Valve's add Contributors feature to share any revenue, what happens with contributors who do not have Steam user account (and do not wish to have one, for that matter)? How will they receive what is due to them? Finally, what about paid user content mods which have "hooks" into other mods, instead of directly using assets or content. For example, they provide an MCM / SkyUI menu, or they make use of items added by other mods if those mods are found in the load order. Valve's line on this (again from the web page explaining paid user content) is the following: What do they mean by "should first ask their permission"??? If no permission is obtained, then what is the recourse for the authors of those other mods. If permission is not required, mods which solely combine elements of other (required) mods can be sold without any liability to share revenues with the authors of those other mods, from what I'm understanding by Valve's statement here. I see this all being very very murky and unclear, and having great potential to be divisive to the point of destroying the cooperative relationships that many different mod creators have fostered over time.

In a very un-Keith-like post, some disorganized thoughts: Some of the things people are saying about modders, both behind a shield of anonymity and without, is absolutely unacceptable abusive harassment. It's both embarrassing and completely disheartening. Personally, I'm more inclined to serious consider no longer contributing to the modding community due to the reaction I'm seeing than I am due to the new paid mods Steam model. Way more inclined. Since I didn't decide to yank Steam off my machine (and this is no commentary on those who did - power to you as it's your prerogative to do so) I'm poking around the initial offering of "paid" Skyrim mods, and see that: Wet & Cold's price is Pay what you want with a default of $4.99 US, and the lowest price at $0.99, and Isoku says "Pay what you can afford. I understand that not everyone can simply drop money on a mod but every little bit is appreciated and by supporting this mod, you are ensuring its further development. " I don't know if that was the pricing set and his note was there from the very start, but the comments on the (paid) Wet & Cold on Steam Workshop are absolutely abhorrent. Arthmoor's Castle Volkihar Rebuilt is also Pay what you want, default and minimum price is $3.49. The comments are not nearly as bad as the one's on Wet & Cold. There is no commentary regarding the mod changing to paid mode or being exclusive on Steam Workshop, etc., at all. Just the description. Arissa by Chesko is also Pay what you want, default $4.99 and minimum of $2.99. Chesko is very clear that the mod will always continue to be available for free, as previously mentioned.I'm running out of time before darting off to work. Will post more, but a couple more observations. Wet & Cold makes use of a lot of other people assets and work. I can't find anything that confirms that any of them would receive any of the 25% that isoku would receive. I totally and utterly agree that there was a chance to do something good and offer paid mods through Humble Bundle with their version of the "pay what you like" pricing model. But I suppose that would take away from the 75% cut shared between Valve and Bethesda. Last thought - Why Skyrim mods? It doesn't make sense to me unless they decided it would be their "lab rat". Although the modding community is still going very strong 4 years later, it's well past its peak in terms of the number of mod users and general interest. So, it is a terrible choice if they are actually expecting to make real money from it. I suspect that a choice was made as to the potential effect of bad press on the TES series leveled against the chance to rake it just a little more cash..... (More thoughts to come, obviously!)

Gamwich makes it very clear in the kid's description that this is not intended be just a high quality version of the vanilla designs, but rather something quite different.

The link in the OP is incorrect, because the mod was removed (and it seems the author went MIA?), and then re-posted under a new Nexus mod ID. Here's the new link: Clean Up Your Corpses by Mofakin

Thanks for trusting me, but I'm just one user. Your idea for a test is a good idea, just make sure to do the same things without Flora Respawn Fix for a proper comparison. I'd do it, but you know... time.... limited...

I'm going to guess that for Tech there's just not enough evidence to show that it's "safe" enough to recommend in the STEP Guide. Personally, I'm a harvester, so I'm continuing to use it (and am not experiencing any noticeable slow-downs due to increase game save file size.)

It's important to remember that ENBoost will only use system RAM (up to the limit you've set) when it's actually needed. You can use something like Skyrim Performance Monitor to find out how much RAM is being used between Skyrim and enbhost.exe. If you set it to 11836, though, I highly doubt all that would get used, and also I highly doubt your CTDs are related to your setting for VideoMemorySizeMB.

The author had intended on updating the mod to include options for either the "modern" elk mesh / texture replacement, or an improved Megaloceros (aka "Irish elk") replacement. However, unfortunately he posted a week ago that problems with the new Megaloceros has put the next release on "indefinite" hold. Very unfortunate. Perhaps keep an eye on this for future inclusion if that update does come to fruition?

I haven't used the RCRN shader .dll in a long time. So I'm going to give Viv7 a try. Woot Woot! EDIT: First thing I noticed straight away is that the DoF settings in Viv7 are very different from 6.5x, but as far as I can tell the enbeffectprepass.fx code is still the one developed by Aiyen. It's just that now there are more .ini settings, and some of them are named differently. So how can I get something approximating the DoF settings from Viv 6.5x? It's too "sensitive" to me and the focal depth is too short now... I played with the settings in the GUI just in the first section (camera), and it's a little better now. I just don't want to mess things up. EDIT 2: Other observations - and keep in mind this is with the Vividian - Vivid 6.5x RCRN weathers plugin, plus my custom patched mix of ELFX Enhancer edits: There's noticeably more bloom, which gives a hazy, Vaseline on the lens impression that results in lower contrast. A bit too much bloom for my liking, so I'll have to figure out which settings I need to change to reduce that. This is particularly evident inside Dragonsreach, which makes it too bright inside at day, as compared with Viv - Vivid 6.5x. I know with my mix of plugins it's not ideal, but I'm just comparing the enb presets only, with no changes in the load order. Don't get me wrong, though - there's a lot of things I'm really liking from what I've seen so far. :)

It should be called a engine "cut-scene" trailer, not gameplay trailer. You have to scour, but there are short descriptions of the UI and play modes to be found all over the place, to piece together into a mental image. It would have been much nicer to have an actual game play preview. Probably not close to finalized yet.

Manga - looks incredible, and I'm so glad to see what you've done with the mist / haze effect. But I'd like to drop it into my current play through - what's the ETA on RCRN compatibility? No rush, but if it's going to be a while, I may hack changes into the Vividian - Extended Weathers - CoT.esp plugin to get it to work. I know there'd be some missing custom weather presets, but RCRN still uses all of the vanilla weathers, so I'd at least get a "taste" of things to come...