Jump to content

z929669

Administrator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    13,028

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by z929669

  1. z929669
    A touch of warmth would correct that. It's far better than the absolute gray of CL snow. It looks like ash as I mentioned. When you are near ice and glaciers, it's comical. Real snow is bright white on a sunny day and very slightly blue shifted. In cloudy weather, it's white. Never gray though except at night, but it doesn't look gray at night due to relative brightness.
  2. z929669
    I think weathers and landscape complement each other due to image-space lighting variables as Mouse and I were discussing on the other topic. My main issue with CL is that its terrain LOD are not 1:1 with full landscape textures in terms of brightness ... and the absolutely horrible gray snow. I know they did this as a compromise, but I vastly prefer ML landscape snow. Not such a big deal when running ENB though. Terrain LOD assets should be relatively simple to generate I would think. Never tried though. I think the RAID author uses ELFX hardcore purposefully to cover interiors. He created the weather mod to do the same for exteriors (thinking of weather as exterior lighting mod)
  3. z929669
    I'm pretty sure the MA for this intends use of ELFX for lighting ... so darker nights and dungeons indeed. That's my play style. Maybe not for Step though.
  4. z929669
    Yeah, I agree that some alternative branch textures would be ideal. Otherwise, this mod does have limited compatibility. Even better would be if they could be affected by BDS.
  5. z929669
    I love the concept of this mod and that it focuses on realism and gameplay in addition to weather lighting and variation. I hate changing up lighting, weather, and landscape mods, since they are all so interdependent. What we have going now looks damned good, and tweaking any of these three variables will most likely break everything. I'd like to try though. My interests are peaked on Majestic Landscapes, RAID Weathers, and HLT now after seeing @Mousetick's screens .... definitely something I want to look at for a 3.0.0 release next year.
  6. z929669
    Oh my, don't get me going on snow in Skyrim. My opinion is that and CL snow is gray and always have been. I absolutely hate it. It looks like ash/ass to me, and vanilla coloring is only slightly better. ENB effectively resolves for the most part, and HLT snow trees match better that way under CL (but I wasn't focused on snow matching snowy pines in HLT when I was modding with it). I don't see ML snow as blue/cyan. I see it as white like snow should be, and the 'cool' bias that you are seeing as cyan is realistic to me on a sunny, clear day. Those ML+HLT screens look much better, IMO. That said, I think it would also look as good and increase compatibility with just a touch of warmth to the snow textures. I wish ML had been around two years ago when I was painstakingly (and futilely) trying to get 'matching' white snow in all snow landscapes of Skyrim (including on glaciers and mountains) without ENB :/ The blue sky may bias your eyes, drawing out the cool tones in the brighter snow, particularly in game. Easy enough to test with overcast weather though. That last compare of yours with the hacked HLT snow demonstrates how gray the snow is in Skyrim (particularly with CL). It looks 'OK' with vanilla cloudy weather, but the clear weather under RAID really shows the grayness of the snow. Appearance of snow in real life is highly influenced by sky lighting, because it is bright and reflective. Not gray. Even with a half moon, the night glows after a fresh snow. PS: This reminds me of why I haven't really played Skyrim for real since 2014. It must all be fixed for me to re-engage. Changing landscape mods is a major PITA, but I may play with ML in Step at some point. There are a hundred ways it may not be compatible though. Just thinking of it makes my head hurt.
  7. z929669
    Updated mod to AA v2.34 compatible. Mod instructions updated likewise.
  8. z929669
    Sounds like it, but if trees are floating, he may have sunk the models into negative z-axis on the affected models. Regardless, I may need to update the plugins, since he still isn't updating tree object bounds for his trees. That will be simpler to update, but it's probably not much work either way. He asked people to continue reporting issues though, so more changes could come.
  9. z929669
    Of course, Mindflux decided to update his mod immediately after I uploaded the LOD update ... I have yet to determine if he made plugin changes, model changes or both, so presumably, this mod will not work entirely with AA 2.34.
  10. z929669
    That weather mod may be worth a look
  11. z929669
    I think this mod may be a special case, since it's so dependent on the lighting and weather setup. Most of our other mods aren't as unintuitive as this one, so I don't think opens the flood gates on adding context to other mod descriptions.
  12. z929669
    Just to be clear: the 2.0.0 guide is still a WIP, so n/a to this conversation. The 1.0.0 guide also uses Cathedral Weathers, so same instructions would apply. Lastly, ENB has no impact on lighting detected by mods. It's post processing, so only affects the user's perception, not the 'perception' of any mod or plugin. According to the MA, many weather mods/vanilla impact interiors as well, even if it's not apparent to the user visually. CW interiors are apparently not relevant though, so use the vanilla reference for interiors: According to the MAs testing (and, in this case, the MA is the 'expert' IMO), Step should be recommending the Lite version if Lighting & Weather ModGroup is installed. Otherwise, it's up to the user to choose based on their lighting setup. steeleb is only suggesting that we add some context to the mod recommendations, so I think it's prudent to do so for the sake of guide followers that may not have the wherewithal to comprehend this mod's mechanics fully and within context of all relevant factors (or those that don't want to figure it all out for themselves). We do try to simplify things a bit for the novice, right?
  13. z929669
    Mod updated for latest version of the main mod. Wiki instructions updated.
  14. z929669
    Yeah, bug reports keeps it on the radar, whereas old posts get lost. I think it's a 'bug' though, since it's not expected. T4 is taking a break I suspect. he hasn't been very active in the past couple of months after releasing HLT. There are several fixes cropping up, and he recently posted that people should have been submitting these reports in the past 6 months I may address some of them on his behalf. This one is really simple, but it would be good to combine everything into a single patch update.
  15. z929669
    I would post it as a bug report. I never noticed it, but it's expected to use local trees for wood.
  16. z929669
    Yeah, I agree we could be recommending an option or giving some quick guidance on the mod instructions. Something like: "only Lite version is recommended with Cathedral Weathers" I don't play much. Pretty much testing and modding only. I stopped playing a long time ago. I'm waiting until the game is perfect. Could be there by end of 2022 I should think for Requiem to fully fledge. I'll let the others make the call, but that's my two cents based on the mod description, which is apparently very weather dependent. This was mentioned at some length on another topic as well. PS: Guide followers should consider reading the mod descriptions as well
  17. z929669
    Indeed OT for your thread. I wanted to give you a chance to reply within the context of that topic before moving these. Fixed that by moving them here. I do like the idea of providing the cleaned vanilla masters. Providing the cleaned vanilla plugin files is on a slippery slope with respect to rights, particularly for paid DLC content. I like even better the idea of the USSEP and USCCCP (or whatever the acronym for that one) patching out these issues. Again, we provide cleaning instructions in our guides but no longer as a specific step for users to execute. We also do explicitly mention that mods should be cleaned if LOOT indicates as much. I just thought @Mousetick was onto something when he mentioned xEdit errors for vanilla plugins in DynDOLOD logs. Around here, we tend to ignore and look past them in the DynDOLOD logs, but users are often concerned by them. If I had an option to ignore them in the output, I would use it just to be rid of the noise so that I can focus more on 'new' issues. Thanks for the clarity though. I don't altogether disagree with you.
  18. z929669
    I should have updated LOD models for the new version uploaded sometime this weekend.
  19. z929669
    Agree. No warning is necessary. The mod author clearly explains how the mod works and the lighting 'gotchas'. We heed this advice in our mod install instructions, so no warning seems necessary. It fixes a vanilla inconsistency, IMO.
  20. z929669
    Want to chime in on this point. Step helped to popularize the "cleaning of vanilla plugins" a long time ago by adding it to our guides. Prior to the advent of the xEdit auto script, this was tedious to explain and support, since it only needs to be done very rarely (on certain game updates). Lots of users had trouble with that and still do even with the script. It turns out it isn't necessary and cleaning some of the vanilla files can break the game in some cases. See this topic for our recent discussion on this and why we decided to eliminate it. With the SAE update, cleaning 'vanilla' masters is no simple 2-minute task. You must spend hours cleaning 40+ masters. It's just not necessary, and the support headaches for those that make a mistake are huge (lots of opportunity for mistakes in simple file management alone, due to the sheer number of iterations). We DO advise and instruct to clean any mod reporting ITM/UDR in LOOT ... but not vanilla plugins any longer. Given that vanilla masters will never be fixed at the source ( ), it's a moot point to report those errors, and I agree that it only adds noise and confusion for both user and developer. Do as you see fit, but reporting them on every run is redundant, IMO.
  21. z929669
    @Majorman or @Greg are the FNV guys that may be able to help.
  22. z929669
    You may need to first launch the game via Steam to assert all of the game config files. Do that and then try launching MO. Maybe a restart would help after Steam launch.
  23. z929669
    As I alluded previously: I'm fine with this bark. I think it is an accurate representation of many conifers (if not necessarily the 'species' depicted by HLT). Most tree mods are not true to natural morphology but rather are --more often than not-- good or passable approximations (e.g., I doubt any tree mod gets leaf/branch/bark morphology exactly right with respect to the intended species).
  24. z929669
    We are testing Collections, but waiting until everything we use is updated for SAE or other alternatives. Before we do that though, we will be updating our standard modding guide, so it will probably be a couple months before we address our support for Collections.
  25. z929669
    Please use spoilers. pasting a wall of text is frowned upon. Check your mods for "NA_BleedPerk" script (or load xEdit and look for a reference to that). I assume that you may have installed a mod option for a missing mod or otherwise installed a mod incorrectly. Look at things relating to Odin and Ordinator. Patches maybe. Disable plugins in blocks to narrow down the culprit. EDIT: This is the issue. You either did not enable this plugin, or you installed a mod option that depends on this: [02/01/2022 - 01:36:39PM] Error: File "SkyrimsUniqueTreasures.esp" does not exist or is not currently loaded.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines, Privacy Policy, and Terms of Use.

  I accept