Skyrim Landscape and Water Fixes (by Wizkid34)

[CorneliusC]

Coincidentally the mod updated again today to version 8.4.

[TechAngel85]

Haha! They're proving my point. They started out as a mod that fixed things that USSEP couldn't due to USSEP's self-imposed scope, but nearly every single one of the items on v8.4 could be addressed and handled by USSEP. I feel they are truly trying to be a companion mod to USSEP, but a real companion mod would work with USSEP and scopes wouldn't overlap.

[z929669]

2 hours ago, TechAngel85 said:

Haha! They're proving my point. They started out as a mod that fixed things that USSEP couldn't due to USSEP's self-imposed scope, but nearly every single one of the items on v8.4 could be addressed and handled by USSEP. I feel they are truly trying to be a companion mod to USSEP, but a real companion mod would work with USSEP and scopes wouldn't overlap.

I completely agree.

[Mousetick]

I don't get what all the fuss is about. What is the problem that this mod presents exactly? What are the tangible, concrete issues it creates for mod users or for players in-game?

This mod fixes cosmetic issues that are not in USSEP precisely because USSEP doesn't address them soon enough or won't ever address them as they're considered out of scope for USSEP. Nowadays USSEP updates mainly addresses gameplay, "lore" and UI issues. Both mods together complement each other nicely. This mod requires and is built on top of USSEP.

We can argue whether some of its changes are necessary/arbitrary/subjective, but the same can be argued about USSEP. I'd rather this mod exist than not, as it's more convenient than using a bazillion tiny fix mods. And fixing this type of issues is painstaking, boring work that few modders are willing to do. So I'm glad someone is taking care of it.

The updates may be beneficial for donation points, but if you care to look at the comments instead of badmouthing, many changes/fixes are in response to user reports. They're not done in a complete vacuum, just for the sake of putting out updates.

Lastly, in regards to conflicts, whether the same changes were in USSEP instead of this mod, wouldn't change anything. So this argument doesn't stand.

The whole bashing on this mod sounds more like politics than serious technical discussion. Please provide actual tangible points to demonstrate how/why this mod is bad.

My 2 cents.

Edited November 18, 2023 by Mousetick

[TadasTalalas]

1 hour ago, Mousetick said:

boring work that few modders are willing to do

Yeah this argument is strong and on point. If I had to choose to have this mod or don't in 2.3.0 version then I would chose to have it. There is not a lot of hours in the day to do everything, that mod creator is doing all of us a big favor.

 

In TechAngel85 post I saw only "could have" and "could be" those fixes done on USSEP, but now they are not done. And words like "I feel like". TechAngel85 you had a bad day or something? You cannot "feel" technical stuff, you can "feel" gameplay or lore stuff.

 

If we look at the big picture. The final result what we get? That guy wizkid34 he's making fixes nobody else addresses, those USSEP fixes comes now every 6-12 months? OK USSEP fixes comes and fixes some stuff, then the wizkid34 guy reverts some of them back. What's the problem?

Edited November 18, 2023 by TadasTalalas

[ButchDiavolo]

Can we please keep this conversation about the mod and not make it personal. There is no need for that. People have opinions and they don't always match your own. As (supposed) adults we can agree to disagree.

On the topic: to me, whether or not SLaWF and USSEP overlap is a non-issue. Skyrim in all it's forms is flawed and both mods aim to fix the flaws. This is what modding the game is about in essence: getting the base game updated/ fixed/ working better. To me most mods that change the LOOK of the game are merely the cherry on top and a matter of personal preference.

SLaWF may have started out as "just" a landscape fix, but over time wizkid probably saw other issues that weren't/ still aren't being addressed by USSEP. So he stepped in to fix them. Nothing at all wrong with that. More kudos to him I say.

As for the overlap, using STEP as a mod guide and adding mods on top of it, invariably means USSEP/ SLaWF edits are being overwritten by other mods. In my modlist over half of USSEP edits are changed for various reasons, like I don't agree with what USSEP changed or another mod does it better. Again, a matter of personal preference.

So in my opinion both these mods complement each other, despite the overlapping scope. Problems are fixed and the game benefits. As to how the overlap is handled is pretty much up to the player. Some will want to keep the USSEP edits and others the SWaLF ones. Everything is easily solved with xEdit, a merged patch and or a wrye bash. In my opinion people should really learn how to use Wrye Bash to fix issues. But that is a whole other discussion.

[TadasTalalas]

52 minutes ago, ButchDiavolo said:

Can we please keep this conversation about the mod and not make it personal.

Yeah you are right, my bad.

[z929669]

Tech has provided context for his stance on this mod if you go back and read the posts from nearly the very beginning: scope creep & lack of documentation (especially early on) leading to unexpected incompatibilities with mods like RS (and others).

The reason I agree with him is admittedly mostly procedural for me (not really 'political'). I abhor scope creep and lack of documentation, and Tech is pretty good with that 'boring' landscape work in the CK. If he is willing to delve into a more specific landscape-correction solution, I'm all for that.

I wasn't originally keen on dropping this for reasons stated by Mouse, Butch, and Tadas, but in the past several years since Tech began pointing out the 'problems', I've come around to see what he is arguing.

[Mousetick]

2 hours ago, ButchDiavolo said:

So in my opinion both these mods complement each other, despite the overlapping scope. Problems are fixed and the game benefits. As to how the overlap is handled is pretty much up to the player. Some will want to keep the USSEP edits and others the SWaLF ones.

There is actually very little overlap in terms of record conflicts in the plugins between USSEP and SLaWF, so it's not even necessary to "triage" the changes between the 2. As I mentioned previously, SLaWF is built on top of USSEP and is designed to complement it. Not to replace or compete with it. There are no serious conflicts such landscape or navmesh between the two. Most of the conflicts between USSEP and SLaWF are caused by the farm crop ownership set by SLaWF, if that feature is used.

1 hour ago, z929669 said:

I wasn't originally keen on dropping this for reasons stated by Mouse, Butch, and Tadas, but in the past several years since Tech began pointing out the 'problems', I've come around to see what he is arguing.

What actual, concrete, problems are there today? If I'm correctly understanding and following Tech's reasoning, the problem is that this mod makes changes that should be in USSEP. How is that a problem? How does it matter where, in which specific plugin, those changes are? The end-result in the load order and in-game is exactly the same whether they are in mod A or mod B. 

[ButchDiavolo]

1 hour ago, z929669 said:

 and Tech is pretty good with that 'boring' landscape work in the CK. If he is willing to delve into a more specific landscape-correction solution, I'm all for that.

If Tech wants to do that, I am all for it as well. Having multiple options is always a good thing. I just hope he is prepared for the potential can of worms, i.e. patches and the like.

I think that for us STEP followers "mod scope" is not as much of an issue as it is for the curators. I guess this is what is causing this discussion.

If I look at myself, it is more an issue of "Does this mod fix the problems I am having?" If it does, great, imma install it. If not, then not. So it is probably more a difference of insight? Basically, we just want to play. Not that I do much playing with all the new mods coming out, but again, that is another discussion.

It is amazing that after all these year Skyrim still has such a vibrant mod scene. Which also means that people are finding different ways of finding solutions for known, unknown and previously unfixable problems. And while we are very fortunate to have the STEP curators keeping watch and update the lists, I keep coming back that it is ultimately the users responsibility what mods to use. But, this is just MY opinion.

[TechAngel85]

8 hours ago, Mousetick said:

I don't get what all the fuss is about. What is the problem that this mod presents exactly? What are the tangible, concrete issues it creates for mod users or for players in-game?

For users/players, none.

8 hours ago, Mousetick said:

This mod fixes cosmetic issues that are not in USSEP precisely because USSEP doesn't address them soon enough or won't ever address them as they're considered out of scope for USSEP. Nowadays USSEP updates mainly addresses gameplay, "lore" and UI issues. Both mods together complement each other nicely. This mod requires and is built on top of USSEP.

That's partly the point. They're not reporting their findings to USSEP so the fixes that USSEP can handle could be included. Over time they've started fixing the same things that USSEP fixes. That is scope creep. I've personally talked to WizKid about it and they agreed the mod developed far beyond the original intent and that the mod should have been renamed a while back....but too late for any of that now.

SLaWF was originally added for a specific reason and over time the mod has developed beyond those reason enough to either completely reconsider it and retest it, or drop it. This isn't the first time we have run into this issue with a mod and had to reconsider it. It happens from time to time as that is part of the process with building a Guide within a limited scope (Step Mandates).

8 hours ago, Mousetick said:

We can argue whether some of its changes are necessary/arbitrary/subjective, but the same can be argued about USSEP. I'd rather this mod exist than not, as it's more convenient than using a bazillion tiny fix mods. And fixing this type of issues is painstaking, boring work that few modders are willing to do. So I'm glad someone is taking care of it.

Who said we were going to replace the mod with a ton of other mods? No one said that. I'll leave it at that since the rest of the post is antagonistic.

4 hours ago, ButchDiavolo said:

Can we please keep this conversation about the mod and not make it personal. There is no need for that. People have opinions and they don't always match your own. As (supposed) adults we can agree to disagree.

Thank you! I seen the posts and I prepared to hand out some warnings if the personal stuff wasn't quenched.

37 minutes ago, ButchDiavolo said:

If Tech wants to do that, I am all for it as well. Having multiple options is always a good thing. I just hope he is prepared for the potential can of worms, i.e. patches and the like.

I think that for us STEP followers "mod scope" is not as much of an issue as it is for the curators. I guess this is what is causing this discussion.

If I look at myself, it is more an issue of "Does this mod fix the problems I am having?" If it does, great, imma install it. If not, then not. So it is probably more a difference of insight? Basically, we just want to play. Not that I do much playing with all the new mods coming out, but again, that is another discussion.

It is amazing that after all these year Skyrim still has such a vibrant mod scene. Which also means that people are finding different ways of finding solutions for known, unknown and previously unfixable problems. And while we are very fortunate to have the STEP curators keeping watch and update the lists, I keep coming back that it is ultimately the users responsibility what mods to use. But, this is just MY opinion.

Precisely. Everyone forgets we're the ones building the Guide that everyone is obviously so passionate about, considering a single mod is sparking such discussion.

 

Now, two of the three major reasons we're considering dropping this are scope creep and the fact that SLaWF is no longer a compliment to USSEP, but rather is doing the same thing. Those two bring us to the third which is back-end maintenance. What Step provides, we do so in our free time. The updates to this mod and the lack of documentation of all their changes lead to a hassle on the back-end for us. We don't have all the time you all seem to have to constantly check and verify changes from this mod for the Guide. We're all older gentlemen (I'm 38 myself with a partner and house to maintain). We all have our own lives, houses, kids, spouses, pets, jobs, etc. that come first. When SLaWF was young, it provided just want it said. Little by little it started doing things considered beyond the reasons it was added to the Guide and quite a few of those things aren't mentioned in their changelog; which means they're changing things users are completely unaware are being changed.

In contrast, USSEP has fairly complete documentation over the years and hasn't made us go diving into their plugins to look for changes that often. It also behaves like a full mod project rather than a individual mod, meaning it's release schedule is far better for users since they tend to update in large chunks rather than smaller releases. That is better for us than a bunch of smaller releases. That's the main reason of preference to having the edits from SLaWF that can be in USSEP, be in USSEP. Some of what we do will always boil down to maintenance and time.

Lastly, our plans are not always public. We have plenty of discussion behind the scenes. What we have discussed in regards to this is creating our own version of what SLaWF is doing, but be a true companion mod without any overlap in scope. This would mean a slimmer and more streamlined mod that does just want it says on the label and nothing more. All issues that can be fixed by USSEP (namely position adjustments, in which SLaWF has 100s of these) would be reported to USSEP for them to address vs being an a separate "companion" mod. Yes, this would take time to develop, but as was pointed out Skyrim isn't going anywhere and more options are always better.

 

I do want to address the quiet part that Z said out loud. DP has created "DP chasers" in the community. I don't believe WizKid to be one of these authors as I have talked to them on occasion. (I will fully admit that I don't have any love for WizKid either. They are distributing a version of RWT on their discord without permission and has been asked to remove it, but has yet to do so. A DMCA has been considered, but no action is being taken as of yet.) Anyway, the reason Z likely mentioned DP is because we, as the Guide creators, have to be on the lookout for these types of mods to ensure they don't become a nuisance to the Guide. At present there is only one author we've considered that does this and who's mods are also in a Step Guide. I have spoken, personally, with this author and determined as such from those conversations; thus, their mods are more closely monitored and more harshly assessed than others.

[ButchDiavolo]

11 minutes ago, TechAngel85 said:

We're all older gentlemen (I'm 38 myself)

 

38 is considered "older gentlemen"? I must be a fossil then at 54...

15 minutes ago, TechAngel85 said:

I do want to address the quiet part that Z said out loud. DP has created "DP chasers" in the community.

What does DP mean though? You youn- um older gentlemen these days use abbreviations that us toothless old biddies don't understand...

[TechAngel85]

16 minutes ago, ButchDiavolo said:

38 is considered "older gentlemen"? I must be a fossil then at 54...

What does DP mean though? You youn- um older gentlemen these days use abbreviations that us toothless old biddies don't understand...

 No ageism meant. We tend to have a younger crowd in the community is all. The majority seem to move on right around when their 30s hit. Greg and Z are closer to your age, I think. DY younger than I. I'm the middle child.

DP = Donation Points (from Nexus)

[framx2l]

3 hours ago, TechAngel85 said:

For users/players, none.

That's partly the point. They're not reporting their findings to USSEP so the fixes that USSEP can handle could be included. Over time they've started fixing the same things that USSEP fixes. That is scope creep. I've personally talked to WizKid about it and they agreed the mod developed far beyond the original intent and that the mod should have been renamed a while back....but too late for any of that now.

SLaWF was originally added for a specific reason and over time the mod has developed beyond those reason enough to either completely reconsider it and retest it, or drop it. This isn't the first time we have run into this issue with a mod and had to reconsider it. It happens from time to time as that is part of the process with building a Guide within a limited scope (Step Mandates).

Who said we were going to replace the mod with a ton of other mods? No one said that. I'll leave it at that since the rest of the post is antagonistic.

Thank you! I seen the posts and I prepared to hand out some warnings if the personal stuff wasn't quenched.

Precisely. Everyone forgets we're the ones building the Guide that everyone is obviously so passionate about, considering a single mod is sparking such discussion.

 

Now, two of the three major reasons we're considering dropping this are scope creep and the fact that SLaWF is no longer a compliment to USSEP, but rather is doing the same thing. Those two bring us to the third which is back-end maintenance. What Step provides, we do so in our free time. The updates to this mod and the lack of documentation of all their changes lead to a hassle on the back-end for us. We don't have all the time you all seem to have to constantly check and verify changes from this mod for the Guide. We're all older gentlemen (I'm 38 myself with a partner and house to maintain). We all have our own lives, houses, kids, spouses, pets, jobs, etc. that come first. When SLaWF was young, it provided just want it said. Little by little it started doing things considered beyond the reasons it was added to the Guide and quite a few of those things aren't mentioned in their changelog; which means they're changing things users are completely unaware are being changed.

In contrast, USSEP has fairly complete documentation over the years and hasn't made us go diving into their plugins to look for changes that often. It also behaves like a full mod project rather than a individual mod, meaning it's release schedule is far better for users since they tend to update in large chunks rather than smaller releases. That is better for us than a bunch of smaller releases. That's the main reason of preference to having the edits from SLaWF that can be in USSEP, be in USSEP. Some of what we do will always boil down to maintenance and time.

Lastly, our plans are not always public. We have plenty of discussion behind the scenes. What we have discussed in regards to this is creating our own version of what SLaWF is doing, but be a true companion mod without any overlap in scope. This would mean a slimmer and more streamlined mod that does just want it says on the label and nothing more. All issues that can be fixed by USSEP (namely position adjustments, in which SLaWF has 100s of these) would be reported to USSEP for them to address vs being an a separate "companion" mod. Yes, this would take time to develop, but as was pointed out Skyrim isn't going anywhere and more options are always better.

 

I do want to address the quiet part that Z said out loud. DP has created "DP chasers" in the community. I don't believe WizKid to be one of these authors as I have talked to them on occasion. (I will fully admit that I don't have any love for WizKid either. They are distributing a version of RWT on their discord without permission and has been asked to remove it, but has yet to do so. A DMCA has been considered, but no action is being taken as of yet.) Anyway, the reason Z likely mentioned DP is because we, as the Guide creators, have to be on the lookout for these types of mods to ensure they don't become a nuisance to the Guide. At present there is only one author we've considered that does this and who's mods are also in a Step Guide. I have spoken, personally, with this author and determined as such from those conversations; thus, their mods are more closely monitored and more harshly assessed than others.

Sorry for the ignorance: who's this modder?

[z929669]

11 hours ago, Mousetick said:

What actual, concrete, problems are there today? If I'm correctly understanding and following Tech's reasoning, the problem is that this mod makes changes that should be in USSEP. How is that a problem? How does it matter where, in which specific plugin, those changes are? The end-result in the load order and in-game is exactly the same whether they are in mod A or mod B. 

First, see Tech's earlier posts. I do agree with his assertions even though they are arguably philosophical for the most part (but this topic mentions a couple of specifics like RS, and you also pointed out the farming/ownership thing). Let's just say (I think) that focused mods that stick to a single premise are easier to manage than 'overhaul' mods that address multiple mod categories, throwing in all kinds of unrelated changes to that original premise. It's more a philosophical position I'm taking personally. I admit that. It's a specialist versus generalist argument, I guess.

There's lots that this mod does that is desirable, but why not provide more focused alternatives if we are able? I don't want to scrap this mod unless there's an alternative approach. Tech has the CK skills and the inclination to do just that, so I'm all for it. I don't advocate dropping this one until we have a reasonable replacement(s), which I have no doubt is possible. I personally like the modular approach.