DynDOLOD 3.00 Alpha 182

[z929669]

just my take:

This is probably confusing for those less familiar with DynDOLOD dev. I know it's not 'incorrect' but it's a little misleading due to some visual inconsistencies. The Main Files don't have "2.xx" label (analogous to the Misc File), and the Misc File would benefit from a file description analogous to the Main Files: "Alpha version: ignore the Main Files if using this version".

I usually get all of the files from the OP, but even our dev guide instructions were wrong due to recent changes to the SSE Nexus source files/layout.

 

In my XP, many people don't read/see much other than what they want or expect.

[MuggleDude]

On 1/5/2022 at 4:08 AM, sheson said:

It is unclear what "your page" is supposed to mean.

The Nexus file sections clearly states what and which version a listed download is.

https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/32382?tab=files lists 3 download archives:

One is labeled DynDOLOD 3.00 Version Alpha-60. Are you saying that the file that downloads after clicking its Manual Download button is not the file DynDOLOD 3.00-32382-Alpha-60-1641286187.7z or does that archive not contain DynDOLOD 3.00 Alpha-60?

To be clear, on the first page of this forum topic, I clicked on DynDOLOD 3.00 Alpha-60 link and got sent to a Nexus page where a download window popped up. It downloaded a file that was labeled 3.00 Alpha-60. I ran it in MO2 and it produced the log file I showed you.  I did not see the actual download page on Nexus until later.  Nexus reports I downloaded 3.00 Alpha-60 on Jan 5.

My guess is the archive might not contain 3.00 Alpha-60. I checked the archive and it is only labeled Dyndolodx64.exe.

 

Edited January 6, 2022 by MuggleDude
Added info.

[z929669]

18 minutes ago, MuggleDude said:

To be clear, on the first page of this forum topic, I clicked on DynDOLOD 3.00 Alpha-60 link and got sent to a Nexus page where a download window popped up. It downloaded a file that was labeled 3.00 Alpha-60. I ran it in MO2 and it produced the log file I showed you.  I did not see the actual download page on Nexus until later.  Nexus reports I downloaded 3.00 Alpha-60 on Jan 5.

My guess is the archive might not contain 3.00 Alpha-60.

Take care to rename/delete your previous DynDOLOD folder so that you can drag/drop the new version into place to ensure a clean folder. Relics from previous versions break DynDOLOD (e.g., ..\DynDOLOD\Edit Scripts\DynDOLOD\Presets folder contents). I always use the Mega links, BTW.

You should also completely replace (rather than merge) DynDOLOD Resources on update and ensure you have no conflicts from previous versions in you mod list.

[sheson]

1 hour ago, MuggleDude said:

To be clear, on the first page of this forum topic, I clicked on DynDOLOD 3.00 Alpha-60 link and got sent to a Nexus page where a download window popped up. It downloaded a file that was labeled 3.00 Alpha-60. I ran it in MO2 and it produced the log file I showed you.  I did not see the actual download page on Nexus until later.  Nexus reports I downloaded 3.00 Alpha-60 on Jan 5.

My guess is the archive might not contain 3.00 Alpha-60. I checked the archive and it is only labeled Dyndolodx64.exe.

The archive contains DynDOLOD 3 Alpha-60. No other user report a problem.

Follow the installation instructions explained at https://dyndolod.info/Installation-Instructions to use 7-Zip to unpack the DynDOLOD Standalone archive into a new and empty 'DynDOLOD' directory that is outside of special OS folders like 'Programs Files' or 'Program Files (x86)', User, Documents, Desktop, Download and also not in SteamApps, game, Data or any mod manager folders. For example C:\Modding\DynDOLOD\.

Do not unpack over old versions.
Do not install the DynDOLOD Standalone with a mod manager or into mod manager or game folders.

[luci66]

Hello,
I have been using dyndolod successfully for a while. 
However I recently noticed that the generated dyndolod output file is only half the size of what it used to be. I remember it being around 10 gb but with alpha 60 and some recent versions, it is only around 4 gb with the same settings, if not higher settings. 
3 part question-

1. Are the newer versions so well optimized that it saves that much space?
2. Does the load order of mods such as "dyndolod resources se", "texgen output", "majestic mountains dyndolod 3 pack", "Skyrim Remastered- Glaciers and Ice LODS for dyndolod" etc matter before running dyndolod to produce output?
3. Even after downloading Inigo bloodchill manor patch and majestic mountain bloodchill manor patch, and rerunning dyndolod, the respective areas are still covered in rocks and almost unplayable.
Thank you  

[sheson]

28 minutes ago, luci66 said:

Hello,
I have been using dyndolod successfully for a while. 
However I recently noticed that the generated dyndolod output file is only half the size of what it used to be. I remember it being around 10 gb but with alpha 60 and some recent versions, it is only around 4 gb with the same settings, if not higher settings. 
3 part question-

1. Are the newer versions so well optimized that it saves that much space?
2. Does the load order of mods such as "dyndolod resources se", "texgen output", "majestic mountains dyndolod 3 pack", "Skyrim Remastered- Glaciers and Ice LODS for dyndolod" etc matter before running dyndolod to produce output?
3. Even after downloading Inigo bloodchill manor patch and majestic mountain bloodchill manor patch, and rerunning dyndolod, the respective areas are still covered in rocks and almost unplayable.
Thank you  

1. Maybe.
2. See https://dyndolod.info/Help/Load-Overwrite-Orders, https://dyndolod.info/Mods/Majestic-Mountains. For third party mods typically refer to its install instructions. too.
3. What does this have to with DynDOLOD? DynDOLOD generates LOD for objects that are added by the vanilla plugins and mods. DynDOLOD typically does not add new objects. Open console, click the object to get its load order form id.

[luci66]

11 minutes ago, sheson said:

1. Maybe.
2. See https://dyndolod.info/Help/Load-Overwrite-Orders, https://dyndolod.info/Mods/Majestic-Mountains. For third party mods typically refer to its install instructions. too.
3. What does this have to with DynDOLOD? DynDOLOD generates LOD for objects that are added by the vanilla plugins and mods. DynDOLOD typically does not add new objects. Open console, click the object to get its load order form id.

Thank you so much for quick and good answer. I understand what to do now.
Good day

[Soulmancer]

Dyndolod seems to get pickier with each update in the alpha 3.0.  Getting anxious about updating because when I do it seems to find a new error that halts the process that wasn't posing any issue in the prior build.  Most recently I am seeing this.  http://icecream.me/uploads/82cd0f6a605a1bac8b6c9f56e3cb5144.png 

edit: running it again, it appears to have skipped over it without the halting error; not sure what was going on the first time or what the naming contention warnings mean. 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Soulmancer

[sheson]

2 hours ago, Soulmancer said:

Dyndolod seems to get pickier with each update in the alpha 3.0.  Getting anxious about updating because when I do it seems to find a new error that halts the process that wasn't posing any issue in the prior build.  Most recently I am seeing this.  http://icecream.me/uploads/82cd0f6a605a1bac8b6c9f56e3cb5144.png 

edit: running it again, it appears to have skipped over it without the halting error; not sure what was going on the first time or what the naming contention warnings mean. 

Read the first post which explains that this is an ALPHA to test things and iron out bugs.

Read the first post what log files and bugreport.txt to upload when making posts.

Rad the first post which explains how to use the "Copy message to clipboard" instead of making screenshots.

Click on the link "Click on this link for additional explanations and help for this message." It should open https://dyndolod.info/Messages/Exceptions

Item not found
This is a bug with the tools encountering unexpected situations. Make a report on the official DynDOLOD support forum.

That  explanation links to https://dyndolod.info/Official-DynDOLOD-Support-Forum which also explains which log files and bugreport.txt to upload when making posts.

No reason to be  anxious about a tool reporting  problems in the load order. It makes it easier to fix/troubleshoot problems and errors. 

[ntluan_vn]

Can I ask you a question?
I noticed that some of the textures of leaves and stems are recorded in the file "dyndolodXXX.dds" but some are not, they are taken directly from the path "textures/***/***".
I've noticed with trees where they get their textures from the path from "textures/***/***" they will be a lot more sparse than the textures recorded at "dyndolodXXX.dds".
So is there any rule for DynDOLOD to write those textures to the "dyndolodXXX.dds" file? I see in version 2.98 all those textures are listed at "dyndolodXXX.dds" but not in 3.x.
Thanks for reading, sorry about my English, it's really bad.

Edited January 7, 2022 by ntluan_vn

[sheson]

27 minutes ago, ntluan_vn said:

Can I ask you a question?
I noticed that some of the textures of leaves and stems are recorded in the file "dyndolodXXX.dds" but some are not, they are taken directly from the path "textures/***/***".
I've noticed with trees where they get their textures from the path from "textures/***/***" they will be a lot more sparse than the textures recorded at "dyndolodXXX.dds".
So is there any rule for DynDOLOD to write those textures to the "dyndolodXXX.dds" file? I see in version 2.98 all those textures are listed at "dyndolodXXX.dds" but not in 3.x.
Thanks for reading, sorry about my English, it's really bad.

https://dyndolod.info/Help/Object-LOD
Object LOD uses the single texture in case the UV coordinates of a 3D shape do not allow the use of the object LOD texture atlas.

For a shape in the object LOD *.BTO to be able to use a texture on the object LOD texture atlas requires its UV coordinates to be inside 0.0 and 1.0.
If any of the UV coordinates are outside, the single source texture will be kept instead.

DynDOLOD may try to update the UV on the fly. If that is attempted and succeeds or has acceptable results depends on each case.

[Phlunder]

While reading through your new info page, I stumbled upon your suggestion to try Billboard4 for HD Tree LOD in object LOD. I have to say, I am blown away. I never saw such good blending and reaction to lighting from billboards. No need to change anything about lighting settings in TexGen either. Perfect blending with every setting on default - with or without ENB - no matter which weather mod. This is great, I just wanted to leave a big thank you - again! 

I just have one question: Why isn't this setting used by default? 

[sheson]

30 minutes ago, Phlunder said:

While reading through your new info page, I stumbled upon your suggestion to try Billboard4 for HD Tree LOD in object LOD. I have to say, I am blown away. I never saw such good blending and reaction to lighting from billboards. No need to change anything about lighting settings in TexGen either. Perfect blending with every setting on default - with or without ENB - no matter which weather mod. This is great, I just wanted to leave a big thank you - again! 

I just have one question: Why isn't this setting used by default? 

Compared to standard tree LOD it requires 4 textures instead of one. It requires 8 triangles instead of 4.
That's a significant change compared to standard tree LOD.

The defaults are somewhat supposed to have consistent results visually and resource wise across the versions. So new features and options are optional.

[Phlunder]

10 minutes ago, sheson said:

Compared to standard tree LOD it requires 4 textures instead of one. It requires 8 triangles instead of 4.
That's a significant change compared to standard tree LOD.

The defaults are somewhat supposed to have consistent results visually and resource wise across the versions. So new features and options are optional.

That makes sense. It just took me a while to figure out it was even an option. Its a drastic improvement, and its performance friendly too. Great alternative to 3D tree LOD indeed, as stated on the info page.

Edited January 7, 2022 by Phlunder

[z929669]

10 minutes ago, Phlunder said:

That makes sense. It just took me a while to figure out it was even an option. Its a drastic improvement, and its performance friendly too. Great alternative to 3D tree LOD!

Step has been suggesting Billboard4 (and Billboard1) for a while now for all LOD levels as a 'performance' option for trees in object LOD (versus Level[0|1|2]). Both react well with lighting. It can give back a lot of FPS with some mod LOD (e.g., Aspens Ablaze).

My XP is that Billboard# is always a bit flatter and darker (and fuller) in game than the 3D models, but they never seem to suffer from some of the alpha threshold issues you get with really branchy trees in LOD.

The Alpha version of DynDOLOD also has some really nice improvements for creating tree LOD as well.