STEP v2.2.8 Official Bug Reports

[EssArrBee]

Nope, you guys are correct :P

 

I DO NOT have Extended installed :facepalm:

 

I'll change it all back ...

---

Looks like Bugs got fixed already (thanks).

 

Distant Decals should be fine though (if we even need that one anymore)

Yeah I did fix it, but hadn't done the changlog yet. I'll do that now.

 

101 Bugs is one of those Extended mods that you should add on to your Core+ install. It adds a lot of dragonflys over water, the standing stones draw bugs too, like they are attracted to magic.

[z929669]

OK, thanks again

 

On another note: I updated the "Detailed Instructions Available" template so that when clicked in mod notes on the Guide, it opens into a new tab rather than advancing to the mod page and forcing users to use the 'back' browser function (which is a real PITA when following the guide).

[DoubleYou]

Thanks Z! That was one thing that was annoying me.

[Octopuss]

I don't know where to post this.

In the AMD CCC guide, there is an instruction to set OpenGL triple buffering on. This is useless and does nothing, because Skyrim is Directx game. If you want to force triple buffering, you have to use Radeon Pro or similar third party tool.

 

edit: The guide is basically inconsistent with 2.2.8 guide.

[rootsrat]

• Brawl Bugs Patch - not required for STEP:Extended users, as it's fully overwritten by Enhanced Blood Textures.

[DoubleYou]

• Brawl Bugs Patch - not required for STEP:Extended users, as it's fully overwritten by Enhanced Blood Textures.

Fixed 

[DoYouEvenModBro]

Sorry, this is not a bug, but rather a general question for the release. I'm not complaining, but are the BCF files going to be maintained for WB users? If not, why have them on the 2.2.8 guide at all? Eventually, a handful of them will be obsolete, right? I'm only asking since you guys said that MO 2.2.8 onward will be MO focused. Thanks :P.

[TechAngel85]

Sorry' date=' this is not a bug, but rather a general question for the release. I'm not complaining, but are the BCF files going to be maintained for WB users? If not, why have them on the 2.2.8 guide at all? Eventually, a handful of them will be obsolete, right? I'm only asking since you guys said that MO 2.2.8 onward will be MO focused. Thanks :P.[/quote']

This has been a thorn in my side for a long time. Basically it's been nearly impossible to get a staff member that still uses BCFs to check this out. WilliamImm was doing this for a while I think, but he hasn't been around a great deal (like myself but for separate reasons) to help with that. If going forward will be MO focused, then I would vote to do away with the BCFs and replace them with FOMODs, if need be, which is more geared towards MO. I can write the FOMODs when I return from my no-computer sabbatical.

[DoYouEvenModBro]

Sorry' date=' this is not a bug' date=' but rather a general question for the release. I'm not complaining, but are the BCF files going to be maintained for WB users? If not, why have them on the 2.2.8 guide at all? Eventually, a handful of them will be obsolete, right? I'm only asking since you guys said that MO 2.2.8 onward will be MO focused. Thanks :P.[/quote'']

This has been a thorn in my side for a long time. Basically it's been nearly impossible to get a staff member that still uses BCFs to check this out. WilliamImm was doing this for a while I think, but he hasn't been around a great deal (like myself but for separate reasons) to help with that. If going forward will be MO focused, then I would vote to do away with the BCFs and replace them with FOMODs, if need be, which is more geared towards MO. I can write the FOMODs when I return from my no-computer sabbatical.

Word. More of a reason for me to switch to MO too :-). I'm still hanging onto WB out of pure laziness :-). 

[SSL]

Sorry' date=' this is not a bug' date=' but rather a general question for the release. I'm not complaining, but are the BCF files going to be maintained for WB users? If not, why have them on the 2.2.8 guide at all? Eventually, a handful of them will be obsolete, right? I'm only asking since you guys said that MO 2.2.8 onward will be MO focused. Thanks :P.[/quote'']

This has been a thorn in my side for a long time. Basically it's been nearly impossible to get a staff member that still uses BCFs to check this out. WilliamImm was doing this for a while I think, but he hasn't been around a great deal (like myself but for separate reasons) to help with that. If going forward will be MO focused, then I would vote to do away with the BCFs and replace them with FOMODs, if need be, which is more geared towards MO. I can write the FOMODs when I return from my no-computer sabbatical.

Doesn't MO have BCF support in terms of plugin?

[DoYouEvenModBro]

Sorry' date=' this is not a bug' date=' but rather a general question for the release. I'm not complaining, but are the BCF files going to be maintained for WB users? If not, why have them on the 2.2.8 guide at all? Eventually, a handful of them will be obsolete, right? I'm only asking since you guys said that MO 2.2.8 onward will be MO focused. Thanks :P.[/quote'']

This has been a thorn in my side for a long time. Basically it's been nearly impossible to get a staff member that still uses BCFs to check this out. WilliamImm was doing this for a while I think, but he hasn't been around a great deal (like myself but for separate reasons) to help with that. If going forward will be MO focused, then I would vote to do away with the BCFs and replace them with FOMODs, if need be, which is more geared towards MO. I can write the FOMODs when I return from my no-computer sabbatical.

Doesn't MO have BCF support in terms of plugin?

No I think it uses FOMOD, right? 

[SSL]

Too, but there is BCF plugin.

[TechAngel85]

Sorry' date=' this is not a bug' date=' but rather a general question for the release. I'm not complaining, but are the BCF files going to be maintained for WB users? If not, why have them on the 2.2.8 guide at all? Eventually, a handful of them will be obsolete, right? I'm only asking since you guys said that MO 2.2.8 onward will be MO focused. Thanks :P.[/quote'']

This has been a thorn in my side for a long time. Basically it's been nearly impossible to get a staff member that still uses BCFs to check this out. WilliamImm was doing this for a while I think, but he hasn't been around a great deal (like myself but for separate reasons) to help with that. If going forward will be MO focused, then I would vote to do away with the BCFs and replace them with FOMODs, if need be, which is more geared towards MO. I can write the FOMODs when I return from my no-computer sabbatical.

Doesn't MO have BCF support in terms of plugin?

No I think it uses FOMOD, right? 

BCF is WB only. MO has BAIN support but it's horribly implemented compared to FOMOD support. Think of FOMODs as WB's wizards for MO.

 

EDIT: Unless the BCF is something new since I've been out of commission.

[DoubleYou]

Mod Organizer has a minor plugin that mentions BCF support. Never used it, don't know if it works. If you're creating fomods, Skyrim Redesigned could use one. For myself, I simply changed it into BAIN format, but that was tedious.

[DoYouEvenModBro]

I mean it's up to you guys whether or not you want to make BCF's for users who still use WB. Idk which one of you knows how to make the BCF's. I wouldn't complain if they were removed. I would just switch to MO. Next clean install I am going to switch. Until then, I already have everything set up in WB so whatever.