STEP:Extended Proposal/Utilities

I just want to start by saying that I don't see any issue listing "STEP approved" utilities on either Guide. They are tools rather than mods so having them all in a Pack (to be install on top of Core) doesn't really make much sense, IMO. Listing them on the STEP Guide and pointing to their individual, respective guides makes more sense. Else, if dropped, they may not ever get mentioned at all and many users may not ever know of their value. That should sum up my vote on the tools in this section. Techangel85 (talk) 23:56, February 25, 2014 (EST)

What about Optimizer Textures and ConSkyrbe? You still want that in there? Your point makes complete sense, and I like the idea of having them listed on both guides. DoubleYou (talk) 00:24, February 26, 2014 (EST)

Not necessarily. That is why I said, "STEP approved" utilities. I don't know of anyone that uses those two you mentioned. Techangel85 (talk) 00:47, February 26, 2014 (EST)

BOSS Userlist Manager

Votes

Template:Yes I prefer this in a Utilities Pack. Might become unnecessary with BOSS 3 or with MO sorting implementation. DoubleYou (talk) 23:37, February 25, 2014 (EST)

ConSkrybe

Votes

Template:Yes I prefer this in a Utilities Pack. DoubleYou (talk) 23:39, February 25, 2014 (EST)

DDSopt

Votes

Template:Yes I prefer this in a Utilities Pack. DoubleYou (talk) 23:39, February 25, 2014 (EST)

Optimizer Textures

Votes

Template:No DDSopt is preferable. DoubleYou (talk) 23:39, February 25, 2014 (EST) Template:No Suboptimal compared to DDSOpt. Techangel85 (talk) 19:42, February 26, 2014 (EST)

Skyrim Performance Monitor

Votes

Template:Yes I prefer this in a Utilities Pack. DoubleYou (talk) 23:39, February 25, 2014 (EST)

TES5Edit

Votes

Template:Yes I prefer this in Core. DoubleYou (talk) 23:39, February 25, 2014 (EST)