Arthmoor is the biggest problem with modding in this game.

[Nyarlathotep]

He has enough pull with the nexusmods people to get any other unofficial patch removed, and while his has some useful features, I hate how it doesn't just fix bugs but is basically "Skyrim according to how Arthmoor thinks it should be".

[sigma sam]

Him deleting the USSEP patches for 1.5.97 version is the sole reason why i love the implementation of mods being undeletable and only archivable
Had there not been archived older version of it, he wouldve been the most notorious skyrim player/modder to exist
I get the idea of modernization but some mods havent been updated for years and i doubt theyll ever get patched to the current versions unless someone takes the job onto themselves

[John]

I'm not denying that he puts a lot of work in it, however i agree on your points. I haven't used the patch in years now for those reasons. If the mod was just bugfixes okay, but he went beyond that, changed things that shouldn't be changed, nerfed things that were never powerful to begin with, dictated that players can't have any input in using exploits yes or no. And no i'm not talking about just the dawnstar chest, and i don't care about the resto loop. So many things were changed for no reason but, "i don't think people should use it so now you can't".

If you know how to avoid game breaking bugs the only thing you might need, is a few console commands to complete some misc quests. The patch seriously ruins any fun to be had in challenge runs and for that reason i avoid it like the plague for those runs.

[Halliwax]

What a "bug" is is subjective. The unofficial patch has thousands and thousands of changes, and I don't think I disagree with a single one. Arthmoor does a great job.

[Bansheebutt]

I have to wonder if he truly thinks that "Doughvuhkiin? nuoohhhHHHOOooooo!" he needlessly packed in the with patch is a good thing or if he's just committing to the bit because of how obviously awkward it is.

[alexander_dougherty]

Originally posted by Nyarlathotep:

He has enough pull with the nexusmods people to get any other unofficial patch removed, and while his has some useful features, I hate how it doesn't just fix bugs but is basically "Skyrim according to how Arthmoor thinks it should be".

Just don't call them an unofficial patch, the Skyrim unofficial patch is Arthmoor's creation, so he defends it's reputation.

Arthmoor can't get a patch pulled if it doesn't use that terminology, if you called it the "Skyrim SE Amateur Modding Patch" or the "Skyrim SE Overhaul Patch" you would be fine, Arthmoor might not like it, but so long as you differentiate between your patch and his he would have no grounds for a complaint.

[Qua2ar]

Arthmoor did alot of good for the modding community, you can not argue against that, you don't like him, that's fine, but that doesn't diminish his accomplishments.

[WhipMyWombat]

i still dont know what he was doing with the USEPP tags he must of unchecked everything so its not stolen like it was in vanilla

[Altbert]

Everything brought in can be pulled out (but obviously you need tools and know how to work with those tools).

[Liquid Inc]

he spent the time making a patch that fixes bugs and glitches across the game. His own time, for free, for you, and you complain about it?
Yes there may be things in said patch you don't like, and there may be things they changed that aren't considered (by you) to be a bug/glitch that needed fixing, but that doesn't mean he deserves the hate for it.... Certainly not the "biggest problem with modding"

It's his mod, why *can't* he pull the older versions if he deems that the correct course of action? what right does anyone else have to say otherwise?

Your just the user of Arthmoor's work at the end of the day; paid for or not he gets to choose what's available in it and where it's available from. That is part of the rights that they have when creating mods for Skyrim (and that applies to anybody who does).

[Darkling]

Serious question: why do you host bugfixes as discrete patches and not as text files on like github or something, and use a bulk script compiler tool to compile and place them in the proper location when they're updated?

It seems like you're using 90s technology to patch the game, when in the software world we have this thing called revision control.

It's much easier to fork patches when they're text files than some sort of bytecode, plus it negates the pissing contests of who "created" what. When your contribution is editing a few text values and ultimately people only keep you around because you know everything about a system, then you're just a computer janitor.

Revision control and open-sourcing of modified (or better yet, completely redone from scratch) vanilla game scripts plus bugfixes is the bane of computer janitors, because then their secret knowledge is free to all.

Also there should be a difference between editing an executable file, editing a script, and editing visual assets. The current mod load order scheme is insufficient.

[Altbert]

What Liquid wrote ^^. Don't complain. Use it or don't. If you dislike some things, create your own patch for the patch. Mod authors are creating mods for personal use in the first place. If they feel it may be of use to others they may publish, at least that's how it works for me. Some will like it, some don't. If you don't like it, move on!

[sdack]

This shows once more how important it is for modders to start embracing the open-source philosophy.

[Rhapsody]

Originally posted by Liquid Inc:

he spent the time making a patch that fixes bugs and glitches across the game. His own time, for free, for you, and you complain about it?
Yes there may be things in said patch you don't like, and there may be things they changed that aren't considered (by you) to be a bug/glitch that needed fixing

The changes can also be reverted or changed further relatively easily. I'd recommend anyone with a bit of time on their hands look into it, you only need xEdit to get started.

[alexander_dougherty]

Originally posted by sdack:

This shows once more how important it is for modders to start embracing the open-source philosophy.

I don't think it does.
As I said people just need to not call their patches "unofficial"....

And as others have said, you can't really complain about someone doing the hardwork for you, if you don't like the unofficial patch create your own, just don't use any of Arthmoor's patch as starting material, as this is illegal, and give them a different name

[Altbert]

Originally posted by sdack:

This shows once more how important it is for modders to start embracing the open-source philosophy.

What the heck do you mean? The only things that are closed by the Creation Kit, creating a BSA file, are the PSC files, which can be easily decompiled by the Champollion Papyrus decompilrer. Everything is open to anyone who wants to use the available tools. It never blocks anyone to create a loose file mod including PSC files. But open-source doesn't mean that you can unabashedly use others ideas!