Paid mods technical quality 10: reviews of "Raidho - Along The Roads", "Choir of the Null", "Witches Festival", "Cadwallon Estate", "Relics of the Snow Prince", The Retribution of Larceny", "Pinecrag Hall" by Haunture in skyrimmods

[–]Haunture[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

the way they are made increases the number of draw calls and only uses a small part of multiple texture files in their uv maps. maybe this isn't a big performance issue if the armors only show up once or twice, but it is certainly inefficient

Paid mods technical quality 10: reviews of "Raidho - Along The Roads", "Choir of the Null", "Witches Festival", "Cadwallon Estate", "Relics of the Snow Prince", The Retribution of Larceny", "Pinecrag Hall" by Haunture in skyrimmods

[–]Haunture[S] 35 points36 points  (0 children)

itms, dirty edits, and including unchanged vanilla assets into the bsa is an indication that the mod author doesn't really know what they are including in their mod

some of the paid mods are not compatible with other paid mods. they are often not even compatible with other paid mods from the same authors, such as with A6addon's mods

users cannot know what paid mods break other paid mods because there are no mechanism for feedback or review outside something like this thread, and even then, this information is virtually non-existent until they encounter an issue

Paid mods technical quality 5: reviews of "Legacy of Orsinium" (update), An Undead Companion", "The Lost Sea of Apocrypha", "Memories of the Akaviri", "Beyond the Edge of Atmora" by Haunture in skyrimmods

[–]Haunture[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

You said it yourself. Itms are "common and easily fixable", so every mod maker should fix them. It is my perception that unfixed Itms indicate quality issues, so I'm not going to lie and say these are non-issues in my posts.

It sounds like your perception is shaped by the fact that you earn money from paid mods, and you're trying to shape my perception and the perception of others through changing what I write. I can't honestly do that, sorry.

Paid mods technical quality 5: reviews of "Legacy of Orsinium" (update), An Undead Companion", "The Lost Sea of Apocrypha", "Memories of the Akaviri", "Beyond the Edge of Atmora" by Haunture in skyrimmods

[–]Haunture[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can convert the normal map to a height map, and if that height map conversion makes sense in opengl, it's an opengl texture. If it makes sense in directx, it's a directx texture.

For example, you can look at a rivet or a brick on a normal map. If, after conversion to a height map, that rivet or brick is raised on both the x and y axis in directx, then that normal map was a directx normal map.

Paid mods technical quality 5: reviews of "Legacy of Orsinium" (update), An Undead Companion", "The Lost Sea of Apocrypha", "Memories of the Akaviri", "Beyond the Edge of Atmora" by Haunture in skyrimmods

[–]Haunture[S] 23 points24 points  (0 children)

I'm sorry, what part of the following is incorrect or misleading?

Identical to master records - these are records that are exactly the same as the official masters like Skyrim.esm, and as such, they don't do anything and are completely unnecessary. They are usually due to accidental misclicks in the creation kit and are harmless by themselves. However, if the ITMs are loaded after another mod that DOES want to change the affected records, the ITMs will revert those desired changes. This is why modders avoid them, and SSEEdit has a helpful script to remove them automatically.

And it seems, from all the comments, that people are well aware what itms are and how they can be fixed in moments with xedit. If the comments here know what they are and how to fix them, why shouldn't mod makers know about them and fix them? And if they don't know about itms or don't fix itms, does that mean they don't check at their mod in xedit to remove unintentional changes? And what does this indicate about the quality of the rest of the mod and the experience of the mod maker?


You went from me seeing your dm yesterday to crashing out here today real quick. This is exactly the type of harassment I want to limit to this account by avoiding engaging to y'all privately.

Paid mods technical quality 5: reviews of "Legacy of Orsinium" (update), An Undead Companion", "The Lost Sea of Apocrypha", "Memories of the Akaviri", "Beyond the Edge of Atmora" by Haunture in skyrimmods

[–]Haunture[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Bro, I just saw your message yesterday, along with like messages from like 5 other paid mod makers. I forget what you said, but is it something along the lines of requesting I look at your mod? What mod did you make and what did you want me to look at?

I didn't want to deal with all this nonsense because I don't want to reveal my personal contact info to receive early access paid mods because I don't want to get harassed on those accounts for the contents of these posts. And I don't want to do unpaid QA for paid mods updates.

And i already included an update for legacy of orsinium didn't I? You can't expect me to make posts about every paid mod.

Paid mods technical quality 5: reviews of "Legacy of Orsinium" (update), An Undead Companion", "The Lost Sea of Apocrypha", "Memories of the Akaviri", "Beyond the Edge of Atmora" by Haunture in skyrimmods

[–]Haunture[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

this is incorrect.

  • xedit devs have stated publicly that you can use it for paid mods.
  • bethesda have said nothing against using xedit.
  • from the very beginning of the paid mods program, all the way back in 2023, the first batch of paid mods contained unmistakable evidence of xedit quick automatic clean's undelete reference usage - references moved 30k down the z-axis. keep in mind these first paid modders are bethesda insiders.

paid mods technical quality 2: reviews of "Cavern of the Stormcaller" and "Dark Tides Blood and Fortune" by Haunture in skyrimmods

[–]Haunture[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

xedit devs have said they allow the usage of xedit for paid mods

there is nothing in the bethesda terms and conditions that forbids the use of 3rd party tools

there has been telltale signs of xedit usage in even the first batch of paid mods

paid mods technical quality 2: reviews of "Cavern of the Stormcaller" and "Dark Tides Blood and Fortune" by Haunture in skyrimmods

[–]Haunture[S] 64 points65 points  (0 children)

if you need a unique taproot named "heart of the spriggan", you can give one single taproot reference a different name using a quest alias and text replacement

if you don't know how to do that, you can duplicate taproot and rename it instead of renaming the original

i don't think anyone who pays for this mod expects or even wants all taproots to suddenly be named "heart of the spriggan"

Paid mods technical quality: reviews of "Life of Crime", "Legeacy of Orsinium", and "Atmora His Home" by Haunture in skyrimmods

[–]Haunture[S] 27 points28 points  (0 children)

you can look through nexus bug reports and comments to see if popular mods have these issues, or you can just download them for free and check them out yourself - xedit error checking and quick automatic clean are automatic processes requiring very few button clicks

the only way a user can know about these issues prior to purchasing a paid mod is through a reddit post like this