New forum guide for modders?

[Gako21]

I'll admit that I hate how Nexus works, but it is a very common source for things like mods. Not allowing it because it requires you to have a free account to download stuff is a bad decision. Honestly, this is starting to feel like an EA or Microsoft controlled thing at this point.

According to what Brains said here,

-- This is why we require a direct download link for the primary download button. If you want to have alternative links in your description such as nexus mods that is fine. --

only the primary link has to be to a direct download site. People can still link other sites, such as Nexus, in their posts. If people have gathered followers in such sites, those people probably will continue to find the mods directly from there, not through these forums anyway.

 

[LittleRedSonja]

I think the same way as Riamus.

I understand restricting downloads to places that might require payments, or private sites or stuff like that.
Nexus is a public place, and creating an account is free. We need an account here in the forums too to be able to interact in any way and I do not see anybody thinking it is a problem.

I already post content in 3-4 places, plus here, just to make it easy for everybody to find it and download it.
Making things more difficult, restrictive or annoying for mod creators is disincentivizing. Or people will probably just decide that sharing mods in the forum is just not worth the trouble and stay where they are now.
Nexus is not perfect, but at least allows for files almost of any size (try doing that in github please), no bandwith limit (like google drive has), can see stats, can add as many pictures as you want, post / discussion section separated from bug reports, file editing without a long approval period, edit texts in mod description because you forgot a comma without it having to go through approval again, mod lists, mod collections, dependencies and recommended mods and what not.

I do not see why suddenly change something that has not been an issue for 10 years.

 

[theFlu]

I wouldn't want "other sources" to be banned, the more options the merrier; but I do love the requirement of a hassle-free download. Heck, I'd be thrilled to see a requirement for a torrent, listed on a TFP-managed tracker. But that's just me.

A "Free account" is free only as long as the _other site_ decides to keep it so. And by default it already will track your actions, so it isn't truly free. Add required emails and whatever "pay to remove friction" -options and the costs keep racking up even before a required credit card interaction. The web loves to nickle and dime everything; enforcing an actually free option is just pure good, imo.

 

[LittleRedSonja]

I would not like a solution like TFP or any other gaming company IMPOSING a requirement to download mods ONLY from a specific site. Allowing monopolies and restricting how people can get access to the stuff they want always leads to bad results.

Mediafire, one of the examples mentioned as "Perfectly fine", is far from free either. The only difference is that it does not require to log in. Other than that, it will track you with 1000 cookies and more (even more than nexus), you have to pay to remove the adds, you have to pay to increase download speed, you have to pay to download folders just to name a few problems. It also has limited bandwith (unless the person that is actually sharing the mods pays), and limited storage (again, unless the person actually sharing the mods pays).
Which means, if you have a few big mods, or many smaller mods, it will force you to dance between multiple accounts/sharing providers, meaning more work, annoyance and hassle for the person actually making mods.

I do not have any interests in Nexus or anything like that, I just think it is the simplest, less restrictive place to share mods for this game and many others. And it annoys me when things are enforced for no clear reason.

And you can say it is possible to add more links in the mod description, but in reality, is an actual ban for Nexus or for any modder wanting to keep things organized in one place, because 95% of people would not even bother reading the mod description and even less looking for other links if there is a shiny CLICK ME TO DOWNLOAD button right there.
Which also leads to more problems, when people just skips the mod information, any notes about requirements and whatnot.

If TFP creates an OPTIONAL (Not mandatory or exclusive) file hosting service here in the forums with bigger file size limit, unlimited bandwith, free for everybody, easier to manage, with less restrictions than now to edit texts and files in the mods shared, a place where modders can have all their files in one place in an easy way, then, yej!, sign me in right now!.

Since this is not the case, then no, banning resources for no clear reason is not good.

 

[theFlu]

Mediafire

Yeh, that name made my skin crawl, but I didn't really know the current state of it. Sounds like the typical collection of All the bad things then, no need to update the crawl reflex. Guess why I suggest torrents

 

[Brains]

I'll admit that I hate how Nexus works, but it is a very common source for things like mods. Not allowing it because it requires you to have a free account to download stuff is a bad decision. Honestly, this is starting to feel like an EA or Microsoft controlled thing at this point.

Don't forget that people have followers on Nexus and that is where they expect to find the mods. Mod authors are probably not going to want to move their stuff somewhere else if they aren't already posting the mods to multiple sources. I can easily see mod authors deciding it isn't worth it anymore for this game with how these rules are being set up and just give up on this game and move on to another. Why jump through hoops when you make mods because it's something enjoyable? That just removes the enjoyment from it.

No one said you have to stop using Nexus Mods. We only want direct download links on OUR platform. If you want to use Nexus Mods as your main distribution source, that is fine. This isn't a monopoly, you are not required to use these forums to post your mods, you can use any platform you want.

Forcing someone to register an account, even if it is free isn't a good experience, just down download a resource. That is why the primary link must be a direct download link and not require an account to be registered, if you use our service. If you want your description to link to nexusmods that is fine, but the majority of people will want to just click the bright visible download button at the top and not read a 5k description to find alternate links.

I feel we are beating a dead horse here so if you would rather use nexusmods as your only download source, then you are free to delete your resources here and just use nexus mods.

 

[Riamus]

According to what Brains said here,

only the primary link has to be to a direct download site. People can still link other sites, such as Nexus, in their posts. If people have gathered followers in such sites, those people probably will continue to find the mods directly from there, not through these forums anyway.

So it is okay to prevent spreading the word about your mods? The mods are what help to keep this game popular. TFP has stood behind modding up to this point. Now they are restricting what can be done with it. No forum to share mods for the game for those who don't want to have the restrictions. A direct link required no matter what. No links to sites that require a log in unless you also have a direct link.

No one said you have to stop using Nexus Mods. We only want direct download links on OUR platform. If you want to use Nexus Mods as your main distribution source, that is fine. This isn't a monopoly, you are not required to use these forums to post your mods, you can use any platform you want.

Forcing someone to register an account, even if it is free isn't a good experience, just down download a resource. That is why the primary link must be a direct download link and not require an account to be registered, if you use our service. If you want your description to link to nexusmods that is fine, but the majority of people will want to just click the bright visible download button at the top and not read a 5k description to find alternate links.

I feel we are beating a dead horse here so if you would rather use nexusmods as your only download source, then you are free to delete your resources here and just use nexus mods.

I wouldn't care about it if we still could post about mods in a mods forum even if we don't use the Mods section. If TFP wants to keep the Mods section in a restricted way, that is fine... so long as there is an alternative here. Let us have the forum back for those who don't want to use the restrictive Mods section. It doesn't hurt TFP any by letting us have that. If people don't want to look there, that is fine, but let it be available. That is all I'm asking. Let people share their mods. It is too TFP's benefit to allow sharing mods with everyone without restricting it.

You say it isn't a good experience to require a log in to access mods, but people use sites like Nexus for mods all the time. I said I don't like them, but that doesn't mean they aren't useful and valuable, or that people won't happily use them for their mod needs. Most people don't care that much about a free account. Those who do can download from a direct link (if available), but if no direct link is available, letting people find the mods here is of benefit.

Think of it this way... Which experience is worse? Having to make a free account to download as many mods as you want for this and many other games (Nexus) or to not only download something but to also get fast support for it (faster than forums in general) (Discord)? Or to not be able to find something that you have always gotten through this forum because it can't be posted here anymore without the mod author following those restrictions that may require posting a mod somewhere else where they normally don't have it and having to maintain it in multiple places if they aren't already doing that? The latter is by far the wise experience. It is one thing to recommend a direct link to improve the experience, but to require it is entirely different.

Our only option now is to post in general discussion, where it will disappear within a day or two. That isn't an option.

 

[theFlu]

So it is okay to prevent spreading the word about your mods?

I won't speak for all, but when I open a mod page, the first thing I find myself reading, is the first sentence of the overview. Nothing's stopping anyone from making that into a decorated Nexus link, afaik - I don't think "prevention" is the thing going on here.

Just Some of the "Required fields" have requirements; "A DL link is an actual DL link" doesn't sound unreasonable. "A DL link is a link to my patreon" sounds a little more questionable. (You can link to free stuff from patreon as well)

Or am I missing something?

 

[bdubyah]

I honestly didn't even see that Nexus wouldn't be allowed for the main download link. Seems both mods I made resources for here got approved with the Nexus link as the main one though. Not sure what the big deal about using Nexus is, I'd bet the vast majority of people who use mods already have an account anyway, but I guess I'll go change it in my resources. I'd assume people who use Nexus would go there first rather than here anyway.

 

[Brains]

I honestly didn't even see that Nexus wouldn't be allowed for the main download link. Seems both mods I made resources for here got approved with the Nexus link as the main one though. Not sure what the big deal about using Nexus is, I'd bet the vast majority of people who use mods already have an account anyway, but I guess I'll go change it in my resources. I'd assume people who use Nexus would go there first rather than here anyway.

Appreciate the flexibility. This will all be a moot point when steamworks support is released anyways.

 

[Riamus]

I won't speak for all, but when I open a mod page, the first thing I find myself reading, is the first sentence of the overview. Nothing's stopping anyone from making that into a decorated Nexus link, afaik - I don't think "prevention" is the thing going on here.

Just Some of the "Required fields" have requirements; "A DL link is an actual DL link" doesn't sound unreasonable. "A DL link is a link to my patreon" sounds a little more questionable. (You can link to free stuff from patreon as well)

Or am I missing something?

They have us the ability to not include a direct download link initially, but removed the option and no longer allow more without such a link. If you don't have a direct download link, you can't post your mod. If you were allowed to post a mod without a direct download link like before and then include the links in the description instead, that would be fine. But they removed that as an option.

As far as Steam Workshop goes, will TFP only allow mods from there? Will they no longer allow any other modding? If so, how can someone provide links to something that isn't an actual mod at that point since it can't go into Steam Workshop if it isn't a mod. So it isn't moot that we can't share the information here without a direct link.

 

[LittleRedSonja]

I do not want to beat dead or alive horses, I love horses too much for that , but adding a little to the conversation and to what Riamus said:

Having the possibility of NOT adding a direct link option in the mod resource, but making that OPTIONAL instead, and instead add one or several links in mod description would be a good solution, if people think it is reasonable. I would be more than happy with that, and would make the mods section much more usable and flexible for everybody. If there is not link to download it could just say "Links in mod description" by default, or something like that.
Then a moderator can check if there is actually a direct link in mod description (and approve the mod) or not (and not approve the mod), like it was in the old forum, because added resources still goes through moderation anyway, and I am sure you do not only look at the DL link, but everything else.
Then the user can choose between the different links provided, yes will have to go through the mod description a little bit, which is anyway something good and we should encourage that, so there is a higher chance that people might read about requirements, EAC required or not, possible incompatibilities and fixes, information about how the mod works, and what not. Like I said, having a direct link right there, clickable without even scrolling down through the mod information is a call for even more problems with mods. Encouraging that behavior, or stating that it is a good thing to do that instead of "having to take the effort to read the mod description to actually download it" is exactly the opposite of what any modder would consider good practice.
So please consider making the requirement about providing a direct link for the "go to download" button something OPTIONAL. That is a change that can only be benefitial for both modders and users, which I understand is what we all want .

 

[theFlu]

If you were allowed to post a mod without a direct download link like before and then include the links in the description instead, that would be fine.

So the contention is roughly that "the most common 'mods distribution site' isn't allowed as a valid DL source"? I can see that being annoying, for sure.

The obvious problem is, where do you draw the line? "Setting up an account" is usually the same as "putting your email in yet another breachable database"; to some, like me, that's already a lot. I don't, and won't, have a Nexus acc; not when actually free forms of file transfer exist. Torrents!

If I was in the engine rooms, since it is the "de facto" site, I would consider granting Nexus an exception (maybe specifically for large mods); but I'm not. Keeping this site simple and as accessible as possible is a good goal. Requiring mods to be actually distributed "with no strings attached" seems an obvious ask to that end. Nexus is almost there, but just not quite..

 

[Brains]

Looks like nexusmod has an api that we can possibly hook into and generate direct download links. No promises but I will take a stab at it.

 

[theFlu]

Looks like nexusmod has an api that we can possibly hook into and generate direct download links. No promises but I will take a stab at it.

That .. sounds too good to be true, when they're actually limiting the DLs to registered people.

And to me, it seems it is: their doc links brought me to

https://app.swaggerhub.com/apis-docs/NexusMods/nexus-mods_public_api_params_in_form_data/1.0#/Mod%20Files/get_v1_games_game_domain_mods_mod_id_files_id_download_link.json

(I've never ran into the site before, but got there via an official looking docs-link on nexusmods (https://www.nexusmods.com/news/13921))

Which states it's for premium users only, others need to go via website. I guess if TFP is acting as a single "premium user", it might work, but is likely a TOS violation somewhere... mby mail their support instead?

 

[khzmusik]

When you add a new version it updates the history so you can view the history tab to download an older version. I'm not sure if it does that for download urls, but I believe it does.

Can you find out if this also work for links, rather than direct downloads? Meaning, if the direct download is a link, and the link changes, will the previous link show up as an older version?

Has anyone suggested the one strength nexus has, about mod dependencies yet?

I suppose we could include those manually, but a specific and consistent methodology would be super helpful.

There is a form field for dependencies, but it is just a text field. IMHO it would be nice if it could be configured to go to the forum pages for the other resources.

I was actually going to suggest that anyway, but forgot. Thanks for the reminder.

Also:
Perhaps it is beating a dead horse, but I am +1 for not requiring a direct download link. (Even though I have them myself.)

Requiring direct links effectively blackballs anyone whose mod is hosted on a third-party mod site.

And Nexus Mods isn't the only one. ModDB is also popular. They allow direct downloads without logging in, but AFAICT there are no permalinks to the files, so no URL to put into the "Downloads" field. And I'm sure there are more services like that.

 

[Riamus]

Don't forget that Nexus is only one site that is impacted by this. Even if you can make it work with Nexus using an API, that only solves one site. A lot of time can be spent reinventing the wheel, which is a bad practice in programming and website development (I've done both), or we could just go back to allowing no direct download link and have it work for all sites without any time spent beyond turning that option back on.

LittleRedSonja makes very good points regarding wanting people to actually read the descriptions. It is similar to my point about wanting users to be in the right place to get support when using an app (Teragon) that is not easy to learn to use. Already being there because you downloaded it from there makes it easy to get that support quickly and without hassle. It is actually a better experience for users than to download something and not have read where that support is located.

The direct link restriction isn't really benefiting users. Yes, having one can make it easier to download a mod than trying to search a description. However, the descriptions usually have far more than just a description. They include instruction to properly install or use the mod, compatibility information, extra downloads for different ways to use the mod, etc. Having users read the description instead of just clicking download is a GOOD thing and leads to a far better overall experience for the user.

One thing I've learned from both website design and software development is that it is important when designing something (or integrating something that was already designed, which I assume is the case with the mods section in the forum) is to consider not just what the designer likes or prefers, but what the users will find useful. That doesn't mean adding features that will take a lot of effort just because users want it if you don't think it is worth it, but for something that is already available, it is an easy choice.

People have been downloading mods for this game for as long as there have been mods and have been doing so through all these various sites without issue. Trying to fix something that isn't broken does the opposite.

Is there an actual reason why not having a direct link is going to negatively impact the game or site? Not "it is a better experience" but an actual negative that isn't based on opinion? After all, the quality of the experience will vary from person to person. Some may even find the new mods section to be a negative experience from their own perspective. That is just opinion and not a factually negative impact. I don't believe there is one. And if there isn't one, why not allow what is being requested? Make a point to recommend a direct download, but allow not having one. If it is really such a bad experience for users, they simply won't bother with that mod.

 

[Brains]

Can you find out if this also work for links, rather than direct downloads? Meaning, if the direct download is a link, and the link changes, will the previous link show up as an older version?

Yes it stores the links with each version.

There is a form field for dependencies, but it is just a text field. IMHO it would be nice if it could be configured to go to the forum pages for the other resources.

I was actually going to suggest that anyway, but forgot. Thanks for the reminder.

Also:
Perhaps it is beating a dead horse, but I am +1 for not requiring a direct download link. (Even though I have them myself.)

Requiring direct links effectively blackballs anyone whose mod is hosted on a third-party mod site.

And Nexus Mods isn't the only one. ModDB is also popular. They allow direct downloads without logging in, but AFAICT there are no permalinks to the files, so no URL to put into the "Downloads" field. And I'm sure there are more services like that.

It does not black ball other sites as you can add them in the description if you want, the primary download should be a link that does not require you to register.

Sorry but I'm going to lock this thread as we are just going back and forth and our legal counsel has asked that we do not link to a 3rd party site that requires registration as the primary download source.