Should TTW Require NVSE

What's new and upcoming in Tale of Two Wastelands? Find out here.
Post Reply
JaxFirehart
Posts: 3003
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 12:33 am

Should TTW Require NVSE

Post by JaxFirehart » Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:54 am

I have been constantly running into issues that could be easily solved by using NVSE. I have found work-arounds in order to ensure maximum compatibility, but I am to the point where NVSE just makes everything SO much easier. So what I want to know is: how many people have a problem with TTW requring NVSE?



Fruckert
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 2:23 am

I can definitely see a lot of

Post by Fruckert » Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:11 am

I can definitely see a lot of people having a problem with this, because it's not vanilla, but NVSE is so ingrained in modding New Vegas right now anyways that I don't think it'd have any significantly negative impact on anything.


I mean, I'm personally using it anyways, so why not? If it'll help, it helps.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

And like, other stuff, I guess.


Computer Build



JaxFirehart
Posts: 3003
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 12:33 am

Well I can guarantee that the

Post by JaxFirehart » Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:15 am

Well I can guarantee that the adherence to keeping things vanilla will remain. For example, when you enter the Pitt in FO3 you can keep either a knife or the .32 Revolver. This is similar to FNV's holdout weapon procedure. I implemented the holdout weapon procedure, but you are also allowed to keep all of your ammo, which makes the pitt a bit of a cake walk.


With NVSE I can ensure that you don't take more than 1 clip's worth of ammo for each holdout weapon you have.



yukichigai
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:28 am

I personally don't use NVSE,

Post by yukichigai » Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:13 am

I personally don't use NVSE, and I know I'm not alone.  NVSE may be solid, but it's still an add-on set of functions that aren't natively part of the game, and require injection.  While NVSE has a lot of benefits, the main issue I have is that, like you said, it's not strictly needed to get a lot of this stuff done.


(Actually using your example of the holdout weapon confiscation routine, I can think of a very solid, reliable way to do the same effect without using any NVSE functions.  In fact, even if I had NVSE I wouldn't use any of its special functions to do what you're describing; between RemoveAllTypedItems and GetItemCount there's not much point.)


Now I'm not saying that I'm opposed to the idea at all, and maybe if you gave me some different specifics where you're bashing your head into a wall I'd say NVSE is necessary.  Right now though I think it's something we can do without, and anything which makes this already complicated-to-install mod simpler is a good thing in my mind.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Risewild
Posts: 2371
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 9:14 am

Well I would say use NVSE,

Post by Risewild » Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:18 am

Well I would say use NVSE, many popular mods require it already so I guess many users are familiar with it.


The only problem is the users that are not that computer savvy getting confused about how to use NVSE, but I think that since it's just a matter of "drop the files in this folder and use this .exe instead" most would get the idea quickly. There are always those that no matter what will never be able to do it properly but that already happens with TTW without NVSE anyway cheeky.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

yukichigai
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:28 am

Actually, a thought occurs to

Post by yukichigai » Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:20 am

Actually, a thought occurs to me: if NVSE opens up a way to "de-level" the Courier when they show up in NV after completing the main campaign in the CW, I'd say that warrants using NVSE.  Right now if you do the CW campaign fully, including all the DLC, you wind up with a fairly high level by the time you wake up in Goodsprings, which sort of turns all of NV (save for Lonesome Road, holy hard) into a cakewalk.



JaxFirehart
Posts: 3003
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 12:33 am

Well I agree that there are

Post by JaxFirehart » Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:30 am

Well I agree that there are workarounds for the pitt holdout procedure, none of them are dynamic. What if a mod adds a new holdout weapon? How do we know how many rounds that thing can hold? What if it uses a whole new ammo type? We could require the mod authors to handle all that themselves, but then we have the issue of multiple mods fighting over that script, and getting them to work together takes some doing.


Believe me, I, too, am hesitant about adding NVSE, but it just makes development so much easier at times.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

gnubee
Posts: 81
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 1:07 am

^^^

Post by gnubee » Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:33 am

^^^


Second this. It does not really bother me either way to require or not require NVSE, but if it does allow for changes like this, then I am all for it being required.


Actually, I use NVSE anyway, so I am not opposed to requiring it. There are a TON of mods out there that use NVSE, and that many consider "must haves" - Project Nevada  - so I suppose the argument becomes something of a moot point really quickly.



Senterpat
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:37 am

I personally wouldn't mind,

Post by Senterpat » Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:46 am

I personally wouldn't mind, but the NVSE requirement would scare away alot of new modders I think. Though I use it, and if it would make things easier I say why not.


Call me Pat. Senterpat is too much to type.

drumber
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2013 7:22 pm

If it makes things easier

Post by drumber » Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:17 pm

If it makes things easier than make NVSE a requirement, lots of people use it and it isn't difficult to install :)


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Post Reply