TES Skyrim 0.211
Forum rules
new topics are not allowed in this subsection, only replies.
new topics are not allowed in this subsection, only replies.
- Author
- Message
-
Offline
- Posts: 77
- Joined: 12 Aug 2013, 20:38
Re: TES Skyrim 0.211
Boris... .211 is just too friggin' cool! Thank you! I have Skyrim moded out to a stupid level now (TPC, Amidianborn, Vivid Landscape, Vurt's, 4k body textures, stupid high quality clothes/robes/everything, and Oyama's Kountervibe tricked out to work with .211) and it all works flawlessly! This is one of the most impressive mods I've ever used/seen/read about. Thank you for dealing with all the stupid on the way to you crafting this masterpiece! Thank you!
_________________
I7-4750k @ 4.00ghz, Radeon R9 290x 4gb, 32gb Ripjaw RAM, Win 7 x 64 on SSD
I7-4750k @ 4.00ghz, Radeon R9 290x 4gb, 32gb Ripjaw RAM, Win 7 x 64 on SSD
-
Offline
- *sensei*
- Posts: 286
- Joined: 20 Sep 2012, 00:20
- Location: the perfect system
Re: TES Skyrim 0.211
OK, first of all, I totally agree with everyone here: ENB v0.207/v0.209/v0.211 are, feature-wise, pretty flawless. I absolutely love and respect and enjoy the project immensely and couldn't play Skyrim without it at this stage.
That said, I do have a problem with the new warning screen in v0.211. It isn't that I don't understand why it was put in, or even that I disagree with the concept in principle. My problem is, from a coding standpoint, I feel it was a little rushed and premature. Here is why:
Some features of the [PROXY] are not necessarilly "crapware" and represent the reason ENB had this feature in the first place. Case in point: SMAA. The standalone version of this AA is superior to anything else compatible with ENB at present, IMHO, and doesn't conflict with any of it's features. I have done EXTENSIVE tests and never had a memory crash, stutter, or even a performance decrease due to this essential feature.
Then there are the detected processes. I know it was suggested programs like MSI Afterburner MAY have incompatibilities beyond just the on-screen display that are KNOWN to cause problems, but it would be nice if the warning routine was smart enough to see WHAT proxy you were using or whether OCD was enabled in things like MSI Afterburner.
I realize this would require a ton of testing, but realistically, there are only a handful of "essential" things that most people use that could be given a pass for, the two mentioned specifically, and certain things that are definitely NOT supported (Hialgo Boost, etc.) that could be left as warnings.
If it was taken on as a "whitelist" approach rather than a blacklist, I think it would be far less overwhelming to add a few standard exclusions to the warn list. Also, the idea I posted before about resizing the warning so there is room for a column on the left that lists WHAT unsupported things were detected, would IMHO just be more professional looking, and wouldn't require really any testing at all to set up.
From a coding standpoint, if you are detecting a process, you know about it. You can have it output to the screen as text information. Just giving people that extra bit of information would IMHO make the difference in APPEARANCES from a generic warning that doesn't tell you anything about why it is coming up, which seems somewhat terse and off-putting, and something that is informative, and gives you INFORMATION about WHAT you did wrong, so you can gain knowledge and go about trying to fix it.
That is just my 2 cents. Again, I truly appreciate everything Boris has done with this project. I just hope to see future versions move more towards this informative approach at least, and possibly even a more selective means of determining whether certain proxies are OK like SMAA, once the author has time to heal from all the nonsense.
No rush though. Life comes first.
That said, I do have a problem with the new warning screen in v0.211. It isn't that I don't understand why it was put in, or even that I disagree with the concept in principle. My problem is, from a coding standpoint, I feel it was a little rushed and premature. Here is why:
Some features of the [PROXY] are not necessarilly "crapware" and represent the reason ENB had this feature in the first place. Case in point: SMAA. The standalone version of this AA is superior to anything else compatible with ENB at present, IMHO, and doesn't conflict with any of it's features. I have done EXTENSIVE tests and never had a memory crash, stutter, or even a performance decrease due to this essential feature.
Then there are the detected processes. I know it was suggested programs like MSI Afterburner MAY have incompatibilities beyond just the on-screen display that are KNOWN to cause problems, but it would be nice if the warning routine was smart enough to see WHAT proxy you were using or whether OCD was enabled in things like MSI Afterburner.
I realize this would require a ton of testing, but realistically, there are only a handful of "essential" things that most people use that could be given a pass for, the two mentioned specifically, and certain things that are definitely NOT supported (Hialgo Boost, etc.) that could be left as warnings.
If it was taken on as a "whitelist" approach rather than a blacklist, I think it would be far less overwhelming to add a few standard exclusions to the warn list. Also, the idea I posted before about resizing the warning so there is room for a column on the left that lists WHAT unsupported things were detected, would IMHO just be more professional looking, and wouldn't require really any testing at all to set up.
From a coding standpoint, if you are detecting a process, you know about it. You can have it output to the screen as text information. Just giving people that extra bit of information would IMHO make the difference in APPEARANCES from a generic warning that doesn't tell you anything about why it is coming up, which seems somewhat terse and off-putting, and something that is informative, and gives you INFORMATION about WHAT you did wrong, so you can gain knowledge and go about trying to fix it.
That is just my 2 cents. Again, I truly appreciate everything Boris has done with this project. I just hope to see future versions move more towards this informative approach at least, and possibly even a more selective means of determining whether certain proxies are OK like SMAA, once the author has time to heal from all the nonsense.
No rush though. Life comes first.
-
Offline
- Posts: 33
- Joined: 01 Jan 2012, 16:49
Re: TES Skyrim 0.211
for some weird reason enbhost wont inject the dll which wont allow me to load/play Skyrim.
I've added it to my exceptions list and set it to run as admin but still displays the error message cannot inject dll.
any help would be great
I've added it to my exceptions list and set it to run as admin but still displays the error message cannot inject dll.
any help would be great
Last edited by Vlaka on 27 Aug 2013, 09:13, edited 1 time in total.
-
Offline
- Posts: 37
- Joined: 26 Jul 2013, 16:11
- Location: US, MD
Re: TES Skyrim 0.211
This sounds very plausible, if you are just COC'ing from the main menu, then there may be many quest problems since you are still the prisoner and haven't done Helgen. You should just find a save game on the nexus that is at that point and do your test.GArfink wrote:
I am able to spawn 40 fire mages and 20 guards out side whiterun and get NO crashes!!!! So you would say that its pretty rock stable!!! (I tried Somber ENB Ultra and that under these conditions didn't crash my game! but even on my machine, it dropped down to 20ish fps though!)
BUT: When I spawn even 1 dragon and then kill it, as I perform the final blow the game CTDs everytime!
My theory: Its a NEW GAME, and I haven't completed the first dragon quest and kill my first dragon, so the game's absorb dragon soul script has a SEIZURE and crashes my game. As there aren't suppose to be any dragons at this stage.
Anyone any ideas?
(I am using only a very small subset of the mods I usually use and there were NEVER this problem before, but I've never tested stability by artificially spawning creatures before either.)
I am an old hand at modding, I have been doing so since Morrowind, so I have all the basics down.
I'm having the same freezing (I think) as it occurs when I try to cast a fire spell. I'm going to try disabling that mod and see what happens.
_________________
i7 3770k 3.5ghz, 32 GB Ram, HD7970 3GB VRAM, SSD for games, Win7 64bit
i7 3770k 3.5ghz, 32 GB Ram, HD7970 3GB VRAM, SSD for games, Win7 64bit
-
Offline
- *sensei*
- Posts: 289
- Joined: 08 Dec 2012, 23:05
Re: TES Skyrim 0.211
You're right, enbhost's memory consumption never goes up with hdtPhysicsExtensions working. I wonder what's so different about it? Other SKSE plugins work fine with enbhost process. hdtHighHeelNative.dll from the same author for example.Fragsnippy wrote:Ok i just find out that a plugin call hdtPhysicsExtensions is the reason ENBHOST.exe is not working. SOmehow it interferes with it
_________________
i5 2500k@4.0ghz - 24Gb RAM - R9-290 4Gb Tri-X - SSD 240gb Intel 520 - Win7x64
i5 2500k@4.0ghz - 24Gb RAM - R9-290 4Gb Tri-X - SSD 240gb Intel 520 - Win7x64
-
Offline
- *master*
- Posts: 199
- Joined: 13 Dec 2012, 18:08
- Location: France
Re: TES Skyrim 0.211
+ 1 for everything. Listing the detected unsupported software would be a good feature. Besides, it's true standalone SMAA might be more bug-free than SweetFx with ENB.Phinix wrote:OK, first of all, I totally agree with everyone here: ENB v0.207/v0.209/v0.211 are, feature-wise, pretty flawless. I absolutely love and respect and enjoy the project immensely and couldn't play Skyrim without it at this stage.
That said, I do have a problem with the new warning screen in v0.211. It isn't that I don't understand why it was put in, or even that I disagree with the concept in principle. My problem is, from a coding standpoint, I feel it was a little rushed and premature. Here is why:
Some features of the [PROXY] are not necessarilly "crapware" and represent the reason ENB had this feature in the first place. Case in point: SMAA. The standalone version of this AA is superior to anything else compatible with ENB at present, IMHO, and doesn't conflict with any of it's features. I have done EXTENSIVE tests and never had a memory crash, stutter, or even a performance decrease due to this essential feature.
Then there are the detected processes. I know it was suggested programs like MSI Afterburner MAY have incompatibilities beyond just the on-screen display that are KNOWN to cause problems, but it would be nice if the warning routine was smart enough to see WHAT proxy you were using or whether OCD was enabled in things like MSI Afterburner.
I realize this would require a ton of testing, but realistically, there are only a handful of "essential" things that most people use that could be given a pass for, the two mentioned specifically, and certain things that are definitely NOT supported (Hialgo Boost, etc.) that could be left as warnings.
If it was taken on as a "whitelist" approach rather than a blacklist, I think it would be far less overwhelming to add a few standard exclusions to the warn list. Also, the idea I posted before about resizing the warning so there is room for a column on the left that lists WHAT unsupported things were detected, would IMHO just be more professional looking, and wouldn't require really any testing at all to set up.
From a coding standpoint, if you are detecting a process, you know about it. You can have it output to the screen as text information. Just giving people that extra bit of information would IMHO make the difference in APPEARANCES from a generic warning that doesn't tell you anything about why it is coming up, which seems somewhat terse and off-putting, and something that is informative, and gives you INFORMATION about WHAT you did wrong, so you can gain knowledge and go about trying to fix it.
That is just my 2 cents. Again, I truly appreciate everything Boris has done with this project. I just hope to see future versions move more towards this informative approach at least, and possibly even a more selective means of determining whether certain proxies are OK like SMAA, once the author has time to heal from all the nonsense.
No rush though. Life comes first.
Whitelisting could be a good idea but I wonder if it's possible for Boris.
_________________
Asus P8Z77-V, G.Skill TridentX 2x4go PC3-19200 CL9, Intel Core i5-3570K (3.4 GHz), Gigabyte Geforce GTX 670 WindForce 3x OC(335.23), Samsung SSD 840 Pro 128go+500Go 7200RPM SATA III, Auzentech X-FI Forte 7.1, Windows 8.1 Pro x64, The Grim and Somber ENB
Asus P8Z77-V, G.Skill TridentX 2x4go PC3-19200 CL9, Intel Core i5-3570K (3.4 GHz), Gigabyte Geforce GTX 670 WindForce 3x OC(335.23), Samsung SSD 840 Pro 128go+500Go 7200RPM SATA III, Auzentech X-FI Forte 7.1, Windows 8.1 Pro x64, The Grim and Somber ENB
-
Offline
- *sensei*
- Posts: 373
- Joined: 07 Mar 2013, 10:14
Re: TES Skyrim 0.211
Funny I found that it was Burn Shock Freeze effects that was the cause of all the issues. That along with Enhanced blood textures. Since they both add scripted onhit effects then they would mess up the game as long as anybody was fighting.I tracked my intermittent freezes (which have sound continuing in the background) to "Deadly Spell Impact"! No matter which version I installed it consistently crashes my game
Deadly spell impacts also use a script for some effects..however you can always try to remove some of your other combat altering mods. Or in general just reduce scripted mods. Even if Frostfall is not active, or if realistic needs etc. is not then they still have scripts running that tells the game they are not running! You can also remove the scripts from impacts so its just a retexture mod... but then it wont be nearly as epic.
You more certainly have an issue with your mod list!BUT: When I spawn even 1 dragon and then kill it, as I perform the final blow the game CTDs everytime!
I ALWAYS coc into the game and test combat stability by unleashing three dragons in solitude and then kill them. (reason.. many many NPCs that each gets onhit triggered etc.) Before I removed the above mentioned mods I could do this for about 2-15 mins before a freeze or CTD.. sometimes even instant. After I removed them I can consistently fight those three dragons for over an hour....
I use both deadly dragons, and dragon combat overhaul AND dragon absorb more glorious and have no issues. Souls are absorbed in epic manner, as long as said dragon actually have a soul.... which is a deadly dragon setting if they do not!
Edit:If you have further questions then this issue is more something you should post over at the STEP forum and not here... since it has nothing to do with ENB (ENB does not alter the script engine afaik). I am also over there and more then happy to help ya out.
-
Offline
- *master*
- Posts: 199
- Joined: 13 Dec 2012, 18:08
- Location: France
Re: TES Skyrim 0.211
Problem not related to these mods. I use the 3 of them together. No CTD, no freezes.Aiyen wrote:Funny I found that it was Burn Shock Freeze effects that was the cause of all the issues. That along with Enhanced blood textures. Since they both add scripted onhit effects then they would mess up the game as long as anybody was fighting.I tracked my intermittent freezes (which have sound continuing in the background) to "Deadly Spell Impact"! No matter which version I installed it consistently crashes my game
Deadly spell impacts also use a script for some effects..however you can always try to remove some of your other combat altering mods. Or in general just reduce scripted mods. Even if Frostfall is not active, or if realistic needs etc. is not then they still have scripts running that tells the game they are not running! You can also remove the scripts from impacts so its just a retexture mod... but then it wont be nearly as epic.
You more certainly have an issue with your mod list!BUT: When I spawn even 1 dragon and then kill it, as I perform the final blow the game CTDs everytime!
I ALWAYS coc into the game and test combat stability by unleashing three dragons in solitude and then kill them. (reason.. many many NPCs that each gets onhit triggered etc.) Before I removed the above mentioned mods I could do this for about 2-15 mins before a freeze or CTD.. sometimes even instant. After I removed them I can consistently fight those three dragons for over an hour....
I use both deadly dragons, and dragon combat overhaul AND dragon absorb more glorious and have no issues. Souls are absorbed in epic manner, as long as said dragon actually have a soul.... which is a deadly dragon setting if they do not!
Edit:If you have further questions then this issue is more something you should post over at the STEP forum and not here... since it has nothing to do with ENB (ENB does not alter the script engine afaik). I am also over there and more then happy to help ya out.
_________________
Asus P8Z77-V, G.Skill TridentX 2x4go PC3-19200 CL9, Intel Core i5-3570K (3.4 GHz), Gigabyte Geforce GTX 670 WindForce 3x OC(335.23), Samsung SSD 840 Pro 128go+500Go 7200RPM SATA III, Auzentech X-FI Forte 7.1, Windows 8.1 Pro x64, The Grim and Somber ENB
Asus P8Z77-V, G.Skill TridentX 2x4go PC3-19200 CL9, Intel Core i5-3570K (3.4 GHz), Gigabyte Geforce GTX 670 WindForce 3x OC(335.23), Samsung SSD 840 Pro 128go+500Go 7200RPM SATA III, Auzentech X-FI Forte 7.1, Windows 8.1 Pro x64, The Grim and Somber ENB
-
Offline
- Posts: 77
- Joined: 01 Aug 2013, 16:46
Re: TES Skyrim 0.211
I tried with 10 dragons in dragon bridge with 6 companions and all the people there and all was fine. Was a complete mess fight but funny.
-
Offline
- *blah-blah-blah maniac*
- Posts: 17559
- Joined: 27 Dec 2011, 08:53
- Location: Rather not to say
Re: TES Skyrim 0.211
Phinix
Read my posts, i said already that Afteburner bring problems ALWAYS, with or without osd enabled. The same with other d3d9 wrappers, i don't have their sources and they always allocate own video memory without my control.
Vlaka
There is no message like that and enbhost do not inject anything.
Read my posts, i said already that Afteburner bring problems ALWAYS, with or without osd enabled. The same with other d3d9 wrappers, i don't have their sources and they always allocate own video memory without my control.
Vlaka
There is no message like that and enbhost do not inject anything.
_________________
i9-9900k, 64Gb RAM, RTX 3060 12Gb, Win7
i9-9900k, 64Gb RAM, RTX 3060 12Gb, Win7