Skyrim talk:Add-ons

just a thought

So, I know that the only two plug-ins which are out so far are available to PC users only, and I know the description at the top of this page notes this. But I assume other content will be available for PS & Xbox users in the future as well, so maybe a column should be added to the table noting platform availability. Though, now that I think of it, it's possible I don't know my lingo, and 'Plug-in' applies to PC while 'DLC' applies to the other platforms? Are the terms 'plug-in' and 'DLC' interchangeable? Someone help me out here, I'm feeling a little dumb now. :P Alphabetface 18:31, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah, that was just a remnant from the Morrowind plug-in page. I was going to add a platform column in actually, as there will definitely be DLC for the consoles in the near future. I might do that now. And yeah, the terms are pretty much interchangable. It's the same thing, and the system works the same on the consoles. --Dorsal Axe 18:45, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for clarifying. I thought they were interchangeable, but as I was writing the post above I started to wonder if maybe that was just a bad assumption on my part. I see that it's been changed on the article now to represent all three platforms, so thanks for doing that too. That should make it easier for editors to add to the article later when more content becomes available. :) Alphabetface 20:37, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I'm hoping that they release the High-Resolution Pack for the consoles. Lord Eydvar 19:23, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

They won't. The hardware can't handle it. --Legoless 21:17, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

That sucks...! Lord Eydvar 01:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

(←) I'd at least like to see the higher detail shaders that they show in the GameJam video. Since the water is amazing as is but the pictures on the GameJam videos show such improvement on the appearance of water. Which I don't think would put too much more strain on the consoles. Unlike as Legoless pointed out the strain that the Hi Res pack would. Lord Eydvar^Talk 15:30, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

This page clearly says "Official Plug-ins". Just because a developer made a mod doesn't make it official or a plugin. We also can't go logging every single mod out there. Kurt Kuhlmann, the poster of the mod in question, is already having massive issues with the mod like any other modder. I don't think we should count this at all. Kaisar Dragon 00:06, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Mods made by developers

Should we mention Maturin's Real Carriages mod here, since it was made by a bethesda games dev? 94.226.179.75 22:54, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

no, it isn't a dlc its a mod. just happens to have been made by a dev. if it shows on ps3 and xbox then it'll be dlc — Unsigned comment by 155.43.160.22 (talk) at 01:19 on 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I think it'll deserve a mention for no other reason than the fact that an actual developer worked on it. However, I can't find this mod in the workshop, nor can I find a link showing it on one of Bethesda's sites, even a Google search failed to turn up anything relevant. So until I can actually see the mod, I can't write anything about it. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 01:19, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I think I found a 'Real Carriages' mod a while back made by Michael Kirkbride. Would that be right? --Legoless 00:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Here you are: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=13790 Phoenix Neko 17:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Unsigned commenter - funny you should say that, considering both items currently on the list are PC-only. I think I'll be bold and add it in. Take it down if you really mind. 94.226.179.75 12:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

(←) If we want to start documenting developer mods on this page, it might be worth making a separate table for the true DLC. --Legoless 12:55, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

done Phoenix Neko 06:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

FYI, the 'loading sceens by your mom' mod is legit. Watch the Destructoid interview with Pete Hines about the kinect update. 94.226.179.75 11:08, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Patch 1.5 rumors...

I checked on Google this morning and there was an article about the possibility of updated kill-cams in the newest patch that will be coming out soon. It talked about how Bethesda had put details of it on their blog, but then took the article down because it may have been posted by accident. If anyone saw the GameJam video that Todd Howard released, which was basically the development team messing with the Creation Kit in order to make ideas for a future DLC. One of these ideas was updated finishing moves, adding finishers to spells and arrows. I don't know when exactly patch 1.5 is getting released but it seems very intriguing.

P.S: If anyone wants to see for themselves,just go to Google and simply type "Skyrim DLC news" and you will see the article I'm talking about. 72.68.154.112 12:54, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for a DLC Suggestions page

Am I the only one who thinks we should have a page here that we may speak freely (Morrowind outlander joke XD) about possible future DLC for Skyrim, except you know, get member input? Who knows, maybe Bethesda will show interest. I'm too new to make one myself(I think), so if someone could do this, I'd be much obliged. It just seems sensible, you know? Skyrim is "the best of the best" so far, they've marketed it that way, reactions have been that way. Let's give Bethesda a run for their money on proposed DLC. If such a page already exists, this is null and void. However please provide a link to it. Tes95 12:21, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I have to oppose this suggestion. "Modding ideas" pages have existed before for Morrowind and Oblivion, and both were deleted. You can see the deletion reviews here and here. The wiki isn't a social site; if you want a place to talk about possible DLC ideas, you can do so on the forums. Of course, feel free to create this page in your own userspace if you want (e.g., at User:Tes95/Mod Ideas). --Legoless 13:02, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay then? I wasn't speaking about modding, but actual suggestions for Bethesda themselves. So they can see what users think, want, expect, etc from Skyrim. Tes95 13:41, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

This is exactly the reason for official forum to exist. Phoenix Neko 15:12, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Hearthfire

On a forum someone told me about a new rumour, Bethesda Softworks has patented "Hearthfire".

After searching the internet I came across 2 articles (in dutch, I'm sorry).

[1] It says ZeniMax Media had patented it and United States Patent and Trademark Office said it they did it for a game.

[2] This one adds that they registered it with the side-note "downloadable computer game software".

While writing this, I came across an English one. [3] Haven't read this one completely but I think it says the same. — Unsigned comment by 81.242.215.176 (talk) at 12:25 on 26 August 2012

That rumor has been going for about a week now, "apparently" it will contain zombies. While it may well be true, there's no point in doing anything on the site about it until it is confirmed. RIM 13:19, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Sidebar links?

Just curious, but why do Dawnguard and Hearthfire have links on the sidebar if they don't have their own namespaces?

Or I guess what I'm saying is, should the links be removed from the sidebar since they aren't major expansions considered worthy of their own namespace? TC01 (talk) 19:40, 5 September 2012 (EDT)

That's what I said, but Consensus says otherwise. See here for more info. Snowmane^{(talk•email)} 19:51, 5 September 2012 (EDT)

Possible New Features and future DLC?

I know I am probably not the firs to suggest this, but I've heard rumors on Twitter that there is a new DLC coming called 'Redguard'. This article:http://www.ibtimes.com/skyrim-dlc-release-after-dragonborn-could-be-redguard-zenimax-files-patent-downloadable-computer?sa=t&fd=R&usg=AFQjCNGgbofoYo9XlF_zfDVyAmPBPhT__w&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter , has been brought to my attention. But it is not the content that interested me (but I still did enjoy it), it was the video below the last paragraph at the bottom. If you can't access the article, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8SE5owAIPmk .

Warning: The video contains bad language. Chezburgar rates it M15+ for mature audiences. Some of the features displayed in the video have been included in the released DLC, so I thought there might be some of these in future DLC. Well if you ask me this sounds like a whole lot of fun! - Chez ^{talk • email} 09:30, 5 February 2013 (GMT)

That GameJam footage has been out for months, and AFAIK ZeniMax doesn't like it being hosted online. —Legoless (talk) 12:38, 5 February 2013 (GMT)

Move

To start off with, the official term is Add-on, not DLC. Secondly we have chosen to keep our name of the page for each game consistent, as Bethesda have not. We had this discussion on the Community Portal which resulted in redirects for Bethesda's official term for each game being created. Those terms are, for Morrowind > Expansions, for Oblivion > DLC, and for Skyrim > Add-ons. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 22:41, 29 March 2013 (GMT)

"Official plug-ins" is incorrect for Skyrim. Was this not established on the Community Portal? —Legoless (talk) 22:51, 29 March 2013 (GMT)

None of them have been called Plug-ins, so its incorrect for all games. The CP discussion basically decided nothing except an inability on what to change it too. I can see the argument for moving it to Skyrim:Add-ons, as that is the official term for Skyrim, but the community has, in different places, decided to have consistency when naming this page for all games. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 22:58, 29 March 2013 (GMT)

Actually, in Morrowind, the small DLC are called "Plugins" in their Readme files. I have no idea where the hyphen came from. I'd support "Add-ons", because that's what it's called in the in-game menu. I'd also support retroactively renaming Oblivion to "DLC" (because the term "Plugins" doesn't apply to them) and creating redirects for each naming variation for each namespace - Addons, Add-ons, DLC, Downloadable Content, Expansions, Plugins, and Plug-ins. • JA^T 01:55, 30 March 2013 (GMT)

While "expansion" is clearly a misnomer when it comes to smaller add-ons, and "plug-in" only refers to smaller ones, "DLC" wouldn't be entirely correct either, considering that, I quote: "PC users can purchase a boxed version of Knights of the Nine from retail outlets for US$19.99. This boxed version also includes seven other previously released Official Plug-ins, excluding Shivering Isles and Fighter's Stronghold." I know it's an exception, and finding a copy is probably challenging now, but can we call a DLC something that isn't exclusively downloadable? Elakyn (talk) 12:13, 30 March 2013 (GMT)

It seems that the only choice that makes sense for the 3 major ES games is "Addons". As a possibly pointless side note, Bethesda, in a blog post, collectively referred to all of the post-release content for Skyrim as "DLC". --Xyzzy ^Talk 02:17, 16 April 2013 (GMT)

To me the problem is taking it all together collectively and titling it, this is where DLC comes in because its all downloadable content whether big or small; while individually Dragonborn is an expansion, Dawnguard is an add-on, and Hearthfire is a plug-in. It seems to me the descriptions just define the DLC in question. Morrowind's time was a different era and the usage of the word DLC wasn't as standard, plus both extra content still classed as expansions - new world, new enemies. BlackOp (talk) 16:06, 3 May 2013 (GMT)

Plain Links

External links on this page got just changed to plain links. Yes, there's already precedence for this on other add-on pages, but Help:Links#Special_Cases tells us not to disguise non-uesp links as internal links. Of course inter-wiki links already are displayed as internal. So the question would be, why have a different style for external links at all, if it is unwanted? Or wouldn't it be better to indicate that those links are actually leading to another site? --Alfwyn (talk) 17:45, 16 February 2014 (GMT)

I left it as-is when I patrolled it, because I liked the way it looked compared to the normal formatting of external links, but you bring up a good point. There is always a little more risk inherent in clicking on external links, so we should probably leave them with their default format. --Xyzzy ^Talk 18:36, 16 February 2014 (GMT)

After some consideration and then forgetting about this, I removed the plainlinking as the links basically send you to sites where you must pay money to obtain the download, which has no affiliation with UESP and must be clearly marked. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 22:28, 26 February 2014 (GMT)

File Size of Add-Ons - Please add to chart or notes.

I know it doesn't follow the pattern you have with Oblivion, but it'd be really nice to see the overall file size of these add-ons. I know most of you probably play on PC, but this information is very useful to people with a console. (Especially those like the Xbox which are intentionally (frustratingly) made with very limited hard drive space.) It should say the file size when you go to download it from an online store for Xbox or PS, but it just seems like this information should still be on the wiki. Plus, evidently there are still quite a lot of people who were/are playing Skyrim on Xbox without Xbox Live accounts of any kind AND people who don't have their Xbox connected to any internet at all. These players have to get the add-ons from discs, and online sellers don't always provide the details, just the front box cover art. Amsuko (talk) 05:29, 16 May 2015 (GMT)

The file sizes vary by platform. The sizes are listed on the individual pages. Adding them to this page would be too cluttering imo. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 13:26, 16 May 2015 (GMT)

Agreed. That information can be found any number of places (such as the store page on Steam, Xbox, etc.), and I feel it's a bit too technical for inclusion here anyway. Zul do onikaan^{Laan tinvaak} 15:44, 16 May 2015 (GMT)

Removal of Amiibo

I have removed the section on amiibo compatibility and added a link to Skyrim:Amiibo instead. The reason for this is twofold:

• The chests spawned by scanning amiibos contain items which can be obtained in the base game on Switch. Mostly they contain leveled junk, with a chance to contain one of the Switch-exclusive Zelda items. However, it has since come to light that these Zelda items can be obtained at the Throat of the World for free, i.e. without any amiibos. The amiibo items are therefore vanilla content and as such do do meet the usual definition of an add-on.
• The amiibo-related content is not the only Switch-exclusive content. Namely, that version of Skyrim also has a blue eye colour available for Bosmer characters. Consistency dictates that we cannot include the Hylian Shield et al. as "add-ons" and exclude this eye colour. Obviously that's totally ridiculous, so I think it better to just remove the section entirely from this page. Skyrim:Switch is the correct place to document gameplay differences.

I think we should keep a link to Skyrim:Amiibo on the page because it is a related topic, in that it is a method of purchasing in-game content. It is not comparable to DLCs. In fairness, no one knew what kind of system we were getting when the information was originally added to the page, but that has since been clarified. —Legoless (talk) 21:05, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Addison of Special Edition?

There's now a version on Nexus Mod (and perhaps other sites) for Special Edition. It's here. I also do not know if it includes wheatley or the new loading screens. I did not make it.