Page 1 of 1

To nickname or not to nickname? A tale of two choices.

Posted: 03 Oct 2017, 15:36
by aesylwinn
While the Land Texture and Land tables were under development, an unused field was discovered! After tilling the ground a while, thinking of what to name it, it was discovered the field seemingly served no purpose. This field belongs to the great Land Texture, which is already the proud owner of a texture index and texture file name. The field appears to be syntactic sugar, where honorable CS users can choose to dub their Land Texture with any name they choose. Some CS users may choose lowly names, such as Grass or Mud, while more chivalrous users could choose Sir Rock or Lord Muck. Then while using the editor, users could potentially refer to a Land Texture by its bestowed name instead of the texture and index. What say you? Do we keep the field, or abandon it to Mother Nature?

Re: To nickname or not to nickname? A tale of two choices.

Posted: 03 Oct 2017, 16:50
by AnyOldName3
So it's never actually used for anything in vanilla files, but often contains a friendly name for the record? Do other sources of esp format info (e.g. xEdit, specifically TES3Edit) not have a description? Is an equivalent field used for anything useful in later games?

Re: To nickname or not to nickname? A tale of two choices.

Posted: 03 Oct 2017, 19:05
by aesylwinn
The
AnyOldName3 wrote:
03 Oct 2017, 16:50
So it's never actually used for anything in vanilla files, but often contains a friendly name for the record?
In the Morrowind data files, it sometimes has the same value as the texture. At other times, it is has the file extension removed. In certain instances, truncated names are extended. In the openmw executable, it is never used. Hopefully people with experience will answer the other questions.