OpenMW support for other games: Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout and more

[Sagacity]

We're not going to be able to do anything about providing creation club content or DLC for free. We're creating a from-scratch replacement for the engine (which copyright lets us do) not the content that engine consumes.

To take a charitable interpretation of what he means; I think he means the equivalent in terms of content, without straight-up violating the actual copyright. IE Tamriel Rebuilt with all the glitz and glamour of the later games.

On a more relevant note, I really like to remind people whenever OpenMW comes up that once OpenMW 1.0 is here, the march on to support later games will be far, FAR quicker. The amount of shared functionality and groundwork between the Bethesda open world games far outweighs their differences. Most of the major changes would likely be with regards to interpreting newer file formats, optimizations, and getting newer bolted-on tech to work. Though, many of these features are being implemented into OpenMW for support of mods...so who knows how much work would be necessary post-1.0

As it stands though, we're really not as close as we might think to 1.0.

[psi29a]

As it stands though, we're really not as close as we might think to 1.0.

Well... it's just a number. For some it's a psychological thing.

For many people, including developers, we've hit "1.0" already with the 0.46 release as we've hit our original goals and are now working towards post "1.0" goals now.

Now there are those who are trying to redefine "1.0" by shifting the goal post by saying that we have to support MWSE, MCP and MGE:XE in some way shape or form.

So... yeah, we'll keep on keeping on by providing better performance and additional features.

[Sagacity]

As it stands though, we're really not as close as we might think to 1.0.

Well... it's just a number. For some it's a psychological thing.

I think that far too many of OpenMW's core functions and pieces of software are under significant development to consider it 1.0

But it is fair to state that "1.0" is just a number. But that number signifies the shifting of OpenMW from an in-progress project, to something that is finished and just being refined. Many OpenMW issues on the gitlab are still being tracked as blockers for .47 and 1.0 I'd suggest this is a clear demonstration that OpenMW isn't quite to 1.0. I'd also suggest that MGE and the like are good bars for what should be 1.0 vs post-1.0 goals in terms of priority.

[AnyOldName3]

There are still a handful of vanilla features we know we've not implemented. Mostly they're minor enough that we know we won't have to do any big refactors of the engine to make them work, which has eroded the need to delay fun things like Lua. IIRC, it's basically just a few obscure Nif features, the dynamic ripples, and one-sided collision, which we've decided we won't do because it'd be difficult and time-consuming, and doesn't matter that much.

[psi29a]

I think that far too many of OpenMW's core functions and pieces of software are under significant development to consider it 1.0

Not at all, OpenMW's core is stable and mature.

We're just moving on with developing new features at this point. It's this active development that is causing turbulence if you're one of those playing with the nightlies.

[dartomic]

How do I load my Fallout NV BSA files? I know it's not playable. I just want to know.

[AnyOldName3]

Just add them as fallback-archive entries like you would for Morrowind BSAs, and they'll work like any other BSA. The problem is that you won't be able to load most of the files within the BSA.

[dartomic]

Do I do this from the terminal? I'm using a flatpak because I'm on Gentoo, and I was having some trouble with compiling it.I forget why. But I don't have man pages for the program.

[AnyOldName3]

They go in openmw.cfg, which you can find with https://openmw.readthedocs.io/en/latest ... paths.html

[dartomic]

Oh thanks. I'll check that out later.