2 things are happening in this screenshot that I'm trying to resolve. I almost have my Morrowind install set up perfectly, but there are just a few small things left to figure out that I could really use your help with:

- that canton, why is it transparent until I get close to it, and the other ones appear normal? I have the draw distance slider at max in the options.

- what mod is that specular nightmare mushroom tree from? I'd like to get rid of those if possible.

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/8509/mgescreenshot1.jpg

The mushrooms is from Vurt's Ascadian Isles replacer, it's esp-less so it might be hard to get rid of.. and why would anyone play without it

Though I'm not familiar with the other issue..

I believe the mushrooms are called emperor parasols or something, so if you find a name similar to that in the mesh folder you should be able to delete it.

and you use them without the morrowind code patch as you should. that's why the texture looks odd, i think.

Correct.
Apply the "bump/reflection maps" fix from the Code Patch and the mushrooms will look normal.

This is clearly explained on the page you downloaded the mod from, and in the ReadMe file.

There are people out there not playing with the code patch yet? Crazy folk...

as for the canton, could it be something to do with MGEs distant statics settings?

>Correct. Apply the "bump/reflection maps" fix from the Code Patch and the mushrooms will look normal.
Are you saying to turn on "Bump/Reflect Map Local Lighting" option in MCP? One can do this, but sadly it breaks Vality's Ice Caverns and I think it breaks Glowing Daedric Armor and probably other glowing item mods too. On the other hand, Vality's Ascaidan Isles, On the Rocks!, and Illuminated Armor may work better.

>This is clearly explained on the page you downloaded the mod from, and in the ReadMe file
To be fair to neonist, I didn't see where it's recommended to use that specific option. PES and the readme say nothing about it. tesnexus suggests using MCP, but it's quite possible to use MCP without enabling that option.

I do like them, it was the shininess that I couldn't live with. Little did I know there was a fix for that in the code patch.






I deserved that, sometimes I move pretty quick through the modding to get to the playing.



I use it! And I did have the bump/reflection map fix checked... but I re-applied the code patch and the issue is indeed fixed. Thanks everyone.






I wish I knew which one. I've been playing around with static sizes and pretty much all of the distant land settings, with no effect. The only other similar issue is with some trees- the leaves pop in similar to that canton. I haven't noticed any other issue with distant land or view distance.

That looks like the foreign quarter canton, which is ex_vivec_c_02. So pull up the .ovr list in the mge3 folder in your morrowind directory. Find ex_vivec_c_02 ( I'm guessing you will see, ex_vivec_c_02=ignore ) changed the "=something" part to what ever ex_vivec_c_04 is. Im guessing its ex_vivec_c_04=building. Then re-run distant statics setup in mge.

one of these days i'm going to have to learn about doing those override doohickies.

http://planetelderscrolls.gamespy.com/View.php?view=Mods.Detail&id=8190



But anyways... glad OP got it sorted out.

>Look again.
>"The latest Morrowind Code Patch is needed for the Bump maps to work properly."

Pluto, where does it mention enabling "Bump/Reflect Map Local Lighting" option?

in bold font -



i would assume that people would understand that you would need to enable the MPC feature.

So, to you, "The latest Morrowind Code Patch is needed" means "install the MCP and then manually enable one specific option out of dozens of options".

That's absurd. :ahhh:

well, out of those dozens of options, how many have anything at all to do with bumpmaps? i'm a couple of betas behind, but i only have one.

There are only 5 fixes under the graphical changes section of the MCP.

Anyway, there aren't many options in the MCP that you could have a reason for not to use.

>Anyway, there aren't many options in the MCP that you could have a reason for not to use.

<_<

Unless, as I mentioned, "reason for not to use" includes it breaking your favorite mods.

I don't agree with the ethics of defending an absurdity or using it to belittle people asking for help. (Specifically, saying people are crazy or accusing them of not reading non-existent instructions. Then claiming the instructions are somehow magically between-the-lines or that the needed change is so wonderful that no one could possibly argue against it, despite my already having pointed out the problems above).

1- Every single feature of the Code Patch is manually activated, no exception. Any user of the patch should know this, be it by reading the instructions or just using it.

2- The instructions of the mod state "The latest Morrowind Code Patch is needed for the Bump maps to work properly."
Looking for Bump maps in the http://i51.tinypic.com/25pu8gp.jpg, it's the third starting from the top.

I don't see the absurdity in any of this.

> "The latest Morrowind Code Patch is needed for the Bump maps to work properly."
>Looking for Bump maps in the patch's options, it's the third starting from the top.
>I don't see the absurdity in any of this.

The absurdity is that the statement the "Morrowind Code Patch is needed" is doing more than just telling the reader to install the MCP. It's telepathically delivering instructions to the reader's brain that they should enable additional, optional bump-related options.

Note that MCP supports bump maps without having to enable any extra "changes". From the readme: "Reflection, gloss maps and bump maps...MCP enables models to have working gloss maps, and lets skinned objects have reflection maps where it was not allowed before. The engine was capable of these, but the proper data handling was not implemented before."

Also note that there are two options that are related to bump maps, not just one. But I'm sure you knew that.

Apparently the telepathic communications emmanating from the magic text "Morrowind Code Patch is needed" are referring to only one of those options. Or is it both?

i think you are reading emotion into these posts that does not exist. i'm just assuming that the people involved in this discussion can put two and two together. vurt's mod says it needs MCP for bumpmaps to function. MCP has one bumpmap option. i'm not belittling or calling anyone crazy. personally, i do not use every option in MCP. that's one reason i'm a few betas behind.... most of the new features are things that i do not want to use. you should not take offense that i believe you to be intelligent enough to figure it out without explicit instructions.

also, i just reviewed my version of MCP. i have one option for bump maps. one for gloss maps, and one for reflection maps. the gloss maps fix mentions that it allows bumpmaps on paperdoll objects. trees are not inventory objects, and are thus not used in paperdolls. what are your two bumpmapping options?

The first point of my post was kinda important.

Also, I didn't find any other option in the patch with Bump map in the name. Feel free to point it out, maybe my version is too old to have it.

That's an interesting enchant icon you've got there. Where's it from?

okay. stop this now or make your own thread about it. not even the op feeled belittled. i knew this bump-map-fact and i never read a darn readme by vurt. i think i can expect, that someone who is that graphic-affine that he tried to repair a mge-issue by himself is able to distinguish different technical ideas. that means: i expect that someone asking for such an issue - in these words! - is capable of understanding the sentence "you should use the mcp for it". and oh wonder oh wonder - he understand immedately! he did not even a minute feel belittled because he knew that moment what the problem was, readme or not. if you use such sensitive programs like the mcp or the mge or the mwse i think i can expect that you at least read some - just a little bit - stuff about it.

so if the readme is not precise enough for you, you read not enough about the works you are using. this means not vurts readme alone but also the readmes of the mcp. these works go hand in hand and are close connected to each other, developing hand in hand. it's your thing to inform yourself about the possibilities of third party programs. i think the op is self-confident enough for not needing you feeling belittled in his place.

thank you.

In my .ovr file:

ex_vivec_c_02=building

I really appreciate the suggestion though, that seemed like it could have been it.

Ah well, it's only that canton.

But if anyone has any other suggestions...