Devious Devices - Integration 4.3a (2019-09-10)

[Dojo_dude]

So... since Im using a 108 slots for the pony animations. what mod uses them? SLUTS and this one?

[Kimy]

On 2/10/2019 at 10:40 PM, Twinking134 said:

Where can i get an older version like DDi v3.3 (its a requirement for some mods)

Just delete the mods that still didn't upgrade to DD4. They are obsolete. DD4 has been out for way over a year now. If a mod STILL hasn't updated yet, it probably means you shouldn't be using them anymore.

[Perseus117]

I am having a bit of a problem.

Some devices from DDx are not even present in the game, but they are showing in the bodyslide menu and thats how i came to know about those devices. these devices are Hobbleskirt with straightjacket topless version type and they aare shown in bodyslide but i cant find them in the game even after using add item menu.... please someone help

[Laura]

15 minutes ago, Perseus117 said:

I am having a bit of a problem.

Some devices from DDx are not even present in the game, but they are showing in the bodyslide menu and thats how i came to know about those devices. these devices are Hobbleskirt with straightjacket topless version type and they aare shown in bodyslide but i cant find them in the game even after using add item menu.... please someone help

They're in the game. You can find them by using: Help "straitjacket dress"

 

[Lupine00]

On 2/11/2019 at 5:40 PM, Twinking134 said:

Where can i get an older version like DDi v3.3 (its a requirement for some mods)

What mod do you actually need DD3 for?

 

• DDe, you can patch to 4 yourself if you really must have it.
• Devious Regulations has a patched version.
• Arngrim's Apprentice should work with DD4 anyway, as it's just a chastity belt.
• Devious Cidhna is up to date.
• Stories Devious is up to date.
• SLUTS Redux is up to date.
• Delazon mods are either not DD or have patches.
• CD has the main quest line patched, and you can probably patch some errant items yourself.
• The old built-in DD quests were flaky and barely worked.
• DF is up to date.
• PoP is fine without DD items enabled at all.
• SD+ is up to date.
• Hormones is up to date.
• Parasites is up to date.
• Slaverun Reloaded 3 beta is DD4.1 compatible and has a patch up to 4.2
• Aradia has a patch to 4 that makes it work better than it ever was in 3
• Barefoot Realism is up to date
• BWitch is up to date
• DD Helpers is up to date
• Devious Mind Break is up to date
• DT2 dev version works fine with 4
• Deviously Enchanted Chests is up to date
• Devious Enslaved Continued is up to date
• Deviously Enslaved is ... totally obsolete
• I'll take the display model ... I think it's up to date
• Whiterun Brothel Revamp was 4.X until it was pulled by the author
• Raven Beak Prison Remastered is up to date
• TreasureHunterWhore is up to date
• Dragonborn in Distress is up to date
• Devious Bashnag still works I think - I played it not so long ago
• Sorlis Balarn's Treasure - don't know but I think it's up to date
• The Devious Manual - I think it's stale
• Barefoot Realism - works fine
• Immersive Plugs - works fine
• Naked Dungeons - if it has a problem, DD4 isn't it.
• PetCollar - updated sufficiently for DD4.X
• Trapped in Rubber is dodgy anyway, and has been promising a new and crucial update for four years now
• Devious Rubber Masks Rebirth! is up to date
• Deviously Cursed Loot ... is up to date  

 

What did I miss?

 

I'm just trying to think of an old DD mod that is so good you'd build your game around it, that has no update, and I can't.

[BeastLP]

So ive been trying to install Slaverun. Thing is  Slaverun doesnt detect DDi4.2 for some reason and thats why it says it hasnt started. Does anyone have an idea how to fix this?

[Zaflis]

49 minutes ago, BeastLP said:

So ive been trying to install Slaverun. Thing is  Slaverun doesnt detect DDi4.2 for some reason and thats why it says it hasnt started. Does anyone have an idea how to fix this?

https://www.loverslab.com/topic/52885-slaverun-reloaded-03-june-2018/?page=212&tab=comments#comment-2425522

 

[Kimy]

13 hours ago, Laura 'Lokomootje' said:

They're in the game. You can find them by using: Help "straitjacket dress"

 

The new Walk of Shame quest in DCL uses these items. It's probably the first that does, but you can expect more.

[Nohrin]

Hey guys. Not sure how often this is brought up (google didn't help me much). I figured out that the Item Hider object is preventing me from using a specific accessory called "Ayame Katana". It is an armor piece that looks like two small katanas my back. They use slot 56. I have changed the item hiders item slot to 61, but it still prevents me from wearing them. I have tried several different itemslots for the item hider, but for some reason it just won't let me use this accessory. Oddly enough I am able to use the accessory, and it will equip, but it won't be shown on my character if I am using any chest piece of armor. Obviously at first I thought it was because my Katanas occupied the same slot as the Item Hider, but I have thoroughly made sure that is not the case. It also appears to prevent other small accessories (like arm bands, and forearm coverings) from showing as well (assuming my chest slot is occupied). 

 

Are there any solutions I take to solve this? 

[Laura]

23 minutes ago, Kimy said:

The new Walk of Shame quest in DCL uses these items. It's probably the first that does, but you can expect more.

That sounds fun. I'm also working on something that uses a straitjacket combo, but it's a shame that they're used so little.

It could be because people think that it covers too much, but I love those comfortable restraints.

[Kimy]

1 minute ago, Laura 'Lokomootje' said:

It could be because people think that it covers too much.

That's literally what I have heard. When Walk of Shame released, "Can we change the dress?" was among the first reactions to it. And the one used by WoS is the "boobs-exposed" one, even. oO

[Laura]

58 minutes ago, Kimy said:

That's literally what I have heard. When Walk of Shame released, "Can we change the dress?" was among the first reactions to it. And the one used by WoS is the "boobs-exposed" one, even. oO

There was a short discussion about this in my tread. About how many use their character as eye candy, while I use her as a stand-in for me. Maybe I look at it differently because I'm a woman, but it makes sense that many play these mods to look at a sexy naked woman in bondage.

[Kimy]

5 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

What mod do you actually need DD3 for?

 

• DDe, you can patch to 4 yourself if you really must have it.
• CD has the main quest line patched, and you can probably patch some errant items yourself.
• PoP is fine without DD items enabled at all.

What did I miss?

 

I'm just trying to think of an old DD mod that is so good you'd build your game around it, that has no update, and I can't.

I think the ones listed above are the typical culprits why people keep asking for old DD versions. CD is one of the more popular DD mods (and for a reason, it IS an awesome mod!), but due to various reasons didn't receive an official update to DD4 yet. There is a patch (I think it was even posted by CD's author himself), but I suppose people easily miss it and think they'd need DD3 to run it, because CD still officially requires it while the official DD4 supported update is getting worked on. From what I've heard, CD using the patch runs mostly fine in a DD4 installation.

 

The POP/DDEquip combo is a case of an arbitrary decision by their author to never update them to DD4, despite in the case of these mods it would be much more trivial to do than updating the far more complex CD. In this case, my advice to users is what I said above: Consider these mods obsolete and uninstall them.

 

In any case, as your list shows, users will lose far more mods by NOT using DD4 than by cutting lose the few outdated ones that never got updated.

[mangalo]

I wouldn't say we'd lose far more by dropping DD.  PoP for example adds as much value to the game as DCL (to me) and a lot of mods still use Zaz so if my plan was to use only DD mods, my game would be really more boring.  It's a shame DD isn't the perfect framework to the authors of the "culprit" mods but I don't think trying to get LL against them is a good move for DD nor LL either.

[Laura]

15 hours ago, mangalo said:

I wouldn't say we'd lose far more by dropping DD.  PoP for example adds as much value to the game as DCL (to me) and a lot of mods still use Zaz so if my plan was to use only DD mods, my game would be really more boring.  It's a shame DD isn't the perfect framework to the authors of the "culprit" mods but I don't think trying to get LL against them is a good move for DD nor LL either.

There is nothing wrong with preferring Zaz to DD. They roughly do the same thing, but they're still very different. I also don't think people are against the older mods.

 

I think the DD team doesn't support older versions because it's a lot of work. Maintaining and supporting multiple versions is a nightmare. They're not a big company and they want to use their time to work on new and better things.

 

The mod makers with older versions probably don't want to do (or can't do) the boring busy work required to update their mod to V4+. Making mods and creating new things is fun, but rebuilding a bunch of devices and code isn't fun.

 

But I'm not in the DD team and my mod was made after the release of DD V4, so these are just assumptions.

[Kimy]

58 minutes ago, mangalo said:

I wouldn't say we'd lose far more by dropping DD.  PoP for example adds as much value to the game as DCL (to me) and a lot of mods still use Zaz so if my plan was to use only DD mods, my game would be really more boring.  It's a shame DD isn't the perfect framework to the authors of the "culprit" mods but I don't think trying to get LL against them is a good move for DD nor LL either.

This is not about DD vs ZAP, it's about outdated DD mods. DD couldn't care less about which ZAP mods you have or don't have installed (and vice versa). They might clash when they fight over who gets to use which armor slot to equip restraints in, but that's the nature of BD mods. The discussion at hand is about mods that for various reasons never updated from DD3 to DD4. People keep asking for obsolete versions of the DD framework to keep these obsolete mods running, and the price for that is that they can't use the overwhelming majority of DD mods that DID update.

[mangalo]

I used Zaz as an (maybe bad) example because it was kind of the controversial topic a few months ago but my point is that pointing those authors as bad/lazy/... might have worse results than anything.  Last time this happened we almost lost Captured Dreams.

 

I agree with you that an update to those mods would be the best option but maybe there's a way to discuss this with the authors (Inte in this case).  I suppose there are already have been talks between the DD team and him, can we -as users- help on this ? 

[donttouchmethere]

16 minutes ago, mangalo said:

I used Zaz as an (maybe bad) example because it was kind of the controversial topic a few months ago but my point is that pointing those authors as bad/lazy/... might have worse results than anything.  Last time this happened we almost lost Captured Dreams.

 

I agree with you that an update to those mods would be the best option but maybe there's a way to discuss this with the authors (Inte in this case).  I suppose there are already have been talks between the DD team and him, can we -as users- help on this ? 

SURE!

Make bug reports, lots of them =D

Keep asking^^

Fill the support topics and give friendly Feedback

[Kimy]

20 minutes ago, mangalo said:

I used Zaz as an (maybe bad) example because it was kind of the controversial topic a few months ago but my point is that pointing those authors as bad/lazy/... might have worse results than anything.  Last time this happened we almost lost Captured Dreams.

I never called these modders bad or lazy, so not sure why you're putting such words into my mouth? I have no control over what modders are doing with the DD framework. Whether they use it or don't use it is as much their own decision as is whether or not to update their mods to the newest version of the framework. But from a framework point of view, DD mods that do not support the newest version of the framework are outdated/obsolete, and of course I have to caution people against using such obsolete mods, for all the potential issues that might cause. We will not support or provide older versions of the DD framework to accommodate obsolete mods. Other than it doesn't solve the problem at all (older versions of DD cannot run the vast majority of mods that DID update, so you're just exchanging one problem for another), but that is like asking Microsoft to continue supporting Windows 95 so you can continue running obsolete applications.

[mangalo]

20 minutes ago, Kimy said:

I never called these modders bad or lazy, so not sure why you're putting such words into my mouth? I have no control over what modders are doing with the DD framework. Whether they use it or don't use it is as much their own decision as is whether or not to update their mods to the newest version of the framework. But from a framework point of view, DD mods that do not support the newest version of the framework are outdated/obsolete, and of course I have to caution people against using such obsolete mods, for all the potential issues that might cause. We will not support or provide older versions of the DD framework to accommodate obsolete mods. Other than it doesn't solve the problem at all (older versions of DD cannot run the vast majority of mods that DID update, so you're just exchanging one problem for another), but that is like asking Microsoft to continue supporting Windows 95 so you can continue running obsolete applications.

Again, you missed my point.  I specifically said keeping up to date was a good thing.  What I didn't say though, is that you called them bad/lazy and such.  The whole point I'm trying to make is that trying to do a war to these mods and authors won't result in anything good.  I'm not saying that it's your intent.  However, I felt that this was the new cool topic to discuss as it was brought to the table by DCL 7.4.

 

Calling us to delete those mods or treat them like trash don't make them inherently bad and I -personnaly- feel like there is some hostility between the DD team and Inte like there were between the DD team and Veladarius.  As you said, maybe we have to make a choice between DD4 and using those mods, maybe there is hope to create new options.  But unless we know at what points are things between the DD team and those mod authors, we can't really help but asking you not create a new drama.  I'm not saying that in a sarcastic manner nor trying to upset you, just being honest here.  Do you want users to ask Inte to reconsider ?  As I said, is it a lost hope or can we help ?

 

This is my final post on that matter as it doesn't belong here.

[Kimy]

15 minutes ago, mangalo said:

Again, you missed my point.  I specifically said keeping up to date was a good thing.  What I didn't say though, is that you called them bad/lazy and such.  The whole point I'm trying to make is that trying to do a war to these mods and authors won't result in anything good.  I'm not saying that it's your intent.  However, I felt that this was the new cool topic to discuss as it was brought to the table by DCL 7.4.

 

Calling us to delete those mods or treat them like trash don't make them inherently bad and I -personnaly- feel like there is some hostility between the DD team and Inte like there were between the DD team and Veladarius.  As you said, maybe we have to make a choice between DD4 and using those mods, maybe there is hope to create new options.  But unless we know at what points are things between the DD team and those mod authors, we can't really help but asking you not create a new drama.  I'm not saying that in a sarcastic manner nor trying to upset you, just being honest here.  Do you want users to ask Inte to reconsider ?  As I said, is it a lost hope or can we help ?

I don't know why you apparently feel offended by me offering sound technical advice. Since when has it EVER been a good idea to run outdated software, anywhere in history? Telling users to consider no longer using such software isn't waging war against its makers, its applying logic and reason. That's really all there is to it. It doesn't matter who made that outdated piece of software and what my personal relations are with them. It's a purely technical matter. I advise against using DD3 mods for the same reason I would advise against using Windows 95. End of story.

[Lupine00]

10 hours ago, Kimy said:

That's literally what I have heard. When Walk of Shame released, "Can we change the dress?" was among the first reactions to it. And the one used by WoS is the "boobs-exposed" one, even. oO

Dammit, now you made me think how cool it would be if the townsfolk explicitly abused your breasts during the WoS, adding increasingly nasty piercings.

 

I love that outfit. Please don't change it. The hobble dress in that color/material is awesome too.

[Lupine00]

10 hours ago, mangalo said:

I wouldn't say we'd lose far more by dropping DD.  PoP for example adds as much value to the game as DCL (to me) and a lot of mods still use Zaz so if my plan was to use only DD mods, my game would be really more boring.  It's a shame DD isn't the perfect framework to the authors of the "culprit" mods but I don't think trying to get LL against them is a good move for DD nor LL either.

What?

PoP adds more value than DCL? I'd have said the opposite, but that's pretty subjective I suppose.

But neither PoP nor DCL is a "build your game around it" one of a kind option.

 

There are alternatives to all the components of DCL, and PoP is just standing around waiting to be whipped or raped. There's no gameplay in it at all.

If all you want is to watch that while you're dragged around in bondage, I guess Devious Framework and Hydras Slavegirls might do it.

If you want a prison, then Skyrim Central Prison is a proper prison mod. Or Raven Beak or Devious CIdhna with CME (at a stretch).

 

 

But there is no major conflict between DD and Zaz. You can run PoP in a game with DCL and simply not enable DD in PoP so it just uses Zaz items.

 

I'm currently using ME, which is Zaz-based, using its own devices based off DD Assets, and DD, and there are a few problems but nothing I can't work around.

Zaz based mods are rarely that picky about whether the items gets removed or not. If DD and Zaz get in a fight, I just remove all the Zaz items.

 

 

I believe, at this point, the logical path is not to use Zaz items on the player. Ever. They are a quick and efficient way to dress up NPCs.

 

So if we rephrase my question to, "What Zaz-based mod that restrains the player, and has no practical replacement, and is so good you can't live without it?"

 

ME?

And... What else?

 

 

Of course, in a world where this wasn't blocked by other agendas, we could have DD and Zaz both reference a single shared mini-ESM that has a set of keywords that are universal. The keyword mod would be a shared resource, with clearly defined contents that should never need to change... At least not with the practical life left in Skyrim and FO4.

 

It's probably a safe bet that by the time TES6 appears, the existing assets will look old and low-res, and the existing code will be all but useless. One day, these arguments will be as forgotten as debates over Morrowind mods.

[Inte]

8 hours ago, mangalo said:

Again, you missed my point.  I specifically said keeping up to date was a good thing.  What I didn't say though, is that you called them bad/lazy and such.  The whole point I'm trying to make is that trying to do a war to these mods and authors won't result in anything good.  I'm not saying that it's your intent.  However, I felt that this was the new cool topic to discuss as it was brought to the table by DCL 7.4.

 

Calling us to delete those mods or treat them like trash don't make them inherently bad and I -personnaly- feel like there is some hostility between the DD team and Inte like there were between the DD team and Veladarius.  As you said, maybe we have to make a choice between DD4 and using those mods, maybe there is hope to create new options.  But unless we know at what points are things between the DD team and those mod authors, we can't really help but asking you not create a new drama.  I'm not saying that in a sarcastic manner nor trying to upset you, just being honest here.  Do you want users to ask Inte to reconsider ?  As I said, is it a lost hope or can we help ?

 

This is my final post on that matter as it doesn't belong here.

As far as I know DDe 4.04 works with DDi 4. I am yet to get a report that proves otherwise. Sure prior DDe 4.04 there were some keywords missing that made the armbinder animations not work properly, but that should have been fixed as of DDe 4.04. Not sure what all the discourse is all about. 

But like always, Kimy and lackeys like @Lupine00, jump on the shit throwing wagon without having (or bothering to check/test) all the facts. Typical. 

 

And calling users to delete a particular mod without actually testing it yourself beforehand and supporting your arguments with facts not just twisting them to fit your agenda is on par with Kimy's MO. 

[Kimy]

2 hours ago, Inte said:

As far as I know DDe 4.04 works with DDi 4. I am yet to get a report that proves otherwise. Sure prior DDe 4.04 there were some keywords missing that made the armbinder animations not work properly, but that should have been fixed as of DDe 4.04. Not sure what all the discourse is all about. 

But like always, Kimy and lackeys like @Lupine00, jump on the shit throwing wagon without having (or bothering to check/test) all the facts. Typical. 

 

And calling users to delete a particular mod without actually testing it yourself beforehand and supporting your arguments with facts not just twisting them to fit your agenda is on par with Kimy's MO. 

 

Oh really? I guess what you're saying is that you don't know what your own mod is doing, then:

 

Quote

 

Mod Status

• Not tested with DDi/DDx 4.

 

 

Which is a statement you confirmed just a few weeks ago:

 

 

So what you're saying is that you can't be arsed to test your own stuff against DD4 and then blaming me to take your expert word at face value and agree with you that your mod is not proven to work with DD4?

 

*slow clap"

 

Bottom line: You still mistakenly assume that I care about your mods enough to install and test them, when YOU are telling everyone that they probably don't work with DD4. Thing is that I stopped caring about you or your mods a long while ago. If you declare your stuff compatible with DD4, I will assume it will be, at least until users tell me otherwise. If you continue to declare it untested with recent version of DD4, I will just believe you and continue to advise users to consider your stuff obsolete.

 

Your call, really. And I still don't care.