prideslayer

I'm with Loogie on this one. The attitude that 25% is somehow worse than 0%, or worse than the 0.001% that the professional DLC developers receive, is idiotic. The split is between the modder and Valve, and nobody elses business or concern. People getting bent out of shape that some mods are "worthless" because they're so "simple" are obviously wrong -- somebody paid for them. People getting bent out of shape that somebody, somewhere, might make money by doing a hobby they already enjoy are best called out as the jealous twits they apparently are. If a mod is sold on the workshop and it relies on some external mod to work (like FNIS), or used some help or documentation provided by the community, tough luck. Every piece of commercial software in the world does exactly the same thing. MS does not get a cut of every piece of software using the windows SDK, nor does the wikipedia foundation get a cut of everything written that uses the information found there. Your public library doesn't get a kickback from the commercial endeavors that use knowledge gained from the books they loan out, either. If you're so small-minded and jealous that you just can't stand the thought of someone making a little money, doing something they enjoy, because others are doing similar things for free -- you're part of the problem. A world where every modder could quit their day job to work full time on their mods sounds like a great place to me. By and large I don't expect players/users to understand or agree with most of what I've said. However, in this case, their opinions don't matter to me even slightly. This is about mods, utilities, and those that create them. All of them deserve compensation for their efforts, and few if any actually get it. Modders SHOULD understand though. We all work countless hours on this hobby and our reward is generally a few "thank yous", and endless bug reports and feature requests to sift through. If one of "us" decides "hey, it would be nice to make a couple bucks off this if I can" then I fully support that decision. Christ I don't even work on my friends computers or cars for free -- I at least expect dinner and some beer out of the deal. I won't be responding to replies or reading this thread any further. As I've already said in "private", my active projects (SexoutNG, NX, FOMM, Bodyslide) are on indefinite hiatus because of the immature and childish "community" responses to modders who chose to participate in this system. The system isn't perfect, but it's the first of it's kind, and it deserves time to get the kinks worked out. Maybe my own project licenses may be changing as a result, at least for three of them -- I don't own the copyrights for FOMM so have no authority to change the license there. Maybe I'm completely done modding or writing modding community software for free. I haven't decided yet. Thanks "community."

Yep, they are there. But could you post your original animations anyway. I would still like to use them the way they were The way they were will not work with the current (beta) version of sexout, or any future version. Bummer. With all of Amras animations on top of the originals there are like 40 or 50 now. I prefer to keep the number lower. 1 or 2 solo, an oral, and 6 to 10 anal/vaginal. Oh well. Love your stuff none the less. If your patient and paying attention, you'll see that Sexout is getting a new MCM menu that will let you enable/disable animations on a per-source (e.g. builtin, zaz, amra, etc) basis before too long.

Yep, they are there. But could you post your original animations anyway. I would still like to use them the way they were The way they were will not work with the current (beta) version of sexout, or any future version.

Odessa is keeping an eye on this thread, I'm sure, so here is fine for now. Errors that still allow sex to work are... well that's weird. I'll be digging into all this more this weekend.

Oh bugger an empty if for an else? Who does that.

No, they actually say exactly the opposite of each other. The first one says "return if the result is equal to 1" The second one says "return if the result is NOT equal to 1"

I don't think you quite read what I said there. You're calling two functions, their return value meanings aren't the same.

That's not the right way to use the ActorValid UDF, it does not only return 1/0 like inuse, it returns the reason the actor is invalid. It can return values from -8 to +1. Only a return value of 1 means "yes the actor is valid" so you want to change that to something like: if eval (1 != call fnSexoutActorValid Myself) return endif That probably won't fix your problem though, I'll keep looking.

I need to see the call. Also please update to beta10 just in case.

You shouldn't be using any of the "amra" files or patches now -- just Odessa's mod for Amra's animations. Just FYI.

It's not sexout. That limbdamage thing hasn't done anything in a year or two, still doesn't. It's one of several MCM things I need to address but I'm in the process of rewriting all the MCM stuff to make it more dynamic and easily integrate the animation selector. Interesting. I have saved the extracted beta 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 and its in the wrong place in all of those also. I never downloaded 8 or 9. I imagine it's wrong in all of them since I included it, dunno why I put it there. Just wasn't thinking. That DOES mean that nobody has actually been testing it as I wanted though It's in the right place in beta10.

Well I don't understand the invisible body aspect, but it was in the wrong place. There shouldn't be invisible bodies since the body is still in the correct location in the sexout bodies BSA.

2.10.93Beta10 in OP Changes: - Fixed erect bodysuit mesh location, thanks packprof. This is a fomod-ready 7z, just install it as a package with fomm/nmm/whatever.