Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, asdj1239 said:

I think you're solution of a "non-forcegreet workaround" would be perfect

In some cases it's practical to replace with a scene - though they have their own issues.

I can fire a scene and it will just start. I need to write a way to pin down the PC though, as DD sabotages all control locking with its own routine that constantly resets it.

Link to comment

@KimyIs there a way to trigger stripping of items that would limit available scenes prior to one occurring (belts/gags/plugs/jackets/dresses)?  I know there's a "rapists can strip belts" option in DCL so I would assume it's doable, but that could be a straight-forward, and immersive way to handle some of the issues folks are encountering, as other modders could just add a "Let's get this out of the way for now" dialogue, event plays, then everything goes back on.

Link to comment
23 hours ago, Kimy said:

 

That's outdated information. The filter had a bug that was still persistent in 5.0,

 

 

Thanks for clarifying, your efforts are appreciated.  I am curious though, is there a reason why the entire filter can't be disabled?  I liked the ability to toggle it off as the previous version of DD allowed.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Marg597 said:

I am curious though, is there a reason why the entire filter can't be disabled?  I liked the ability to toggle it off as the previous version of DD allowed.

Also, should be possible to disable it via ModEvent.

 

e.g.

DD-AnimFilter-Disable - turns the filter off until re-enabled

DD-AnimFilter-Enable - turns the filter back on

 

Pass your form in the event so that it can work with multiple callers.

 

There's no reason to not have such a capability. If a mod is firing these events, it clearly does not want the filter.

Why would you force the filter on for mods that do not want it and do not benefit from it?

This is preferable to the player having to disable it globally, though presumably, if they did that Enable events would do nothing.

 

As a solution for mods that rely on the filter, they could call a DD function to explicitly obtain an animation, and this is likely how the filter should always have worked.

 

It should have been opt-in-explicit from day one.

 

 

Interference with the player controls-enable state by DD needs a way to override it too.

The alternatives are complicated, brittle, and shouldn't be necessary, except for the issue that DD acts as if it "owns in perpetuity" so many shared resources (player speed mult AV is another one of those resources that DD is squatting on).

 

 

That said, any such feature, if it were ever added, would be of no use to DFC because it's still in DD4.2-land, where...

a) you can disable the filter anyway;

b) all Kimy's new features - like furniture, and ability to alter device "manipulation" state - do not exist.

 

 

I have Kimy on block/ignore - so I don't know what she was saying (if she said anything) - and for all I know she blocks me too, so probably she can't see this either.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, kylexf said:

I know there's a "rapists can strip belts" option in DCL so I would assume it's doable,

DFC could strip devices that aren't marked quest.

 

That would probably cover most situations.

 

The problem I have with device stripping is that DD is rather slow, so the wind-up to the sex scene starts to become interminable.

Another problem is that it's somewhat unimmersive.

Also, DFC basically relies on the idea that you are having sex in devices to take away your resistance, and ultimately willpower.

 

Some devices are fine to leave, others are impactful:

Spoiler

Impactful

  • belts
  • hobble-dresses
  • straightjackets
  • hobble-skirts themed to match straitjackets
  • yokes
  • armbinders and other bindings with the same animation override
  • pet suits
  • chastity-bras

 

Not Impactful

  • arm cuffs
  • leg cuffs
  • blindfolds
  • corsets
  • slave boots
  • gloves
  • mittens
  • harnesses with no chastity component
  • purely decorative shackles

 

And then there are some items that are in a tricky middle-ground, such as gags and hoods, which may, or may not, block oral.

 

Also, we have plugs, which should be a total sex-blocker, because you can't put a penis in a hole that has a plug in it!

 

The way DD's filter in 4 or 5 treats these as blockers or not likely differs from my own interpretation.

Seems to me that mods should have the choice.

Catching and altering scenes from non-DD-aware mods should always have been an off-by-default option that players had to purposely enable in the MCM.

 

As far as I know, the filter in 4 only concerns itself with armbinders, yokes, and chastity devices (including bras) ... and maaayybee blocking gags?

 

 

But returning to the issue of device stripping, the only device that DFC could reasonably strip and remain immersive is a belt.

That's just one item from a list of impactful items.

 

Pet-suits and hobble-dresses are particularly problematic.

 

You can just treat a hobble-dress as chastity (and SLD does), because unless it has an open bottom, it is, but mainly because practically every sex animation out there looks like a total mess with a hobble-dress.

 

Pet-suits are worse, because they are clearly a "for sex" outfit, but there are very few animations that work well with them.

 

Spoiler

It's a restraint I'd rather avoid because of that. It also animates badly due to it being so speed sensitive. The walk almost always slip-slides in a disturbing way.

The suit design makes little sense anyway, as it lacks anything to hold it on.

I know people like the idea of that suit - it's very nice - but it's not convincing as modelled or animated, and seriously lacks sex-animation support.

I don't think I've seen a real suit of that style that didn't hook over the hands/feet to prevent it slipping off. It could also strap around the wrist or ankle, but the DD one does neither, and appears to be held on by magic, which sort of defeats the point of a physical restraint.

Should DFC be popping off pet-suits, hobble-dresses and straightjackets before sex?

I guess the best answer is to let the player decide.

 

It's something to think about if I ever have time to overhaul the animation selection system.

Link to comment
21 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

In some cases it's practical to replace with a scene - though they have their own issues.

I can fire a scene and it will just start. I need to write a way to pin down the PC though, as DD sabotages all control locking with its own routine that constantly resets it.

 

Based on my play experience the last couple of days, it doesn't actually seem like a massive problem anymore. Ever since I dismissed my follower and re-recruited them (maybe used something like a reset option in DF MCM too) all debt events have been triggering properly. I have a suspicion it's something to do with DCL that caused the problem in the first place, although if that were the case I guess a lot more people would have reported this issue unless everyone is always playing endless mode/trying their hardest not to hit the enslavement threshold.

 

If/when I start a new game, I'll try and keep track of when the issue arises and if it seems like it's related to DCL or something else (maybe I can just increase debt every time I finish a dcl quest and see if the event is still working).

Link to comment
18 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

I have Kimy on block/ignore - so I don't know what she was saying (if she said anything) - and for all I know she blocks me too, so probably she can't see this either.

 

I can see your postings just fine. I don't put people on ignore for having one silly disagreement with me, after years of mostly cordial exchanges. Albeit seeing you constantly throwing spite at me sinceever I said no to that one feature you wanted to have (and ironically enough I changed my mind on later) does make me admittedly sad.

Link to comment
18 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Also, should be possible to disable it via ModEvent.

Technically, moder can add a "NoSwap" tag no animation he wants to play and remove it in EndAnimation Hook. Something like

 

Spoiler

sslBaseAnimation[] Anims

Anims = SexLab.GetAnimationsByType(ActorCount, Aggressive = True) ; list of animations

int RandAnim

RandAnim = Utility.RandomInt(0, Anims.Length - 1)

sslBaseAnimation SelectedAnim

SelectedAnim = Anims[RandAnim] as sslBaseAnimation ; picking a random animation from list

SelectedAnim .AddTag("NoSwap")

SelectedAnim .AddTag("NoSwapAdded") ; we need this to check whether we added NoSwap tag or is was there before.

SelectedAnim .Save()

; play animation

 

Event OnAnimationEnd(int threadID, bool HasPlayer)
    sslThreadController LastScene = Sexlab.ThreadSlots.GetController(threadID)
    sslBaseAnimation LastAnim = LastScene.Animation
    if LastAnim.HasTag("NoSwapAdded")
        LastAnim.RemoveTag("NoSwap")
        LastAnim.RemoveTag("NoSwapAdded")
        LastAnim.Save()
    EndIf
EndEvent

 

I'm using this method to test animation selection in different mods. Not sure is it "legal", taking in account the fate of the previous mod that tinkered with animation filter. :)
 

Link to comment

I have been experiencing ctds since dropping in the beta update that was posted a few days ago.  I am not going to say for certain that the update is causing them.  I have only really played two times since updating, and have no real evidence.

 

Here is my flimsy evidence:

 

I have not updated anything else since before the update.

 

Before the update I would have freezes every once in great awhile (like when I play for way too long); however, after the update I started getting good ol ctds, where the game just goes away.  I have not seen a ctd in a long time.  

 

I did not see any suspicious activity in the papyrus logs.  All I have is a few crash dumps I don't know how to decipher. The first crash dump says something about an endless recursion detected, the others say other things I cannot decipher.

 

I will probably try to play again and see if I can notice any commonalities in what was going on in the game at the time of ctd.

I have not seen anyone else report problems with the update, not sure how many people tried it.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, slvsaris said:

I did not see any suspicious activity in the papyrus logs.  All I have is a few crash dumps I don't know how to decipher. The first crash dump says something about an endless recursion detected, the others say other things I cannot decipher.

These would be C++ engine code crashes?

As DFC has no C++ in it, that would suggest the issue is related to how it's loading the records of the new ESP into your save.

 

Maybe?

 

If DFC is in the middle of your LO somewhere, you can't be sure to get away with updating it mid-game; that's just Skyrim.

Whether or not that works out depends on all your other mods.

 

If DFC is on the very end of your LO, it's more likely you can get away with an update.

 

Personally, I find that while mid-game updates of various mods that are "harmless" or shouldn't be a problem, usually seem to go in OK, and everything is fine, that long-term stability is still impacted by updating mid-game.

 

The beta update adds a lot of dialogs and dialog conditions, and that seems to be a brittle area of Skyrim, and they don't always update reliably.

When I put them into my own established game, it was fine. So far...

 

For me, rvery CTD I get is the exact same CTD, caused by a bad asset I have yet to locate that tries to allocate a single 90MB memory block.

It's almost certainly a corrupted NIF, and it hasn't changed in a long time.

The problem with finding it, is that I could play for many hours, or even multiple sessions of many hours, and never get a crash; it's quite rare.

 

I didn't get any new CTDs from the beta.

As it makes fairly modest Papyrus changes, and they really are small compared to (say) the preceding update, most of what it does is add new dialogs or change dialog conditions.

I'd have thought that if your game can load it and start, that's it, it's fine. But without a debug build of the Skyrim engine, and source, I doubt it's possible to get an answer to what is crashing your game.

 

You might get some value from checking your save with Fallrim tools. It could at least throw up some information.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, AndrewLRG said:

Not sure is it "legal", taking in account the fate of the previous mod that tinkered with animation filter.

If you don't change the DD code, then I'd guess it's legal.

This is something only the caller does.

 

Of course, DD might stop respecting NoSwap. I don't know if that's remotely likely. I can't really understand the reasoning that drives the current behavior, so I have no way to guess what would be seen as a logical response to this.

 

I'm guessing it will continue to be supported because DD respects it intentionally?

 

It looks like a useful approach, that - for mods that don't let SexLab just select their animation for them - will allow them to get the animation they intend.

 

Perhaps I can use this to stop DD swapping spank animations out and replacing them with bound animations that aren't spanks at all?

In this case, I can update the tags statically; doesn't even need a code change. But people will need to update their Spank Pack or edit the tags themselves.

Link to comment

I've been informed that Kimy is posting things here - a post was forwarded to me, or part of one.

Thus:

Spoiler

I can see your postings just fine. I don't put people on ignore for having one silly disagreement with me, after years of mostly cordial exchanges. Albeit seeing you constantly throwing spite at me sinceever I said no to that one feature you wanted to have (and ironically enough I changed my mind on later) does make me admittedly sad.


I don't block people out of spite.

As for suggesting this is a dispute over a feature? It obviously wasn't.

It was entirely about behavior on forums.

 

My reasoning for blocking is well documented elsewhere. As an approach it's successfully prevented provocations escalating for some time.

It just stops those moments where I read some post and go "WTF!!!" It's just easier for everyone if I never see those things.

However, it's problematic developing a DD-based mod without occasionally feeling a need to explain problems I have encountered, or issues that make me uncomfortable about moving to DD5.

 

No doubt Kimy wouldn't be posting if she didn't feel provoked. I'm not really sure how to deal with this.

I don't have much expectation that I will want to unblock Kimy or participate in the DD forums.

I decided I better do it.

There is far too little trust between us at this point. But if I keep pretty quiet, then maybe it will be ok.

I wish I could resolve this, but I don't know how without becoming a huge hypocrite.

 

Sad? I was extremely upset, and now I am upset again.

 

I wish I could just have nothing to do with it, but there are issues with DD that are up-in-my-stuff like a lolcat.

 

So, I will unblock Kimy, and when I don't like what she writes, or disagree with her reasoning, or more likely, her premises for it, I'll just suck that up.

If I stay away from her domain and never speak of her of her work, I probably won't have to see anything anyway.

She doesn't come over here unless somebody tells her that "Lupine is dumping on here again" or something.

I'll try to stay in my little box and be good. (I reserve the right to some residual bitterness).

 

 

In case there's any confusion, I'm immensely grateful to Kimy for her work on DD, without which we couldn't enjoy a great many lovely mods in the way that we currently do. Without her holding the whole thing together, who knows what madness might have ensued after Min backed away from it?

 

Also, though I have some (significant) issues with the license impositions, it has avoided fragmentation of the mod-base that might otherwise have occurred, and again, we can't say what sort of mess might have arisen without that. I don't know for sure it has benefits, but I at least acknowledge there's a possibility they exist.

 

I don't really know if Kimy cares at all, or whether the whole thing was never that important from her perspective, but I was absolutely gutted by the dispute that arose and how it was resolved (if you can call it that), and how that was an inevitable sequel of the previous disagreements regarding my perception of Kimy's rejection of assistance or contributions, non-existent bug-tracking, disengagement from users, non-acknowledgement of bug reporting, etc. In retrospect, I now appreciate that those comments weren't helping. Getting involved in any of that debate was just a way of manufacturing my own misery, and it didn't make anybody else feel better either. Also, nothing changed as a result, there was no benefit of any kind. It was a totally futile effort with only negative consequences.

 

Anyone who's ever been at the bottom of one of those pile-ons knows how bad it feels. But it's not like they just came and invaded my Twitter. If you go and complain loudly on the DD forums, you are going to get crushed, and that's just how it is. If Kimy had wanted advice on how to improve DD she would have come and asked for it, right?

 

 

My immediate position on DD problems will be to not discuss them on public forums.

If you have a question that relates to DD or DD-behavior in DFC or elsewhere, I won't answer it.

Somebody else can answer it. Or not.

 

This creates a problem for players. Maybe? Maybe nobody will notice a difference.

Either way, I don't have a better answer right now.

 

 

The alternatives are things like:

  1. Abandon DFC and make a new mod with no DD in it.
  2. Don't go to DD5, and instead replace DFC's DDs with Toys.
  3. Magically resolve everything with Kimy and dance off into the sunset.
  4. Build some other DD-like framework and replace DFC's DDs with that.
  5. Just quit the whole thing and let somebody else worry about it.

 

I don't think any of those are great options.

Well... (3) is a lovely option, but I cannot see how we get there. If I could, we wouldn't be where we are now. Or there likely wouldn't have been a disagreement in the first place.

All of them get less features for people in the near term.

No disrespect to Toys, but DFC won't magically convert itself to use that without a ton of effort. It would make more sense to start over.

Whether or not that's option (1) or not, is another issue. If I moved onto something else it might not be that kind of mod.

So, for now, the best thing is simply not to go there.

 

I remember saying a few years ago, that I wouldn't be bullied into censoring myself. But I have been, and more so now.

Well, I guess it's complicated. What's the difference between self-censorship and consideration?

 

I'm not saying that Kimy doesn't deserve a certain amount of peace-and-quiet, with freedom from constant attacks.

But if we can't bring up any issues or discuss problems, then these forums are a less useful.

 

Maybe that's an issue that society is struggling with in many ways right now?

Certainly makes me think (5) is the easiest option for me personally.

When I blocked Kimy in the first place, it was a way of avoiding that path, but I'm not sure it's working.

I did it to stop myself getting dragged into this stuff, but I'm getting dragged into it anyway.

 

 

I've wasted so much time on it. So much time wasted, and nothing but a lot of depressing upset to show for it.

 

As the post from @AndrewLRG shows, it's just better to put time into finding ways around problems than moaning about them.

So, if I'm doing that in the future, somebody please remind me to stop.

 

Yes, sometimes users need to understand where their problems are coming from, and it's impossible to always be positive, but if these things go too far, it just drags everyone down.

 

There were some very negative posts here recently, and TBH, I wanted to hear them, because often people do raise real concerns that deserve a response, even if actual improvement is hard. It probably helped put more focus on the "Slut" dialogs in DFC. SLS licenses might have suffered because of that, but something people were also saying, is that stability is better than lots of new features. Reading those negative posts, I had a lot of sympathy for Kimy, who has had to endure that as a background level for years now, and I thought about how I might have contributed to that, and it made me feel a lot worse than the negative feedback.

 

If Kimy were to say she was upset by all this in a significant way, I will apologize however she likes, as I want to bury once and for all this theory that I am maintaining a grudge against her personally. I'm afraid there is so little trust that she won't even accept that. I can't blame her too much.

Link to comment

@Lupine00 I've read, and re-read your post a few times now. It's obvious it took some time and great thought put into what you wrote. It's even more obvious how passionate you are about the community, the mods, and DFC, to the point where you can appreciate others, and their passion and their work, without compromising yourself and your own work. Anyone who has ever used DFC, know this. I won't speak for others, but I do appreciates your efforts, not only for the care you put into your mods, but for taking the time everyday to answer questions, comment on suggestions, and help troubleshoot issues. I don't think you get enough credit (like others on this site), but you are appreciated nonetheless. What you wrote though, as I was reading it, occurred to me just how difficult it was for you to write it. It's easy to see. But I think you did the right thing, as it took a great deal of courage to not only take the time to write it all out, but to share the post with the rest of us.

 

I see all kinds of shit around me every day, and it's very discouraging to the point where i often wonder if i should keep having faith in that people are inherently good at heart. It just seems like compassion, kindness, empathy, are nothing more than simple myths, like a feel-good bedtime story. And then i read your post... and I am reminded that there are good people out there. And I thank you for your words and for reminding me of that.

 

You're right, the past is the past. nothing can be done to change it. What does matter is "now" and what happens moving forward. Regardless of what happens, focus on what you do best, and remember there are people here who respect you and your work, and will be supportive. I do hope Kimy will also appreciate what you wrote, and that things can move forward amicably, as I am sure it would give you both peace of mind, if it could.

 

Anyway, you have my utmost respect (you're only the second person i've said that to on here lol), and again, thank you :)

 

Link to comment

@Lupine00

 

All right, where to start this?

 

First by saying that if I wouldn't be similarly upset about what happened, I wouldn't be here, writing postings in your thread. I still have no clue what happened back then. I mean, if course I know WHAT happened in terms of events, I just can't wrap my head around it as to WHY it happened. It was one of these things that start with a minor disagreement and then escalate so fast that when it was over, I wondered how it just could have gotten to this. Particularly since we seemed to be on mostly amicable terms for most of the time.

 

I am not LL to pick fights. Or play the main act in some high-school like drama. And yet, it happens all the time. I wish it wouldn't, because it takes away both my mind and my time from what I actually want to do, which is writing code and improving my work. I have the feeling that it happens a lot when people push the wrong buttons in me, and I have a few of them. I am not necessarily proud of them. One thing I react VERY badly to is when I have the feeling that people are pushing me around. Like when they ask me for a certain feature, I say no, and then they keep going, and going and going, getting more and more aggressive and pushy over time. It happens a lot, and I am not sure why that is and why some people can't take no for an answer, or at least remain polite and constructive when they can't. I am admittedly a bit touchy when I have the impression that people think I work for them without getting paid. And that they can just snip their fingers and I will implement whatever they want for them - in these mods that are available free of charge, unless people chose to tip me. Which only a small fraction of everyone who downloaded them ever did, of course. There is only one way to get me to implement a suggestion, and that way is to convince me. And acknowledging that ultimately, decisions about the direction of my mods lie with me and nobody else. That includes any license terms people might or might not agree with, or the question whether or not to operate a public bugtracker. I like to think I am listening to the community, and that I implement a lot of user suggestions. Perhaps more than most mod authors do. But while users of my mods have a VOICE about where to take my mods, they don't have a SAY. That's an important difference, and other touchy subject for me, people need to understand when dealing with me.

 

In this particular case, I think what went wrong was not the suggestion being bad, but I somehow reacted badly to how it was presented. I -can- be convinced, even if I initially say no, but the way to deal with me is making a good case and remaining polite and constructive. If I feel attacked or pushed into a corner, I will lash back, and things will go downhill. It happened a few times. Some of my reactions I had to people pushing my wrong buttons I wish I could have back, but I -do- have a temper like a volcano, and people just need to understand that. Particularly when I feel that I am being pushed around and/or getting treated unfairly. And in this case...I somehow did. In case I overreacted back then...I am sorry.

 

I cannot make this undone any more than you can. I can also not tell you how to move forward. I do however, agree that basing a mod on a framework written by someone you hate so much that you feel the need to block them is not going to work well. I have seen you posting outdated or blatantly wrong information about DD (particularly the new version) numerous times in numerous places now, and it cannot go on like this. If you don't see my postings and updates, this will just go on, and neither of us can want that.

 

As to your possible alternatives, only you can decide that. The only one that makes any sense from a rational point of view is just moving on and keep building DFC and make it even more exciting. I'd think you put too much work into it to cast it aside just because you don't want to deal with me anymore. Or shrinking its target audience by 90-99% by using another framework that offers nothing over DD, unless "I hate Kimy really THAT much" is really good enough a deal in return for DFC basically guaranteed to be unable to exist in the same loadorder with DD mods in the future, the same way Maria Eden is. If you decide to stick with DD and need any help with getting DFC to work with DD5, by all means, ask me. I really don't expect too many issues, really. Up to you, of course.

Here is the good thing. I might have a temper, but I also don't hold grudges for long, unless in extreme cases. I never had you on ignore or even thought about it. The most constructive way to deal with a dispute is to sort it out and move on. Despite the amount of fights I had on LL over time, there is only ONE person on LL who upset me enough to make me 100% determined to never want any dealings with them anymore, ever again. I think we both know who that is and it's not you. So, if you want to move on...let's move on.

 

 

Link to comment
On 3/24/2021 at 11:04 AM, AndrewLRG said:

Technically, moder can add a "NoSwap" tag no animation he wants to play and remove it in EndAnimation Hook. Something like

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I'm using this method to test animation selection in different mods. Not sure is it "legal", taking in account the fate of the previous mod that tinkered with animation filter. :)
 

 

This method works since the filter exists, and it works intentionally so, and I have no intention to break it, unless I see extreme abuse of that workaround going on. If people go to that length to force an animation past the filter, sure, go ahead. They probably REALLY want it, then.

 

What is NOT "legal" is reaching directly into my mods, even when not using my code for it, and change my mod's behavior in ways I explicitly disagree with. That point of view has been confirmed by forum moderators and was the basis for certain mods being removed upon my request. Even versions of said mods that weren't stealing my code.

 

If people would give me a SOLID usecase for a feature requiring bypassing the filter, I would implement it properly and without needing the workaround quoted above. So far nobody gave me a SOLID usecase, though. Except for creatures, which I already implemented.

My normal stance is that a well-designed DD mod should never play invalid animations, because it defeats the purpose of restraints if they're not working as intended (e.g. vaginal intercourse through chastity belts), and implementing realistic restraints is the entire point of DD. In line with the above, convince me, and make a good case why it's needed, despite I still don't think there is a good usecase for it.

Link to comment

@Kimy @Lupine00 Tagging you here because tbh, it's easier than quoting both of your posts.

I don't have context for what initially happened between you two. I don't particularly keep up on drama in the modding community, unless it starts affecting me at the end user level. So, I realize that while I may not have much of a place to throw in my two cents, I would like to add them in any case, for both of you to consider.

I have seen the absolute havoc that two well known mod authors being at odds can create. Without naming names, there is a clear example of this in the Sims community. A big name mod author accused another of stealing code, the accused left Loverslab, in terms of any participation in public conversations, can't upload, etc. All fine and good... except the accuser still has no problems making problems for the accused. Even after the accused has left Loverslab, writes his own code for his mods, and has no intent to even have anything to do with the accuser. To the point that the accuser inserted code in to his mod to actively break the mods created by the accused.

Do I think either of you would ever resort to such a thing? No. From what I've seen of both of you, especially in this thread, I think the two of you are better than that. I will say Kimy seems more than willing to bury the hatchet. Lupine, I think even if you don't see the way forward, you have a desire to mend fences as well. In that case, what's stopping that?

You both create, and maintain content that is loved by the community. You both are well known modders, and as much as DFC depends on Devious Devices, I imagine a lot of people would agree that without DFC, Devious Devices just wouldn't feel as satisfying to use. Devious Devices shines when its mechanics are employed by other mods, and in my personal opinion, allowing some past drama to get in the way of that just doesn't help anyone.

The past is the past. You can't change it, but you can learn from it, and better understand one another. You don't have to be best friends. You don't have to like each other, but the fact that you both seem to want to get along is more than enough. What's important is that you can communicate.

Kimy, if Lupine has legitimate concerns about how DD5 operates, maybe it's best to hear them out, and really dive deep in to what could be causing it? Lupine, if Kimy investigates, and tells you that she's done all she can do, maybe then, it's time to look at how to work around it in DFC?

Just my own thoughts.

Link to comment

@Kimy thankyou!

I really appreciate your response.

If there's some way I can make some amends in future, you can always message me.

 

I could take such a large part of what was just said there, and say, "that's me too."

 

If we'd had those troubled discussions privately, I think they might have gone a lot differently with less pressure on.

So, if there's anything I want to raise, I'll do that privately in future.

Similarly, if there are things I ought to know, it is a good way to contact me.

 

I am really nice in private messages! ?

 

 

  

7 hours ago, Kimy said:

If people would give me a SOLID usecase for a feature requiring bypassing the filter, I would implement it properly and without needing the workaround quoted above. So far nobody gave me a SOLID usecase, though. Except for creatures, which I already implemented.

My normal stance is that a well-designed DD mod should never play invalid animations, because it defeats the purpose of restraints if they're not working as intended (e.g. vaginal intercourse through chastity belts), and implementing realistic restraints is the entire point of DD. In line with the above, convince me, and make a good case why it's needed, despite I still don't think there is a good usecase for it.

Thanks. That is really helpful.

 

Something like the spanks is (almost) a good case, as they get conversion when the PC is in chastity, but chastity isn't a problem for spanking.

The animations are mis-tagged though, so I'm not suggesting it's a DD defect, and the problem can be fixed with a tag update, I just need to do that, and then everyone who cares will need to update their animations (but won't need to re-FNIS).

 

 

I'm sorry about having old information, but:

 

1) other people could have provided correction if needed, and they didn't, so unless people tell me I'm wrong, I won't know :( 

 

2) I'm still on 4.2, and stuck there for some time to come, so all the benefits of DD5 are out of reach for now. I don't imagine you have any intention of back-porting any fixes to 4.2 nor would that make any sense. That means there's no way to get any changes unless I move to the latest release. I will see how I can move that up a bit.

Link to comment

I had a long break from Skyrim but came back a few days ago. Good to see that you and Kimy get along with each other again, Skyrim without DD, DCL and DFC isn't a fun Skyrim :bawling:.

 

I have just updated all mods before checking in detail the mod subfora, how incompatible is DFC with DD 5.1.? I played for a few hours now and haven't noticed anything yet i think, but i don't use the spanking feature so far.

 

So should i decide to either downgrade to 4.2 DD or deinstall DFC or can i try to continue playing with all 3 mods?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, xboronx said:

I had a long break from Skyrim but came back a few days ago. Good to see that you and Kimy get along with each other again, Skyrim without DD, DCL and DFC isn't a fun Skyrim :bawling:.

 

I have just updated all mods before checking in detail the mod subfora, how incompatible is DFC with DD 5.1.? I played for a few hours now and haven't noticed anything yet i think, but i don't use the spanking feature so far.

 

So should i decide to either downgrade to 4.2 DD or deinstall DFC or can i try to continue playing with all 3 mods?

I personally haven't had any issues between DFC and DD 5.1. However, I'm not someone who reliably triggers the random content, such as games. Maybe someone who doesn't just jump straight to enslavement can weigh in. ?

Link to comment

Hi,

 

I have a small bug (i think ...).

 

I have sl tools installed and many animation (straight or lesbian). But when i have to do the daily quest with the weird potion, its always a futa animation, and in the SL menu i only have 4 choices, all futa. My follower is a woman.

Same thing with the daily quest, where do you ahve to beg for sex, always a lesbian animation + 3 futa.

 

Everywhere else i have the full list of animations.

 

So there is something somewhere in the mcm menu i missed ?

 

Link to comment
10 hours ago, xboronx said:

i don't use the spanking feature so far

Spanking should be fine if you're not wearing chastity devices.

If you're wearing serious restraints, it shouldn't happen anyway.

 

If most things are working with DD5 you should stick with it, it will most likely be a better experience than 4.2

 

 

3 hours ago, gurdilhfkk said:

I have sl tools installed and many animation (straight or lesbian). But when i have to do the daily quest with the weird potion, its always a futa animation, and in the SL menu i only have 4 choices, all futa. My follower is a woman.

Same thing with the daily quest, where do you ahve to beg for sex, always a lesbian animation + 3 futa.

 

Everywhere else i have the full list of animations.

The logic for that scene is not especially odd or sophisticated. It simply uses QuickStart and tries for the Blowjob tag, then if that fails, it tries the Oral tag.

 

My guess is that the Blowjob tag is the problem. It's assuming a male follower a bit too much.

 

I've just made a change so it won't try that for female followers.

 

Also, if oral sex fails, it will fall back to regular sex rather than doing nothing.

Link to comment

To clear up confusion, I don't know of any reason you shouldn't use DD5.X

 

The spanking issue, such as it is, is minor, and can be fixed with SLATE or similar (or just editing and reloading your tabs in the file).

 

Spanking will be perfectly fine if you aren't restrained ... but it's DD, so probably you are.

In DD4.2 you can turn off the filter, and avoid some spank problems. I don't use the filter myself, but you can try either way and see which you prefer.

 

I'll fix the animations soon. It's a tiny job. I just keep forgetting.

 

 

The reason I have conversion to DD5 down as a big task for the future is not because lots has to be done, it's because lots should be done.

DD5 seems to work OK with no conversion. 

To get the full benefit of it, some more work needs to be done.

DD5 has new features that DFC doesn't know about, and some better ways to interact with the framework, that DFC doesn't know about.

Maybe a properly converted DFC will handle devices faster and more reliably? You should probably ask someone else about that for now, as I don't know the facts.

 

Also, the LDC needs some fixes and improvements, and also support for new objects, and ability to support arbitrary items from external mods.

LDC has concurrency problems; it fails when trying to add mods quickly in succession - maybe due to issues in DD4.

It should be possible to fix that with a proper conversion to DD5.

 

That's quite a bit to do, but in the meantime you can still use DD5, and you probably should use DD5.

But, this week at least, I'm still using DD4.2 and development test is on that. I can't help with any DD5 bugs.

Link to comment
On 3/21/2021 at 3:35 AM, Lupine00 said:

If you want a specific set of deals, it makes more sense to have a way to get specific deals via the MCM, and then you can just click on them and set them all up without churning through dialogs for ages. In that case you'll also see when taking a deal has locked you out of others.

 

But I've never had a request for something like that before. As far as I knew, the only audience for such a feature was me, and that only for testing.

If you're looking for input, I would like that option as well. 

It would be handy for say, when I'm about to enter a game play session with certain objectives and you can pick deal options that you know from experience will give you just the right amount of trouble but not to much or too little. 

I've been just spamming deal requests and reloading to make that happen.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. For more information, see our Privacy Policy & Terms of Use