Devious Devices LE 5.2

[Kimy]

8 hours ago, donkeywho said:

But a Framework is only as good as it provides for the production of mods that support the kind of gameplay that people like

Yes

 

Quote

ZAP has been great at producing assets, but being basically 'non functional', they're probably best (and I don't mean to be rude here, rather just make the point clear by exaggerating it) for people who want to prance around in a story world where the 'restraint' etc is primarily in their heads' imaginations, not in the functionality of the game

 

Also true. ZAP lacks proper locking/escape mechanics, so it's pretty much limited to Player-is-Dominant scenarios. The NPCs will happily wear ZAP devices even when they're technically just regular clothing with no locking mechanics. If you put ZAP devices on the player, she can take them off with minimal effort, so yes, it works for people liking cosmetic devices only.

 

Quote

 

I like DD because it has the functionality, but it's at its best for players for whom the game is primarily about being restrained, subjugated or enslaved as if , given the 'authentic' mechanic, for real.  It's not nearly so good / been developed as well for players who primarily are interested in being dominant characters (Oddly, cliftonjd & musje & pamatronic have made a fairly decent fist of using ZAP to do that, albeit some aspects are still being developed and may be even better in ZAP9)

 

That's the part I do not agree with. There is zero technical limitation in DD keeping people from writing either Player-is-Dominant mods or mods with largely cosmetic devices. The locking system in DD is 100% optional. You can design devices that can be just removed, without key and without having to escape them. You don't even need to write code for that, as it's controlled by properties.

I cannot conceive any BDSM scenario you cannot implement in DD. If there is no DD mod providing cosmetic devices, the reason simply is that no modder wanted to make one yet. Same goes for Player-is-Dominant mods. I honestly don't know why there isn't such a mod for DD. All I can tell you is that my own interest in this type of scenario is limited, which is why -I- didn't make one. DCL is largely Player-is-Sub, and the same is true for all DD mods I am aware of.

 

Since DD can be used for ANY imaginable BDSM scenario, there is absolutely zero reason for another BDSM framework. None. Nada. The reason why VirginMarie started this project is plain and simple because she doesn't want to use DD anymore, for it doesn't let her disable a framework feature anymore she disagrees with.

 

Quote

So if someone wants to make another framework that supports a further type of gameplay, we should probably all really be pleased, insofar as it may include other parts of the community not best served by those that exist already

 

Well, while choice is never a bad thing per se, splitting up the community is. Mods doing the same thing have a notorious habit of being incompatible. Her new framework, assuming it will get picked up by anyone but herself, will just force people to pick between mods based on her framework, and mods based on DD. There is no way to make competing frameworks fully compatible, even if we wanted to. ZAP and DD don't directly clash either, but this doesn't mean that mods built on them always run flawlessly together. ZAP-based mods are largely Player-is-Dom mods, and DD-based mods are largely Player-is-Sub mods, which means that by design they largely stay out of each other's way, and that's the only reason why it works halfway well in practice.

 

Releasing that framework is her prerogative, so if that's what she wants to do, it's not that anyone's going to stop her. Am I afraid of competing with her framework? Certainly not. Her biggest selling point for it will be "Because it's not made by Kimy!", for that's the primary reason why she started it. Other than that, I cannot see what it's supposed to do that DD can't do better. *shrug*

 

 

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Kimy said:

I cannot see what it's supposed to do that DD can't do better.

If I could, I'd add a couple more thumbs up here. ? ?

(? Oh wait, but I can!) 

????

[GreatCroco]

2 hours ago, Kimy said:

Am I afraid of competing with her framework? Certainly not.

I went over to the new framework thread and read the feature list. I'm not impressed. They either are features that DD already has (so no reason for mod authors to switch, if the mod is even maintained) or features that don't go well with Skyrim, e.g. the device library, which promises to be fast (hah!) but open to all modders. This totally smells like the discontinued device library. They are also looking for modellers to make new items, but we all know how that looks right now. The "busy check" function alone looks like a total performance killer because Papyrus probably ate glue again and concurrency being concurrency...

 

 

The only area I could see that new framework potentially overtaking DD is in the SSE space, because that's DD's big weak spot.

 

 

 

Oh and the "framework that shall not be named" for DD? Really? How childish is that?

[Kimy]

40 minutes ago, Techpriest said:

 the device library, which promises to be fast (hah!) but open to all modders.

A little technical detail that might or might have been overlooked is that the new system is ALSO extensible by 3rd party mods. All you need to do is adding your device to the FormList objects they fit in, and any other DD mod will be able to pick it. As for fast...yeah...good luck trying to be faster than a built-in engine feature! ?

 

Quote

The only area I could see that new framework potentially overtaking DD is in the SSE space, because that's DD's big weak spot.

I admittedly don't work on the SE version myself, but develop on LE. But for all I know she will do it the same way.

 

There is one device I am aware of clashing with SE (prisoner chains), but I think the porting crew provided a fix for that.

 

Quote

Oh and the "framework that shall not be named" for DD? Really? How childish is that?

 

? ? ? ?

[DonQuiWho]

3 hours ago, Kimy said:

Yes

 

 

Also true. ZAP lacks proper locking/escape mechanics, so it's pretty much limited to Player-is-Dominant scenarios. The NPCs will happily wear ZAP devices even when they're technically just regular clothing with no locking mechanics. If you put ZAP devices on the player, she can take them off with minimal effort, so yes, it works for people liking cosmetic devices only.

 

 

That's the part I do not agree with. There is zero technical limitation in DD keeping people from writing either Player-is-Dominant mods or mods with largely cosmetic devices. The locking system in DD is 100% optional. You can design devices that can be just removed, without key and without having to escape them. You don't even need to write code for that, as it's controlled by properties.

I cannot conceive any BDSM scenario you cannot implement in DD. If there is no DD mod providing cosmetic devices, the reason simply is that no modder wanted to make one yet. Same goes for Player-is-Dominant mods. I honestly don't know why there isn't such a mod for DD. All I can tell you is that my own interest in this type of scenario is limited, which is why -I- didn't make one. DCL is largely Player-is-Sub, and the same is true for all DD mods I am aware of.

 

Since DD can be used for ANY imaginable BDSM scenario, there is absolutely zero reason for another BDSM framework. None. Nada. The reason why VirginMarie started this project is plain and simple because she doesn't want to use DD anymore, for it doesn't let her disable a framework feature anymore she disagrees with.

 

 

Well, while choice is never a bad thing per se, splitting up the community is. Mods doing the same thing have a notorious habit of being incompatible. Her new framework, assuming it will get picked up by anyone but herself, will just force people to pick between mods based on her framework, and mods based on DD. There is no way to make competing frameworks fully compatible, even if we wanted to. ZAP and DD don't directly clash either, but this doesn't mean that mods built on them always run flawlessly together. ZAP-based mods are largely Player-is-Dom mods, and DD-based mods are largely Player-is-Sub mods, which means that by design they largely stay out of each other's way, and that's the only reason why it works halfway well in practice.

 

Releasing that framework is her prerogative, so if that's what she wants to do, it's not that anyone's going to stop her. Am I afraid of competing with her framework? Certainly not. Her biggest selling point for it will be "Because it's not made by Kimy!", for that's the primary reason why she started it. Other than that, I cannot see what it's supposed to do that DD can't do better. *shrug*

 

 

I had hoped that I had already said my piece

 

If you had just expanded on the Sub / Dom comments, I would have been happy to accept that and left the matter there

 

Otherwise, if someone wants their mods to behave differently and DD doesn't seem to, or maybe even can't, accommodate it, why shouldn't they do something for themselves if they want to take the effort?

 

Unless, of course, that you are telling us that DD5 will absolutely do, 100%, what they want for their mod.  If it does, that's a different ball game, but nothing I have seen so far seems to say that it will. 

 

And if I understood the earlier discussions correctly, that it may restrict the range of SLAL animations etc available through Defeat, etc - which some of us happen to like, and can actually make work OK ?  - then I'll possibly have to do without the shiny new stuff and stick with DD4.3 and and DCL8.5, not because I want to, but because it might be the only way I can get the game to play to my style.  But so what?  I'm just one of thousands and that would be MY choice.  Obviously, if you can tell me with 100% assurance that it won't, that would be really really good, but at the moment I'm still really waiting to see, anbd if not, I'm not going to die without it.  Unless something nasty in Bleak Falls Barrow has a surprise I don't know about LOL 

 

I appreciate that you want to both make progress, AND not split people off.  Whilst admirable, in some circumstances that might just well happen by accident, though, as it were.   Hell, in the real world there are even banks still running COBOL routines and XP based terminals, so legacy stuff is nothing out of the ordinary

 

I don't see any point in discussing the rest in too much detail, as frankly, it'll just be in danger of getting to be a pointless he said/she said argument.  Bottom line is that there will be many views, NONE of which will be 100% 'right' and sure as little green apples, will ever please everyone

 

I'd hope that I can stick a fork in it there, but almost certainly, someone will now come along and dig up the corpse ?

 

Meantime, take care of yourself and yours, and above all 'Hang In, there!'.  You can only do your best at what you do, and there's not anything wrong with that. 

 

Hoping that doesn't all sound too sanctimonious, but at my age, that can tend to come naturally ? 

 

 

 

 

[Kimy]

33 minutes ago, donkeywho said:

And if I understood the earlier discussions correctly, that it may restrict the range of SLAL animations etc available through Defeat, etc - which some of us happen to like, and can actually make work OK ?  - then I'll possibly have to do without the shiny new stuff and stick with DD4.3 and and DCL8.5, not because I want to, but because it might be the only way I can get the game to play to my style.

 

The "Use Bound Animations" toggle in MCM is supposed to leave the full range of animations available for a scene, if people don't like the limited choice of DD bound animations. The only reason why it currently doesn't, it's because it apparently bugged.

 

Not -everything- I do is because I am evil, you know? Sometimes it's just plain old software bugs that want me to fix them.

 

 

[GreatCroco]

1 hour ago, Kimy said:

A little technical detail that might or might have been overlooked is that the new system is ALSO extensible by 3rd party mods.

Yeah, I must have overlooked that part. I read that you switched to a FormsList system, but I have been out of Skyrim modding for so long to see that angle working for 3rd party mods. The whole post in reinforced my impression (in addition to the DD5 Beta thread conversations) that they have not a good understanding of how software development actually works.

 

1 hour ago, Kimy said:

I admittedly don't work on the SE version myself, but develop on LE.

I mean that's totally fine as long as the porting crew delivers a good product, but that's the same topic as Console <-> PC ports and how you can fuck up.

  

5 minutes ago, Kimy said:

Not -everything- I do is because I am evil, you know? Sometimes it's just plain old software bugs that want me to fix them.

What!? Kimy not evil? It can't be. That's impossible!

 

 

 

 

 

BTW: How should we call you from now on?

She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named making the Mod-That-Must-Not-Be-Named or You-Know-Who making The-Mod-Everyone-Knows?

Also: When are you removing your nose and start splitting your soul?

[qawsedrftg765]

3 hours ago, Techpriest said:

 

The only area I could see that new framework potentially overtaking DD is in the SSE space, because that's DD's big weak spot.

 

If you havn't give 5.0 a look on SE it has been pretty much flawless for me on my playthough using SL survival, Devious Lore, Devious captures and a bunch of others. Zarantha is doing god's work porting everything so well.

2 hours ago, Kimy said:

Not -everything- I do is because I am evil, you know?

If that is true then why does the slave chastity belt require 5 keys @ a tiny drop chance?!?!?

[zarantha]

On 12/11/2020 at 3:18 AM, CaptainJ03 said:

I don't think that it's a bug. Have you ever tried tying your elbows? Yes, you might manage to get in, but there's no way to reach the locks. In RL I use a 20cm extension on a handcuff key to get the shackles off. Ooops, I mean, a friend does that... yes, a friend!

By that same logic, I shouldn't be able to do the same thing with armbinders or elbowbinders, yet those aren't a problem.

 

I understand what you're saying, but the feature isn't meant to be realistic I think.

[Guest]

So 2 questions

 

1. So if I understand this right this is an all in one, what all does this include, so I know what to get rid of and what to keep?

 

2 Request for future items, can you add leather belt collars like these pics here?

Spoiler

 

[Zaflis]

53 minutes ago, ClockworkTower said:

1. So if I understand this right this is an all in one, what all does this include, so I know what to get rid of and what to keep?

You can just choose everything you want and not in the installer. Standard part of DD includes

- DD Assets

- DD Integration

- DD Expansion

- DD Contraptions (this is now required for Cursed Loot)

 

Devices for male and the beast refits are optional and less supported, at least from what i understood it's not Kimy's area to deal with and based on reports so far they could be bugged.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Zaflis said:

You can just choose everything you want and not in the installer. Standard part of DD includes

- DD Assets

- DD Integration

- DD Expansion

- DD Contraptions (this is now required for Cursed Loot)

 

Devices for male and the beast refits are optional and less supported, at least from what i understood it's not Kimy's area to deal with and based on reports so far they could be bugged.

Is devious devices equip included too?

[Zaflis]

1 hour ago, ClockworkTower said:

Is devious devices equip included too?

DD-Equip is outside mod same as Devious Lore or others, it is not a dependency to any mod as far as i remember. Even Inte's Prison Overhaul Patched might have not had DDE as hard requirement.

[Skullered]

8 hours ago, Zaflis said:

Devices for male and the beast refits are optional and less supported, at least from what i understood it's not Kimy's area to deal with and based on reports so far they could be bugged.

Currently I'm the one who's maintaining those two plugins and sending updated versions as my time and motivation allows me.

Where's the source of these reports? It could just be user error (plugins need to be placed in the correct order) or a content mod that'd need to be patched or updated.

[Rogwar002]

On 12/11/2020 at 7:34 AM, Kimy said:

Yes. Which is why I am really wondering why I am still doing this. I honestly don't know right now.

Because the rest of us (almost 99% of the active DD user) adore you. Your merciless, cruel evilness in giving us what we want: To be locked tight in shiny or clinking restraints to punish our sorry asses for being nosey in buried ruins.

And of course because this devious device idea is just wonderful.

It is making me furious to be blinded in a dungeon dive. I roll my eyes being restraint with an armbinder while looting in a fight. But for whatever reason the thrill of doing it again and again is keeping me play Skyrim with DD and DCL.

Have some wonderful days with your family during this extraordinary christmas time and keep in mind: It is still a hobby. Even if there are a few bucks in it for maintaining your hobby.

Some do like our hobby, others don´t.

Cheers.

[DonQuiWho]

11 hours ago, Kimy said:

The "Use Bound Animations" toggle in MCM is supposed to leave the full range of animations available for a scene, if people don't like the limited choice of DD bound animations. The only reason why it currently doesn't, it's because it apparently bugged.

 

Not -everything- I do is because I am evil, you know? Sometimes it's just plain old software bugs that want me to fix them.

 

 

@Kimy

 

I'm not ascribing demonic powers to you!  I'd be frightened that I would get fried on the spot if I did .... ?

 

But, in my own way, I'm seeking some clarity, and my manner of asking can often sound more pointed than intended.

 

I'm OK about bug squashing.  It's nothing to do with that   Anyyway, that's only to be expected by quality mod develpers  ? and I wouldn't see you as doing anything less ?

 

-----------

 

But, where I am struggling a bit, and what would be extremely helpful to have assurance from you about, is if you can please be absolutely clear about what all that squashing will finally leave us with.  So:

 

-----------

 

1 - if I use DD5, will whatever you do prevent any animations in my, or anyone else's SLAL list, or even other source animations activated in Sexlab, activating in/being played by SexLab? 

 

I appreciate that SLAL's tagging etc isn't great.  But I have a range of options from those that I use and, using Sexlab Tools, I can obtain a dropdown list of which are 'activatable' (so to speak) by SexLab at MY choice in any particular mod scene.   

 

So, (as 'filter' out seems to be an emotive expression, and I am trying to avoid it ?  ), will what you are doing with DD5 in any way prevent, in the same gameplay circumstances, the exact same list of animations appearing in SLTools or being available to SexLab to choose from? - even if, say, for any reason SLTools itself no longer works under DD5

 

----------

 

2 - will DD5 & DCL9, when used together, in any way restrict the choice of animations available to SexLab to their inbuilt animation libraries?   If so, in what circumstances?

 

----------

 

As you can see, given the vagaries of some of the previous discussions, I'm worried about other mods continuing functionality being limited, or future mods capabilities being set to eliminate what would then effectively become proscribed content, as set from within the DD Framework.  I have not seen anything that states, in simple layman's language, that that won't be so.  Or that any DD5 functionality will be compromised if other mods capabilities are enabled

 

Definitive clarity on that is what I'm seeking

 

One can fairly easily see why, in the absence of certainty about that, others might prefer to go their own way.  Some will, regardless, but it would be silly if it were just caused by a fairly fundamental misunderstanding, or as a result of something to which there might be some easy technical fix, excluded for merely technical reasons

 

------------------

 

As I said when I started, I know I can sound pretty pointed and pedantic - the kids have been telling me that since they could talk - so I hope that this doesn't come across as being mean spirited/pissed off/generally disruptive.  I'm always very aware that I'm just a layman, but it does give me the opportunity to sometimes stand back from the weeds and look at the whole garden

 

--------------

 

TIA for whatever response you feel appropriate 

 

 

 

 

[GreatCroco]

13 hours ago, qawsedrftg765 said:

If you havn't give 5.0 a look on SE it has been pretty much flawless for me on my playthough using SL survival, Devious Lore, Devious captures and a bunch of others. Zarantha is doing god's work porting everything so well.

Ah, good to know. Then I finally might make the switch to SSE. It just runs better (maybe the glue for Papyrus is higher quality?) and I can live without many of the graphical effects of Oldrim+ENB

[daeeb1a]

Are the bound animations completely hardcoded, or is there a way other mods could say "This animation looks alright with an armbinder"?
 

[Zaflis]

13 hours ago, Skullered said:

Currently I'm the one who's maintaining those two plugins and sending updated versions as my time and motivation allows me.

Where's the source of these reports? It could just be user error (plugins need to be placed in the correct order) or a content mod that'd need to be patched or updated.

Some reports in Cursed Loot thread i think. Invisible belts, corsets or gags? Might depend on if they're equipped simultaneously, they didn't provide too much details, don't even remember mention of the race they were playing. Some screenshots seemed human female.

[HexBolt8]

Quality of life suggestion for the shock event message in zadEventVibrate.psc.

 

Rather than 2 lines (with a misspelling):

A devestating [sic] jolt of electricity rocks through you,

leaving you writhing in pain.

 

Shorten it to one:

A painful jolt of electricity rocks you.

[zarantha]

Nevermind...

 

[HexBolt8]

13 minutes ago, zarantha said:

SE is a conversion, no development is done here. I don't mind fixing SE conversion bugs, but something like that will be on LE too. Please report on the LE thread.

The new combined mod thread is here:

https://www.loverslab.com/topic/157168-devious-devices-le-50/page/14/

You really confused me.  This IS the LE thread.  Your link points here.  Kimy is the developer for this thread.  I really don't understand what you're trying to tell me.

[zarantha]

12 minutes ago, HexBolt8 said:

You really confused me.  This IS the LE thread.  Your link points here.  Kimy is the developer for this thread.  I really don't understand what you're trying to tell me.

Sorry, too many threads open. My mistake!

[Skullered]

12 hours ago, Zaflis said:

Some reports in Cursed Loot thread i think. Invisible belts, corsets or gags? Might depend on if they're equipped simultaneously, they didn't provide too much details, don't even remember mention of the race they were playing. Some screenshots seemed human female.

@Kimy did make me aware of an issue with missing gags on elves with DCL items, which was a compatibility issue. I've already sent a PM about fixing it, but I haven't received a reply yet.

 

 

[junky1234]

Belts also go invisible when equipping corsets for me since 5.0.