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

[DonQuiWho]

42 minutes ago, Lupine00 said:

I think it would be sad if Musje spent a whole lot of time re-inventing the wheel, especially at this point in the Skyrim lifecycle.

Wouldn't time be better spent putting those assets in a DD asset pack, and the coding effort pushed towards a solution for the slow DD inventory traversal, or into better ways to integrate the master into the furniture set-ups.

 

In the past, I've asked why there isn't an archetypes system for the DD item scripts, or a cached archetypes system - so it doesn't have to placeatme 50 times if you're holding 50 different devices - but I never got an answer as to whether that had been tried and rejected, or why it wouldn't work.

 

There are many players who like NPC slavery, and are kind of counting on someone to carry PaH forward, and adding player bondage to PaH isn't all that likely to be top of their wish list. Is there an army of modders who want to rush out and make a DD-a-like mod using Zaz? It seems like a solution in search of a problem.

 

The greater part of Zaz works horribly with player as slave, hundreds and hundreds of items have unusable cameras, or drop you into a collision box, or have activation boxes in weird places. That continues because they weren't made for player slavery; they're props you put NPCs in, or decorate your dungeon with. The work required to bring them up to a player-usable level that is actually usable is tremendous.

I wouldn't disagree with much of that at all.  And it's very sensible.  Some of the original pack assets do seem to be making their way into DD, courtesy of zaz perms.  But, if you haven't already, you need to read the ZAP8+ thread, ignoring the pretty pictures, to see why, although some cam improvements seem likely, much of the rest of what you suggest is very unlikely to happen. ?

 

 

[Lupine00]

1 hour ago, donkeywho said:

much of the rest of what you suggest is very unlikely to happen. ?

Could you clarify what you think is likely and unlikely to happen, as I described a hypothetical scenario with Zaz, then a performance issue with DD and a mitigation for it, then another hypothetical with Zaz, then a suggestion as to why Zaz wasn't well suited to player-bondage.

 

Which bits are the unlikely ones?  And why?

I'm guessing the Zaz forum isn't going to illuminate the DD matter.

 

I spent a while "reading" the Zaz 8 forum recently, but could find nothing concrete other than screenshots of new devices and cheering about new textures.

When there was a post from Musje, it was entirely about add-ons to PaH.

[DonQuiWho]

19 minutes ago, Lupine00 said:

Could you clarify what you think is likely and unlikely to happen, as I described a hypothetical scenario with Zaz, then a performance issue with DD and a mitigation for it, then another hypothetical with Zaz, then a suggestion as to why Zaz wasn't well suited to player-bondage.

 

Which bits are the unlikely ones?  And why?

I'm guessing the Zaz forum isn't going to illuminate the DD matter.

 

I spent a while "reading" the Zaz 8 forum recently, but could find nothing concrete other than screenshots of new devices and cheering about new textures.

When there was a post from Musje, it was entirely about add-ons to PaH.

Sharing assets

[Inte]

8 hours ago, Kimy said:

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

Just because something is not tested it does not mean it does not work. Yes, and I stand by that statement.

 

8 hours ago, Kimy said:

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?

That sentence doesn’t make any sense to me. 

 

8 hours ago, Kimy said:

Bottom line: You still mistakenly assume that I care about your mods enough to install and test them,

Then stop shitting all over them because obviously, by your own admission you do not have all the facts. You revere yourself as a leader, and yet you spread discourse based on nothing but fallacies. 
I’ve read in one of your posts that DDe should not even be in the same load order as DDi. Yet, you haven’t even tested DDe to confirm that it breaks DDi so bad that they cannot coexist in the same load order? Honestly Kimy! 

 

8 hours ago, Kimy said:

YOU are telling everyone that they probably don't work with DD4.

Again you are twisting what I am saying to fit your argument. I NEVER said that DDe does not work with DDi. What I said was that DDe is not tested with DDi. Two very different things. 

 

8 hours ago, Kimy said:

Thing is that I stopped caring about you or your mods a long while ago.

Aw, I will try to go on, I know it will be very difficult at first but... I... I... will try to survive. Luckily I never drank any of your Kool-aid. 

 

8 hours ago, Kimy said:

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.

Untested does not mean obsolete. 
So, just advise users of the facts. Tell them that DDe was not tested with DDi by its author. That’s it. Stop telling them that DDe cannot be in the same load order as DDi.

[Inte]

3 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

If you think Kimy likes me or my comments, you must be smoking some crack.

The definition of a lackey is quite the opposite, it seems you’re the one doing all the smoking. 

 

3 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

You can't spend a year protesting about DD4, then simply turn around and say "it works now, Lupine is the fake news media enemy of the people!"

I did not protest against DD4, just its leadership’s unwillingness to address concerns brought up by the very mods DD4 was supposed to framework. 

 

3 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

If you frequently treat people who have a problem, or raise an issue as an enemy, and beat them down with snide comments and just general bullying behaviour, don't be surprised when they decide to discuss those bugs in less hostile environments. 

Have you any examples, or is Kimy’s Kool-aid so strong that you’re also starting to see things that are not there. 

 

3 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

But really... It's the DDe support forum that were saying DDe doesn't work.

I guess everyone there with a problem is just throwing shit too?

Prior to DDe 4.04 that might have been true, but you started your shit throwing campaign after the DDe 4.04's release. I recall something about DDe being ‘...dead in the water...’. I’m all for informing the public as well, but get your facts straight first. 

 

3 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

Below is the chain of recent changes, with at the bottom "Not testing with DD4" which was a euphemism for "has bugs on purpose." There is no unambiguous information that this ever changed. Read for yourselves...

The Kool-aid is strong within you. 
It’s ‘Not tested with DDi 4, which is a euphemism for ‘not tested with DDi 4'. 

 

3 hours ago, Lupine00 said:

I guess, it's there, if you're psychic, and know that "Patched: some missing keywords" in the latest release, actually means "Patched: fixed missing DD4 keywords - should be fully compatible with DD4.2 now." I guess it wasn't a secret after all?

They are not DDi 4 keywords, hence the reason I did not do that. 
Point is, DDe 4.04 will run fine alongside DDi 4 without breaking anything like some fear mongers would have you believe.   

[Kimy]

 

27 minutes ago, Inte said:

 

Again you are twisting what I am saying to fit your argument. I NEVER said that DDe does not work with DDi. What I said was that DDe is not tested with DDi. Two very different things. 

 

Aw, I will try to go on, I know it will be very difficult at first but... I... I... will try to survive. Luckily I never drank any of your Kool-aid. 

 

Untested does not mean obsolete. 
So, just advise users of the facts. Tell them that DDe was not tested with DDi by its author. That’s it. Stop telling them that DDe cannot be in the same load order as DDi.

Fine, I will tell them then that its been declared untested by its own creator, which makes it potentially unstable software that STILL shouldn't be used unless people like installing unproven beta-quality software in their installations. We can split hairs all day long over the exact semantics, but baseline is that by slapping the "untested" label on your stuff you're scaring people away from using it with DD4, which then makes them run to -me- and ask me to provide obsolete versions of DD to run your stuff in. As long as you continue that practice, my advice to users against using your stuff will not change, and I couldn't care less if you like that. It will change the day your declare your stuff fit for use with DD4, and not a moment earlier. And no, it's still not MY obligation to test your stuff. It's yours.

 

That's my last word on the matter. You can do both of us a favor now and GTFO of what's for all practical purposes my support thread.

[Darkwing241]

39 minutes ago, Inte said:

Just because something is not tested it does not mean it does not work. Yes, and I stand by that statement.

 

That sentence doesn’t make any sense to me. 

 

Then stop shitting all over them because obviously, by your own admission you do not have all the facts. You revere yourself as a leader, and yet you spread discourse based on nothing but fallacies. 
I’ve read in one of your posts that DDe should not even be in the same load order as DDi. Yet, you haven’t even tested DDe to confirm that it breaks DDi so bad that they cannot coexist in the same load order? Honestly Kimy! 

 

Again you are twisting what I am saying to fit your argument. I NEVER said that DDe does not work with DDi. What I said was that DDe is not tested with DDi. Two very different things. 

 

Aw, I will try to go on, I know it will be very difficult at first but... I... I... will try to survive. Luckily I never drank any of your Kool-aid. 

 

Untested does not mean obsolete. 
So, just advise users of the facts. Tell them that DDe was not tested with DDi by its author. That’s it. Stop telling them that DDe cannot be in the same load order as DDi.

If you make a mod that makes use of another mods assets, it's your responsibility to keep up to date,  I think everyone is sympathetic to the difficulty of it, but the fact of the matter is the community doesn't function if we don't keep to that system.

[Inte]

7 minutes ago, Kimy said:

You can do both of us a favor now and GTFO of what's for all practical purposes my support thread.

Nice! 

Quality leadership right there. 

[Nohrin]

On 2/13/2019 at 11:15 AM, Nohrin said:

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? 

Going to shamelessly quote myself, because I still haven't solved this. Anyone got some advice?

[Lupine00]

9 hours ago, Inte said:

The definition of a lackey is quite the opposite, it seems you’re the one doing all the smoking. 

ORLY

 

Quite the opposite of what?

 

Dictionary result for lackey

Spoiler

/'laki/  noun
1.

a servant, especially a liveried footman or manservant.
"lackeys were waiting to help them from the carriage"
synonyms:    servant, flunkey, footman, manservant, valet, liveried servant, steward, butler, equerry, retainer, vassal, page, attendant, houseboy, domestic, drudge, factotum;

2.

a brownish European moth of woods and hedgerows, the caterpillars of which live communally in a silken tent on the food tree.

 

So, in Inte-land, a lackey is a known antagonist of their "master", has recently been in several voluble disputes with them, does no work for them, has no obligations to them, and isn't paid by them. Though, despite major differences, may, coincidentally support one or two viewpoints they happen to hold, perhaps with some significant nuances of difference. I know you didn't miss what happened on the DCL forum because you replied to the PoP thread.

 

I think this must be opposite-opposite day?

 

Perhaps Inte believes that lackey means "person who agrees with someone I disagree with on a particular point".

It doesn't mean that. I quoted the definition above, so we can see. 

He's going to say he meant No. 2 now...

 

 

As for the literary gymnastics Inte has to perform to explain away the last year of making DDe part of a very obvious anti-DD4 protest (right down to the big red "not tested" warning) it's amazing to behold.

 

My comment that DDe is dead in the water was not based on its technical problems - which as far as I was aware were minor, and resolvable by concerted effort on the part of the user - but that a mod that sets out not to interoperate with, and exists as a protest against, the very framework on which it depends for its core functionality, makes no sense.

 

It's self-defeating.

It's sawing off the branch its sitting on.

 

And the whole protest seemed to based on an impractical belief that Zaz keywords would come back onto DD items one day, if the screaming just continued long and loud enough.

 

If Zaz hadn't been turned into a bloated behemoth DD wouldn't have been under presssure to remove those keywords.

 

The problem originated with Zaz, and unless those keywords are split from it, or Zaz is otherwise partitioned in some sensible way, the problem persists. It's not DD's fault. Yet all the rage was directed at Kimy because - probably - she is sensitive to criticism, and seeing somebody else get upset provided some kind of satisfaction in lieu of an actual solution, which was really beyond her power to deliver. And also, raging at T.ara? You might as well shake your fist at the wind. Or you can soft-dep Zaz and factor out your keyword checks. Problem solved.

 

 

Or put another way, the biggest problem with DDe isn't the mod, it's the modder. Who instead of working on a compromise deal to get the keywords split out of Zaz (or simply fix the problems and move on), declared a war-of-sulks on DD.

 

And now we're told that DDe wasn't on hunger strike against DD - apparently, never was - and has by some magical reversal of reality, suddenly become the paragon of (still untested) DD4 interoperative goodness, and was - allegedly - supposed to be this all along.

 

This total reversal of position STRETCHES CREDULITY BEYOND ALL F**KING BELIEF.

 

There seems to be a disconnect between the technical edifice that is DDe, and the alleged intent of its creator, that is ... perturbing.

 

It's like one of those faintly annoying Xmas Santa dolls that dances and plays a tune, moving its mouth as if it is singing, but with the added feature of screaming "Santa is a filthy lie! Satan is your God!" Every time it finishes its little song.

 

 

Unlike Kimy, I do care. I care that people don't know whether they can safely use DDe. I care that people are asking for DD3 downloads so they can have a working DDe or PoP (when they don't need DD3, but misinformation has been spread to this effect). I even care that DDe isn't being "the best DDe it can be". I just don't care that much. It's not like it keeps me awake at night, but hey, I'm still bothered.

 

I understand why Inte is mad at me. I'd probably be mad too, but on the other hand, I wouldn't start from where he's at.

 

But don't read too much into my disagreements with him. This is ultimately a minor dispute, on the internet, about some details, in a mod, for a game that nobody will care about ten years from now. I don't hate Inte, but I do think he can be derisive, dismissive, and somewhat bullying - on purpose - and that is certain to trigger some people. Sometimes he's funny, or raises good points. Some of his work is fantastic. It's not all black or white. I'm not trying to construct a reality where Inte is "enemy of the people" or even the worst guy in the room. If you want to meet some real assholes, start reading the NPC slavery and general adult-mods forums.

 

He also should realise that trying to dismiss my comments by implying that they are just some attempt to kiss-up to Kimy isn't going to work. It's not reflected by the evidence, and also happens not to be true. Kimy and I aren't buddies, and are never going to be - and the only things I want from Kimy are things she is going to do (or not do) regardless of whether I want them or not - a new DCL version once in a while, and bug+performance improvements to DD.

 

For example, I don't agree with Kimy's request that he shut up. It feels like censorship, and if Inte is talking nonsense, I think most people will work it out for themselves. Most of what he said was self-defeating. He's not trolling, he's defending himself against issues that were raised. IMHO badly, but we're still wiser in some ways for it. In some ways, I'd like Inte to clarify what his position is now, what he thinks is wrong with DD, and the forum. Maybe then we'd know what the real differences are between him and Kimy, and it wouldn't seem like a clash of personalities is drowning out some fairly minor differences of opinion? Or maybe we'd see the glaring point of contention? Instead it's more like "you know what I'm talking about".

 

I'll happily take Inte's part of an argument if I happen to think he's in the right - and he has made points, counter to Kimy that I agree with, which is why his "lackey" dismissal is absurd. I may well agree with him on other issues in the future, or not. I have no idea what he's going to do or say.

[donttouchmethere]

I don't know what all the fuss is about from my humble user perspective. ?

In load order DDe does not conflict with DDi => DDi works as intendet, same goes for DCL.

DDe's devices that relay on the old DDi tag system won't have fitting animations.

This mainly has hurt the POP/DDe combo and will confuse users that don't follow LL soap operas.

Since DDe 404 that seems to change and I can see in my game that Inte is working on a solution.

This comes as a suprise, but I think that's the good sort of a suprise.

So instead to continue the bashing, how about falling back to the normal LL waiting game and see how mods evolve,

while using alternative mods or modify MCMs to make stuff compatible/circumvent bugs?

[Skullered]

1 hour ago, Nohrin said:

Going to shamelessly quote myself, because I still haven't solved this. Anyone got some advice?

Have you tried looking for the Body - Full (32) label? There should be an option to change slot 56 to None.
 

Spoiler

 

 

[DonQuiWho]

1 hour ago, Lupine00 said:

  Reveal hidden contents

/'laki/  noun
1.

a servant, especially a liveried footman or manservant.
"lackeys were waiting to help them from the carriage"
synonyms:    servant, flunkey, footman, manservant, valet, liveried servant, steward, butler, equerry, retainer, vassal, page, attendant, houseboy, domestic, drudge, factotum;

2.

a brownish European moth of woods and hedgerows, the caterpillars of which live communally in a silken tent on the food tree.

 

So, in Inte-land, a lackey is a known antagonist of their "master",

TBF to Inte, I'm pretty sure English isn't his first language, so while his English is certainly much much better than my 'whatever', can't we just cut him a little slack on meaning?

Quote

He also should realise that trying to dismiss my comments by implying that they are just some attempt to kiss-up to Kimy isn't going to work.

I could have fallen off my chair.  That's the funniest, and most accurate, acceptance of likely rejection that I've read all Valentine's Day

 

 

[Nohrin]

1 hour ago, Skullered said:

Have you tried looking for the Body - Full (32) label? There should be an option to change slot 56 to None.

I'm a bit confused. What I am currently doing is just disabling the Item Hider entirely, but I would like this feature to work, just for it to not hide my accessories.

 

Would doing what you suggested with the Body - Full (32) Label, disable Item Hider for slot 32? Wouldn't that just mean that any slot 32 devices would clip through my armor?

[donttouchmethere]

1 hour ago, donkeywho said:

Quote

He also should realise that trying to dismiss my comments by implying that they are just some attempt to kiss-up to Kimy isn't going to work.

I could have fallen off my chair.  That's the funniest, and most accurate, acceptance of likely rejection that I've read all Valentine's Day

Had to laugh about that too, as if that would need a Kimy ?

[Skullered]

1 hour ago, Nohrin said:

I'm a bit confused. What I am currently doing is just disabling the Item Hider entirely, but I would like this feature to work, just for it to not hide my accessories.

 

Would doing what you suggested with the Body - Full (32) Label, disable Item Hider for slot 32? Wouldn't that just mean that any slot 32 devices would clip through my armor?

Just scroll down in the Devices Underneath #1 menu until you find Body - Full (32), then look for Chastity Bra (56) within the 4 options listed under it, and change it to None (Disabled).

The device hider will still work, it just won't hide items in slot 56, and consequently chastity bras if you are wearing those.

[Nohrin]

2 hours ago, Skullered said:

Just scroll down in the Devices Underneath #1 menu until you find Body - Full (32), then look for Chastity Bra (56) within the 4 options listed under it, and change it to None (Disabled).

The device hider will still work, it just won't hide items in slot 56, and consequently chastity bras if you are wearing those.

I will give that a try. But out of curiosity, why would doing it with this method work, but not switching the item hiders itemslot to 61? The method you're explaining is to basically disable Item Hider for slot 56 so that Item Hider and my Katanas are not sharing the same item slot. But why wouldn't changing Item Hider to slot 61 (through MCM option) work? I don't know why its not working. I have them on different itemslots so I can't see why there is a conflict.

[Zaflis]

1 hour ago, Nohrin said:

I will give that a try. But out of curiosity, why would doing it with this method work, but not switching the item hiders itemslot to 61? The method you're explaining is to basically disable Item Hider for slot 56 so that Item Hider and my Katanas are not sharing the same item slot. But why wouldn't changing Item Hider to slot 61 (through MCM option) work? I don't know why its not working. I have them on different itemslots so I can't see why there is a conflict.

It would propably work if you set the hider to slot 61 too. As it says in the hint, it doesn't matter much which slot the hider itself is in. Only so that it's not using same slot some of your armors (or DD restraints) would need. Even if you set it to 61 you will need to tell it that: If item with slot (any) is worn, don't hide slot 56. It just sounds like the slot 32 (body) is the only one that would hide the 56 normally, but you can always check the 2 pages if that's not the case.

[Perseus117]

On 2/13/2019 at 9:44 PM, 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.

Thanks

 

[Perseus117]

On 2/13/2019 at 9:44 PM, 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.

DCL means deviously cursed loot right ? I can't seem to find this quest. Can you help me.....

[Lozeak]

I would like to ask Devious Devices - Integration 3.x still be left downloadable for the sake of preservation of old content.

 

I know the argument is DD3 is out of date and mods that have died/having updated are obsolete is valid to a certain nature and you want to not deal with support requests or anything like that.

 

I really do see every mod on here as a form of art or expressing their passion at the very least and making so it is impossible to experience them is only a loss and not positive in any way. 

 

Going by the example stated Windows Versions,

 

There are Window XP games that will not run on Windows 10

But I still can download from Microsoft, Windows XP and install it on to a virtual machine and play these old games meaning that content isn't lost forever because the company that made the game went broke/didn't care meaning I can still experience peoples hard work and passion.

 

Maybe if you want to totally disconnect DDi (current update version) to DDi 3.3 then make it a separate post saying Devious Devices - Integration 3.3 (OBSOLETE) and just saying in opening post "NO SUPPORT WILL BE GIVEN!"

[Lupine00]

1 hour ago, Lozeak said:

I would like to ask Devious Devices - Integration 3.x still be left downloadable for the sake of preservation of old content.

I agree with this, but I believe it's been denied previously.

 

You'd also need something like DDx 2.0 as well.

 

 

Some mods leave old versions up, and some don't. But with a framework, there is quite a strong case to say that old versions should remain available indefinitely.

Nexus still hosts Morrowind and Oblivion mods.

I think the intent of the LL git repos was to do this sort of thing, but that's gone.

 

I should think you can still get old versions off some .ru domain, or Baidu, but that's another story.

 

Presumably, you personally have these old versions anyway. Better keep them somewhere safe  

[Kimy]

Older DD versions ARE still available on GItHub (links are in the DD dev thread). I never delete older releases. They are just 100% unofficial and 100% unsupported. I keep telling people that it's a bad idea to install outdated mods, but I have never and will never keep them from doing so.

[Lozeak]

41 minutes ago, Kimy said:

Older DD versions ARE still available on GItHub (links are in the DD dev thread). I never delete older releases. They are just 100% unofficial and 100% unsupported. I keep telling people that it's a bad idea to install outdated mods, but I have never and will never keep them from doing so.

Thank you. I didn't know this ^^.

 

As someone that has used a lot of your and the rest of the dd teams work in Dd4 the modder tools have been awesome and all that time you spend commenting code is very much appericate! 

 

Some old mods are worth the effort sometimes and if i had infinte time I'd love to keep them all updated like i did with Simple slavery but yea thing don't last forever and i have a life and job.

[Zaflis]

The game is allowing me to wear body armor while wearing bondage mittens. A message appears in top left corner that i can't equip it, but it's not actually preventing it. DD setting for hardcore mittens on or off doesn't make a difference, nor does item hider.