Sex Mod Framework - Development Discussion

[ag12]

23 hours ago, StarSyChiba said:

...

 

I'm not going to chime in on the "who did what" discussion, but after now having looked at the document I can confirm that it's pretty irrelevant. Some of the information about wwise etc. can be useful since it is new tech, but I've never seen that document before now and I'm pretty sure my interiors are higher quality than 95% of "verified" content. Not sure, though, since I don't look at microtransaction DLCs. I can't stand people that literally work for Bethesda now and call themselves "modders". They're freelancers creating paid DLC for Bethesda and people should stop calling them "creators" and "modders" and all that. They work there, that's all there is to it. They're a part of the company, not a part of the modding community.

[notaperviswear]

Just a lurker here to chime in and say I hope things are going well! 👍

[knots1353]

On 9/4/2024 at 9:31 PM, ag12 said:

 

ModEvents? Like "SendCustomModEvent" and whatnot from Skyrim?

I mean, CustomEvents are working just fine for 99% of applications. I get that you have to have a bridge plugin or go via reading from .esp file, but I don't see the application where you make a mod that relies so heavily on something else but also doesn't want it as a dependency.

 

E.g. I knew that I'd have multiple mods that need to track time changes, GalBank+ uses it, and I'm going to use it in other mods I've got planned, so I just put that stuff in a little library and distribute it alongside. Feel free to use it, I think I included sources specifically for that purpose.

 

CustomEvent LUL_OnDayChange
; [0] -> multiplier of how long since last time, e.g. if player skips more than 1 day between ticks
; [1] -> GameDaysPassed as float, UT
...
...
function fn_DayChange(Float afTime)
	float fTimeMult = afTime - fGameDaysPassed
	fGameDaysPassed = afTime
	
	Var[] kargs = new Var[1]
	kargs[0] = fTimeMult
	kargs[1] = afTime
	
	SendCustomEvent("LUL_OnDayChange", kargs)
endFunction

...

function fn_load()
	RegisterForCustomEvent(libs.LUL.ScrTime, "LUL_OnDayChange")
	...
endFunction

event _LUL:LULscrTime.LUL_OnDayChange(_LUL:LULscrTime akSender, Var[] akArgs)
	...
endEvent

 

I know you're acting in good faith, but overall I find it frustrating that a lot of people seem to look at SF and go "wait, this doesn't work like Skyrim so it must be broken", when really *everything* about the CK and Papyrus has been vastly improved. Sure, there is some things that SFSE will have to add (quite a few things, I reckon), but it's not like the tools aren't there to make virtually any "normal" mod you want.

 

Application - A DLL plugin which needs to provide a Papyrus native function which can register an event or function which can then be triggered or called from the DLL at a later point.   I'd been looking specifically for SFSE's mechanism for implementing custom events as it exists in both Skyrim and FO4... but perhaps it isn't needed in Starfield.   I still haven't seen anything in SFSE which allows one to trigger an event or call a function from a DLL plugin in any case, which is what I would need for the mod I want to do.   The Plugin --> Papyrus interface doesn't seem to have been cracked yet, and that's a significant holdup for a lot of stuff we used to do in Skyrim and FO4.

Would it be possible to make a sex framework *entirely* in Papyrus?   Maybe.    Toys in Skyrim ran almost entirely in Papyrus, although it did a lot of data storage using JContainers which was a DLL plugin.   But I don't know if it's approach would work nearly as well in Starfield or if it would work with the newer animation frameworks out there.   If I were designing a sex framework from scratch, I'd start with the DLL plugin approach myself... and that would need the Plugin to Papyrus interface I was talking about. 

[StarSyChiba]

On 9/6/2024 at 3:28 PM, Allnarta said:

 

Here's you the one who spread false information, so probably those who you were talking with just lied to you (no surprise).

Gatekeeped vc's wiki was already leaked to open access and you can explicitly evaluate how "poor", "useless" and "no different" it is:

https://starfield.hell.vc/

 

Only truth they told you is that it indeed not 100% finished so doesn't cover all the aspects yet.

 

On 9/6/2024 at 3:35 PM, Miauzi said:

 

Aha - so I also know someone who told me -> that he spoke to someone...

-

Sorry - you have THIRD HAND information... and with that you want to defame the statement of someone who was there himself (note: this is FIRST HAND information!) as a lie?

 

 

Alright, I believe I have now seriously gone through the document.

First of all, I must apologize for my overly harsh words at the beginning. Although I regretted that comment shortly after making it, I didn’t feel the need to delete it. I hold no ill will toward you, and after reading this document, I certainly cannot deny its value. However, I do think you have somewhat exaggerated certain aspects.

I believe I fully understand and agree with the certified author's reasoning when they informed me that the document is 'almost useless,' as this document is indeed quite incomplete. It can help mod authors become more familiar with CK2, but for the most part, it remains an introductory guide, often only describing how to use basic functionalities. The document’s usefulness is essentially limited to the native game environment on the CC platform, and for mod authors who are working on relatively complex mods, such as adjusting sea levels, creating realistic elevators, or destructible environments, this document provides little to no substantive help.

I don’t understand nor agree with why Bethesda chose to make this document an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) document, but it indeed doesn’t significantly create a 'competitive' difference between certified authors and regular creators. We all know that in the past, whether for TES5 or FO4, Bethesda's modding community has relied heavily on third-party scripts and mods. In the case of Creations, especially paid Creations, using or referencing third-party assets is not allowed. This directly eliminates the possibility of selling relatively complex mods, such as third-party scripts or copyrighted assets, as it only encourages creators to use assets and features within the game’s native environment.

Moreover, in reality, I also don’t believe there is a competitive relationship between paid authors and regular creators. Even without CC, many creators would still profit significantly each month through platforms like Patreon, and this is part of a large-scale gray market.

Personally, if some high-quality creators can gain more exposure and access to more legitimate and legal revenue channels through CC, I think that would be a good thing.

Although the quality of paid mods on CC is still generally low at present, we should choose to trust the wisdom of market competition at this point. Players will vote with their wallets, judging both the rough and the high-quality mods.

If you feel you cannot accept this and choose not to spend money, it is not compulsory. However, in the long run, this platform is undeniably a beneficial development for all three parties involved.

[StarSyChiba]

19 hours ago, ag12 said:

 

I'm not going to chime in on the "who did what" discussion, but after now having looked at the document I can confirm that it's pretty irrelevant. Some of the information about wwise etc. can be useful since it is new tech, but I've never seen that document before now and I'm pretty sure my interiors are higher quality than 95% of "verified" content. Not sure, though, since I don't look at microtransaction DLCs. I can't stand people that literally work for Bethesda now and call themselves "modders". They're freelancers creating paid DLC for Bethesda and people should stop calling them "creators" and "modders" and all that. They work there, that's all there is to it. They're a part of the company, not a part of the modding community.

They are not directly employed by Bethesda, and there is likely no formal employment contract between them, meaning they are not official Bethesda employees, although they likely possess such professional qualities. Well, your accusation that they are not truly community creators is probably reasonable, but at least from a legal standpoint, they are not; they are still freelancers.

[Djlegends]

3 hours ago, knots1353 said:

 

Application - A DLL plugin which needs to provide a Papyrus native function which can register an event or function which can then be triggered or called from the DLL at a later point.   I'd been looking specifically for SFSE's mechanism for implementing custom events as it exists in both Skyrim and FO4... but perhaps it isn't needed in Starfield.   I still haven't seen anything in SFSE which allows one to trigger an event or call a function from a DLL plugin in any case, which is what I would need for the mod I want to do.   The Plugin --> Papyrus interface doesn't seem to have been cracked yet, and that's a significant holdup for a lot of stuff we used to do in Skyrim and FO4.

Would it be possible to make a sex framework *entirely* in Papyrus?   Maybe.    Toys in Skyrim ran almost entirely in Papyrus, although it did a lot of data storage using JContainers which was a DLL plugin.   But I don't know if it's approach would work nearly as well in Starfield or if it would work with the newer animation frameworks out there.   If I were designing a sex framework from scratch, I'd start with the DLL plugin approach myself... and that would need the Plugin to Papyrus interface I was talking about. 

have you not seen this yet?
https://www.nexusmods.com/starfield/mods/10896

[ag12]

4 hours ago, StarSyChiba said:

They are not directly employed by Bethesda, and there is likely no formal employment contract between them, meaning they are not official Bethesda employees, although they likely possess such professional qualities. Well, your accusation that they are not truly community creators is probably reasonable, but at least from a legal standpoint, they are not; they are still freelancers.

 

Did you even read what I wrote? At no point did I say they were employees, I specifically stated they are freelancers.

>"I can't stand people that literally work for Bethesda now and call themselves "modders". They're freelancers creating paid DLC for Bethesda (...)"<

Freelancers still *work* for the company that contracts them.

[Snapdragon_]

6 hours ago, knots1353 said:

 

Application - A DLL plugin which needs to provide a Papyrus native function which can register an event or function which can then be triggered or called from the DLL at a later point.   I'd been looking specifically for SFSE's mechanism for implementing custom events as it exists in both Skyrim and FO4... but perhaps it isn't needed in Starfield.   I still haven't seen anything in SFSE which allows one to trigger an event or call a function from a DLL plugin in any case, which is what I would need for the mod I want to do.   The Plugin --> Papyrus interface doesn't seem to have been cracked yet, and that's a significant holdup for a lot of stuff we used to do in Skyrim and FO4.

Would it be possible to make a sex framework *entirely* in Papyrus?   Maybe.    Toys in Skyrim ran almost entirely in Papyrus, although it did a lot of data storage using JContainers which was a DLL plugin.   But I don't know if it's approach would work nearly as well in Starfield or if it would work with the newer animation frameworks out there.   If I were designing a sex framework from scratch, I'd start with the DLL plugin approach myself... and that would need the Plugin to Papyrus interface I was talking about. 

 

This has been possible since around the end of July, when my pull request was merged into the CommonLibSF repo. (For anyone who might not know, a pull request is basically merging code into a project.)

 

Right now, there aren't really any technical limitations preventing sex mods. It's just a matter of whether or not anyone wants to make a sex mod & animations. Personally I'm waiting for a better female body mod before investing time in animating. CRT and VBB are good, but not customizable like CBBE. I know of at least one person working on a customizable body mod, which utilizes CharGenMenu morphs instead of BodySlide.

Edited September 8, 2024 by Snapdragon_

[Allnarta]

7 hours ago, StarSyChiba said:

Moreover, in reality, I also don’t believe there is a competitive relationship between paid authors and regular creators.

 

Well, you should begin to, because this is exact case. BGS obviously would like to monopolize any mods monetization (don't need to have 160 IQ to realize it), and they obviously do steps towards it (aka gatekeeping documentation). Some "verified creators" (not modmakers) are also into it, sharing aknowledge and experience only inside private vc's discord and not with normal people who try to make mods. It is how it is, and I'm tired a bit to repeat that I am a person who actually saw it by my own eyes and be gaslighted into "it doesn't happen".

 

It will probably be my last message here, as lately the more I look/interact with overall SF "sommunity", who slowly begin to praise paid modding disaster and not realizing what it leads to already (brainwashing?), the more I realize how hopeless it is to spread actual truth about whats going on inside vc programm. So be it.

[xking]

Damn...so much discontent over here on Lover's lab. Makes you wonder if there's any future for the game over here. 

[NotDiscoDragonInAWig]

20 hours ago, Allnarta said:

 

Well, you should begin to, because this is exact case. BGS obviously would like to monopolize any mods monetization (don't need to have 160 IQ to realize it), and they obviously do steps towards it (aka gatekeeping documentation). Some "verified creators" (not modmakers) are also into it, sharing aknowledge and experience only inside private vc's discord and not with normal people who try to make mods. It is how it is, and I'm tired a bit to repeat that I am a person who actually saw it by my own eyes and be gaslighted into "it doesn't happen".

 

It will probably be my last message here, as lately the more I look/interact with overall SF "sommunity", who slowly begin to praise paid modding disaster and not realizing what it leads to already (brainwashing?), the more I realize how hopeless it is to spread actual truth about whats going on inside vc programm. So be it.

Just gonna throw my hat in the ring, Youtubers who took sponsorships were once called "sellouts" now it's common place. Paid modding will end no differently. it was always going to happen since the "free internet" got it's first paywall and now look: wanna use Twater? that'll be 8 bucks please. want to use YouTube without being bombarded with ads every microsecond? Gimme 20 bucks. almost all the news sites are paywalled now. the reality is we lost another free part of the internet and WE let it happen we tried to fight it and we lost just enjoy the last few free things we have on the internet before in all becomes a hyper monetized capitalist hellscape this was always going to happen. after all they like money

[BigAssClapper]

So is this project dead?

[DocClox]

On 9/7/2024 at 8:39 PM, knots1353 said:

Would it be possible to make a sex framework *entirely* in Papyrus?   Maybe.   

 

I did it with Four-Play for Fallout 4. It's doable.

 

You need some way to trigger the animations, but we've got that with NAF. It's doable.

[Djlegends]

9 hours ago, djreloader said:

So is this project dead?

no since the author never made an announcement lol

[NotDiscoDragonInAWig]

24 minutes ago, Djlegends said:

no since the author never made an announcement lol

Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make our own if worse comes to pass let's see what NAF can do

[BigAssClapper]

2 hours ago, Djlegends said:

no since the author never made an announcement lol

On 8/26/2023 at 9:24 AM, Ashal said:

I plan to develop a new sex animation framework for Starfield soon as it is possible.

I mean he did announce it.

[nIn nIn nIn]

5 hours ago, djreloader said:

I mean he did announce it.

 

Those words say that she plans to develop a framework as soon as it is possible. Perhaps she still needs some things, perhaps NAF means it's no longer necessary. Afterall Ashal didn't need to port Sexlab into FO4 because AAF was released. Perhaps it's the same here.

[Ashal]

I still plan on developing it, but I consider the project on hold for now.

 

Frankly, I found Starfield itself rather dull, which has killed much of my motivation. I'm hoping the mod scene for the game matures some more and the DLC brings the interest back to the game in a way that helps motivate the project again. I'll get back to it, but I'm just focusing on other things in the meantime.

[AceofWind]

18 minutes ago, Ashal said:

I still plan on developing it, but I consider the project on hold for now.

 

Frankly, I found Starfield itself rather dull, which has killed much of my motivation. I'm hoping the mod scene for the game matures some more and the DLC brings the interest back to the game in a way that helps motivate the project again. I'll get back to it, but I'm just focusing on other things in the meantime.

That's a bit disappointing, but honestly I wasn't expecting those mods to be out any time soon anyways since we just got the CK only a few months ago. I anticipated that there would be something by at least sometime during the spring or summer of next year. Hopefully you'll find the motivation to work on it again in the future.

Edited September 10, 2024 by AceofWind

[cheese76]

sad:(

[Heartless1206]

On 9/9/2024 at 5:02 PM, Ashal said:

I still plan on developing it, but I consider the project on hold for now.

 

Frankly, I found Starfield itself rather dull, which has killed much of my motivation. I'm hoping the mod scene for the game matures some more and the DLC brings the interest back to the game in a way that helps motivate the project again. I'll get back to it, but I'm just focusing on other things in the meantime.

are you planing to start a patreon or subscibestar if you get back devloping the framework?

[Herr_Cabal]

On 9/8/2024 at 7:08 PM, NotDiscoDragonInAWig said:

Just gonna throw my hat in the ring, Youtubers who took sponsorships were once called "sellouts" now it's common place. Paid modding will end no differently. it was always going to happen since the "free internet" got it's first paywall and now look: wanna use Twater? that'll be 8 bucks please. want to use YouTube without being bombarded with ads every microsecond? Gimme 20 bucks. almost all the news sites are paywalled now. the reality is we lost another free part of the internet and WE let it happen we tried to fight it and we lost just enjoy the last few free things we have on the internet before in all becomes a hyper monetized capitalist hellscape this was always going to happen. after all they like money

On 9/7/2024 at 2:01 PM, StarSyChiba said:

In the case of Creations, especially paid Creations, using or referencing third-party assets is not allowed. This directly eliminates the possibility of selling relatively complex mods, such as third-party scripts or copyrighted assets, as it only encourages creators to use assets and features within the game’s native environment.

 

The problem with this is there is already a paid environment in the modding scene through Patreon. The people who sell out and begin developing mods for for Creation Club money are literally all the dregs who couldn't actually make it in a market where donations are optional (Patreon) and had to sell their mods for pennies of Bethesda cash. The advent of paid mods means nothing for the game environment as long as the community refuses to respond, since there are modders out there operating through the freenet only that can afford to live off Patreon income alone while I sincerely doubt Bethesda pays well enough to justify any of the modders to work on their projects fulltime. Patreon takes a much smaller cut than Bethesda, typically has a higher payout per consumer, and is entirely reliant on your capabilities as a creator to determine your income. Anything Bethesda tries to do will be useless and they will remain noncompetitive with independent modding, let's also not ignore how completely out of touch modern Bethesda leadership is and how they literally do not have the corporate capability to manage their own modding community and make it thrive. The CC method is perfect for learning prospective modders to make shitty paid content before they have the chops to make freeware that's so good people will want to donate for early access to upadetes and such on patreon, other than that it offers no prospective value to anyone who actually nows what they're doing. If you were a genuinely respected modder Bethesda would have hired you for development and then just put you on busy work that didn't reflect you talents like they did with that one Skyrim house maker. 

 

Plus the mention of third party assets, like I'm sorry the fact that Bethesda sponsored modding needs to play by all the corporate rules is literally the biggest shot in the foot for the entire concept. I mean we're in a porno forum that's well over half Bethesda content modding, and this community is the largest of thousands. Some of the most popular mods in the mainstream used copywritten IPs (Randy Savage and Thomas the Tank would not be free use under CC) and everyone messes around with at least one music mod. 

 

Also CC cash versus a dedicated fan budget funded by a successful Patreon have wildly varying potential. I don't thin we will every see anything akin to ManlyMarco's work or followers like Inigo in the CC environment, they literally could not afford it from the money Bethesda gives back. Total conversion projects or DLC sized mods like Helgen Reborn or all the Beyond/Tamriel Unlimited projects are completely impossible because I doubt Bethesda pays enough to run an entire dedicated development team, they can barely afford to pay for their own after spending 200 million on starfield (and daddy Microsoft spending 8 billion on them) and the game's "sales" only performing on Microsoft's subscription service meaning no directly related profit. I don't actually have proof for that last point but I noticed Bethesda only ever mentioned player count numbers in marketing the game's success versus the usual sales numbers. I also know for a fact that the game did not have those "millions of players" we were hearing about through the PC paid storefronts like steam, they would have to be Xbox sales or other PC storefront sales.

 

Fact of the matter is manufactured consent is real and Microsofts marketing budget is going to play all the mind games with people able to play the game at no personal investment if they have gamepass for any other reason; typically kids who are too young to have lived the good ole days and manipulated to imprint the present as such. That being said, the CC environment is too creatively constrained, too lacking in clear meaningful reward to either the creators (minimal pay) or consumers (shitty content), and sponsored by the corporate entity currently operating on what is imo the most bad faith in the current Triple A games industry. I don't think the idea is going to die now that we've opened the flood gates, but I can't imagine people are ever going to have to give a shit. I literally have yet to by a Todd Credit, I got some free ones for Anniversary Ed so I tried some CC content on Skyrim and I have to say I am not concerned in the slightest.

[Allnarta]

32 minutes ago, Herr_Cabal said:

In the case of Creations, especially paid Creations, using or referencing third-party assets is not allowed.

 

It is allowed. I don't know where did you get this.

 

More so, BGS doesn't seem to check details of permissions/licences of those assets during QA - at least I don't remember them asking to show if "creator" used licensed software (photoshop, substabce, 3d max etc.) or pirated one, and they never asked to show assets author permission.

 

Even more so, I saw "creators" discuss pirating software in private "vc" Discord. Literally.

 

It just works.

Edited September 11, 2024 by Allnarta

[Allnarta]

23 minutes ago, Herr_Cabal said:

The people who sell out and begin developing mods for for Creation Club money are literally all the dregs who couldn't actually make it in a market where donations are optional (Patreon) and had to sell their mods for pennies of Bethesda cash.

 

It can be thousands of dollars per "creation" that is "creator"'s cut. BGS get a lot more (75%).

 

Console r*tards gladly pay for anything they see, generating thousands of hundreds of downloads even for trash "creations". So... It just works.

Edited September 11, 2024 by Allnarta

[Herr_Cabal]

28 minutes ago, Allnarta said:

 

It is allowed. I don't know where did you get this.

 

More so, BGS doesn't seem to check details of permissions/licences of those assets during QA - at least I don't remember them asking to show if "creator" used licensed software (photoshop, substabce, 3d max etc.) or pirated one, and they never asked to show assets author permission.

 

It just works.

I got this from a prior post, from what little I've seen looking at the creation club scene as far as assets are concerned there are considerable share of third party models but as far as copywrite and NSFW especially are concerned the content is lacking. I can't speak for scripting, I wouldn't even be able to tell if a mod used third party scripts.

25 minutes ago, Allnarta said:

 

It can be thousands of dollars per "creation" that is "creator"'s cut. BGS get a lot more (75%).

 

Console r*tards gladly pay for anything they see, generating thousands of hundreds of downloads even for trash "creations". So... It just works.

That requires the mod to make Beth 4000 dollars before the creator gets 1000 (Btw if a creator makes 4000 dollars on patreon I'm pretty sure patreon only takes 200 total iirc Patreon is a flat 5%), a 5 dollar creation needs 800 unique DLs to hit that point. I don't know kind of numbers creations are putting out, but I wouldn't be surprised if while there are a few more popular mods that have unique DLs in the upper 10's of thousands to 100's of thousands most don't ever make their creator more than a grand. Beyond that Patreon is a monthly commitment, CC modders need to maintain minimum of 800 unique dls a month to make a 1000 dollars a month, which is worse than even Federal minimum wage (1160 if you work 4 40 hour weeks) and doesn't even cover rent in a multitude of states anymore. And even for those super popular mods, if you divided their DLs by the months since the release of the CC for their respective games I wouldn't be surprised if most if not all hit less than that 800 unique DLs per month. I could be wrong about that specifically for sure, I don't have anything Bethesda on my harddrive rn (uninstalled bad space game for new Baldurs Gate campaign) so I can't check numbers, can someone pull up a creation unique DL count and divide by the months since release so I can see how far off I am since the universe loves to humble me when I make ballsy claims.

Edited September 11, 2024 by Herr_Cabal