Sex animations.

[Stormsone]

I agree with labrat the workarounds that we have seen so far by adding extra races or temporarily replacing your race just are asking for bugs and a meltdown when things get more complex.

[billypnats]

I'm not sure if this has been proposed but maybe we could take advantage of the activated animations used by NPCs, for example use can use the wood cutter, NPCs carries wood back and forth in whiterun, animation used during forging etc. Those are probably limited to single NPCs only but maybe we could expand on that

[prideslayer]

FYI beth is taking questions for the upcoming podcast. The top two questions asked repeatedly are a fix for the 64cell range bug, and releasing of the animation tools or some work around.

 

http://forums.bethsoft.com/topic/1351643-taking-your-skyrim-workshopcreation-kit-questions-for-the-bethesda-podcast/

 

Get over there and "+1" the top two questions.. you never know, they may take notice.

[Gsus30]

sorry, if I missed this, but I checked the wiki and the last few pages and found nothing so I thought I would just ask:

 

Is there a possible release date? or is there still a lot of work needed?

[prideslayer]

sorry' date=' if I missed this, but I checked the wiki and the last few pages and found nothing so I thought I would just ask:

 

Is there a possible release date? or is there still a lot of work needed?

[/quote']

 

I don't think you read the last few pages or even the first page. This thread isn't for a mod, and there is not and never will be a "release date" here.

[labrat]

FYI beth is taking questions for the upcoming podcast. The top two questions asked repeatedly are a fix for the 64cell range bug' date=' and releasing of the animation tools or some work around.

 

http://forums.bethsoft.com/topic/1351643-taking-your-skyrim-workshopcreation-kit-questions-for-the-bethesda-podcast/

 

Get over there and "+1" the top two questions.. you never know, they may take notice.

[/quote']

 

Its interesting that Beth's official stance on the 64 cell bug is "This is inherent to Havok and so we have no intention of fixing it"

 

would that "We don't mess with Havok" also apply to providing an animation workaround?

 

There seem to be a growing number of restrictions that weren't mentioned in any of the sales literature that I saw.

 

It's a bit like buying a car and then, much later, being told you can only drive on certain routes, oh, and no resales or refunds.

 

[prideslayer]

FYI beth is taking questions for the upcoming podcast. The top two questions asked repeatedly are a fix for the 64cell range bug' date=' and releasing of the animation tools or some work around.

 

http://forums.bethsoft.com/topic/1351643-taking-your-skyrim-workshopcreation-kit-questions-for-the-bethesda-podcast/

 

Get over there and "+1" the top two questions.. you never know, they may take notice.

[/quote']

 

Its interesting that Beth's official stance on the 64 cell bug is "This is inherent to Havok and so we have no intention of fixing it"

 

would that "We don't mess with Havok" also apply to providing an animation workaround?

 

There seem to be a growing number of restrictions that weren't mentioned in any of the sales literature that I saw.

 

It's a bit like buying a car and then, much later, being told you can only drive on certain routes, oh, and no resales or refunds.

 

 

I'd take that answer on their part with a grain of salt, it sounds suspiciously like the actual reason is "this is a side effect of the way we are using havok", but then again, I never take developers who blame other developers at their word. We're a prideful bunch.

 

The animation bit I think is a different game entirely. There may be licensing restrictions that prevent them from releasing the tools as others here have guessed, but if that's the case they can still open up the CK to allow you to pop in your own files -- even if they don't give you the means to *create* those files.

 

That seems to be the only major hurdle left to doing this the "right way."

[fore]

Ok, folks, I just published the following on the Bethesda forum, but I think you are as eager to hear the news:

 

I think i have a real break-through.

 

I changed some behavior fies using Hologram's invaluable hkxcmd release. With that I have defined 2 NEW anim events, and I have a script with which I can animate a standard race NPC to play 2 new Idles associated with these events. In other words ...

 

we can add NEW Idles WITHOUT replacing old ones

 

The process is more complicated than I had expected, and requires the addition or change of at least 8 classes, mostly in mt_behavior.hkx. I still want to straighten out some things, and also want to test if it is possible to add like 100 animations. So before everybody bugs me what to do, please give me some time so I can publish all of that, maybe make a little mod to prove it. I didn't have much sleep last night, and also need to keep up with real world tasks.

 

 

[prideslayer]

Definitely very interesting results. Are you adding all the animations to that single hkx? Also this is adding to an existing behavior right, or is it new behaviors as well that shows up in the CK?

 

Don't want the details on "omg how do i do this" until you're ready, but curious about how it works and what the effects are, especially as it relates to the CK and interoperability with multiple mods trying to do the same thing.

[fore]

Definitely very interesting results. Are you adding all the animations to that single hkx? Also this is adding to an existing behavior right' date=' or is it new behaviors as well that shows up in the CK?

 

Don't want the details on "omg how do i do this" until you're ready, but curious about how it works and what the effects are, especially as it relates to the CK and interoperability with multiple mods trying to do the same thing.

[/quote']

This is something which can't be "modded" in a sense that independant modders can do different stuff, which then can freely be merged by mod users. Impossible. Even if someone adds new combat animations in another behavior file than mt_behavior.hkx, then he still has to modify at least 3 other files I have touched. Either, or. I hope that one day there will be some "ultimate authority" amongst modders, who will be able to integrate the most popular behavior related mods into one master piece.

 

For adding new animations it can be a little easier. Assuming it is possible to add at least 500 new animations to the behavior (which adds about 35,000 lines of XML in my current approach), then there should be enough room so different modders could use that one behavior set without interfering with others. Of course, these animations and their events would have to use pre-defined names. That's inevitable.

 

In a long run there should be a manager program which generates behavior files based on the user's mod set. And this could include a wrapper, which allows customized animation names.

 

To answer your question: I only added existing behaviors, and that's sufficient to add the new events into the CK. Adding new behavior files seems outright impossible. But well, what does this mean. One month ago I wasn't even sure if it would ever be possible to add new aminations at all.

[prideslayer]

I always had faith.

 

That said, I think you're not really using your imagination here. From what you've gathered, an updated FOMM (which I am working on for other reasons) could, given some new FOMOD scripting magic, take a custom XML supplied with the mod, unpack the behavior hkx via hkxcmd, integrate the new XML, then recompile the HKX -- all during mod installation.

 

This part actually sounds pretty simple compared to everything else going on WRT animation.. I'm more than willing to tackle this if it will work.

[jjjaaannneee]

FYI beth is taking questions for the upcoming podcast. The top two questions asked repeatedly are a fix for the 64cell range bug' date=' and releasing of the animation tools or some work around.

 

http://forums.bethsoft.com/topic/1351643-taking-your-skyrim-workshopcreation-kit-questions-for-the-bethesda-podcast/

 

Get over there and "+1" the top two questions.. you never know, they may take notice.

[/quote']

 

How do we +1 them? I've never been on that site but I want to add my vote to help out.

[prideslayer]

FYI beth is taking questions for the upcoming podcast. The top two questions asked repeatedly are a fix for the 64cell range bug' date=' and releasing of the animation tools or some work around.

 

http://forums.bethsoft.com/topic/1351643-taking-your-skyrim-workshopcreation-kit-questions-for-the-bethesda-podcast/

 

Get over there and "+1" the top two questions.. you never know, they may take notice.

[/quote']

 

How do we +1 them? I've never been on that site but I want to add my vote to help out.

 

Register, and post a "+1 to these ides" like everyone else is doing.. nothing more complicated than that.

[DocClox]

we can add NEW Idles WITHOUT replacing old ones

 

I'm a bit pushed for time right now, so I'll just say: Fantastic stuff!

 

 

[jjjaaannneee]

FYI beth is taking questions for the upcoming podcast. The top two questions asked repeatedly are a fix for the 64cell range bug' date=' and releasing of the animation tools or some work around.

 

http://forums.bethsoft.com/topic/1351643-taking-your-skyrim-workshopcreation-kit-questions-for-the-bethesda-podcast/

 

Get over there and "+1" the top two questions.. you never know, they may take notice.

[/quote']

 

How do we +1 them? I've never been on that site but I want to add my vote to help out.

 

Register, and post a "+1 to these ides" like everyone else is doing.. nothing more complicated than that.

 

Done... I think... It didn't seem right contextually to literally say "+1 to these ideas" at the end of the thread so I just posted to fix those bugs.

[fore]

I always had faith.

 

That said' date=' I think you're not really using your imagination here. From what you've gathered, an updated FOMM (which I am working on for other reasons) could, given some new FOMOD scripting magic, take a custom XML supplied with the mod, unpack the behavior hkx via hkxcmd, integrate the new XML, then recompile the HKX -- all during mod installation.

 

This part actually sounds pretty simple compared to everything else going on WRT animation.. I'm more than willing to tackle this if it will work.

[/quote']

Using my imagination? prideslayer, I'm probably a few thoughts ahead of you in imagination

 

Your proposal is unpractical due to at least 2 reasons. First, anim events are IDs, not strings. So every time you compile behaviors, you will also have to recompile all mod scripts using PlayIdle. But script sources are not necessarily part of a mod any more. Second, XML is text, no API. So you can't write a program which takes ANY type of XML as input. Whenever Beth changes behaviors, Hologram changes output format, other modders want to change the same file, you would have to immediatly modify your program (possibly a huge effort), or all users would be blocked.

 

My proposed wrapper is MUCH simpler. It would require an indirection layer which has to be called by modders instead of PlayIdle. But THIS layer can easily be parametrized by a manager program. Same result, a fraction of your overhead.

[remois]

I shouldn't be talking about something I don't really understand, but if it's about merging xml, it shouldn't be impossible to make it automatically and only prompt user on conflicts, am I wrong?

 

And if not, even if it's a pain any standard merge tools could do for manual installation... I used them for the witcher2 it's not that hard to figure tools like winmerge I think...

[Rosewind]

I shouldn't be talking about something I don't really understand' date=' but if it's about merging xml, it shouldn't be impossible to make it automatically and only prompt user on conflicts, am I wrong?

 

And if not, even if it's a pain any standard merge tools could do for manual installation... I used them for the witcher2 it's not that hard to figure tools like winmerge I think...

[/quote']

 

I don't think it is as simple as merging XML files, think they ahve to stuff those XML files back into the hkx and then have that new hkx be recognised.

 

 

But if that was wrong ignore me I am half asleep.

[prideslayer]

I always had faith.

 

That said' date=' I think you're not really using your imagination here. From what you've gathered, an updated FOMM (which I am working on for other reasons) could, given some new FOMOD scripting magic, take a custom XML supplied with the mod, unpack the behavior hkx via hkxcmd, integrate the new XML, then recompile the HKX -- all during mod installation.

 

This part actually sounds pretty simple compared to everything else going on WRT animation.. I'm more than willing to tackle this if it will work.

[/quote']

Using my imagination? prideslayer, I'm probably a few thoughts ahead of you in imagination

 

Your proposal is unpractical due to at least 2 reasons. First, anim events are IDs, not strings. So every time you compile behaviors, you will also have to recompile all mod scripts using PlayIdle. But script sources are not necessarily part of a mod any more. Second, XML is text, no API. So you can't write a program which takes ANY type of XML as input. Whenever Beth changes behaviors, Hologram changes output format, other modders want to change the same file, you would have to immediatly modify your program (possibly a huge effort), or all users would be blocked.

The papyrus compiler is available to be called from the command line so recompiling mod scripts is not an issue. Not seeing why hkxcmd changes would affect me, since I'd just be invoking it, and the XML fragment included in the mod is what would have to be updated, and possibly positioning data within the file -- which could be an ini setting for the app and not hard coded.

 

 

My proposed wrapper is MUCH simpler. It would require an indirection layer which has to be called by modders instead of PlayIdle. But THIS layer can easily be parametrized by a manager program. Same result, a fraction of your overhead.

 

Well.. as always.. interested in hearing more.

[remois]

@Rosewind> Compressing/decompressing stuff has been done already, the hard part here is to know if it can be done in command line if it's a program or in a program if the library is accessible... the size problem is when you hexedit the file since there seems to be some crc-like control if you re-compress the control should be correctly updated...Then it would have to put the animation files to the correct path in the hkx and modify the files for the animation to be recognized (the hard part here mainly because they don't understand all here). You never know if they set an idle count somewhere or data that rely on it... Anyway there are xml editing library in all language so it shouldn't be a (big) problem... So I think the file editing is the more tricky part

 

It's easier said than done, though...

 

(captain obvious here, was it?)

 

My proposed wrapper is MUCH simpler. It would require an indirection layer which has to be called by modders instead of PlayIdle. But THIS layer can easily be parametrized by a manager program. Same result, a fraction of your overhead.

 

I'm interested too, tell us more...

...

Please?

[zmzjeff886]

Thank you for your sharing!

[Rosewind]

@Rosewind> Compressing/decompressing stuff has been done already' date=' the hard part here is to know if it can be done in command line if it's a program or in a program if the library is accessible... the size problem is when you hexedit the file since there seems to be some crc-like control if you re-compress the control should be correctly updated...Then it would have to put the animation files to the correct path in the hkx and modify the files for the animation to be recognized (the hard part here mainly because they don't understand all here). You never know if they set an idle count somewhere or data that rely on it... Anyway there are xml editing library in all language so it shouldn't be a (big) problem... So I think the file editing is the more tricky part

 

It's easier said than done, though...

 

(captain obvious here, was it?)

 

My proposed wrapper is MUCH simpler. It would require an indirection layer which has to be called by modders instead of PlayIdle. But THIS layer can easily be parametrized by a manager program. Same result, a fraction of your overhead.

 

I'm interested too, tell us more...

...

Please?

 

I knew was something to do with putting something somewhere, been few years since I have done any kind of programming.

 

 

[labrat]

I think i have a real break-through.

 

Another rung on the ladder. I look forward to seeing this.

[prideslayer]

fore when you said this:

In a long run there should be a manager program which generates behavior files based on the user's mod set. And this could include a wrapper, which allows customized animation names.

 

I envisioned FOMM as that 'wrapper'. It's advantageous as everyone has it (or something like it) already. The functionality could be in a lib (dll) that all the mod managers can use, doesn't have to be a core part of FOMM. HKXCMD could be dllified as well, or if not, called from a wrapper in the new lib to make it appear as such.

 

"yet another external program" for FOMM and the like to use, as you suggest, would work -- but doesn't really have any advantages. A standalone app could use the lib as well, so you could still have one if you wanted.

 

I didn't see that part when I said you weren't using your imagination.. I got that from the "make 500 animations and then prename them all" bit. I don't think that step should come first. I don't think it should come ever. We know the right approach, so taking it from the start will save a lot of players and modders grief.

[jiggazigga]

So are there any mods out there yet to use the new way of adding animations ?

Or is this method not ready yet ?